Having toured and understood one’s country would be one way to measure the level of patriotism in oneself. That could be a basis upon which every individual citizen would cease a moment to make a social impact –with prior knowledge about the countries challenges to address at individual level.
The recent talk about patriotism has featured two nation’s political party heads reaching out to the countryside to spread the gospel of patriotism. Unfortunately, patriotism speeches have been partisan – as applicable only to supporters of the ruling party while, according to them, the rest (Ugandans) never qualify to be patriotic outside their parties.
Much as the idea was fantastic, it has served competing interests of FDC and NRM to foster the love for one’s party –rather than in the best way to construct national identity, unity and solidarity against challenges that affect Uganda, as a whole.
As a consequence, the NRM party has resumed its patriotic activities by recruiting students into para-military engagement commonly known as chakamchaka. From that, we are set to have new definitions of patriotism; among them being one according to FDC party and another from the NRM view.
One interesting complimentary on the patriotism talk was one by former vice president of Uganda, Wandera Specioza, who suggested to members of parliament –to consider their positions as mere services to the country rather than a career –whilst responding to the proposal of securing a government house for a serving vice president.
Her appeal was a show of patriotism; although during her time as a vice president, she accepted huge sums of tax payer’s money to fund her PhD study. If Specioza was patriotic as she meant, she would have rejected tax payer’s money and opted for her own allowances, since she was working and could afford.
Perhaps, if she was in Bukenya’s position, she would as well support the idea of tax payers providing accommodation to her. It is, however, hard to imagine that as some people are making their lives as comfortable as possible, elsewhere in the country-side citizens lack essential livelihood services.
In Busia District, for example, HIV/AIDS services have to either be sought in Kenya or some miles into nearby districts like Tororo and Mbale. The situation can be worse for the more rural people, who they have to travel for several miles to access ARVs and other related services. This can be pretty costly for them to sustain in-patient care at a health center, and stigma is very high in rural areas.
Family members keep the anger and remain in denial over a period not less six months –characterized by violence against the person living with HIV/AIDS. Because of that, a much longer recovery and positive living program would be desired, for example; 1) having to address household poverty –which renders life with HIV difficult to live, 2) having to create awareness about HIV/AIDS –to desensitize people of the fears and negative cultural attitudes about HIV/AIDS and, 3) encouraging NGO establishment in places like Busia to provide psycho-social services and medical services that foster positive living.
There are a handful of NGOs in Busia. HIV/AIDS components of the existing organizations are too weak or limited to offer tangible services to potential clients. Yet, Busia, being one of the historically a trans-boarder route –through which HIV/AIDS is said to have penetrated Uganda should have benefited earliest from HIV/AIDS service organizations, both local and international. In Busia, they are mainly focused on widows, orphans and other vulnerable groups.
From an assessment of a sample of twenty five women selected to benefit from a micro-credit scheme; a poverty alleviation program of New Hope African Children organization in Busia showed that all married women did not make independent decisions that affect their health and livelihood.
Husbands often interfered with their businesses and played a more influential role, which negatively affected the extent of credit trust-worthiness –given the danger of men wholly determining allocation of money, and possibly taking it to drinking sprees.
Moreover, all did not have necessary knowledge to ensure proper hygiene and sanitation, and were under constant threat of heavy rainfall due to poor housing. Actually, some were often kept awake whenever it rained; fearful that their shelters could be washed away.
Interesting about non-government organizations there was their ability to use brain and paper-work to win and manage huge sums of donor money. However, their management was so centralized that the founder in reality acted as the chairman board of director.
Organizations decisions never involved the stipulated board members as per the constitution requirement. It was only strategic to include prominent men and women as board members –to win donor money and reputation. They only sat down and cooked attractive reports to retain healthy donor relations.
Some of them are lucky to have achieved that without key organizational structures in place. Perhaps the Christian face of such organizations left their sponsors with no doubt but to offer whatever assistance they could.
And those working for the organization are a small team of family members (wife and husband), in-laws, friends and distant relatives. This, supposedly, was intended to reduce incidence of conflicts and fasten decision making process in the organization
Whereas rising towns like Busia are basically secure, there exist individuals or small groups who are very influential and seemingly untouchable. Reports say that criticizing them could land one in trouble.
They can organize violent action against people they found a threat to their personality or any possible competitor in terms of power and wealth. And when they need anything, they explore all means to get there; an interesting value, though.
For example, a famous local council one or village chairman was able to become district speaker with ease –an opportunity only reserved for a councilor at district level –who chooses to vie for that position (district speakership).
However, religion as a major tool for social order has bigger roots in Busia. One interesting element is the ease at which one became a pastor. The balokole –born again Christians have a great network of members –who relate well and often help each other in times of need.
It, again, was the most influential and expressive balokole –who as other go to Bible schools to become pastors, they either labeled themselves so or others simply began calling themselves pastors. It was like business to do so by organizations and individuals –who want to gain financially or attract donor money.
Bazungu –whites or colored people are viewed as gods because of the commonly held view that they are “wealthy” guys who have come in the area to give away money. Because of that, they are made to feel as comfortable as possible. For a field team consisting of two or three whites, the most likelihood there could be discrimination of local team members by local communities they served.
Perhaps the only privilege local team members would enjoy is paying cheaper prices for good and services. Even with equal roles and responsibilities side-by-side with mutual respect within the team, outside it, will be conclusions that local team members are servants to bazungu.
At home stays, chefs will want bazungu to eat what is best of the food served rather than have it shared equally among team members. According to the hosts, best food consisted of passion fruits, irish potatoes, meat and rice. The local team members could only serve from that menu long after the bazungu have served.
The host expectations ever are that, when the foreign visitors return to their respective countries, they would send them gifts and other donations, which really any local community member could do to someone in need.
What Africans need to develop is the culture of volunteerism and caring or helping out change lives of vulnerable groups, victims of war and natural calamities –for the better. This could help raise and preserve African dignity in the face of bazungu.
Jacob Waiswa
Community Psychologist, DISHMA CONSULT
Showing posts with label Organisation culture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Organisation culture. Show all posts
Saturday, May 16, 2009
DECISION MAKING FOR ORGANISATION DEVELOPMENT: THE CASE OF ORGANISATIONS IN BUSIA-DISTRICT
It takes a lot of effort to form, make paper-work and achieve organization objectives. Some people can be successful with project formulation, but fail at implementation –due to a number of factors that maybe; financial, legal, technical, environmental or political, among others.
But, even at implementation, like at every other developmental stage, there exists challenges ranging from administrative to financial accountability. Common in the administration department could be disagreements, role ambiguity, and formation of antagonistic groups –each working hard to suffocate progress under each other’s roles and responsibility (if any). Some people call it office politics.
Because administration is centralized, with powers entirely falling on the director’s shoulders, each of the groups will want to compete hard to win the directors favor and indispensability. And the director, with limited or no knowledge and skills in conflict resolution, is in many cases bases on rumors to make decisions.
Attempts to solve conflicts will only feature him carrying the rumor to the targeted person –from where tempers ensue, since the rumor might not have truth. The accused, thereon, develops a grudge on the rumor-monger. The organization head, on his part, will only walk away having made a statement to the accused, but without reaching a consensus.
It is in such state of affairs the organization head will seemingly flourish, which in a long run affects progress and quality of reports that have to be made. But, since himself is the head of monitoring and evaluation, he will always cook his reports for whoever needs them.
Noting that centralization of power makes organization boss very busy, never does he find time to make inquiries into raging conflict among his or her work force. Himself can be a source of conflict –when he crosses his boundaries to briefly manage and make reports for affiliated projects –whose heads are left with no powers, no confidence, and at times no work.
Being the founder, actual chairperson of the board of directors and director leaves no one to offer accountability to or make administrative checks and balances. He or she is only accountable to himself.
No one advises him on matters of policy and decision making. Uncertainty soon crops in as the founder and director lacks the capacity to run organizational programs, yet claiming to trust no one.
Since most of his time so far has been spent on resource mobilization since project formulation, it becomes the best skill possessed by the organizational director. Beyond that, he has to either hire unskilled and semi-skilled labor that never help much, exploit skilled labor without wage pay or partner with existing organization –with whom to share technical knowledge and skills.
The mismanagement on his or her part can be a disappointment to project partners –who eventually lose confidence in the director’s ability to run the organization. Funny enough, instead of accepting the weaknesses of his management style, he displaces self-inflicted frustration on project partners.
Hiring labor, according to him or her can never entail preparing guidelines and agreements or contracts that must be signed by hired worker. He applies verbal agreements whilst sure that they will be broken anytime –where verbal termination of work will not judge him in the way that disrupts his motive and prior decisions based on suspicion.
The project partners, on the other hand, use their bitterness to discourage other partners –including donors to bury their confidence in the director and his organization. This deepens the conflict –to even create psychological scars.
This, in future, affects new partnerships, as he will nurse suspicion and mistrust that whoever seeking to partner with him are likely to cause similar negative scenarios as previous encountered in fallen relations.
In case a new project partner, with whom he has mixed feelings (e.g. trust-mistrust) found his way to working with the traumatized director, entry initiation would be organized –involving telling stories about past negative experiences with ex-partners and setting expectations reviewable almost weekly.
Whatever program created by a project partner, upon rumor sent regarding it, could be called off until the planned activities are discussed and approved by the director. This is how far his or her sensitivity can be to whoever works with him.
Whilst in the field, his “spies” will report to the organization head every movement, action and words spoken by the project officer or business partner. The information carried to him is repackaged in the way that discredits the dynamic project officer before the organization head. It can be as though the spy-master’s preference is passiveness or idle-talk at work.
Decisions made are emotionally triggered (i.e. when happy, or fearful). Without having to consult anyone or make further inquiries, fear or anxiety-based decisions would be made against staff qualifying for it.
This, now, becomes the norm applicable in every organization development process –be it at recruitment, promotion, demotion or dismissal. Fear, to such a director, is perceivable as a threat not only for him, but organizational as well.
At this stage of affairs, he can hardly be separated from organization needs. He would assume that his bad taste should be the same to everyone that may be; his support staff, partners, and clients.
Such an organization would be the kind that collapses as soon as its director physically falls ill or dies. This would be so because he would not have prepared the organization for sustainability.
As a result, the disempowered workers will even consult for the obvious –fearing they will make mistakes costly to their careers. That soon turns them into statue workers, who are nothing-doers –yet pausing as staff at the organization.
Surprising, still, is be absence of a work plan. Neither is it known to staff nor organization frameworks, objectives or ideals. He, of the sort, runs the organization himself –since project or program descriptions are only known to him. Shrewd staff as he would perhaps expect could design and implement programs along side probable organization objectives –to keep busy.
An assembly, which in most constitutions is the highest decision-making body, is never followed. Decisions passed are only shelved once forwarded to him –in favor of rumors from conflicting parties about how the meeting went.
If part of agenda was to address staff conflicts, he would choose traditional one –famous to him that preserved conflicts. It seems like he found it was fan conflicting parties having to rush to him, one after another, to give their versions of the cause.
Yet, it would be focusing on resolutions reached at assemblies or recommendation in reports submitted that could be a basis of policy and decision making. Doing so, is what could eventually find a lasting solution for lingering fusses in the organization.
Otherwise, absence of such would not only stall organization progress, but lead to its collapse. No wonder, organizations found to nurse conflicts have had a history of failed programs.
Perhaps, if there was an active and most influential board of directors, they would help advice such a managerially-ill director with parameters –with which to direct the organization along set objectives –to realize real impact.
Unfortunately, for most non-government organization, especially of modern times, the aim of their establishment is mainly to employ the founder, rather than community development. In fact, a personal business. So, they fasten the idea formulation process and paper-work, as well as hire names of those who could act as members of board of directors –for the purposes of registration.
Unfortunately, the boards of directors are only involved to facilitate registration exercise. They never have a say or influence of how implementation and financial matters must be addressed. He or she, thus, studies reports with no body –as for financial accountability.
And, because of the past conflicts with previous business partners, and how dangerous they soured to largely and negatively affect organization development, the troubled director must have developed a mental disorder to now necessitate rehabilitation.
Regarding his managerial deficits, he will only have to try a recognized local management institution. Important to note also would be that, having successfully founded an organization can be unrelated to good management. Even when anyone smelt a rat as soon as he or she joined the organization and brought it to his attention; he, still, could claim was good manager.
At such a level of an organization; very young, and that has not impacted communities in which it operates, management must open up to forces of positive organization change; strictly following known and understood –established systems of conflict resolution and monitoring and evaluation.
Jacob Waiswa
Community Psychologist
DISHMA CONSULT
But, even at implementation, like at every other developmental stage, there exists challenges ranging from administrative to financial accountability. Common in the administration department could be disagreements, role ambiguity, and formation of antagonistic groups –each working hard to suffocate progress under each other’s roles and responsibility (if any). Some people call it office politics.
Because administration is centralized, with powers entirely falling on the director’s shoulders, each of the groups will want to compete hard to win the directors favor and indispensability. And the director, with limited or no knowledge and skills in conflict resolution, is in many cases bases on rumors to make decisions.
Attempts to solve conflicts will only feature him carrying the rumor to the targeted person –from where tempers ensue, since the rumor might not have truth. The accused, thereon, develops a grudge on the rumor-monger. The organization head, on his part, will only walk away having made a statement to the accused, but without reaching a consensus.
It is in such state of affairs the organization head will seemingly flourish, which in a long run affects progress and quality of reports that have to be made. But, since himself is the head of monitoring and evaluation, he will always cook his reports for whoever needs them.
Noting that centralization of power makes organization boss very busy, never does he find time to make inquiries into raging conflict among his or her work force. Himself can be a source of conflict –when he crosses his boundaries to briefly manage and make reports for affiliated projects –whose heads are left with no powers, no confidence, and at times no work.
Being the founder, actual chairperson of the board of directors and director leaves no one to offer accountability to or make administrative checks and balances. He or she is only accountable to himself.
No one advises him on matters of policy and decision making. Uncertainty soon crops in as the founder and director lacks the capacity to run organizational programs, yet claiming to trust no one.
Since most of his time so far has been spent on resource mobilization since project formulation, it becomes the best skill possessed by the organizational director. Beyond that, he has to either hire unskilled and semi-skilled labor that never help much, exploit skilled labor without wage pay or partner with existing organization –with whom to share technical knowledge and skills.
The mismanagement on his or her part can be a disappointment to project partners –who eventually lose confidence in the director’s ability to run the organization. Funny enough, instead of accepting the weaknesses of his management style, he displaces self-inflicted frustration on project partners.
Hiring labor, according to him or her can never entail preparing guidelines and agreements or contracts that must be signed by hired worker. He applies verbal agreements whilst sure that they will be broken anytime –where verbal termination of work will not judge him in the way that disrupts his motive and prior decisions based on suspicion.
The project partners, on the other hand, use their bitterness to discourage other partners –including donors to bury their confidence in the director and his organization. This deepens the conflict –to even create psychological scars.
This, in future, affects new partnerships, as he will nurse suspicion and mistrust that whoever seeking to partner with him are likely to cause similar negative scenarios as previous encountered in fallen relations.
In case a new project partner, with whom he has mixed feelings (e.g. trust-mistrust) found his way to working with the traumatized director, entry initiation would be organized –involving telling stories about past negative experiences with ex-partners and setting expectations reviewable almost weekly.
Whatever program created by a project partner, upon rumor sent regarding it, could be called off until the planned activities are discussed and approved by the director. This is how far his or her sensitivity can be to whoever works with him.
Whilst in the field, his “spies” will report to the organization head every movement, action and words spoken by the project officer or business partner. The information carried to him is repackaged in the way that discredits the dynamic project officer before the organization head. It can be as though the spy-master’s preference is passiveness or idle-talk at work.
Decisions made are emotionally triggered (i.e. when happy, or fearful). Without having to consult anyone or make further inquiries, fear or anxiety-based decisions would be made against staff qualifying for it.
This, now, becomes the norm applicable in every organization development process –be it at recruitment, promotion, demotion or dismissal. Fear, to such a director, is perceivable as a threat not only for him, but organizational as well.
At this stage of affairs, he can hardly be separated from organization needs. He would assume that his bad taste should be the same to everyone that may be; his support staff, partners, and clients.
Such an organization would be the kind that collapses as soon as its director physically falls ill or dies. This would be so because he would not have prepared the organization for sustainability.
As a result, the disempowered workers will even consult for the obvious –fearing they will make mistakes costly to their careers. That soon turns them into statue workers, who are nothing-doers –yet pausing as staff at the organization.
Surprising, still, is be absence of a work plan. Neither is it known to staff nor organization frameworks, objectives or ideals. He, of the sort, runs the organization himself –since project or program descriptions are only known to him. Shrewd staff as he would perhaps expect could design and implement programs along side probable organization objectives –to keep busy.
An assembly, which in most constitutions is the highest decision-making body, is never followed. Decisions passed are only shelved once forwarded to him –in favor of rumors from conflicting parties about how the meeting went.
If part of agenda was to address staff conflicts, he would choose traditional one –famous to him that preserved conflicts. It seems like he found it was fan conflicting parties having to rush to him, one after another, to give their versions of the cause.
Yet, it would be focusing on resolutions reached at assemblies or recommendation in reports submitted that could be a basis of policy and decision making. Doing so, is what could eventually find a lasting solution for lingering fusses in the organization.
Otherwise, absence of such would not only stall organization progress, but lead to its collapse. No wonder, organizations found to nurse conflicts have had a history of failed programs.
Perhaps, if there was an active and most influential board of directors, they would help advice such a managerially-ill director with parameters –with which to direct the organization along set objectives –to realize real impact.
Unfortunately, for most non-government organization, especially of modern times, the aim of their establishment is mainly to employ the founder, rather than community development. In fact, a personal business. So, they fasten the idea formulation process and paper-work, as well as hire names of those who could act as members of board of directors –for the purposes of registration.
Unfortunately, the boards of directors are only involved to facilitate registration exercise. They never have a say or influence of how implementation and financial matters must be addressed. He or she, thus, studies reports with no body –as for financial accountability.
And, because of the past conflicts with previous business partners, and how dangerous they soured to largely and negatively affect organization development, the troubled director must have developed a mental disorder to now necessitate rehabilitation.
Regarding his managerial deficits, he will only have to try a recognized local management institution. Important to note also would be that, having successfully founded an organization can be unrelated to good management. Even when anyone smelt a rat as soon as he or she joined the organization and brought it to his attention; he, still, could claim was good manager.
At such a level of an organization; very young, and that has not impacted communities in which it operates, management must open up to forces of positive organization change; strictly following known and understood –established systems of conflict resolution and monitoring and evaluation.
Jacob Waiswa
Community Psychologist
DISHMA CONSULT
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
SURELY, HOW GOOD IS TEAM-WORK ETHIC?
A lot of emphasis has been put on team work as a value that must be central in the running of organizations, corporations, political bodies and in any strategic plans of individuals and groups of them.
Being in the team can be very challenging. It would require sacrificing much of the individual self, seeking approval before taking certain actions on behalf of the group, accepting policies passed the general assembly even when they encroach on individual values and belief systems, and being forced to take a “foolish” idea because the majority people have decided.
As benefits of team-work, people talk about easy problem-solving, less costs, more confidence and moral, greater energy levels or strength, quick results and more success than not towards a specific objective.
There is a strong relationship between team-work and socialism –in the run-up to capitalism. The poor and less able could find team-work or collaboration unquestionably much suiting in trying to compete at a healthy level with others or be in position to meet certain qualities of living as well as to survive tough times. It could be a means for community or individual healing after a traumatic event.
The National Resistance Movement (NRM) has proved itself excellent in team-building and sustainability. Having kept the bond over years (22 years), yet continuing in the same spirit is something that cannot be underestimated. There are people who have wedded like today and divorced tomorrow.
One interesting observation about them is that they are scientific in the running of affairs within the group, in its consolidation and continuity. They use evolutionary principle that people in the group must be selected out if found unfit such that it is only the strong that remain, while at the same time -massively recruiting energetic young generation in its ranks.
It is, however, important to note that life in a team is not different from life out of it. After all, it is all about having supportive healthy relationships whilst ensuring harmony, cohesion and continuity –which could be met from the fact that man is a social being.
As a social being he needs others much as he needs himself. And, at most or certain times, he would seek others or be sought without hesitation. Politicians, in this regard, play it handsomely, as enshrined in the saying, ‘there is no permanent friend or enemy’ in the game.
Nonetheless, there are people who get into teams without ever opening up to the value. In it they continue to jealously guard and nurse individual interests, forming smaller worlds within the bigger one, and accelerated by a lot of mistrust and suspicion.
This could be due to some members in the team having a history of conspiracy, pest-like behavior, back-stubbing, mud-pouring, feeling robust enough to run affairs single handedly, where relating with them could mean risking death or reversing progress and “killing” productivity.
Teams, also, could be good sources of inequality and exploitation of some individuals by the most dominant. The dominant ones begin to create values and rules that elevate them far above the simple and non-questioning ones.
In such, it would be possible to find people earning a lot in wages, but doing so little or no work, while others do heavy work-load and earn very little. An equity element in the team soon drops, as the domineering begin their work of; disrespecting others, feeling and acting as most important in the group worthy to be showered with all the respect, and eventually creating cult-like atmosphere.
It would hardly be so long, when the team begins to break into small or mini-alliances opposing and working against each other. Those suffocated by rules and policies would most likely walk out to find “oxygen” elsewhere -aware that the world is much bigger than the entity in terms of opportunities for development and success.
Affected people must move out and on, and help turn affairs positively from the outside. The experience within the group would most definitely help one prove personal worth, with both determination, and qualities subsequently got to succeed. It would call for a lot of focus and resilience to overcome and make a milestone walk to success.
But, even with largely good membership within the team, some individuals may choose to be wild, where instead of focusing on team progress, resort to foul-play and undermining its advancement, as if they are pests and weevils.
They are the kinds, who like their hobbies, complain without suggesting, and have hidden agendas to destroy and cause disrepute of others, nagging a lot, and above all, carry out acts of aggressions without clear reason.
The condition could be so chronic that separation, as was the case with Abraham and Lot, might provide the best answer -to reduce the spread of mental toxics and its debilitating effect on the individual, group or organization.
There are four basic situations with which to comprehensively describe such people.
1) Presence of Judas Iscariot in the amidst, 2) A snake in a living room, 3) A terrorist bomber on the plane, and 4) A married woman who after having sex goes to her parent’s home just to inform them about how much of it she had.
The biggest tumor could be presence of a higher degree case of individuals, whose characters not only prove dangerous to the team, but also, capable of self-destruction. They could also be the kind of people, whose satisfaction, at best, is got through seeing others in pain as a way to reduce their own. What would happen if this person assumed important responsibilities in society?
The future would most likely have Hitlers, who leave power disgracefully, and with a lot of retaliations or kind of compensations to pursue and execute. In Palestine and Israel, it has been centuries of aggression revenge and counter-revenge – a story that could still run for more years into the future.
Similarly in the team, battle lines could be drawn for as long as members are alive, and even potentially hotter to lead into bloodshed. And the aggression and repression could be too hard to either forget or forgive – as the cycle of assaults continues.
All the ingredients turn out to act like a hobby to the fellow. It is a kind of identity seeking by living rule-less and anarchical life that is key characteristics of adolescents between the ages of nine (9) to twenty four (24). Could they have skipped some stages in it so that in future society suffers as a result?
A good example here is the growth and rise of The Monitor Publication led by Wafula Ogutu, Onyango Obbo and others. But also, in the most read book, the Bible, at one point a relationship circumstances could force a split as the case with Abraham and Lot.
But then, settlement of conflicts among parties could be every member’s responsibility to either calm down the dangerous gut, reconciling and pledging mutual support, and helping save aggressive energy for alternative positive pursuits that would still create a mark in life.
Some sacred values need to remain personal and never be diluted by the team type. There could be a lot of satisfaction if there were a distinction between team and personal values –to keep nursing
The architects of team building must, therefore, not make unlimited furnishings about team-work. Much as team-work is good, people must not be led into it blindly. They must first understand the modes of cooperation, over what and for how long as the tentative and unifying team values are clarified to members and understood.
In it people should freely go in and out without anyone pointing a finger or having to subject them to indoctrination, while uniqueness in personality and diversity of views are appreciated.
And, whilst in the team the values of mutual respect, defending each other’s interests and supporting them, mutual understanding, having equal chance to speak and listen –with appropriate timing and quantity of words, cooperation, accepting to disagree, using politeness and humor to influence ones ideals –with a take it or leave it stance, and demonstrating care about other’s boundaries and constantly checking one’s limits, must be taken into account.
Under extreme cases of madness from the aggressor –where madness of one person predicts similar cases in others, victims should shake off the “mud” by moving away for personal safety, health, to regain hope, focus, regenerate and progress towards one’s life goals.
During such a process –with timing that varies from one person to another and from one situation to another (depending on the impact it has had on the individual or community), patience is vital. There is nothing cowardly about moving to safety. Even in the toughest battles, soldiers retreat.
Jacob Waiswa
Situation Health Analyst
www.situationhealthanalysis.blogspot.com
Being in the team can be very challenging. It would require sacrificing much of the individual self, seeking approval before taking certain actions on behalf of the group, accepting policies passed the general assembly even when they encroach on individual values and belief systems, and being forced to take a “foolish” idea because the majority people have decided.
As benefits of team-work, people talk about easy problem-solving, less costs, more confidence and moral, greater energy levels or strength, quick results and more success than not towards a specific objective.
There is a strong relationship between team-work and socialism –in the run-up to capitalism. The poor and less able could find team-work or collaboration unquestionably much suiting in trying to compete at a healthy level with others or be in position to meet certain qualities of living as well as to survive tough times. It could be a means for community or individual healing after a traumatic event.
The National Resistance Movement (NRM) has proved itself excellent in team-building and sustainability. Having kept the bond over years (22 years), yet continuing in the same spirit is something that cannot be underestimated. There are people who have wedded like today and divorced tomorrow.
One interesting observation about them is that they are scientific in the running of affairs within the group, in its consolidation and continuity. They use evolutionary principle that people in the group must be selected out if found unfit such that it is only the strong that remain, while at the same time -massively recruiting energetic young generation in its ranks.
It is, however, important to note that life in a team is not different from life out of it. After all, it is all about having supportive healthy relationships whilst ensuring harmony, cohesion and continuity –which could be met from the fact that man is a social being.
As a social being he needs others much as he needs himself. And, at most or certain times, he would seek others or be sought without hesitation. Politicians, in this regard, play it handsomely, as enshrined in the saying, ‘there is no permanent friend or enemy’ in the game.
Nonetheless, there are people who get into teams without ever opening up to the value. In it they continue to jealously guard and nurse individual interests, forming smaller worlds within the bigger one, and accelerated by a lot of mistrust and suspicion.
This could be due to some members in the team having a history of conspiracy, pest-like behavior, back-stubbing, mud-pouring, feeling robust enough to run affairs single handedly, where relating with them could mean risking death or reversing progress and “killing” productivity.
Teams, also, could be good sources of inequality and exploitation of some individuals by the most dominant. The dominant ones begin to create values and rules that elevate them far above the simple and non-questioning ones.
In such, it would be possible to find people earning a lot in wages, but doing so little or no work, while others do heavy work-load and earn very little. An equity element in the team soon drops, as the domineering begin their work of; disrespecting others, feeling and acting as most important in the group worthy to be showered with all the respect, and eventually creating cult-like atmosphere.
It would hardly be so long, when the team begins to break into small or mini-alliances opposing and working against each other. Those suffocated by rules and policies would most likely walk out to find “oxygen” elsewhere -aware that the world is much bigger than the entity in terms of opportunities for development and success.
Affected people must move out and on, and help turn affairs positively from the outside. The experience within the group would most definitely help one prove personal worth, with both determination, and qualities subsequently got to succeed. It would call for a lot of focus and resilience to overcome and make a milestone walk to success.
But, even with largely good membership within the team, some individuals may choose to be wild, where instead of focusing on team progress, resort to foul-play and undermining its advancement, as if they are pests and weevils.
They are the kinds, who like their hobbies, complain without suggesting, and have hidden agendas to destroy and cause disrepute of others, nagging a lot, and above all, carry out acts of aggressions without clear reason.
The condition could be so chronic that separation, as was the case with Abraham and Lot, might provide the best answer -to reduce the spread of mental toxics and its debilitating effect on the individual, group or organization.
There are four basic situations with which to comprehensively describe such people.
1) Presence of Judas Iscariot in the amidst, 2) A snake in a living room, 3) A terrorist bomber on the plane, and 4) A married woman who after having sex goes to her parent’s home just to inform them about how much of it she had.
The biggest tumor could be presence of a higher degree case of individuals, whose characters not only prove dangerous to the team, but also, capable of self-destruction. They could also be the kind of people, whose satisfaction, at best, is got through seeing others in pain as a way to reduce their own. What would happen if this person assumed important responsibilities in society?
The future would most likely have Hitlers, who leave power disgracefully, and with a lot of retaliations or kind of compensations to pursue and execute. In Palestine and Israel, it has been centuries of aggression revenge and counter-revenge – a story that could still run for more years into the future.
Similarly in the team, battle lines could be drawn for as long as members are alive, and even potentially hotter to lead into bloodshed. And the aggression and repression could be too hard to either forget or forgive – as the cycle of assaults continues.
All the ingredients turn out to act like a hobby to the fellow. It is a kind of identity seeking by living rule-less and anarchical life that is key characteristics of adolescents between the ages of nine (9) to twenty four (24). Could they have skipped some stages in it so that in future society suffers as a result?
A good example here is the growth and rise of The Monitor Publication led by Wafula Ogutu, Onyango Obbo and others. But also, in the most read book, the Bible, at one point a relationship circumstances could force a split as the case with Abraham and Lot.
But then, settlement of conflicts among parties could be every member’s responsibility to either calm down the dangerous gut, reconciling and pledging mutual support, and helping save aggressive energy for alternative positive pursuits that would still create a mark in life.
Some sacred values need to remain personal and never be diluted by the team type. There could be a lot of satisfaction if there were a distinction between team and personal values –to keep nursing
The architects of team building must, therefore, not make unlimited furnishings about team-work. Much as team-work is good, people must not be led into it blindly. They must first understand the modes of cooperation, over what and for how long as the tentative and unifying team values are clarified to members and understood.
In it people should freely go in and out without anyone pointing a finger or having to subject them to indoctrination, while uniqueness in personality and diversity of views are appreciated.
And, whilst in the team the values of mutual respect, defending each other’s interests and supporting them, mutual understanding, having equal chance to speak and listen –with appropriate timing and quantity of words, cooperation, accepting to disagree, using politeness and humor to influence ones ideals –with a take it or leave it stance, and demonstrating care about other’s boundaries and constantly checking one’s limits, must be taken into account.
Under extreme cases of madness from the aggressor –where madness of one person predicts similar cases in others, victims should shake off the “mud” by moving away for personal safety, health, to regain hope, focus, regenerate and progress towards one’s life goals.
During such a process –with timing that varies from one person to another and from one situation to another (depending on the impact it has had on the individual or community), patience is vital. There is nothing cowardly about moving to safety. Even in the toughest battles, soldiers retreat.
Jacob Waiswa
Situation Health Analyst
www.situationhealthanalysis.blogspot.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)