As we continue in yet another year of the pandemic, it seems that there are even more instances of topics and situations that continue to divide us. Looking for new ways to navigate through the coming months with respect and creativity is important.
Those of us in agriculture represent two per cent of the population. Another recent statistic I read was that 70 per cent of the population has never even been on a farm. Those two examples illustrate how wide the gap is.
If we hope to help connect the urban and rural, we must come together and focus on our commonalities, not the differences. As Allan Savory used to say, when you are pointing fingers there are many pointing back at you.
Read Also
A strategic approach to risk on the ranch
Given the increase in the value of livestock and the market volatility, we need to cover our risks. First,…
Perhaps we all need to examine our existing paradigms. A paradigm is simply a belief that governs how we make decisions. Paradigms are the particular lens through which we see the world and are neither good nor bad. However, it is helpful to examine those that influence us and see if there is a need for housecleaning. In agriculture we often see, and ourselves have alliances to, particular breeds of livestock or types of machinery, to cite a couple of obvious paradigms.
The recently formed Agriculture Carbon Alliance (ACA) is one of the entities I have seen that bring a wide array of producer groups together at the same table with a common goal. The ACA was established to ensure that Canadian farmers’ sustainable practices are recognized through a policy environment that maintains their competitiveness, supports their livelihoods and leverages their critical role as stewards of the land. This is new and uncharted territory for many of us in agriculture.
But coming together from a variety of viewpoints and backgrounds can be challenging. Some in the family business field talk of the importance of learning to work through conflict, also stressing that conflict is inevitable. And recognizing that new, creative and impactful solutions can come from differing opinions. But there are some basic ground rules in dealing with conflict.
According to John Davis of the Cambridge Family Enterprise Group, there are four types of conflict in a family business. The first is minor disagreements. The second is serious disputes, followed by destabilizing conflicts and finally warfare. These are on an escalating scale, and so it’s important to deal with situations before they get worse.
In a Harvard Business Review article by Amy Castoro and Fred Krawchuk, the authors suggest that “(a) common mission, high-trust relationships and effective decision-making can help to bolster family-business performance, especially in today’s uncertain business climate.”
Certain characteristics of a family business can lead to conflict, says Davis. Complex, close relationships, entrenched communication patterns, attachment to legacy and multiple overlapping roles all play a part. The three-circle model of the family business system — three overlapping circles: family, ownership and business — individual members are in and who should be involved in certain conversations and decisions.
There are four typical reactions to conflict: criticism, contempt, defensiveness and stonewalling. Likely all of us can relate to or identify each of these in certain situations.
One suggestion is to have a definition of acceptable behaviour or a code of conduct. Don’t avoid conflict. Choose a neutral location for a meeting and try to avoid triggers or interruptions.
Neil N. Koenig, in You Can’t Fire Me, I’m Your Father, presents 10 guidelines for getting along with each other in family businesses:
- Eliminate personality clashes. If people truly clash, don’t make them work together.
- Focus on goals. They need to be big and clearly defined.
- Compartmentalize. Put personal stuff in one compartment and business stuff in another.
- Eliminate special treatment. Everyone is treated like a non-family employee.
- Praise and correct effectively. Praise in public, correct in private and avoid creating triangles or talking behind someone’s back.
- Give advice carefully. Think while both giving and receiving.
- Use persuasion, instead of giving orders.
- Treat children equally on the job to minimize sibling rivalry.
- Be grateful. This goes both ways across the generations.
- Stand together. It is better to be close than right.
Koenig goes on to say that for a family business to succeed, it has to perform as if it is not a family business at all. He also stresses two best practices. One is to vigorously foster and support each member’s growth from a very young age to well past retirement. It seems to me many family farming and ranching operations are not emphasizing that this growth process does apply to the senior members who are stepping back. Again, it’s about stressing the importance of what one is going to do, not just letting go of it.
The second is for family members working together to make a concerted effort to get along with each other in a professional way. We have different comfort levels in our families that often bring closeness but can also move into being too relaxed and not as conscious of people’s responses. I often see that the presence of a neutral third party helps family members to navigate through difficult conversations in a more respectful and thoughtful way, without reverting to old, comfortable patterns.
Koenig is making a distinction between family and non-family teams. But as we continue to navigate through uncertain waters many of the concepts are relevant to any group. Again, it is important to focus on commonalities and not differences. Diversity of thought and ideas can be considered a good thing in our human interactions, just as it can be in natural ecosystems. As Einstein has said, the thinking that has got us to where we are is not the thinking that will get us to where we want to be.
