This file was created by scanning the printed publication.
Errors identified by the software have been corrected;
however, some errors may remain.
"Can't We All Just Get Along"
Jon S. Bumstead
Is she right? If so, our organization has been bypassed by a change in basic values. Have we
shifted our views enough in the past years to regain our legitimacy?
A class I took in the development of social
theory through qualitative analysis again focused my attention on our operational culture.
In this class I learned to observe and record
qualitative data. While collecting data, I observed that the organization was putting out a
lot of messages about" customer service." At the
same time, in my personal interactions with a
variety of people at all organizational levels, I
kept encountering actions that I felt were more
self-serving than customer oriented. I kept asking myself why this was happening, despite our
good intentions.
Finally, as I worked throughout the region in
my University Liaison position, I hit on what I believe is the core element that keeps us all from
achieving some really worthwhile work It is the
failure to communicate effectively both internally
and externally. This is probably no surprise but it
really is a central, recurring problem. Poor communication continually leads to breakdowns in
achievement of reasonable solutions to continuing
problems and opportunities. I recognize that we
all are aware of how difficult it is to communicate
effectively. What I have to offer may be new to
some of you, and may even turn some of you off.
However, if you reflect on my opening questions
regarding who it is appropriate to, "do science
with," I'll ask you now considering applying some
science taken from salespeople. What I have to offer today is a selling process that I learned about
while I was moonlighting as a realtor. I believe
there is much in this process from which we can
benefit. The essence of the process is honesty, careful listening, and the ability to articulate that you
understand how another person feels.
Before I describe this process, I would like show
you some results from a social survey project I
helped construct with the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest and the Sociology Department at
Northern Arizona University.
During the past several years I've worked for
the Forest Service in many different jobs: as a Forest Planner, University Liaison, Regional Social Science Coordinator, and as a University Liaison for
Land Management Planning. Currently I am
working on the Eastside Ecosystem Management
Project as the co-lead of the social science staff on
the Science Integration Team. This team is assessing the ecological health of the Interior and Upper
Columbia River Basin.
Lately, there is some debate among science
team members questioning "whom we can do science with," and who can be legitimately involved
in this learning/scientific process. I won't go into
that discussion now, but it's something to consider
while reading this article.
In the midst of these Forest Service experiences,
and during the time of "New Perspectives," I became a realtor and spent many of my off hours
moonlighting for a successful real estate company.
While working in Flagstaff, I went to night school
and obtained a Master's Degree in Applied Sociology. I think each of these experiences has given
me some unique insights that I would like to share.
Like most insights, this one begins with a story.
One evening about three years ago, in a class on
the development and structure of sociological theory, I stumbled across a sociological proposition by
Dr. Max Weber, one of the founding fathers of social
theory. His proposition was, "The more a political
authority loses prestige in the external system, the
less able it is to remain legitimate." (Zeitlin, 1990).
I looked at this statement (which is about
equivalent, in sociological terms, to a mathematician saying 2 + 2 = 4), and asked myself if the Forest Service was approaching the point where we
would be organized out of existence. Later, in a
New Perspectives session in Denver, I was exposed
to the work of Dr. Julia Wondolleck, from the University of Michigan. In her book, "Public Lands
Conflict and Resolution, 1988," she explained how
our management paradigm and training experiences were focused on a set of values to which the
organization steadfastly clings, whil~ American
social values have shifted to a less utilitarian view.
1
1
Forestry Sciences Laboratory, Flagstaff, AZ.
141
The management team on the Apache/
Sitgreaves National Forest recognized the
importance of understanding people's FEELINGS
as a crucial first step in resolving management
issues. They asked myself and members of the
sociology staff at Northern Arizona University
(NAU) to work with them in the construction and
analysis of a survey to determine how employees
and Forest users felt about the Apache Sitgreaves
National Forest timber management program. In
my opinion, a lot of Forest Service officials fail to
recognize the importance of addressing feelings.
We tend to just want the "facts." While the
gathering of factual data is an integral part of forest
management, the importance of addressing
people's feelings and perceptions cannot be
ignored (Figure 1).
As we worked with the forest staff, we found
that some of us were, unintentionally, trying to
construct questions that explained the Forest Service perspective of each question. Dr. Fernandez, a
sociology professor from NAU, finally got it
through to us that we should seek other people's
opinions and perspectives;· not explain our own
views. Thus, the final questions in the survey were
very direct, brief, and nearly free of Forest Service
interpretations. I want to show you some of the results, in case you think we've moved past the time
of internal and external conflict (Figures 2,3,4,5).
We could look at the internal split of opinion
and hope it was a sign of organizational balance
and health. I want you all to understand, however,
that while I was a University Liaison I had people
from a variety of ranger districts, national forests,
and from within the regional office talk to me in
emotionally ridden terms about the·" gridlock" and
inability of interdisciplinary teams to work together effectively. Further, one of the questions we
are currently asking on the Columbia River Basin
assessment, asks people whether they trust our
agencies' motives and ability to implement ecosystem management. With about 50% of the survey
responses in, we find that only 30% of the National sample has moderate or a great deal of trust
in the Forest Service. Western Washington and
Oregon are at 31 %. People living in the Columbia
River Basin, currently, are responding at a rate of
33% with moderate or a great deal of trust. Another sample is of people who have been directly
involved and are on our mailing list (over 2000),
they have 41 % who trust in our abilities to imple-
Figure 1.-0eallng It... rather than dealing WITH It.
ment ecosystem management but only 29% who
have a moderate or great deal of trust in our motives. A previous rangeland reform survey conducted by Dr. Brent Steel from Washington State
University found similar responses in a National
survey... 32%. If you bat 300 in baseball you are
doing pretty good. Does a 30% degree of trust
meet our expectations for ourselves?
I believe that a first step for each of us is to improve our communication skills before we will
start to see an upward movement in public trust.
With the above demonstrations that a problem
does exist, I ask you to consider if there is anything
we can learn from the following sales process I
learned while moonlighting.
The selling process I was taught to use as a realtor is found in the book "The Best Seller" by Ron
Willingham (1984, Prentice Hall). My broker, who
had thousands of books in his home, said, "Jon, you
only need to read one book on selling and here it
is." Willingham'S book is rooted in the need to be
completely honest, always. Never, never do anything that moves you off that center. A second
foundation is to find out what the customer needs
and wants. Your beliefs and values do not enter the
picture until you truly understand the desires and
perspective of the customer.
142
o Conservationists
Na13?
SA
A
o
SO
Fa Forest Business Employees
N = 113, X2 =76, Pr = .0001
No OpInion
SA
o
A
SO
No Opinion
Figure 4.-Conservationists and Forest business employee
comparisons: Statement - Recreation activities on the forests contribute more to economic stability than do timber
harvest activities.
Figure 2.-Forest Service employees only: Statement - The
Forest Service is doing a good job of managing ecosystems.
~ Conservationists
100%
Nal39
90%
rB
80%
N = 111, X2 =78, Pr = .0001
Forest Business Employees
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
SA
A
o
0%
SO
No Opinion
SA
A
o
SO
No Opinion
Figure 3.-Forest Service employees only: Statement - When
timber harvesting Is In conflict with recreation activities,
priority should be given to recreation activities.
Figure S.-Conservatlonlsts and Forest bUsiness employee
comparisons: Statement - When timber harvest Is In conflict with recreation activities, priority should be given to
recreation activities.
While I was forest planner on the Santa Fe
National Forest, we frequently planned a conflict
resolution strategy prior to appeals negotiations.
We would meet before negotiations to determine
"our" position and bottom line. In other words, we
walked into conflict resolution focused on where
we would draw the line in the sand. How open do
you think we were to any new ideas? Of course,
the appellants were doing the same thing. That
was our basic approach to conflict resolution a few
years ago: Determine Position-Go Negotiate.
In contrast, the sales approach I was taught had
these steps:
A. Approach
I. Interview
D. Demonstrate
*The "I" in validate is saying that, "I will take
the time to understand and validate your concern from your perspective." I still try to apply
in my daily work activities.
In Willingham'S process, negotiation is the next
to the last step. In the appeals process we often
opened with negotiation discussions. There was
hardly a breath of "Hi, how are you" prior to starting negotiation. In Willingham's process, a lot of
foundation work precedes the negotiation step.
During the Approach and Interview steps we
were taught to "tune yourself out and tune your
customer in." The most important job of successful
sales people, according to Willingham, is to listen,
listen, listen!
The process has a varie:ty of application techniques for each phase in the sales process. For instance the acronym "EO.R.M." was used in the
Approach phase. The letters stand for Family, Occupation, Recreation, and Message. Most people
I. Vaijdate*
N. Negotiate
C. Close
143
like to talk about one of these things, and, if you listen carefully, you'll pick up messages from them
about what they value most. This process emphasizes the importance of getting to know your clients on a personal basis. I think this relates closely
to what the early district rangers excelled in...
"Spittin' and Whittling." Maybe we should think
more about going back to the old method. It pays!
The positive side of taking the time to get to know
each other on a personal basis is extremely important.
In the book, Willingham talks about a sales person so committed to the Approach that he would
decline trying to potential customers if he was unable to build a good rapport at the outset. He simply felt people would never buy from him, if he
was unable to build an immediate relationship that
"felt" right. During the transition from Approach
to the Interview phase we were expected to gain a
clear understanding of customers needs, desires,
and lifestyle priorities. The ability to tune your own
values and preferences out is extremely difficult.
Try it! Only your customer's perspective is important during these first phases ..
I'll skip to the Validation process next, as I feel
this is the area where we could all make the biggest
strides in learning to communicate effectively.
Willingham insists that it is not enough to just repeat back what you've heard the customer say.
Many of our communication classes suggest we
paraphrase the words we have heard from someone else to demonstrate that we have indeed
"heard" them. While that is better than just interrupting and stating your opinion, it falls short from
Willingham's perspective .. He recommends that
you personally step in their shoes and validate
why their concerns are valid, from their perspective. You can't do this unless you have a clear understanding of their views and can articulate to
them that you understand their perspective, not
yours! You should relate their concern to a similar
experience you have had with the technique of
"Feel, Felt, Found." It goes like this: "I see how you
feel about A, B, C. I felt that way too about D, E, F
(your similar experience); Here's what I found
about D, E, F.
By the way, my broker had a Doctorate
degree in psychology, and had been a profes'sor
at the University of Oklahoma for several years.
His brother worked for him as a sales
representative and held a Master's degree in
sociology. The brother, Dave, used this sales
process to perfection. As I watched him 'work,
you could see that he was always totally engaged
with his customers. If you watched him for 20-30
minutes he might be in a speaking mode for only
five of those minutes. The rest of the time he
listened to his customers. He had a knack for
keeping dialogue open and flowing. About
every week you could count on Dave closing
another contract.
Some of you may have concerns about this
process being used to manipulate people. I know I
did. I said to my broker, "Jeez, you guys are dangerous!" The broker believed that you couldn't
use this process to trick people. He felt that if you
tried any of these techniques with anything but
complete sincerity and honesty, your customers
would read that insincerity and be gone in a minute. Further, he stated that by law we were required to reveal everything we knew about a
home. Keeping your opinions and feelings out of
discussions in the beginning doesn't mean you
give up stating your opinion during the negotiation and final stages of the sale. Your willingness to
learn about and understand your customer's perspective goes a long way towards building trust.
Further, it will make the customer more receptive to
your views as you enter the negotiation and closing
phases of this process. As he went on, my broker
explained how important it is to all of us to know
that we have been heard and understood. As I
have reflected on this process recently, and done
some objective/scientific observations around our
work areas, I find that we all (me too!) are so eager
to tell people what we think and feel, that we often
don't listen carefully enough to gain an understanding of the other person's perspective.
moved
Back to the process, once you've
through these first four phases of the sales process,
it is time to enter into negotiations and, finally,
come to a sales agreement. In three years of real estate sales I successfully utilized this process only
twice (I made other sales, but none felt as good as
these two). I am too eager to insert my own opinion and talk about myself, and I'm not alone in
this weakness. While I was a University Liaison
traveling throughout the re gion, I observed frequent failures to achieve complete communication.
This was occurring at all levels within the organization. Specifically, the lack of the ability to listen
to the point of true understanding was preventing
us from doing, or becoming, all that we could and
should be.
So what can we do? First, we need to bolster
our education and training in the human dimension fields, especially vital communication skills.
In the long-term, we should continually work at
staying involved with citizen groups all throughout
the year, not just for the length of each individual
144
stopped myself from using this phrase. I may still
interrupt, but I won't do it with "yeah but."
project. I know the Prescott National Forest has
been actively working on this for several years.
Short term recommendations include allowing
ample time in our planning processes for
meaningful relationship building both within and
without the organization. You can't expect to
throw a bunch of people in a room and have them
automatically function like a team. It takes time!
Finally, I think each of us needs to identify and
work on our own communication shortcomings.
Personally, I noticed that "yeah, but" was maybe
the single greatest stopper of effective communication in our organization. It's everywhere! Listen,
you'll see. I used to be one of the greatest users of
"yeah but." To the best of my knowledge, I have
REFERENCES
The Best Seller, The New Psychology of Selling and Persuading People; Willingham Ron; Prentice Hall, 1984.
Public Lands Conflict and Resolution, Managing National Forest Disputes; Wondolleck Julia M.; Plenium
Press; 1988,
Ideology and the Development of SOciological Theory;
Zeitlin Irving M.; Prentice Hall; 1990.
WE'RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER,
SO WHAT COMMUNICATION IMPROVEMENTS CAN
YOU MAKE?
145