I have often wondered if colleagues have found themselves asking the above captioned question to others or themselves.

I propose to consider the question from the perspective of sourcing a solution to the many issues we are faced with as we endeavour to govern an organisation at different levels in the governance structure.

Many a time, the line between rendering input and being perceived as defending a particular position tooth and nail and oblivious of the fact that your audience is not the adversary, can become fluid.

This is especially so if one of the parties is focusing on what they desire and expects the other to do what they do best to actualise that desire without contrary views.

If the other party to the deliberation is of the view that the desire cannot be met for one reason or the other and submits to that effect, sometimes they are viewed as resistant, unenlightened, missing the point, or even incompetent for not being able to comprehend the desire in a certain context.

Clearly, the above scenario can be a source of dispute, conflict, misunderstandings and so on, to the extent that parties will use different tactics including ego and vantage position to carry the day.Is this necessary?

The question in the title of this post becomes critical at this point and would be literally “screaming” for an answer!

My two cents on this is that one should slow down and even stop to think about one’s response. In my view, you are, or are supposed to be on the same side. To me, this reminder “resets” you to open your mind to the solution and how best you can contribute to its successful delivery.

Listening with respect while communicating that you understand is the first step to building levels of trust and confidence between the parties that there is mutual commitment towards the end game, in the best interest of the organisation.

Further, i would advise that an approach based on backing up your respective contributions with established authority and comparative situations always helps to remove the notion that colleagues are advancing baseless and irrational arguments during deliberations.

Lastly, it is important to actively recognise and appreciate each other’s roles in the governance process so that unnecessary flare ups are nipped in the bud!