How can we experience the same thing so differently?

5/5/2015

I live in a small rural community in central England. Until a couple of years ago, it was a tranquil, peaceful area. Then the local farmer introduced gas gun bird scarers, hoping to protect his crops. If you haven’t heard these guns, they emit a very loud bang every few minutes. It now feels like living next door to a live artillery range. Imagine a grenade exploding outside your front window every 2 minutes. From dawn until dusk. Day in, day out. Week in, week out. Month in, month out.

I struggle to find words to express how stressful and exhausting this experience is. As time goes by, I range from anger to frustration to despair. The sheer relentlessness of it tests my Christian values to the limit. I’ve written so many letters in my head and yet, thankfully, managed to avoid sending them. I’ve explained how I’m feeling and asked the farmer, politely, to consider alternative methods available that are not so intrusive. No response. The loud blasts continue. No end in sight.

And now imagine the farmer’s experience. Struggling to make a living, growing and selling his crops in an increasingly competitive market. Climate change making things worse, alternating between drought and floods. Birds wreaking havoc, or so it seems to him, on the crops. Every loud bang brings a feeling of comfort, an expectation of birds dispersed, hope for a good crop this year. The guns make him feel safer, better protected, more able to deal with the challenges he faces.

This begs questions such as whether the gas guns actually have what the farmer considers to be the desired effect (because increasing evidence shows they are ineffective or even, over time, attract birds) and whether a better win-win solution could be found. However, the striking aspect I want to focus on here is how two parties are able to experience and respond to what is, on the face of it, the same phenomenon, in this case loud bangs throughout the day, so very differently.

Bolman & Deal explored this phenomenon in 1991 and commented that, ‘What’s important is not what happens but what it means’, that is, that every event carries with it potential psycho-symbolic significance. This resonates with Ellis’ earlier observations (the basis for his rational emotive therapy, forerunner of cognitive behavioural therapy) that what we feel tends to be governed more by what we believe about an event, what associations it holds for us, than the fact of the event itself.

There are important implications for coaching and organisation development, as there are in therapy. When working with individuals, groups and organisations, we need to pay attention to what is happening in the client’s world and what meaning, what significance, it holds for them. Imagine, for instance, a change initiative at personal, team or organisational level. What, subjectively, will the change mean to the client? What hopes and fears and implications does it evoke for them?

The client’s meaning-making is likely to be influenced psycho-dynamically (i.e. how it resonates with their previous experiences) and culturally (i.e. how their cultural group – e.g. team, sector or wider community - makes sense of these experiences, including what value judgements it places against them). It means that where leaders seek to introduce proposals, solutions or resolutions, they need to take careful account of different stakeholder values, goals, perspectives and experiences.

30 Comments

Sue

6/5/2015 12:22:36 pm

Very fair and calm comments from a sufferer of the noise nuisance from gas guns, that will hopefully be of some solace to others who are struggling with the noise pollution…

Nick Wright

6/5/2015 12:24:47 pm

Thanks Sue. I hope so. This is certainly growing as an issue of concern and potential conflict in rural areas. With best wishes. Nick

Ken Gilbert link

11/5/2015 02:12:25 am

Nick..Thanks for this eloquent little story. I intend to use it at my May non-profit Leadership Circle with your permission?

Ken Gilbert Armidale Australia

11/5/2015 03:06:03 am

Hi Ken. I would feel honoured! Let me know what responses it evokes from the Circle. With best wishes. Nick

Bob Larcher

11/5/2015 04:11:24 am

Maybe the concept of the ladder of inference can provide a part of the answer. The model suggests that we all have a “data bank” of experience in our head (and maybe in our bodies) that we refer to when anything happens and that we go through a number of steps in order to reach our conclusions. As we compare what is happening to us in the current situation with our stored experience, we make assumptions based on our experience and hence we come to conclusions and then act accordingly.

I published an article some time ago on LinkedIn on the subject (www.linkedin.com/pulse/20141115134030-2919261-up-and-down-the-ladder-of-inference?trk=mp-author-card) and how the use of advocacy and inquiry can help to come to at least a common perception.

11/5/2015 04:14:03 am

Hi Bob. Thanks for the helpful comments. That's an interesting link and reminds me of Eugene Sadler-Smith's research on intuition. He proposes that intuition is the result of a subconscious process of distilled experience - quite different to a rational/logical approach to decision-making. With best wishes. Nick

11/5/2015 04:50:43 am

Sounds like Jung's Perceiving function.

Sensing Perception being the process of collecting concrete data through using our five senses and Intuitive Perception being the process by which we make connections and infer meanings beyond sensory data.

Peter James Hill

11/5/2015 04:57:31 am

A powerful reminder of how our own experience of the world informs our responses to day to day situations, often unconsciously. Your willingness to put yourself in the shoes of the farmer to try and understand his experience is a wonderful reminder of the power of moving clients from subject to object in order to reflect on events and draw out hidden and perhaps unhelpful assumptions. I have used this in a number of guises, for example, the meta mirror, based on the gestalt third chair technique, and ABCDEF technique taken from rational emotional behaviour theory.

11/5/2015 05:02:01 am

Hi Peter and thanks for such an encouraging response. I have to confess that it has felt very difficult to put myself in the others' shoes in this instance. I have felt so stressed and exhausted that it's hard to see beyond that! :/ Yes, there are resonances with Gestalt third chair. I've heard of REBT's ABCDEF technique but can't remember what it entails. Can you remind me? From what I remember, it's something about the relationship between how we experience an event and what we believe about it? With best wishes. Nick

11/5/2015 07:08:31 am

Hi Nick, the ABC... model provides a framework to work with your client to review an emotionally challenging event (e.g. difficult working relationship, challenging presentation/meeting etc.) to uncover unhelpful thinking/beliefs and is based on Albert Ellis's model of emotional disturbance in which someone assumes a direct link between the Activating event (A) and the emotional/behavioural Consequence (C) when, in fact, this relationship is mediated by Beliefs (B) and perceptions about the event. You would encourage your client to uncover these beliefs and to then Dispute (D) or examine them and go on to develop a more Effective (E) response or change of behaviour. You can go on and look at what lessons can be drawn from this experience that might be useful in the Future (F).

11/5/2015 07:11:08 am

Many thanks, Peter. That's a helpful explanation. I'm very familiar with Ellis' ABC theory of emotion but hadn't seen the DEF aspects explained before. Sounds very similar to cognitive behavioural therapy and coaching - based on the same principles. With best wishes. Nick

James Henman PhD

12/5/2015 02:18:42 am

Nick,
What a challenging situation to face, day after day, with a sense of powerlessness to impact a resolution that could meet everyone's needs. You are so right that we all have perceptual filters that color/impact our experience of things that happen (or don't happen) in our lives. I commend you for trying to be understanding of both your own experience and that of the farmer. This shared perspective is what I call the lantern, shining in all directions - inside and out - with the same light of grace and respect for all concerned. This mutual respect is most challenging when we feel that the other side is not open to exploring a mutual solution.

When we are in a situation where mutual respect is not coming back to us from the other party, the focus becomes "protecting the other party from hurting us". When we have tried all we know to do, and it sounds like that's the case for you in this situation, the Serenity Prayer still gives us guidance and direction: "God, Grant me the serenity to change what I can change, the freedom to release what I can't change to You, and a growing wisdom to know the difference." Easier said than done! Thanks for sharing this real nugget of life experience.

12/5/2015 02:37:15 am

Hi James,

Thanks for such a compassionate and insightful response. You are right...the sense of powerlessness exaccerbates the tension and stress. I'm having to discover what power I can exert in this situation, e.g. trust in God - somehow; the power of protest to the local authority, MP, DEFRA, NFU; civil action via a national campaign group etc. Doing something, no matter how little, feels more hope-ful than passive helplessness.

I'm also trying to act ethically. At times, I have felt so tired and stressed that I've been close to direct angry confrontation and action against the farmer. It is so tempting, but I choose to hold back. I love your expression of 'the lantern, shining in all directions - inside and out - with the same light of grace and respect for all concerned.' That's the kind of person I hope and am trying to be.

There is a psychodynamic dimension to this experience for me too. It's not the first time I've felt like this. I once felt trapped in a neighbourhood from hell where I became quite ill with stress. Sometimes, I feel like I'm re-living that experience as well as the one I'm facing now. There are powerful resonances. A very real experience of transference/pattern-matching.

I agree with you that it's much, much harder when not experiencing the same consideration or respect from the other party. That's when I have to choose to act according to my own ethics and beliefs, irrespective of what the other party is doing. I met with a good pastoral friend last night who helped me and prayed with me. We agreed it's about standing up for something important that isn't only affecting me, but doing that grace-fully in God, not on my own.

With thanks again for your thoughts. Much appreciated.

Nick

15/5/2015 03:12:00 am

Nick,
I have not been in your specific situation, but so resonate with the position. At those challenging times, when I am going through "valleys", I have found that often one or more of my wounded inner kids have been triggered by the experience and many of those old "survival software" perceptions begin to overlay and distort my healthy perceptions. I choose to feel good about noticing when this happens, and begin to nurture my wounded kids inside, reminding them that "I will handle this situation as best I can, that they are passengers, that I will be driving. http://www.cairforyou.com/depression/depressionadultchildcharacter.htm

Psychology often sees these patterns from a pathological perspective. My therapeutic Coaching approach sees it as the best choice up to now, and the focus is on getting all the nuggets I can from this particular "valley" - I believe God's promise is that "when we are going through a challenging valley, He will not only go through the valley with us, but His Promise is that the deeper the valley, the more abundant the nuggets we will gain, as we keep our eyes on Him and let Him draw us through the valley - we provide the willingness (imperfectly), He provides the rest!"

The next step for me was very hard at first, since I'm a recovering Vulcan (from StarTreck TV), I need to let myself vent and complain to my Big Brother Jesus and a safe friend, letting all the raw feelings from me (the adult) and my wounded kids inside come out uncensored and deeply honest. Without this step, I tend to get stuck in my head and intellect.

Valley's suck! Since they do, at least we can get all the nuggets we can tolerate.

Ray Mathis

12/5/2015 08:35:45 am

A formula for the way life unfolds:

EVENT + THOUGHTS = FEELING > DO

Anything that happens, or that others say or do is just an event. Events can be real or imagined. We constantly generate thoughts about such events, try to make sense of them, and attach meaning to them. That’s a protective function of the human brain – always on guard for threats. Sometimes those thoughts evoke feelings (emotion). Emotion is energy to move, to get what we want and need, protect ourselves, others and resources, and survive (ultimately giving us a chance to reproduce).

This process can lead to plugging into our fight or flight response. We can generate anger and/or anxiety that makes us more reactive. In truly life-threatening situations, that would be a good thing – even life saving. But people can and often do needlessly plug into fight or flight because of the way they choose to look at things, the meanings they attach to things – meanings that make others and life events bigger threats than they really are. It’s why people can have anxiety disorders, and be all “stressed out”, or have anger problems.

To put the formula into words, THOUGHTS cause FEELINGS, not EVENTS. And attitude is always the father of behavior, and our behavior will follow our emotions toward our life events.

The formula above is an adaptation of one I got from Active Parenting.

EVENT > THINK > FEEL > DO

That in turn is an adaptation of Albert Ellis’ ABC Theory of Emotions. Where A is an Activating Event, B is/are the beliefs someone has about the event, and/or themselves, others and life, and C is the Consequences, or what people end up feeling and doing as a consequence of what they believe about the Activating Event, themselves, others and life.

The beauty of Ellis’ theory is it taps into prior knowledge most people have from algebra: a + b = c, where a is a constant, and b is a variable. If a stays the same, and you change b, c changes. Likewise, take the same EVENT, and change your THOUGHTS about it, and it changes the way you FEEL and what you might DO, perhaps for the better, perhaps for the worse.

This was not a new idea.

“...for there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so” Shakespeare

"Men are disturbed not by things, but by the view which they take of them." – Epictetus

An important point is that at the THOUGHTS (THINK, BELIEFS) step in the formula(s), we have a host of what I like to call cognitive choices:

How we LOOK AT what happens
What MEANING we attach to what does
What we REMEMBER at any given moment about the past
What we IMAGINE will happen in the future
What we FOCUS on
What we COMPARE things to
What we EXPECT of ourselves, others and life in the first place
How much IMPORTANCE we attach to what does happen

There is always more than one way to LOOK AT anything that happens, and make all the other choices, as the story suggests. When I was a child, on rainy days, my mother would say “See, Jesus is telling us we should be sad” (bizarre, I know). Even then I would respond with “But mom, farmers are happy it’s raining”. Some ways we might choose will make us feel better, others worse. Some ways will make it easier to deal with things we don’t like, others harder. But we always have a choice.

When we practice and rehearse certain ways of making these choices, the way we do becomes “rutted” in our brain, and therefore automatic. This automaticity causes people to lose sight of the fact that they always have choices, and to keep ending up in, and often get stuck in some unhealthy, undesirable emotional places.

But we always have such choices. And no one can make them for us, unless we let them. Since how we choose to THINK really determines how we FEEL, then technically, we also have a choice how we want to FEEL.

“A man is about as happy as he makes up his mind to be” Abraham Lincoln

12/5/2015 08:48:14 am

Hi Ray. Thanks for such a thoughtful and though-provoking response. Yes, I too find Ellis' ABC theory or emotion helpful. I like your framing as: Event + Thoughts = Feeling > Do. Well explained! Although in principle I believe we can exert influence, if not control, over how we perceive a situation and what meaning we attribute to it, I'm not sure it's something we can always do. Sometimes, for instance, we may feel so mentally, emotionally and physically debilitated by a situation or experience that reflective reasoning feels pretty much impossible. I guess that's where ACT practitioners sometimes criticise CBT practitioners for being too 'optimistic'! Lots to think about. With thanks again and best wishes. Nick

12/5/2015 09:30:39 am

Thanks for posting the original article and providing the opportunity to talk about something that saved my life, and I think can do the same for others. We don't often hear Ellis' name (or CBT) mentioned.

Yes, there are some times when events can, at least initially, seem so overwhelming that choosing the best way to look at things can be difficult, and even seem futile. And we'll often be fighting brain physiology; all our cognitive, emotional and even behavioral "ruts" our brain will want to plug into. We might even get stuck in such "ruts", and struggle to get out.

That's why having USA or Unconditional Self-Acceptance is so important - or Unconditional Other Acceptance for others when they get stuck is. To accept that it's understandable that we do think, feel and do what we do now given what we've been through before.

But the choices are always out there. Kind of like some life line, or life preserver to grab onto when we feel like we're bobbing in some huge ocean and fear going under at any moment. But only we can grab it. Even then, it's easy to slip back into old "ruts", sort of like loosing our grip on that life line or preserver because it's slippery and the seas are rough. But with practice and rehearsal, new and healthier ways of looking at things can start to compete with the old, automatic and unhealthy ways - kind of like getting a firm grip on that life line or preserver. I've always believed it's important to keep this aspect of brain physiology in mind.

I also believe this kind of discussion is crucial because so much of the talk about emotional intelligence is about desirable traits or characteristics people should strive to have. The problem is that people have to be able to get in the right emotional places to allow such traits to express themselves - I believe most are inherently human, but get blocked because people generate a dysfunctional amount of emotion in response to life events because of past experiences. Simply telling people where they should want to go in terms of traits (i.e. empathy) isn't always enough to help them get there.

Ian Henderson

15/5/2015 03:09:54 am

Thanks to you both for a great contribution to my understanding - greatly appreciated.

Pip Ferguson

13/5/2015 12:46:21 am

Hi Nick
I would find this situation intolerable too. I so value peace and quiet. And yes, the resonances it must bring up for you with a previously stressful living situation won't be helping.
As I read the account, I was reminded of reading an essay by Bruno Bettelheim, the Jewish psychologist (psychiatrist? not sure) many years ago, in a book called 'Surviving', or perhaps that was the name of the essay. It was a collection of his work. He talked about having gone through the concentration camp experience, and how various people he'd been interred with responded to that horror. He said those who managed to 'make sense of' what they were going through were the survivors; others either committed suicide or willed themselves to death, having no sense of future or hope. It was a very powerful piece of writing. The tragedy, of course, is that apparently Bettelheim himself committed suicide much later in life.

I do hope your farmer finds a better way of scaring the birds. I'd have thought that that kind of noise intrusion day in and day out would be banned by local authority by-laws, but doubtless you have investigated that.

I hope you manage to keep some sense of equilibrium despite the pressure and duration of this trial.
Warm regards
Pip

15/5/2015 03:27:48 am

Hi Pip and thanks for such a thoughtful response. Yes, my own experience certainly doesn't compare with those of people who experienced the unspeakable horrors of Nazi concentration camps. And yet there are parallels in that sense of grasping to make meaning of a situation rather than being simply subject to it.

I have a close Jewish friend who once commented that some of those still trying to come to terms with the Holocaust have chosen to conclude that, ultimately, God was behind it because the alternatives are too nihilistic and therefore terrible to live with.

Suffering often evokes existential questions of meaning. The challenge is to find or create meaning that feels authentic and enables a person or community to survive or somehow grow through it. It enables us, however tentatively, to take a deliberate and determined stance in the world and to act according to it.

You raise a good question about local authority regulations. I and others have had conversations with Environmental Health Officers which have, on the whole, proved unfruitful. They do have powers to act but often appear more interested in protecting Councils from legal battles than in protecting local residents from noise. :/

With thanks again for your kind words and thoughtful reflections. Nick

Jeremy Marchant link

13/5/2015 09:30:22 am

It seems you've answered your own question. We experience the same thing differently because we cannot actually experience the thing-in-itself, we can only experience the thing in the context we (cannot help) give it. And each of us givers it a different context based on our beliefs and feelings.

More broadly, what I read you describing is that your relationship with your neighbour is in the power struggle stage, where each party is fighting to have their needs met. If you are not to move into the dead zone (a mutual standoff - though maybe you've already got there) and then oscillate between power struggle and dead zone, you'll need to do something substantial.

You say that you have written letters which you have then not sent. I suggest you need to communicate more strongly than that and, taking a leadership position, step forward to initiate the negotiation of a consensus. Not a compromise.

15/5/2015 03:37:06 am

Hi Jeremy and thanks for the helpful comments and challenge.

In my experience, there is a feeling of power in acting that is quite different to a feeling of powerlessness in not acting. There is a risk, as you say, of ending up in an unhealthy stalemate with neither party having their needs met...or at least not having them met enough for it to feel like something close to a win-win solution.

I have taken a number of determined actions in an attempt to resolve the situation positively, including contacting the farmer directly, the local authority, the local MP, DEFRA and supporting a protest group's EU submission on this issue.

It's also important to me values-wise to approach these contacts in a constructive spirit. Leadership qualities like courage and humility are at the forefront of my mind - both of which are quite a challenge when faced with exhaustion and stress. I will see where these negotiations take us. With thanks again and all the best. Nick

Agatha

13/5/2015 11:51:05 pm

Hi Nick!
Thank you Nick for sharing your experience and insights.This is an extraordinary situation which calls for an extraordinary leadership.Serenity prayer is good to keep you going but need to act is paramount,seek for a solution unceasingly and i pray that the farmer softens and come to the table and discuss.I believe the two of you and other concerned parties can come with a win -win solution.

17/5/2015 05:15:51 am

Hi Agatha and thanks for the note. Yes, I'm trying hard to find a win-win solution. Of course, it begs the question of whether the farmer feels the need for reconciliation or a willingness to look for a solution other than the one he has already chosen. I do appreciate your prayers! This has become a national issue so I will be meeting with a national campaign group (www.b-ooom.co.uk) next week to discuss strategies for a national and EU response. With best wishes. Nick

Roger Greenaway

20/5/2015 09:28:35 am

Nick - I hope peace and tranquility soon returns. Maybe the farmer would also prefer a quieter solution to the problem?

What drew me to your eye-catching headline is how this question applies to experience-based training. I find participants and even trainers easily slip into talking about "THE experience" as if it is much the same for everyone involved.

For participants I think that talking about "THE experience" typically happens when they have been so fully engrossed in the training task and working so closely together that they tend to assume that every other group member was experiencing things in much the same way. A review that reveals the range of different experiences can be quite an eye-opener - and a powerful source of learning.

For trainers I think that talking about "THE experience" typically happens when the training activity has been carefully designed to generate specfic experiences that will lead to predictable learning outcomes. In this kind of situation, little or no attention is paid to experiences that do not conveniently fit the prescribed pathway.

A good starting point for trainers is to expect a range of different experiences, and to provide good opportunities for individually different stories to emerge (during the review). If everyone keeps coming up with much the same story it is a strong warning sign that the training programme needs a radical makeover by a designer who respects and welcomes diversity and difference.

Roger

20/5/2015 09:39:01 am

Hi Roger. Thanks for sharing such helpful insights.

My ears always prick up when I hear someone describing an experience in definitive terms, as if how they experienced it is what happened in an absolute objective sense, e.g. 'You took too long to make that point' rather than 'I would have preferred it if you had been more succinct.'

Other good pointers along similar lines are if a person starts a sentence with something like, 'obviously', 'clearly', 'anyone can see that...', 'common sense tells us that...' etc. Interesting to see how that the notion of 'self-evidence' is enshrined in the US Constitution.

You may be interested in this short article I wrote a few years ago: http://www.nick-wright.com/trouble-d.html. I would be interested to hear what you think. With best wishes. Nick

21/5/2015 04:38:33 am

Hi Nick, There are clearly some strong connections in our work and writing - and also some different perspectives. I have read your article which shifts the topic a bit from "How we experience the same things differently" to "How we define the same things differently" - and how definitions shape experiences.

I like your summary points:

* The way we define a situation determines the way we are likely to intervene in it.

* The definitions we use have an effect on our thinking, feelings and behaviour.

* Finding common definitions can help build relationships and resolve conflict.

But I think what you refer to as "definitions" are really shorthand for "lazy labels". There are many ways of breaking through such stereotyping, my favourite of which is through stories, in which you encourage people to tell new stories about themselves as a way of challenging the lazy labels. As in your example (in your trouble-d article) this making of new stories needs to be a social activity in which significant others are also tempted/challenged to change the stories through which they see, talk about and relate to the person. My take on this is at: http://reviewing.co.uk/stories.htm

And on the original topic of "How we experience the same things differently" I refer to this in 'Trap 9' in my article about: Avoiding Common Traps when Reviewing with Groups at http://reviewing.co.uk/articles/Avoiding_common_traps_in_reviewing.htm#Trap_9

A closely related question is whether as trainers we enjoy having a neat summary of learning at the end of a review, or whether we prefer having such diverse outcomes that each person is learning something different? If we define differently and experience differently then what are the chances that our learning outcomes are the same?

21/5/2015 04:43:48 am

Hi Roger and thanks for the thoughtful response and for the helpful links. Some of the content in your stories piece reminds me of the role of language and story-telling in social constructionism. Some good practical tips in your 'Trap 9' piece too, especially to avoid group-think or social conformity! With best wishes and thanks again. Nick

Jerry Beal link

15/8/2015 09:04:00 am

I didn't read all the comments, but I've been studying this very issue for 25 passionate years. And the Truth is... we aren't experiencing 'the world'... nor 'what happens' in the world... not one tiny iota!! Instead, we're experiencing our own defining mind contexts, ABOUT 'what happens' in the world!... but we're dishonestly and irresponsibly, crediting and blaming 'what happens', for what our own beliefs and interpretations, ABOUT 'what happens' are causing... which means we're 'Falsely Attached To The Material World'! We humans have only one single relationship... at least in time/space it's that way. And that's with, our own defining mind contexts, ABOUT 'this', 'that' or anything at all! As far as I know, I've never heard or seen anyone take that kind of singular position... we have only one single relationship in our lives! But WHEN people find the Truthfulness of it, just imagine how the world can change for the better... if 'what happens', has nothing at all to do with the way we experience our feelings or our lives! I SURE HOPE YOU'LL REPLY TO ME ON THIS INFO! Sincerely, Jerry Beal

Chet link

17/3/2023 03:53:56 am

The plague of humankind is the apprehension and dismissal of variety: monotheism, government, monogamy and, in our age, monomedicine. The conviction that there is just a single right lifestyle choice, just a single right method for controlling strict, political, sexual, clinical undertakings is the underlying driver of the best danger to man: individuals from his own species, keen on guaranteeing his salvation, security, and mental stability.