In the previous chapter, I discussed some of the psychologi- cal implications of Einstein's theory of relativity and gave an example of how the strategy Einstein used while developing the theory could be used to help resolve psychological con- flicts.* Below are a set of steps, based on Einstein's thinking strategy, that can be applied to help people resolve conflicts of beliefs or identity. These steps both review and apply the most important psychological aspects of Einstein's strategy for the integration of opposing frames of reference.
1. Identify the antagonistic frames of reference associated with the change; i.e., the 'first' and 'second' positions. The conflict may involve yourself and another person, two others in conflict or two parts of yourself in conflict; e.g. the woman's conflict between wanting to change and fear of change.
2. Establish a 'third position' or 'meta position' that is outside of either of the two positions in conflict. As much as possible identify the underlying assumptions associated with the conflict; e.g. the universe is "unfriendly."
3. Form symbolic or metaphoric images representing each of the conflicting positions; e.g. the "butterfly" and the "mother dinosaur."
" N L P has a number of techniques and formats for resolving conflicts and changing limiting beliefs. For some examples, see NLP Vol. I (1980),
Beliefs: Pathways to Health and Well Being (1990) and Changing Beliefs with NLP
4. Put yourself into each perceptual position as completely as possible and identify the positive intention or purpose of each position, e.g. the positive intent of the "butterfly" was "growth," the positive intent of the "dinosaur" was "survival" and "protection."
5. Identify the common purpose of both positive intentions at the higher level; e.g. "being a successful human being."
6. Identify the 'complementary' capabilities of each position; that is the capabilities that one position has that can actually help the other accomplish its own positive intention more effectively, e.g. The "butterfly's" ability to "prepare for the future" and the dinosaur's ability to "assess the present."
7. Return to a meta position and form a new symbolic image of the two positions working in unity and harmony; e.g. the "mother eagle in her nest."
In the previous chapter, I gave an example of applying this strategy to a woman who had a serious personal problem. The following example illustrates how the same strategy could be applied to help solve a relational problem in a business context.
I once consulted with a young man who was in a crisis because of a promotion. Before this promotion he had always gotten along very well with all of his co-workers. He was a highly relational person. He really stood up for his colleagues and helped them with their work. He covered for them if they weren't able to complete a job or could have gotten into trouble. So the company said, "This guy is good! We will make him their manager."
So there he was, suddenly their manager. And all his co- workers said, "Great, we can get away with whatever we want now. He will cover for us just like he always did. He is one of us!"
This is where his crisis started. He said, "Wait a minute! I don't have the same relationship with you anymore. I have a responsibility for a larger system of things now. The values I have to uphold in the larger system with my new role and the evaluation of my behavior by my own managers are com- pletely different now. From this new frame of reference, I can't ecologically do those kinds of things anymore from my new position in the system."
Then all the things which got him promoted started working against him. His co-workers said, "Traitor, jerk,..." His own manager said, "Hey, what's going on. You're sup- posed to be getting along with these guys. Your performance is falling off. If you can't keep these guys under control we're going to have to let you go." He really felt like he was in a double bind. From one frame of reference he felt responsible for his co-workers, from another frame of reference he had responsibilities to his own manager and to his company.
As a part of our work, I asked him to create a symbolic image of the conflict situation. He pictured himself as a crew member on an old time sailing ship. His boss was a naval officer (a bit like Captain Bligh of the Bounty) and his co- workers were like a mutinous crew. Because he had shown qualities of positive leadership, the captain had taken him away from the rest of his duties as a crew member to help maintain order. But the captain had given him a whip to use, which he felt uncomfortable with and which inspired fear and hatred in the crew members.
We then established a frame of reference outside of that whole problem space - a meta position where he could look at all the members of the system, including himself. The next step was to identify assumptions that were being presup- posed in the conflict and were being reflected in his symbolic construction.
He realized that the feelings of his co-workers came from the presupposition that you needed protection from the company - that the company was foreign and hostile to them.
The presupposition behind the response of his own manager was that the workers needed external controls to get them to work. The common assumption was that they were not part of the same system or team. Neither the presuppositions of his former co-workers or his own boss were based on facts or personal contact between workers and company manage- ment. Instead they were both presuppositions about how companies functioned that had been around historically and had gone unquestioned.
The workers felt that they needed to "get away with" something because the rules that set their work patterns were out of their hands and were unresponsive to the needs they had within the reality of their jobs. The company's upper management felt the workers needed to be controlled because they were constantly breaking the rules.
I asked the manager to put himself into the perspectives of the conflicting positions and find the positive intention of each one. He concluded that the positive intention of the "crew" of co-workers was to be able to do their job with a sense of camaraderie with their fellow workers and with the minimum amount of external interference. The positive in- tention of the boss or "captain" was to run an orderly ship that was able to operate smoothly enough to fulfill its mission.
I also had him consider the problem from the point of view of his own broader mission and identity. He determined that his own positive intention was to be a key player on a effective team.
We then discussed that it was important to acknowledge the beliefs and values of all the different points of view, but in the end no one frame of reference was the ultimate reality. We began looking for what was common to all the perspec- tives and intentions. What seemed to be the constant in all of the perspectives was the desire for consideration and acknowledgment as being an important member of the sys- tem or team, and participation as a "team member."
As a result, the young manager realized that if the workers felt like they had an opportunity to offer input regarding the organizational rules that affected their work- ing environment, they would not need to get away with anything because they would be participating in their own management. If they felt like they were a 'part of the company they would be more motivated to work because it was in their own best interest.
Likewise if the upper management could see that the workers were taking responsibility for their own scheduling and productivity, they would not feel the need to exert controls over them. The company could then become more responsive to the needs of the workers out of its own best interest.
At this point, as with Einstein, his ability to experience things from multiple frames of reference became an advan- tage for the young manager instead of creating a double bind. He found that he could translate between the frames of reference for both the workers and the upper management.
When I asked him to reform his image of the situation, he laughed confidently and said that his "bull whip" had turned into a "bull horn."