A DIFFERENT KIND OF OFFICE POLITICS

We work at home, together, so we don't really worry about offending anyone at the office when we start spouting off our political opinions. For those who work in more traditional office settings, however, it is worth keeping an eye on that line where authentic conversations leave off and political browbeating sets in. That is why we are feeling downright giddy after Lisa Belkin at The New York Times mentioned our book in her Life's Work column on Tuesday. Please check it out: Talking Politics in The Office.

U.S. voters will be making a huge collective decision in November at a time when the stakes feel particularly high.  A good conversation is an important element in informed decision-making.

To that end, we invite you to read a letter that we have enthusiastically co-signed. It was written and signed by men and women who have authored books on leadership, social justice and community. We have a point of view, and we wanted to share it with others who will join us in making a critical decision to determine the future of our country. If it speaks to you, we hope you will share it with others.

JAMIE & MAREN

JUDGE NOT, LEST YE LOSE THE GAME

We played this game on a road trip awhile back -- or maybe you could call it a combination of wager and game.

I challenged Jamie to one hour of judgment-free conversation. The first person to make a judgmental statement would lose. We would be limited to descriptive language – no judging allowed. For instance, I was prohibited from saying, “Jamie, you are speeding” but I could say “Honey, you are going 80 and the posted speed limit is 65.”

If we stopped for lunch, we couldn’t say, “That waitress gave us crappy service.” Instead we would have to describe it: “It took five minutes for that waitress to acknowledge us, and another 15 minutes before we got the water we asked for. She did not bring the salsa we requested. And I never saw her smile once.”

What was the point? 

We often bury assumptions in the statements we make and the questions we ask. “Why are you ignoring me?” is a judgment that may raise the hackles of someone who is lost in thought but has not meant to ignore you. Why not try: “I asked you three questions in five minutes and you have yet to respond. What’s going on?”

So try the No Judgment Allowed game. I dare you! And then let us know how long you lasted.

We didn’t make it to 20 minutes.

MAREN

CONVERSATION IS WORK

Authentic Conversations blog CONVERSATION IS WORK Monday September 22 2008I wish I could take credit for this statement, "Conversation is Work," but it comes from The World Café. The World Café is a book and a community located on the Internet, and it is much more. The big idea comes from material developed by Juanita Brown and David Isaacs written about in the book. The quote comes from workshop we attended at Fielding Graduate University in Santa Barbara, conducted by Bo Gyllenpalm.  World  Café  is a powerful way to engage 12 or more (read thousands) in “conversations that matter.” By convening people in an organization or in a community and creating conversations with provocative, energizing questions, people can build common purpose and develop plans for pursuing those purposes. Click on the links above and read for yourself. This method is building communities of people, resolving difficult issues and creating outcomes of meaning that stick. Yahoo, more authentic conversations! JAMIE

IS RACE A RELEVANT DETAIL?

I don’t know about you, but in this highly political season our email boxes have been filling up with emails extolling/deriding the character of this or that politician and skewering/supporting this issue or that. We get them from friends and family who see us as sympathetic to their point of view and from friends and family who hope to win us over. Heck, I have sent a few links out myself.

Clearly, people feel passionately about their points of view. I get that. What concerns me more than anything is how people are arriving at their points of view. As thousands of bloggers, viral email, polls, YouTube, special-interest Internet sites, the TV, magazines and print media weigh in on this politician or that issue, we’re dealing with a Category 5 Content Hurricane! While it’s wonderful to have a plethora of diverse information sources, the whirling and contrary debate can make it extremely difficult to separate the fiction from fact. It’s frequently daunting to determine whether the information is rumor and innuendo or if it is what really happened. And we can't become informed, thoughtful citizens without accurate information.

When 81 percent of U.S. citizens say that they are dissatisfied with the way things are going in this country (USA Today/Gallup Poll. Aug. 21-23, 2008), the stakes in this election are in the stratosphere. It’s not enough to rely on a blogger saying that Sarah Palin cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent (she didn’t) or an email that claims Barak Obama is a Muslim (he isn’t.) It isn’t enough to rely on one news source, whether it’s Fox News, MSNBC, CNN or the network news. If your relying solely on your hometown newspaper or the New York Times, it’s not sufficient. You won’t get a balanced, well-rounded picture by listening only to Rush Limbaugh or Ed Schultz. 

We can’t have authentic conversations about politics unless we listen to each other and tell each other the truth. And we can’t tell each other the truth if we haven’t done any investigation into the information we hear or read. It is dangerous and counterproductive to rely on chain emails, convention speeches, something your coworker heard from a neighbor or political ads. Winning is what counts with political campaigns, not telling the truth.

OK, so I am one more blogger adding to the public discourse with this plea: Please, pretty please with sugar on top, inform yourself! Here are two non-partisan websites, staffed by experienced researchers, that I highly recommend. Their mission is to thoroughly investigate the claims made in interviews, speeches and political ads.

www.factcheck.org (Be sure to read the article about chain emails in the left-hand column.)

www.snopes.com

If you know of others, I’d love to hear from you.

MAREN

WE'VE APPROVED THIS MESSAGE

I don’t know about you, but in this highly political season our email boxes have been filling up with emails extolling/deriding the character of this or that politician and skewering/supporting this issue or that. We get them from friends and family who see us as sympathetic to their point of view and from friends and family who hope to win us over. Heck, I have sent a few links out myself.

Clearly, people feel passionately about their points of view. I get that. What concerns me more than anything is how people are arriving at their points of view. As thousands of bloggers, viral email, polls, YouTube, special-interest Internet sites, the TV, magazines and print media weigh in on this politician or that issue, we’re dealing with a Category 5 Content Hurricane! While it’s wonderful to have a plethora of diverse information sources, the whirling and contrary debate can make it extremely difficult to separate the fiction from fact. It’s frequently daunting to determine whether the information is rumor and innuendo or if it is what really happened. And we can't become informed, thoughtful citizens without accurate information.

When 81 percent of U.S. citizens say that they are dissatisfied with the way things are going in this country (USA Today/Gallup Poll. Aug. 21-23, 2008), the stakes in this election are in the stratosphere. It’s not enough to rely on a blogger saying that Sarah Palin cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent (she didn’t) or an email that claims Barak Obama is a Muslim (he isn’t.) It isn’t enough to rely on one news source, whether it’s Fox News, MSNBC, CNN or the network news. If your relying solely on your hometown newspaper or the New York Times, it’s not sufficient. You won’t get a balanced, well-rounded picture by listening only to Rush Limbaugh or Ed Schultz. 

We can’t have authentic conversations about politics unless we listen to each other and tell each other the truth. And we can’t tell each other the truth if we haven’t done any investigation into the information we hear or read. It is dangerous and counterproductive to rely on chain emails, convention speeches, something your coworker heard from a neighbor or political ads. Winning is what counts with political campaigns, not telling the truth.

OK, so I am one more blogger adding to the public discourse with this plea: Please, pretty please with sugar on top, inform yourself! Here are two non-partisan websites, staffed by experienced researchers, that I highly recommend. Their mission is to thoroughly investigate the claims made in interviews, speeches and political ads.

www.factcheck.org (Be sure to read the article about chain emails in the left-hand column.)

www.snopes.com

If you know of others, I’d love to hear from you.

MAREN