Years back an old boyfriend and I
decided to open up an art gallery together.
We had different viewpoints on how the business should be run and
different business attitudes. His
attitude as the “artist” was more generous and laissez faire where I thought it
very important to be involved in the business and with the artist that we
showcased. We fought continuously about
the future of the gallery because our ideas and attitudes collided. To begin with, the gallery required some
money upfront, which at the time was a significant amount for two recent
college graduates. There were also many
physical and personal resources that were needed to run the gallery. We were both very set in our ways and neither
of us wanted to back down from our ideals.
Eventually our inability to resolve this conflict resulted in the
closing of the gallery. Levine (cite)
mentions four cost of conflict that are the result of unresolved
conflicts. The first one is direct
cost. Our gallery had a direct cost
because we lost the money that we had primarily invested in the gallery plus
outstanding costs that had to be paid to artists that were left out in the cold
who we had contracted to show in our space.
The second cost of conflict is what he calls productivity cost or lost
time. Obviously because we could not
resolve our conflict, we were not able to continue showcasing artists. Our gallery had begun to receive some
recognition and we were on a path of expanding our artist showcase. The third cost of conflict is continuity
cost. Because we were unable to resolve
our differences in business management, we ended up severing our personal
relationship as well which caused many other direct costs due to the fact that
we lived together. Lastly, Levine
mentions the emotional cost involved which in our case was destructive. I not only lost a business partner but my
best friend and boyfriend.
Looking back, if I would have had
access to the resources I do now and known about Levine’s (2009) Ten Principles
of New Thinking, I may have addressed our conflicts in a different way. Levine describes an old way of thinking and
contrasts it with a new way of thinking.
For example, the idea of scarcity is something that any business owner
fears. However, over the years, I have
learned to believe in abundance and that lack, or the idea of lack, is only in
the mind. During my conflict over the
gallery I was also always very concerned with losing resources. Levine tells us that we need to flip the
switch and think of it as creating partnerships instead. Everyone knows that two heads are always
better than one. I know for a fact that
I have had far greater successes in my life when I have teamed up with
people. Along with more creative
partnerships it is also important to foster sustainable collaboration. Again, working in collaborative teams renders
higher results. Some of the other
principles that Levine mentions are transforming negative feelings into
creativity and being open with our emotions.
It is impossible to run a business if you do not share your
feelings. With my boyfriend we would get
upset with each other because of assumptions we made regarding what the other
person was feeling instead of clarifying exactly what we wanted. We could have
avoided a lot of miscommunication this way.
Lastly, I always tried to reach a
consensus or decision using logic and trying to revert to traditional business
models. My boyfriend, being very creative and intuitive, always suggested we
try other new ways of doing things. And
although I liked his ideas, I was afraid to make the plunge because my life
savings was involved. Looking back, I am
sure we could have reached a middle ground if we made a stronger effort to
resolve our differences.
I definitely believe that we could
have avoided many cost of conflict would we have adapted an attitude of
resolution instead of defending our positions.
Levine explains that “learning and being open to influence puts you in a
mind-set of discovery, allowing you the luxury of not knowing the answers or
the specific path that you will take” (2009, p. 98). When we open ourselves to other perspectives,
voices and ideas we open ourselves to other opportunities. No one knows everything about everything, yet
during a conflict our emotions and pride restrain us from learning.
I think the takeaway from this
exercise is to learn to think from the heart, but not necessarily from the
emotions. To step away from the conflict
far enough were you are not emotionally invested but still able to see other
perspectives. And most importantly, I
feel that I will be more adept to “listening” to others instead of fighting to
maintain my position.
References
No comments:
Post a Comment