Rules

14/6/2016

What’s your first instinct when you see a sign that says, ‘Don’t walk on the grass'? Do you see it as an instruction to be obeyed at all cost, a mere suggestion or an outright provocation to break the rules? There are, of course, certain mitigating circumstances where, for instance, the building you’re in is on fire and the only safe way to escape from danger is across the grass. Or you may be in a place littered with hidden landmines and the only safe option is to stay on the path. Under those types of circumstance, it would be fair to say the range of realistic options available to you is limited at best.

Those kinds of situation apart, however, what’s the first thought that comes to mind, the first feeling that you experience? I have to confess that these signs often trigger a playful, mischievous spirit in me – unless I could see some really good reason not to do it. I experience the same spirit, often accompanied by frustration, if I encounter rules, regulations, policies, procedures – anything that seems like constraining, life-wasting, pointless bureaucracy. I’m open to influence and persuasion but I need to believe that what I’m doing is worthwhile and I need to feel the freedom to choose.

This disposition has served me well at times, particularly in terms of questioning assumptions, challenging the status quo and finding different ways to think about and do things. It can, however, lead to a restlessness; an inability to settle down; a need to keep experiencing new things - new people, new cultures, new environments in order to feel truly alive. It can also mean that, if I’m not careful, I can drive colleagues whose role is to enforce policies and procedures crazy! So, what’s your instinct if you see the ‘grass’ sign? What are the pros and cons for your leadership, coaching or training?

(For more playful, subversive inspiration, check out: http://imgur.com/gallery/8frOy)

72 Comments

Monty Padmanagara

14/6/2016 10:00:42 pm

In a normal situation usually i just follow the sign but in an extreme situation i do believe i will surely ignore this suggestion.

Nick Wright

14/6/2016 10:03:30 pm

Thanks for your note, Monty. I'm curious: do you know why you would normally follow the sign? What would lay behind that decision for you? All the best. Nick

Gopal Singh

14/6/2016 10:04:51 pm

Nick I enjoyed reading this simply because I'm in the military and have been avoiding walking on the grass for years ..literally "stay off the grass" signs everywhere however I also like to know the reason behind the policies and procedures. I love to ask why simply because there might be a better solution.

Nick Wright

14/6/2016 10:11:35 pm

Hi Gopal and thanks for posting such interesting reflections. I'm assuming that 'staying off the grass' in that context is an aspect of military culture? I remember once working with a group of medical doctors who always took detailed notes in management meetings. It was as if they had subconsciously transferred a practice they had developed in one cultural context (taking detailed patient notes) into the management meeting context (taking detailed meeting notes), even though in the latter context it meant they were focusing too much on detail and not enough on bigger picture issues. I like your emphasis on asking questions because it's a great way to avoid becoming inappropriately culturally conditioned and unhelpfully blinkered as a result. Thanks again! Nick

Shanti

15/6/2016 05:48:02 am

Nick, normally rules frustrate me and i do challenge their purpose, but there are times i abide by them because it makes my life easy (in certain contexts, rules give me boundaries within which i operate and at times, i need them). As you said, i do check if it is worthwhile and exercise my freedom of choice.
And literally speaking, i love to step/walk on the grass as the child and the rebel in me comes alive :)

Nick Wright

15/6/2016 09:11:37 am

Hi Shanti - rebel! - and thanks for the note. :) There are situations I abide by the rules too...and I like to think of myself choosing to abide by them rather than just doing it. That helps, psycholologically at least, to retain that sense of choice. I have this image of you now stepping and walking on the grass like a child. Enjoy! All the best. Nick

Penny (Penelope) Tucker

15/6/2016 09:02:09 am

Hello and thanks for proposing the question Nick. I think that it is these gray areas of life which are the most interesting and great learning ground. Like you Nick, I find myself just wanting to walk on that grass, it prompts to do so, the defiant me is able to get a fix, so to speak. I wonder... What has happened to need such a sign?

Nick Wright

15/6/2016 09:13:45 am

Thanks Penny. Love the idea of getting a fix by being defiant. :) What is the 'fix' that you get through doing it it? 'What has happened to need such a sign?' What a great question! All the best. Nick

Ericka Krystalyn

15/6/2016 09:27:59 am

My instinct when I see the 'grass sign'? Well, I would skip a few steps on the grass and quickly run back to the path! And then wait to see if any law enforcers are around watching with handcuffs...

Nick Wright

15/6/2016 09:28:48 am

Thanks Ericka - your comment really made me smile!! :) All the best. Nick

Carl Bishop

15/6/2016 09:29:26 am

Rules are made so that someone can break them! I dabble in photography and on occasion I am asked about this rule or that one as far as photography is concerned. I encourage all persons interested in photography to learn the rules, that way you know when you break them and why you break them. I get it that rules provide guidance and for the most part we need guidance, but in the practice of creativity it should be more of a guideline with minimal punishment for coloring outside the lines.

Nick Wright

15/6/2016 09:34:32 am

Thanks Carl. I really like the photography example and metaphor. I've noticed how often when I'm training that people ask me, e.g. 'Is it OK if I ask a closed question when coaching someone?' It's as if there are written rules out there somewhere that we must obey. It's also about a sense of needing permission, perhaps as validation. I usually respond with a different question along the lines of, 'What might the implications be of asking a closed question? or, 'If you were to ask a different question that wasn't closed, what might you ask?' That allows people to work with principles in mind but without adopting them slavishly, irrespective of context. All the best. Nick

Ranganath Srinivasan, PCC

15/6/2016 09:36:12 am

Nick, in my view, as Coaches we need to be aware of ourselves and our natural instincts, of which you have described an example in detail. The challenge is not to let our per-dispositions and our opinions influence our Coaching conversations which is essentially focused on our client and her desires. This is not to say we disregard our gut feel about the client's observations and her whole person. But it is good to be aware how our natural instincts and reactions can make us unconsciously judgemental and acknowledge and accept those thoughts

Nick Wright

15/6/2016 09:41:13 am

Hi Ranganath and thanks for the note. Yes, I agree that self-awareness is very important in coaching. For me, it's not necessarily about stopping our pre-disposition and opinions influencing our coaching conversations per se. That sounds a bit like a rule. ;) Another way of thinking about this would be to have a clear intention in our coaching practice and, if we were to allow our pre-disposition or opinions to influence our coaching, to do that with awareness rather than by default. What do you think? All the best. Nick

Ranganath Srinivasan, PCC

16/6/2016 09:40:18 am

I agree, Nick- be natural, be yourself, be aware , go with the flow- trust yourself to do the best for your client with full transparency.

Sue Sanford

15/6/2016 12:56:42 pm

I'm definitely with you Nick, mischievous and inclined to question the status quo and look for alternatives. Sometimes its necessary to stick to the policies and procedures, in my own field, there is no point, faced with an Ofsted inspection, saying "that's not what you should be measuring or asking". However when as individuals or organisations the policies and procedures aren't delivering the impact or outcomes or change that's needed, that willingness to be curious and ask what would happen if you didn't have to do it like that as coaches is invaluable. "How would you do that if you knew you couldn't fail?" I think mischief and curiosity and closely linked and its OK to be playful and mischievous on our own account and a requirement to be able to use friendly, maybe even playful, curiosity in our coaching .

Nick Wright

15/6/2016 04:32:48 pm

Hi Sue and thanks for sharing such interesting thoughts on this topic. I agree that there are sometimes rules that, even if simply for pragmatic reasons, we do well to follow. The occasions that I find rules most frustrating are when, say, as a customer I'm in dispute with a retailer and they refuse to shift on an issue where they have clearly acted unfairly, 'Because that's our policy.' I'm always tempted to say, 'With all due respect, your policy is an internal matter for you as an organisation. As a customer, I'm not interested in what your policy is. I'm interested in reaching a solution.' In those situations, I find it important to remember that the person is a person and to treat them with humanity and respect, and to reflect on the idea that maybe, within that cultural environment, they really do have no room for manoeuvre. In other situations where there is more that is open to reflection and exploration, I often find myself, like you, approaching it in a curious, playful spirit to test assumptions and ideas and see what emerges. All the best. Nick

Carina Veracierto, MA

15/6/2016 04:23:22 pm

Rules take away the freedom of choice beyond the intention to control impulses and 'misbehavior'. It is then natural to question rules. In Coaching this means questioning those beliefs than function as a rule and condition behavior, and those cognitive distortions that bring about black-white thinking and rigidity.

Many of these counterproductive beliefs are rooted someone else's arbitrary rules (parents and early education).

Nick Wright

15/6/2016 04:41:06 pm

Hi Carina and thanks for the note. Yes, I agree that, if we notice a client implicitly or explicitly imposing 'rules' on themselves, others or their situation (e.g. by using lots of words like should, must, ought), it can be useful to reflect that back as an observation to raise awareness and, thereby, create opportunity to explore and experiment with alternative ways of seeing, framing and doing things. I believe that we too, as coaches, need to be aware of imposing rules on ourselves or the client that can, at times, prove counter-productive. It's something about choosing 'rules' that are e.g. consistent with professional standards we represent, safeguard the client or client/coach relationship or ensure that the interests of the client are well served rather than blindly sticking to a set of assumed rules for its own sake - e.g. as you say, arbitrary rules or those that may have served a useful purpose at a different time or in a different relationship or context. All the best. Nick

Vince Lunetta

15/6/2016 07:37:24 pm

My instinct to the sign ‘Don’t walk on the grass'? and the attitude to rule as you state – constraining, life-wasting, pointless bureaucracy – is to reframe it. I sense you have a foundation view of rule as restrictive, though I could be wrong.

When rules are viewed as the 'best way to get where you want to go', then rules are not restrictive; they are the keys to freedom and success. Changing my attitude changes everything!

Nick Wright

15/6/2016 07:52:44 pm

Hi Vince and thanks for posing such a good challenge!

My instinct and attitude is a response to rules that appear pointless or exert control with no discernable good reason. In that sense, psychologically-speaking, I think it's a reaction against meaningless, purposelessness and inappropriate or unfair control rather than against rules per se.

I agree that sometimes reframing can make a significant shift in perspective attitude and behaviour. One of my HR colleagues, for instance, reframes policies as 'facilitating frameworks'. In order to ensure that's authentic rather than spin, she consults and develops the policies with that intention and spirit in mind. I like that.

There are also situations in which policies and procedures are in force that appear to serve no useful purpose (e.g. because circumstances have changed since they were created or they have been transplanted from one context into another without re-contextualising them) or they create unreasonable work/stress.

In those situations, I will challenge them to see if we can unearth the underlying intentions beneath them and find a more effective approach, more life-giving solution etc. This sometimes means scrapping ineffective rules or creating new rules that are genuinely more useful and/or facilitative. Does that make sense?

All the best. Nick

E.G.Sebastian (CPC)

15/6/2016 09:47:28 pm

I don't know if I should answer or contribute to this discussion... i think it's self-incriminating :) -- Instead, of giving a real comment (something I had in mind to share), let me just say that I try to hire people - and partner up with people - who are rule followers... BUT I can't make real friends with them, as they drive me TOTAL NUTS!!! :) There are 1000s of rules that are there to be bent... and some straight out to be broken. I try to follow common sense, and less the rules... which gets me in trouble at times :) (so much for "common sense," ey?)

Nick Wright

15/6/2016 09:49:58 pm

Thanks E.G. - your comments always make me laugh!! :) Really intrigued now about why you try to hire and partner with rule followers..? All the best. Nick

Sue Sanford

16/6/2016 09:58:32 am

This is fascinating! I was thinking about E.G's comments and your question Nick and wondered if its because EG actually knows he needs the rule followers on his team /as partners for things to work right as a team - question of balance?

E.G.Sebastian (CPC)

17/6/2016 05:52:15 pm

o answer you Nick Wright, I "must" partner up with Rule-Followers for several reasons:
1. They provide me with balance, as I tend to "not see"/totally disregard rules (nothing that can put me in jail, though - I'm a real stickler about those :) )

2. Us, rule-breakers, tend to be big-picture people - just "going for it," without considering all the angles. Rule-followers usually are more analytical type people, and they provide me with crucial input on stuff that I'd miss on my own... INCLUDING existing rules that I might break if I proceeded in a certain way (for example, we have to be careful of what promises we make on our sales copy, websites, etc. - the FTC has stringent rules about income or monetary-gain promises - who knew!?)

3. Rule-followers are more organized - can help plan better.

Ok... yes, I think that about describes why I need them in my life :)
(my wife is also a rule-follower and highly analytical, down-to-earth person -- a true Ying to my Yang :) )

Nick Wright

17/6/2016 06:01:58 pm

Thanks E.G. You made me laugh again. :)

Yes, those are the same reasons why I seek out 'rule-follower' people in my own work too. They often see all sorts of important things that I would either not see at all or see and not pay proper attention to. Having said that, I have to be in the right mental-emotional space to do it. I handle it better, I think, when I invite the rule-follower's perspective rather than having it landed on me! ;)

I remember a conversation with an HR leader in one organisation I worked with where I commented that, 'For every bright idea I have, your team seems to think of at least 20 reasons why I can't do it'. This conversation helped to shift the team's approach from, 'This is why you can't do it' to, 'There are some things I'm aware of that we will need to take account of if we were to move this forward - now let's see if we can find a solution together.' I could live with that...and it meant I was less inclined to to try to avoid or stay away from HR when developing new initiatives.

By the way, you came to mind for some reason when I posted the final paragraph of my latest blog: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/work-life-nick-wright?trk=prof-post

All the best. Nick

Sian

15/6/2016 10:47:04 pm

Just read you blog.....I had a day last week when i had fun breaking rules....stand still on escalator and hold hand rail sooo walked up and didn't hold hand rail ... Played bowling and it said don't cross the line...yep crossed the line. Having a sliding race with the trolley in the supermarket... It was a silly fun day! Just some rules are meant to be broken😄 just saying 😂 absolutely have to stand on grass!!! Just for few seconds well maybe a bit longer ...

Nick Wright

15/6/2016 10:48:28 pm

Hi Sian and thanks for sharing such an entertaining story - I love it!! What a wonderful playful spirit. So alive. Really made me laugh. :) All the best. Nick

Cath Norris, MA, BA, Dip Couns

16/6/2016 09:33:23 am

This has been such a hot issue for me! Where rules have been based on asserting authority and unacknowledged privilege, and failed to support fairness, I challenged them. Most of my working life was spent supporting folks who were marginalised and I felt a duty to work with them on challenging and addressing rules which perpetuated their 'underdog' position. I spent 20 years in conflict! As a result I trained in conflict facilitation. I needed to develop a process which took me beyond a reactive state into a position where I could build awareness, connection and process between authority figures and marginalised players.

Nick Wright

16/6/2016 09:38:52 am

Hi Cath and thanks for the note. Your comments remind me of some of my own experiences in human rights work. There are e.g. law/rules that oppress the poor and laws/rules that protect the vulnerable. For me, it's about trying to unearth intentions, challenge those roles that have negative impacts on the most vulnerable people, work with people to find alternative 'solutions' and affirm those that have positive effects. Clearly, it's not always as clear-cut as that where multiple stakeholders and interests are concerned. I'd love to hear more about your experiences in this area. All the best. Nick

Cath Norris, MA, BA, Dip Couns

16/6/2016 03:04:28 pm

I was working in children's rights Nick and wherever possible I tried to encourage and support meaningful dialogue between young people and decision makers. At times rules / policy / legislation or interpretation of such was so damaging that we resorted to direct action, lobbying and on a couple of occasions whistle blowing.
The other side of the coin was pushing for appropriate legislation and guidance to be implemented such as with the UN convention on the rights of the child and the Children Act.

Nick Wright

16/6/2016 03:05:49 pm

Thanks for sharing such a great example, Cath, of fighting against and for rules and in the spaces inbetween! All the best. Nick

Ray Lamb

16/6/2016 01:52:18 pm

Being aware of one's pre-dispositions is most definitely essential. Also, for me is to be aware of when these get triggered in a coaching conversation. I seem to have developed an additional 'watcher' in my system when coaching. The 'watcher' will take note of a trigger, log it, call it interesting and mark it for attention at a later date! May sound odd but it works in my case. Being busy at being fully connected to client is critical; following their flow and waves of thinking; listening to the assumptions, the spoken and unspoken; allowing powerful questions to emerge is the work. Our own pre-dispositions, assumptions and opinions have no place in all this. So notice and move on, figuring out the trigger(s) at a later time, maybe in supervision.

Nick Wright

16/6/2016 02:02:26 pm

Hi Ray and thanks for the great reflections. Yes, I can relate to the 'watcher'. I have a similar experience - my 'observing self'. On the question of 'have no place in this', I see it differently. There's something about what I notice gets triggered in me when I'm with the client or client system that sometimes provides the deepest insight into the client/system. I guess it's what psychodynamic coaches would call 'countertransference' or Gestalt coaches 'use of self.' I agree that this is where supervision can be so important and useful - to try to make sense of the experience. Does that resonate with your experiences too, especially when in 'watcher' mode? All the best. Nick

Ray Lamb

17/6/2016 09:37:25 am

I don't experience any deep insight into the clients system. What I get is a 'that's really interesting' moment about me, and I move on. The client always leads. I am insignificant, irrelevant and essential at the same time. My witness to their thinking and my connection to them is what's important. 'Listening to Ignite the Human Mind' - (Nancy Kline) - is such a powerful concept. Nothing in this for me, everything for the client.

Nick Wright

17/6/2016 09:42:30 am

Thanks Ray. Really interesting comments! Have a glance at this short piece and let me know what you think? http://www.nick-wright.com/what-is-really-going-on-here.html I wonder if it's partly about how we see our role in relation to the client - what we are there to do. Where coaching includes an element of reflective practice, enabling the client to make sense (which needs to be the client's sense, rather than the coach's) of themselves and situation, attention to wider systemic and cultural influences/issues can make a real difference. All the best. Nick

Ray Lamb

18/6/2016 12:54:52 pm

Truth is we (as coach) never absolutely know 'what's really going on here.' For me the real work is to support our clients to figure out 'what's really going on' and to come to a conclusion that's useful for them and causes them to move forward to a more resourceful space. Our diagnosis, in the role of coach, is likely to be faulted, contaminated; mis-construed by our system, knowledge and experience, and as such not useful for the client. Our connection, deep listening, powerful questions, to facilitate the best, freshest thinking in our clients; those make the difference.

Nick Wright

18/6/2016 12:55:37 pm

Hi Ray - I think we are close to agreement on this. I wouldn't offer a diagnosis to a client for all the good reasons you mention. However, disclosing what I notice and experience could be part of what enables the client to figure out what is going on in them and in their own situation. Sometimes it raises fresh insight and awareness for the client that wouldn't have been available to them through pure listening, self-reflection and thinking alone. Thanks for posting such a stimulating and thought-provoking challenge! All the best. Nick

Christine R. Andola

16/6/2016 02:12:09 pm

I like rules. They help me know what to do and what to expect. When I encounter a sign, I assume there is a logical reason for the rule. I find it sad that businesses have to post signs telling people not to talk on their cell phones while transacting business because I take this to mean that it has happened in the past.

In my work with business owners and managers, I often hear that something is common sense. They did not feel the need to explicitly state the rule but instead made an assumption that everyone knew what it was. I think this demonstrates the value of stating rules and posting signs. Employees are not consciously defying the rules. They have plausible deniability when the rules are not clearly communicated.

Nick Wright

16/6/2016 02:16:07 pm

Hi Christine and thanks for sharing such a different perspective on and experience of rules to my own! :) I'm really curious now. I wonder what it is about our psychological wiring and experiences that means we view and experience 'rules' so differently. What do you think? All the best. Nick

Christine R. Andola

16/6/2016 02:23:37 pm

I think that goes all the way back to the nature/nurture argument, Nick, and how personality is developed. I know people who are more accepting of rules than I am, and they struggle with gray areas. On the other hand, the people I know who ignore rules when it suits them exist on a larger emotional continuum.

It may be connected to a level of comfort with large crowds and wide open spaces. These are other parts of personality that develop as a result of genetics and experience. For some people, too many options is a problem they cannot comfortably process.

Nick Wright

16/6/2016 02:35:04 pm

Thanks Christine. If I think back to my earliest memories, I always had a yearning to be free, to be unconstrained by rules unless I thought they were reasonable. I think this probably made life quite difficult for my parents! That independent spirit has continued throughout my life. I think it's probably one of the psychological drivers that led me into human rights work, international development work etc - challenging injustices where people find themselves e.g. vulnerable and excluded because of other people's or states' policies and practices. I also wonder how much I'm influenced culturally in this area. I've lived in the UK for most of my life and notice how e.g. my island location and UK's history shapes my outlook differently at times to the outlook of my continental European friends and colleagues. Interesting stuff! All the best. Nick

Christine R. Andola

16/6/2016 03:00:53 pm

We are similar in our desire to fight injustice, Nick. Mine is a battle against corporate structures that don't work i.e. rules that are set and not followed or not applied equally to all.

Nick Wright

16/6/2016 03:02:32 pm

Many thanks, Christine, for presenting such an interesting and compelling 'flip side of the coin' perspective! All the best. Nick

Manuel Mateos

16/6/2016 06:16:33 pm

Good question. Thank you Nick. I try to answer your question based on my beliefs and practice. A real Coach usually do not acts as a Judge. Her role is not to judge or disapprove the way her client ( coachee) behaves in his life or treats others, unless the client express concerns about it. In rhis case, the Coach will encourage the client to find out by himself which could be his best options toward any rules or ethical codes and to decide which he considers the best there is for him to follow or respect. So, the reinforcement of rules, by indicating or remarking these is none of her primary goals. This attitude might be based from the coaching key principle of maintaining commitment to support the client.

Nick Wright

16/6/2016 06:21:52 pm

Thanks Manuel. It sounds like you are saying it's important that the coach does not superimpose his or her own 'rules', values or judgements onto the client. Instead, the coach encourages and enables the client to explore and choose their own stance. Have I understood you correctly? Thanks! All the best. Nick

Manuel Mateos

17/6/2016 09:44:10 am

Thank you Nick! You just described clearly the idea. I believe the attitude of a real Coach toward rules is to support clients to voluntarily decide what to do in regard of these and to reflect on how will they manage the consequences whether positive or negative for their purposes. However, there could be specific situations demanding a Coach to adopt the attitude of raising the respect for certain rules, like it is in Football, -for their team to avoid penalties and inconveniences-. But considering that attitude does not represent the upmost important function of his job.

Nick Wright

17/6/2016 09:49:56 am

Thank you, Manuel! Yes, I think you raise very important points about: it's the client's decision, the coach can enable the client to explore implications of their decision and, at times, there are rules (as in the football analogy) that have particular implications for the client and others if they choose to ignore or break them. All the best. Nick

Jack Hamilton

17/6/2016 09:52:55 am

Rules are typically made for a reason. We don't always know, or understand, the reason, but without them there is chaos. That being said there are always exceptions to the rule. No one should be a blind automation following the rules without question, but in the absence of corroborating evidence that not following the rule will result in an adverse outcome, we should follow the rule.

Nick Wright

17/6/2016 09:58:10 am

Hi Jack and thanks for the note! 'We should follow the rule' sounds like a rule. ;) I'm fascinated by how people hold such different views on this topic. Perhaps it depends on our starting point. If we believe rules are made with good reason, it leads to a view that rules should be followed unless we have good reason to do otherwise. If we believe rules can be arbitrary or unfair, it leads to a view that rules should be ignored or challenged unless we have good reason to do otherwise. I'm curious about what personal, cultural and contextual factors shape different people's respective starting points. Thanks for posting such a stimulating response! All the best. Nick

Cath Norris, MA, BA, Dip Couns

18/6/2016 11:41:20 am

Lol Nick, I can relate so well to the aversion to being told! At 7 years old my school report said 'Catherine will not be told'...I'm as proud of that now as I was then. It's exactly what led me into studying and falling in love with person centred therapy. A model based on recognition and respect for our inner authority and innate intelligence was the only way I was ever going to go. Carl Rogers was in his 70's before he realised the political implications of his model. I've spent 20 years studying, applying and expanding my world view and practice based on that model.

Through it I've developed a fundamental appreciation of why we need to value and harness each person's unique perspective, experience and contribution.

I found studying deep democracy with Arnold Mindell to be astounding, the way he links the development of healthy global dynamics to the inclusion of all voices is so affirming of the need to follow, respect and unfold our inner nature... so that we can connect, respect and help unfold what needs to emerge between us. Rule breaking is fundamentally about the need to be heard and included in how we define our own lives and influence our collective existence.

Nick Wright

18/6/2016 11:48:57 am

Hi Cath and thanks - again - for sharing such profound and personal insights. I love your 'Catherine will not be told'! I remember working with a leader who said, after a while, 'Nick is un-manageable'. I think he meant it as a kind of compliment given the nature of work I was involved in. I instinctively resist what I see and feel as pointless bureaucracy or oppression, although how I 'resist' has become more nuanced and diplomatic as I get older. ;) I love your comment, 'Rule-breaking is fundamentally about the need to be heard'. It adds an interesting and useful political dimension to discourse, especially in systems such as organisations or societies. I have a copy of Mindell's book on my shelf. You have prompted me to read it! All the best. Nick

Cath Norris, MA, BA, Dip Couns

18/6/2016 01:20:33 pm

Thanks Nick...happy reading! :)

Michael Traynor

18/6/2016 12:22:42 pm

As I move around the world on assignments, I encounter many rules similar to your example. As an outsider I often wonder why somebody would create that particular rule. The rules emerge from and are an embodiment of their culture. Whilst he rules are reflective of the maturity of the social developmentof the country ... they need to be adhered to otherwise your defence of, my sense of humour, got the better of me, may not receive much understanding nor sympathy.

Nick Wright

18/6/2016 12:28:10 pm

Hi Michael and thanks for introducing such an interesting and important dimension to this discussion. Yes, I too find that, when in different cultural environments, I try to learn and be respectful of rules and norms, often because I want to be respectful to the people and society and what matters to them. In that sense, my beliefs and values provide a rationale for my following the rules in those environments. Sometimes, it means that the more rules-orientated the culture is, the harder I have to work, including emotionally, to avoid feeling suffocated within it, especially if the values or principles that lay behind the rules are very different to or clash with my own! All the best. Nick

Brian Casem

20/6/2016 04:38:16 pm

In the second paragraph of the opening, I see my own essential reasoning mirrored. For me, this same cascading line of reasoning engages, but it culminates very rapidly into one question: "What is the consequence?" The second question that instantaneously follows is: "Can I or am I willing to accept and bear the consequences?" And then the final and last logical question is: "will it be worth it to me, and by proxy of me, will other's benefit or will they suffer?"

This is true for me. I tend to be rather empathetic by nature, so it's near equally important for me to observe and be aware of collateral damage for breaking a rule if breaking a rule is somehow justified. What determins that for me, in a generally defined way, is in determining some moral, detrimental or particle barrier to valuing the rule as helpful, essential in some way or absolute in physical laws of physics.

If through inquiry, collaboration and discourse...or even argument I am not persuaded of the rule's value, and if there are indeed barriers to believing the rule is concretely substantiating (subjectively or objectively imposted by some outside authority) then I default to the initial two questions: what is the consequence? Can I or others bear the consequence of me breaking this rule? If I answer, "no," then the potential for rule breaking goes right out of conscious thought. If I answer, "Yes," then doing so is for a greater purpose, and likely people in observation are going to know about it ahead of time because I've already done due diligence in "Testing the spirit" and integrity of the rule...for myself.

I accept the consequence. That said, I have a choice. I don't have to break any rule at all...ever. Is that realistic to never ever break a rule?

Real good Leadership is inovative, creative and must be adaptable. If rules don't change then there is no ongoing synthesis; there is no innovation, not really. Ultimately the outcomes of such rule breaking will either benefit, or they will be detrimental in some way. Only the most courageous (or foolhardy) go where angels fear to tread: knowingly, willfully and with abandon walk (or run headlong) into the unknown with prayers to tell the story about it...and live another day...

...or not, but if a person chooses to, they can, also, choose to due diligence by active and conscious inquiry...

...or not. It's a choice. And there are many choices about breaking any single rule. We all have our process about it.

Nick Wright

20/6/2016 04:41:09 pm

Deep thoughts, Brian! All the best. Nick

Ramon Ponce

20/6/2016 06:02:35 pm

Attitude makes the difference regardless of what field one is in. For instance in training, an instructor is the one that controls the flow of events , the daily activities in the classroom and therefore he or she must have a positive pro-active kind of attitude to inspire the trainees or participants. The energy must start from him/her, instructor 's attitude affects the outcome of the training process as a whole.

Nick Wright

20/6/2016 06:07:45 pm

Hi Ramon and thanks for the note. Yes, I agree that the trainer's attitude can significantly influence the group - including the trainer's attitude to rules! All the best. Nick

Dave Garcia

20/6/2016 06:08:35 pm

In my opinion, and experience. attitude is everything. if the students believe you want to be there and believe in what you are instructing, they are more inclined to have a good learning experience also. As for the learning environment, we let the students make up the, "ground rules," that will the make the training session a good learning environment for all.

Nick Wright

20/6/2016 06:14:54 pm

Hi Dave and thanks for the note. Yes, 'ground rules' are a great example of facilitative 'rules' in a learning environment. If the rules are good and adhered to, it can make an incredible different to the quality of the group's experience. All the best. Nick

Cheryl Cheng

20/6/2016 06:17:02 pm

All rules should serve a purpose. If the rule doesn't serve a purpose then I may be a rebel and break it if the situation warrants it. Depends on the circumstances.

Nick Wright

20/6/2016 06:18:01 pm

Thanks Cheryl! I guess it depends too on whether the 'purpose' appears meaningful and reasonable to us too..? ;) All the best. Nick

J. Mark Walker

20/6/2016 11:33:24 pm

For many of us rules are just guidelines. For some of us they are posted for "other people, not me." Traffic signs are a great example. Generally I try to "obey the rules," even if I find them silly or insignificant. About 25 years ago my wife and I took our two youngest sons to a local national park. We parked and took out our lawn chairs and frisby, and headed for a gigantic grassy field. It was easily three, maybe four, acres. Within a few minutes a park ranger was there to tell us to get off the grass. I asked, "What is the purpose of a park if not for recreation?" Of course, his job was to enforce the rules, not explain them. But he said that it was the site of a historic battle, and "trespassing" was not permitted. Now I have to say that rule is just plain silly. But we complied. Such rules contribute to my "healthy disrespect" for most rules, especially those promulgated by mindless bureaucrats, who never use the facilities for which they make the rules.

Nick Wright

20/6/2016 11:36:21 pm

Thanks for sharing such a great story, J. You reminded me of an experience I had when I visited a new office to run a training workshop. The security guards took me through a whole series of elaborate rituals before I was even allowed into the building, never mind the training room. As time passed, I became more and more curious (and bewildered) by the rituals so I asked one of the guards what the purpose was. He replied with an equally bemused look: 'I have no idea.' Aaargh. All the best. Nick

Liza Oxford-Booth

21/6/2016 06:55:37 pm

Rules? What rules? Rules are there to be questioned and sometimes challenged not always broken as some are there for our H&S. It all depends on the situation.

Nick Wright

21/6/2016 06:58:26 pm

Hi Liza. 'Rules? What rules?' Love that! :) Yep, I agree with your outlook on this. To disregard all rules as a matter of principle, irrespective of consequences for self and/or others, strikes me as reckless. To question and, where appropriate, to challenge strikes me as a healthy attitude and approach. The tricky part sometimes is having to accept and go along with rules even if we are unable to identify or discuss the rationale behind them. All the best. Nick

Infer Khalid

21/6/2016 07:52:43 pm

This is a very interesting topic. I think I would definitely stay off the grass if there's a sign indicating that I should. But at the same time I will probably really start reflecting on why I should be staying off it.. I'll observe the grass for a while and see if it's yellowing or something.. All the hints that are validating the reasons why the sign post is there and why I should not walk on the grass.

Nick Wright

21/6/2016 07:54:23 pm

Hi Infer and thanks for the note. So it sounds like your starting point is to trust that there is a good reason for the 'rule' and to trust and respect that, even if the reason is not immediately apparent? All the best. Nick

Infer Khalid

22/6/2016 08:43:07 pm

Yes I think that's what I am trying to say Nick. However, my second step is always to investigate the reasons why the rule is there - to validate its existence. I do this because I want to rule out any politically driven motives behind the rule. So I will stay off the grass and validate that it is right for me to stay off it because the rule isn't one that is biased. However if I see for instance that the sign post is only reserved for a certain group of people e.g. poor people are not being allowed to walk on it but wealthy people are freely walking on the grass then I will most probably start doubting the rule.

Diann Rogers (Ed.D.)

22/6/2016 08:39:39 pm

Rules, policies, and guidelines. I used to tell my teams that we could, with good cause, a solid case, and a high enough approval, bend or break our own policies and guidelines. That is because we had knowledge of why they were in place and they were out in place by our company. Rules from others, such as the IRS, SEC, or FINRA could not be broken, bent, or even wiggled. They had their reasons: most of which were regulatory in nature. This distinction helped reduce frustration.

Nick Wright

22/6/2016 08:42:16 pm

Hi Diann. That sounds like a very positive approach to me. I'm mindful of context too. There are situations in which rules absolutely must be followed (e.g. if I were working with a nuclear reactor); others in which rules are appropriately open to challenge. Who decides what and when is 'appropriate' can be, however, an interesting question! All the best. Nick

Rules

Leave a Reply.

Nick Wright

Archives

Categories

Rules

Leave a Reply.

​Nick Wright

​Archives

Categories

Nick Wright

Archives