VetLearn, serving the veterinary profession, sought out my advice on resolving conflict in veterinary practices, particularly around setting vaccination protocols. I thought I’d share an excerpt from the article because it’s advice that will serve any group grappling with differences of opinion.
Here’s the excerpt from Toughest Part of Vaccination May Be Setting Clinic Protocols by Marie Rosenthal:
The first decision when choosing a vaccine policy for your hospital is deciding how you will decide, the experts say. Setting ground rules before choosing any policy might seem like a waste of time, but it can ensure that everyone is heard and onboard with the final policy.
“Deciding how to decide always seems funny to people because they want to know why they should waste their time,” offers Tammy Lenski, owner of Tammy Lenski LLC, which offers professional mediation. “They want to jump right into the content of the conversation and figure out the policy.”
“The problem that I see when I work with small groups like practices is that unless the veterinarians have clarity about how they are going to make a decision, when they get to the point that it is really mucky and they most need that clarity to bail them out, they get really stuck,” she explains.
Lenski also suggests that the veterinary staff bring something else to the table — their curiosity. “When we are in conflict with someone, our curiosity shuts down. We don’t want to learn more, we want to tell. We want to convince. We want to persuade,” she says. “They need to turn their curiosity back on because they will hear things in other people’s ideas and proposals that might lead to a solution for everybody. When we don’t bring our curiosity to the table, we miss a lot of information.”
…The experts say that it is a good idea to consider all the evidence, find out what all the veterinarians in the practice think about the issue and then take time to determine what the protocol should be. “The idea is to get a decision that will stand the test of time,” says Lenski. “Anyone can get people to agree, but it doesn’t mean that it is an agreement that they feel good about or everyone is going to follow.”
Clarity is the key. It is sooooo important, and almost no one wants to stop and do it. As a Project Leader and someone that has worked in large corporations most of my business career, I have seen that there is the problem to be solved or the opportunity to be created and then there is the date it is due.
After that, the conceptual discussions begin about what the solution should look like. That is just thought trying to leap in and take control of the situation. At this point I have noticed that my "supposed" thoughts are talking to your thoughts. All of those thoughts are influenced by our conditioning, cultures, beliefs, unique experiences etc… Don't be fooled. No one leaves their baggage at home. Nothing wrong with all that. It is the diversity that can add value. My question is What brings awareness into the process? How is the way we are doing this influencing what gets done and its ability to meet the objective?
I think you have your finger on the trigger here Tammy. If we stop to decide how this gets done and what that looks like, then we have a process in place for determining if we are successful in accomplishing the goal rather than doing it to say it is complete.
Curiousity is so key to just trying to understand what is actually happening today and how that impacts the situation. I find too often a nebulous statement such as "We want to improve productivity in our tools, and then it is off to races to fix the tools based on everyone's pet peeves about the tools which rarely align.
How about being a little more curious. What does productivity mean. Is it easier to use? Is it faster? Who wants to improve the productivity of the tools? What are their ideas around productivity? What are the expectations we are operating under? What are we worried about? (God Forbid) Does this productivity need to be measureable? If so, who wants to know and how do they want to see it?
These seem like painstaking questions that make things more difficult. I have learned that they are the kinds of questions that need to be asked so we have clarity, and decide how we are to move forward. As an implementer of visions, the exciting work is taking the concepts into reality not so much to hit a date although that is a factor, but instead to meet an objective. Reconciling the viewpoints openly and honestly and understanding possible misunderstandings or missing information that impacts productivity before we change the first tool is so helpful as well.
I was recently told that this approach makes things hard. o.k. if that is the way you think about it. How hard is it if we spend thousands and some cases milliions and miss the mark? Then the mad scramble begins from what I have seen.
What are we about as we proceed? This is the how of it that is so important. It changes the game on what is delivered is my experience to quality and even surpassing expectations. If it doesn't, then what do we learn from it if I shelf my ego that I can use next time around.
I could go on and on. What you point to here is the toe hold to proceeding with awareness rather than repeating patterns that don't quite satisfy.
Bravo!
Hi, Ben –
Due dates add a lot of pressure, don't they? They make us hurry down the bumpy road in the name of productivity.
I think you've got your eyes on the right prize, Ben, with your clarity about the value of meeting the objective as opposed to just meeting the deadline. Folks should consider themselves lucky to be able to work with a project leader like you.