Post No. 907 - reprint from PGB, and "Group Conscience"

This a comment I posted on my PGB Teams, Technical and Writing site:

Any good thing can be twisted or misused. In the context of this blog, examples I wish to consider are:

(a) (mis)use of group bonding, and
(b) incorrect views around emotional intelligence.

This is based on some recent reading, but I have decided to NOT post the original links as I want to consider these issues free of the hoopla which has developed around them.
Now, on group bonding, there is a reasonable case to be made that having a sense of belonging or connection can increase people’s contribution to a group. However, that has been taken to a contradictory and destructive extreme by some companies who shut people out for not dressing in a similar fashion to everyone else there – which was part of two articles I read recently on line. In the case I am considering here, this misuse of group bonding effectively constituted discrimination against women and minorities – which is something that can be explained by the good people at the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, if you wish to know more. (I acknowledge that asking that question is limited by my not having provided the links, but you can at least get some information and start thinking.)

What I am particularly concerned about there is, in addition to the discrimination and loss of access to resources, the high potential for such actions to be locking in “group think”. This is particularly so if the group has a history of, perhaps, being founded by a group of friends, or recruiting from a limited social class/ethnicity/religion (as an example of that, consider that here in Australia, there was massive prejudice against Irish Catholics on the part of the British soldiers and aristocracy in the late 1700s and early 1800s), which may lead to self reinforcing behaviour, leading eventually to a loss of relevance. On the other hand, if a group truly has flexibility and freedom to think creatively and thoroughly and clearly, such misuses of good ideas would possibly be raised and challenged.

There are a number of fairly obvious (or, at least, reasonably well known) measures to take to address the problem of group think (increasing diversity, for instance, at all levels of a group, up to and including leadership); another idea I have worked on (for a non-engineering group, and to the extent of creating a Position Description) is having someone be (with that person’s prior acceptance of an informed invitation) the group’s “conscience”. Now, most people tend to automatically feel guilty when they hear the word conscience, which does tend to put the Group Conscience in a difficult situation, but that also means the Group Conscience is not going to be expected to conform and go along with proposals automatically – they’re far more likely to challenge group think because they have no stake in belonging.

That, of course, makes delegating an employee or member to be the Group Conscience difficult, so perhaps this needs to be someone who is not an employee or member. In fact, we already have quite a few such people in fields such as finance and QAQC: we call them auditors. What I am proposing, however, goes further than that: someone taking part in the workplace culture and decision making on a daily basis – which suggests the person needs to be an employee or member. If so, they will need to be a remarkable person to manage their situation – which involves, when all is said and done, enormous potential to “do good”.

Another situation which verges on this is a recent situation, described on-line, where a group of young interns were apparently sacked for creating a petition for a relaxation of dress standards. One of the articles I read about this argued that the interns were there to learn, but:

(a) there was an exception being made and not being explained (there were privacy constraints on how much should be said about that exception, but there was no constraint on saying “there are reasons for that exception which are subject to privacy constraints”), which is poor communication and poor emotional intelligence on the part of the employer;

(b) petitions are normal behaviour amongst some people,

(c) the young interns are representative of the future clientele of that organisation, and

(d) by any objective measure, there were legitimate reasons for asking questions about a potential workplace grievance.

Now, on that last point, there may well be reasons relating to client expectations for the dress code, as was generally suggested in the articles I read and the comments / responses, but it needs to be kept in mind that circumstances and fashions change with time – for instance, men mostly do not wear Elizabethan ruffles now, it is acceptable in all good workplaces for women to wear slacks, corsets are not in widespread use (which has health benefits), the health benefits of flat (“sensible”) shoes for women in some professions (e.g., nursing) is accepted enough for high heels to have gone to the same place as the abhorrent practice of foot binding, triple breasted suits including the placement of cod pieces around the neck (i.e. ties) is being questioned by many and, in most situations, the triple-breasted suit has (and this also has health benefits in warmer climates) gone the way of the dodo – which I suspect may also be the case for the company that sacked its interns when its future clients are from that age group.

What was particularly concerning for me was the way one of the articles portrayed the young people concerned as lacking in emotional intelligence – which brings us to the second point I wish to cover.

Now, emotional intelligence is MORE than just being able to identify emotions, but identification of emotions is a good first step. Unfortunately, the article concerned did not discuss emotions at all, only behaviours, and in a way which suggested the author was hierarchical and possibly discriminatory (towards young people) in their thinking. Yes, some young people can be aggravating and self entitled (I’ve told some off in the workplace for such behaviour) – but so can people of all ages (I’ve had to threaten some older people with legal action, for instance, over discrimination and ethical concerns), and young people can also be talented, and are our future (and I am very pleased to have known and contributed to the development of some such young people – in fact, I will be looking at a verification of experience for one such engineer next). There clearly was a need for the young people to learn why the rules were there, but, in terms of emotional intelligence, why had management not foreseen that this exception could lead to resentment? Did they lack an understanding of how people from outside their group would react?

In fact, in terms of emotional intelligence, the situation shows flawed communication in the harsh response - why was there no immediate response on the part of management that this was a misunderstanding, based on identification of an unexplained exception to a stringently enforced and actively advertised policy? Was it based on a belief that young people should be seen and not heard?

Obviously the emotional needs of the person who had the exception are important (as I said, there was a valid reason for the exception – and the young people may have struggled with the fact that they couldn’t know the details, but so would many people I know in other age groups), but the response and the articles show NO awareness of the valid needs of those younger people – and, based on my life experience, I suspect the management group may well be likely to be discriminatory in other areas as well.

Finally, I want to emphasise that both articles fail, in my opinion, to note that there were legitimate workplace grievances – beginning with the existence of unpaid internships, and also low wages making survival a major challenge. I’m glad that we don’t have internships here.

Both of these situations might also have been helped had there been a Group Conscience …

PS - the Group Conscience was part of the Grove of Gyhldeptis, with a similar role for the Rangers. The sort of operating context I had in mind was:

(The diagram needs an arrow back from the Grove Ombudsperson.)

I hadn't got as far as writing a Position Description for the Group Conscience (when I wrote the above extract from the PGB I thought I had, but that was actually for the Rangers), but the references to Group Conscience in the following position description for the Grove Guide give a bit of an idea (it's detailed because I have a lot of experience of disagreements and other situations where that dtail would have been necessary from other groups):

Position Descriptions

Grove Guide

General

The following applies to the position of Grove Guide from the Constitution:

The Grove Guide is responsible for ensuring that the Grove functions effectively and in accordance with this Constitution.

The Grove Guide has the authority to:

·         accept or reject prospective members

·         examine the relevant activity of or remove current members

·         initiate or accept or reject proposed alterations to the Grove Constitution, By Laws, Operating Procedures and other documentation

·         create or dissolve subsidiary positions within the Grove, and appoint or remove members to such positions

·         issue instructions or undertake other actions, subject to the accountabilities outlined in Section 4, as may be deemed necessary from time to time to ensure proper functioning of the Grove.

The following applies to the position of Grove Guide from the By-Laws:

The Grove Guide shall ensure current copies of Grove documents, including Constitution, By Laws, Operating Procedures, Code of Behaviour and Position Descriptions are accessible via the on line site(s) of the Grove.

The Grove Guide shall ensure position descriptions are created and maintained for all offices within the Grove of Gyhldeptis, including Grove Guide.

Should no such activity have been observed for a twelve month period, the Grove Guide may seek to verify whether or not the member still wishes to be a member of the Grove of Gyhldeptis. Should no response be received from the member to three attempted communications over a three month period, the Grove Guide may end the respective membership.

Members shall indicate their wish to be active or inactive upon application, by the means determined by the Grove Guide. Acceptance of applications for inactive membership shall be at the discretion of the Grove Guide, who may take such advice as she deems fit or appropriate. Inactive members may change their status to active by activity combined with a request. Acceptance of such change of status may be conditional upon undergoing a period of probationary membership.

At the end of the nine month Probationary Membership period, the Grove Guide shall review the probationary membership with respect to such factors as activity, conduct and ability of probationary member to “fit” the Grove’s group and social dynamics, and then may:

·         accept the member into active membership of the Grove

·         end the membership

·         extend the membership for such period as considered appropriate

·         other action as deemed appropriate.

The Grove Guide shall create, maintain and modify as deemed necessary by either the Grove Guide, the Grove Conscience, the Spiritual Advisor or the Grove Guardian, a Code of Behaviour for Members of the Grove of Gyhldeptis.

Undertake appropriate role(s) in management of disputes.

Duties

The Grove Guide’s duties include the following:

Duties	Methods/comments/references
	·
Creation of Subsidiary Positions	·              ·            ensure that the Spiritual Advisor, Grove Conscience and Grove Guardian have sufficient access to the Grove to be capable of performing their job ·            ensure the Historian and Record Keeper, if appointed, has adequate support and resources to create a Privacy Policy, and that the Privacy Policy is adopted and managed as an Operating Procedure

Authority

The Grove Guide has Authority to do the following:

·         appoint or, subject to the provisions of Section 4  Responsibility, Accountability and Dispute Management of the Constitution of the Grove of Gyhldeptis, dismiss persons to the positions of Spiritual Advisor, Grove Conscience and Grove Guardian

·         accept or reject prospective members

·         examine the relevant activity of or remove current members

·         initiate, accept, amend or reject proposed alterations to the Grove Constitution, By Laws, Operating Procedures and other documentation

·         create or dissolve subsidiary positions within the Grove, and appoint or remove members to such positions

·         issue instructions or undertake other actions, subject to the accountabilities outlined in Section 4 Responsibility, Accountability and Dispute Management of the Constitution of the Grove of Gyhldeptis, as may be deemed necessary from time to time to ensure proper functioning of the Grove

·         accept, reject or alter proposals for rituals, projects or other activities for the Grove of Gyhldeptis

·         start, alter or stop rituals, projects or other activities for the Grove of Gyhldeptis

·         alter membership status or rights of Members and exercise all the powers of Group Owner on the Grove’s YahooGroups website

·         manage or direct dispute resolution procedures

Accountability

The Grove Guide has the following accountabilities:

To	For
Spiritual Advisor	·            ensuring the Spiritual Advisor is fully aware of the Grove Guide’s - and the Grove’s - activities and is able to fulfil his/her/hir position efficiently and effectively ·            maintaining own spiritual development
Grove Conscience	·            ensuring the Grove Conscience is fully aware of the Grove Guide’s - and the Grove’s - activities and is able to fulfil his/her/hir position efficiently and effectively ·            ensuring the Grove operates in a spiritual manner
Grove Guardian	·            ensuring the Grove Guardian is fully aware of the Grove Guide’s-  and the Grove’s - activities and is able to fulfil his/her/hir position efficiently and effectively ·            ensuring the Grove is adequately protected
Grove Ombudsperson	·            Ensuring the Grove Ombudsperson is able to fulfil his/her/hir position efficiently and effectively
Self	·            executing the duties of this office in a manner which will incur only positive karmic returns ·            identifying and taking opportunities for personal and spiritual growth which occur through having this office ·
Members of the Temple	·            the proper and effective functioning of the Grove ·            the appointment and oversight and, if necessary, removal of persons to positions within the Grove ·            ensuring the Grove’s members are adequately informed as to the Grove’s activities ·            ensuring the dispute resolution provisions are properly implemented, and that members are all aware of such provisions including contact details of Grove officials ·            administration of Grove’s online websites and/or groups

Resources

The experience, skills, qualifications, knowledge and training of the Grove Guide are a resource, to be managed as any other resource.

The experience, skills, qualifications, knowledge and training of other members of the Grove are also available for use by the Grove Guide.

From time to time, and subject to authorisation of the Grove Guide (subject to review by the Spiritual Advisor or Grove Conscience if requested), the experience, skills, qualifications, knowledge and training of people outside the Grove may be accessed.

Post No. 593 - Initiations of Nations

Groups of people tend, over time, to build up a Group Mind. That can be done intentionally and relatively quickly (maybe months or years), with a deliberately formed group (e.g., a club, Coven/Temple, circle, or 'intentional community' - or the 'pilgrims' on the "Mayflower"), or unintentionally and more slowly (decades or centuries), as happens with towns, cities and nations.

People who come to one of those places will, if they wish to 'fit in', eventually be part of that established Group Mind. If they don't wish to 'fit in', others who are a comfortable part of the Group Mind will unconsciously sense a strangeness about those new people, and be hostile towards them. If those new, not-fitting-in people are strong enough and persistent enough, it may be that they can change the established Group Mind to something that is accommodating to both established people and newcomers. This can also happen if the new people are simply considered too different by the Group Mind - which is what manifests in the physical as racism, which is a sign that the Group Mind needs to be healed / helped to grow. 

People who willingly leave such places tend to fairly quickly and automatically sever their psychic connections to the Group Mind, although, if they were particularly troublesome to it, the Group Mind may well indulge in psychic attack.

Now, from time to time, those groups, and their associated Group Mind, may undergo what I choose to refer to as an Initiation - in the broadest sense, which includes a personal test of some significance (see here for something I've written on this). In a sense, the World as a whole underwent such an initiation test in 1914 - and failed. My nation, Australia, has failed - and continues to fail - exactly such an initiatory test in relation to our indigenous people, and refugees.

The world as a whole is also failing the current initiations in relation to environmental issues (which should be sub-titled "survival of humanity/the planet") and matters such as poverty and inequity/discrimination generally.

On a more constructive note, the world largely passed (well, maybe a conceded pass) the test created by the existence and activity of the Nazi's.

The USA currently has one such initiatory test (well, a couple at least, actually, but I'll focus on this one) before it: how it chooses to respond to the revelations about torture of people after the terrible events of '9/11'.

President Obama has urged that the torturers be not judged harshly - and certainly their actions would be supported by many people, even now. But the issue remains as to what you are trying to defend, and whether your actions undermine that.

One of the most powerful arguments against the death penalty, in my view, is that governments should be aiming to teach that life is valuable, and should demonstrate that - and taking life when there are other options is not demonstrating a respect for the sanctity of life. There are circumstances when taking a life is necessary - for instance, in the heat of battle during which a terrorist is aiming to take as man lives or harm as many people as he or she can (although, even then, one's conduct can be becoming or unbecoming ... ), but as a matter of a fair and just trial where a criminal has been arrested and brought to justice through proper, due course and the death penalty would be imposed deliberately - coldly, if you will, then the consideration needs to be made:

in the long term, what is going to send the greatest message to respect life: keeping someone alive, despite their harm or even evil, or indulging in short term actions that temporarily seem to satiate a crowd's blood lust ... until next time when they roar even louder?

That question is loaded with emotive wording and bias, of course - mine. I will, furthermore, add that my perspective is that souls are indestructible, and thus killing someone is pain and fear and hatred is only more likely to create a rebirth of that person in those such energies - it doesn't help heal or remedy anything. In fact, it likely feeds the uncooperatives who are inevitably drawn to such people and events.

So, in the context of the USA and its current deliberations, does the reduction of loss of life and damage to property outweigh the harm that is done by torturing people and then covering that up for a decade?

I'm not going to answer that question directly, but I will add a few other points for consideration:

1. maturity is, in my view, a key necessity in being able to consider this issue properly;  
2. I've already mentioned the issue of stopping people who are actively harming others (which most people seem to think of from the physical perspective, but it also covers emotional, mental, financial, spiritual and psychic - e.g., uncooperatives), but I also favour - with qualifications (e.g., staying alive if one has responsibilities for dependents, or so one can be part of a resistance, etc) the view that it is better to die on one's feet than live on one's knees;
3. some commentators seem to be of the view that the actions of the USA and its allies (including Australia) have helped drive people towards terrorism (incidentally, both Australia and the USA have had problems with terrorism before 9/11 - e.g., the Hilton bombing here in 1978, and perhaps the 'Battle of Broken Hill' in 1915, and the Oklahoma City Bombing [I found the children who were killed in that latter particularly disturbing]); and
4. I suspect that future kids will not play 'doctors and nurses' so much as 'TSA agent and passenger' ... and others have posted about people who are not using air travel because of 'security' measures - see here.

Now, my opinion on this is clear from the above, I think. The point is: what is your considered and properly informed view? Are you prepared to allow others to have different views, or do you want to control them (psychic or otherwise) - or is there an extent to allowed disagreement (e.g., allow different views unless they are advocating violence)?

There are other nations undergoing such initiations as well - Israel, Gaza, Ukraine, Russia, several in Africa, and so on. When you've finished thinking about my question in the context I've posed. put yourself into these various other situations and rethink it.

[1] BPLF = Balanced Positive (spiritual) Light Forces. See here and here for more on this.

[2] Please see here and my post "The Death of Wikipedia" for the reasons I now recommend caution when using Wikipedia. I'm also exploring use of h2g2, although that doesn't appear to be as extensive (h2g2 is intended - rather engagingly - to be the Earth edition of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy").

Love, light, hugs and blessings

Gnwmythr, Wéofodthegn 

(pronounced "new-MYTH-ear"; ... aka Bellatrix Lux? … Morinehtar? … Would-be drýicgan ... )

My "blogiography" (list of all posts and guide as to how to best use this site) is here, and my glossary/index is here.

I started this blog to cover karmic regression-rescue (see here and here), and it grew ... See here for my group mind project, here and here for my "Pagans for Peace" project (and join me at 9 PM on Sunday, wherever you are, to meditate for peace), and here for my bindrune kit-bag. I also strongly recommend learning how to flame, ground and shield, do alternate nostril breathing, work with colour, and see also here and be flexible. 

I am a Walker upon the Path of Balanced Positivity, seeking Spiritual Maturity.

• One size does NOT fit all.
• Don't be mediocre - seek to excel.
• Gnwmythr's Stropping Strap: Occam's Razor only works if  the simplest solution is actually recognised as being the simplest, rather than the one that best fits one's bigotries being labelled 'simplest'.
• Our entire life experience, with all the many wondrous and varied people, places and events in it, is too small a sample for statistical reliability about Life.
• May the world of commerce and business be recognised to be a servant, not a master, of the lives of people.
• Ban the dream interpretation industry!
• A home is for living in, not feeling, becoming or being rich or a “better” class than others.
• Being accustomed to interacting via certain rules makes those rules neither right nor universal.
• Like fire to the physical, emotions to the soul make a good servant, and a bad master.
• Expertise at intimacy and emotional happiness is generally not the same thing as spiritual growth.
• Any person, male or female, who has neither a serious health issue, dependents nor an agreement about study. yet expects their partner to work to support them, is, spiritually speaking, little more than a parasite.
• The means shape the end.
• BPLF restraint of uncooperatives is NOT an opportunity for revenge or getting even - even unconsciously.
• As words can kill, the right to freedom of speech comes with a DUTY to be as well-informed, objective and balanced as you can be.
• My favourite action movie of all time is "Gandhi", although I've recently come across "Invictus" and might put that one in to that category. However, I loathe the stereotypical action movie - and, for similar reasons, I loathe many dramas, which are often emotionally violent, more so in some cases than many war films.
• All of the above - and this blog - could be wrong, or subject to context, perspective, or state of spiritual evolution ...

Do not pray for easy lives. Pray to be stronger [people].

John F. Kennedy (who was quoting 19^th Century Episcopal Bishop Phillips Brooks)

Jesus loves you. Odin wants you to grow up.

(Facebook meme, according to John  Beckett)

We make our decisions. And then our decisions turn around and make us.

F.W. Boreham

Females, get over 'cute'. Get competent. Get trained. Get capable. Get over 'cute'. And those of you who are called Patty and Debby and Suzy, get over that. Because we use those names to infantalise females – we keep females in their 'little girl' state by the names we use for them. Get over it. If you want to be taken seriously, get serious.

Jane Elliott

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good [people] to do nothing.

(based on writing by) Edmund Burke

The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them.

Albert Einstein

We didn't inherit the Earth from our ancestors, we only borrowed it from our children

Antoine De Saint-Exupéry

Like an unchecked cancer, hate corrodes the personality and eats away its vital unity.

Martin Luther King, Jr.

True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar; it is not haphazard and superficial. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring.

Martin Luther King, Jr.

Too much and too long, we seem to have surrendered community excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things. Our gross national product ... if we should judge America by that -- counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. ... Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages; the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage; neither our wisdom nor our learning; neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country; it measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile."

Robert F. Kennedy 1968

There are risks and costs to a program of action. But they are far less than the long-range risks and costs of comfortable inaction.

John F. Kennedy

If we could change ourselves, the tendencies in the world would also change. As a man changes his own nature, so does the attitude of the world change towards him. … We need not wait to see what others do. (Often degraded to “Be the change you want to see in the world” – see here)

Gandhi

Tags: abuse of power, control, crime, discrimination, group dynamics, Group Mind, history, initiation, justice, maturity, society,

First published: Laugardagr, 13^th September, 2014

Last edited (excluding fixing typo's and other minor matters): Saturday, 13^th September, 2014