WHEN THE SALVO COMES YOUR WAY AT WORK - DON'T DUCK OR DIVE, IT'S SCATHING BUT NEVER FATAL

WHEN THE SALVO COMES YOUR WAY AT WORK - DON'T DUCK IT'S SCATHING BUT NEVER FATAL

Some days in the workplace can just spiral out of control due to misunderstanding of our creation or by other parties, regardless of who is  responsible  as a matter of fact the salvo may just come your way blazing
and scathing like that.

Everybody loses their heads and tempers flare, exchanges of threats and insults fill the air, fingers point and when they point at you as the one responsible for the obtaining situation gone out of hand what do you do?

Do you duck? Do you dive? Do you shift blame and find a scapegoat? As a responsible individual who understands that the only person whose control and conviction you have is yourself you do none of those things because they will certainly be met with resistance and backlash at some point.

As living beings our default setting is to defend ourselves when attacked or backed into a corner, as such if one ducks in the firing line then the missile hits the next thing in its path. In this context that next thing happens to be a fellow human being who is most likely to defend themselves by whatever means necessary. Knowing that the salvo was meant for you and you ducked to let them get hit will put you on a collision course with
that person.

It's the same as shifting blame explicitly or implicitly, the response by the person at whose door you park condemnation duly or unduly is highly unlikely to be a friendly one but another scenario of defence mechanism deployment.

 Enlightened people however with
progressive and constructive mentalities believe in contributing solutions at the first instance or sign of a problem or conflict, the new default setting no longer becomes defense but resolving the problem right away and ensuring peaceful continuity.

Yes the fingers have pointed at you or somebody has clearly ducked and let the salvo come your way which would have been meant for them.
The primary reason for ducking and shifting blame is that they have neither a solution to the problem nor capacity to contain and process the situation amicably.

However grasping self mastery brings us to knowing that no matter how disadvantaged we may find ourselves in a situation it is always possible to engage "resolve" mode and contribute positively rather than
"defend" mode which effectively means counter-attack on our part. By launching a counter-attack we engage in warfare and it goes on an on damaging the relationships and weakening the team structure and spirit be it in business or social settings.

This getting out of hand of situations spiraling out of control is an example of our pride and egos at their worst when at least one party could have taken a step back to evaluate the situation and respond in a manner that resolves the problem rather than aggravating it with counter-accusations.

If an organisation is to realise its goals and mission, all team members ought to bring their A-game everyday and have the big picture in mind. Conflict among team members even just two out of a whole affects the overall performance of the whole team as the "warring" parties seek to discredit each other and prove points. Discrediting each other and proving points are all exercises in futility and misdirected efforts for an organisation seized with missions running on set timeframes.

We could figuratively all look at ourselves as first aiders at work, using the first aid analogy means at the instance of an accident or emergency situation we swing into action with the sole purpose of protecting and preserving life, mitigating the effects of the accident on the injured party pending arrival of emergency services and further  professional medical attention.

Such is the case with potential conflict, when the attacks come your way and fingers point at you, one can decide to render first aid to the situation rather than add salt to injury or fuel to the fire. First aid means containing the situation first and bringing it under control to allow amicable resolution without blowing it further out of proportion.

Normally formal organisations have prescribed grievance procedures and conflict resolution mechanisms where hearings can be convened and  matters thrashed out amicably with full presentation of facts regarding certain situations. This is where one can and should as a professional vindicate themselves of the accusations leveled in the mad scenario of squabbling and exchanging all sorts of vitriol.

The good thing is at the hearing of a matter all parties are present with a neutral party overseeing. Facts are presented as they are with all the necessary evidence. No hearsay or prejudice prevails, if you have been falsley accused it comes out clearly and the accuser is silenced.

Sometimes the matter is so trivial yet it generates so much tension and misunderstanding amongst parties hence the need for one to be strong and choose to be the bigger person by rising above the "noise" and humbly choosing "resolve" rather than "defend" or "attack" mode.

This is different from being the whipping boy who has no say to all the torture they go through for the incompetences and sins of other people, neither is it the same as condoning abuse by some colleagues and superiors. One just evaluates situations with clear eyes and looks out for the nearest resolution point to a situation gone out of hand, e.g. promptly making a sincere formal apology if indeed one has a degree of blame to own up to in light of the problem situation or engaging another superior who has the authority to call people to order and resolve matters in the organisation.

It is very disheartening and unpleasant  to have someone at work descend upon you with vitriol for something you have nothing to do with or falsely accuse you based on hearsay or misinformation, however returning illegitimate fire results in a totally unnecessary war between parties when it could have been handled more constructively with the restoration of the aggrieved party's dignity and enlightenment/training of the accusing party on how to present problems without blowing them out of proportion for the sake of flexing muscles and wielding power if it's someone senior.

In light of the above we see the importance of knowing the system within which one works, that includes fully understanding the respective code of conduct and organisational policy so that in the event of conflict one knows the nearest official resolution point of a matter having already rendered first aid to the situation.

We learn therefore that there is no need to duck and dive or return fire with fire but to know the available methods of resolution well in advance.  The question is do you know and understand the respective code of conduct for your organisation and the statutory instruments governing it? Do you understand your company policies and prescribed procedures?

THE GOLDEN WORD FOUNTAIN - (TGWF)