Your observation that open-mindedness is a natural strategy for business people is excellent – a lot there to think about.

As for reflection, that’s also a very interesting perception. I certainly think that effective and thoughtful assessment of experience is key to true, lasting success. It would be interesting to see how many who have achieved senior decision-making positions can be said to view that sort of reflection as important to their progress. It may well be that, even if it is, the evident bias for decisive, prompt action prevalent in the business world might discourage admission of such a tendency – or even suppress awareness of it.

You surprised me with that comment. Despite certain types of efforts to institutionalize reflection into business practice or insert it by proxy into individual development, I agree that it is generally not accorded the status its value warrants. A lot to think about here, too – to what degree that is true, and why.

It is not reflection, but action, that makes things happen. On the other hand, reflection best makes and guides action. The alternative is to simply shotgun vast arrays of random action into the marketplace and hope something hits the mark. Both are actually strategies employed on each of the micro and macro scales by companies and economies. Perhaps a surfeit of resources drives one to the luxury of action without reflection. Which, of course, sets in motion dynamics that both deplete those resources and calcify the instinct and talent for reflection that will eventually be required to recover them.

You note that so many combatants relish the combat as much or more than the issues generating the contest. That seems to me just the reason why an alert (or reflective!) debater should not simply compete with such a combative debating partner, but use him or her as a foil to address, and more effectively deliver one’s message, to the audience – including the opponent’s nominal constituency.

That’s a pretty big topic, actually, isn’t it? Perhaps worth more elaboration. I meant it in the post, of course, to refer to everything from workplace debates over alternatives of various types, to controversies current in the international scene, largely driven by the events still unfolding as a consequence of 9/11.

I, like you, hope the audience will ultimately show the wisdom so many of its leaders lack. And I hope more of those “leaders” will acknowledge that wisdom when it is expressed.

Thanks so much, Shaun, as always, for your visits, your thought-provoking observations, and your kind words – not to mention your own work!

What’s always slightly amazed me is your focus on a business audience, since it’s filled with folks who tend not to be all that reflective. Yes I know, some are, (especially some who read your blog) but bottom-line pressures tend to squeeze the sensitive souls out.

The upside with business types is they’re actually more tolerant than many give them credit for – if only because a good deal is a good deal, good business ideas can come out of any corner, money is green everywhere, etc. (And it’s also why I don’t mind helping them create healthier workplaces.)

People pay lip service to the idea of a vigorous debate between strongly held views as being good for all of us, but not that many truly believe it – and, for too many, it’s combat they relish.

But unlike actual war, where a decisive outcome is obvious, (especially to the vanquished,) wars of ideas and values can be morphed into mere wars of words in which no one allows himself to “lose” simply by not acknowledging that it ever happens.

The cost of losing (loss of dignity, “face,” perception of strength) at the symbolic and psychological level is too much to “allow.” Denial is a powerful, ubiquitous tool of human cognitive functioning. And of course, if you try to penetrate that, they’ll deny they’re denying.

Which is why I especially like your point: speak to the audience. That’s where to put the focus and energy.

I confess that I go in and out of believing that strategy will ultimately prevail, but I’m sure hoping you’re right.

Thanks,

Shaun

PS I’ve been away, so I haven’t commented on your use of Tolstoy as grist for discussion, but I’m enjoying the reading.