Feeling that your feedback is not heard, appreciated or acted upon, reminds me of the ‘Resistance Line’ I read about in a Dutch book called ‘Deep Democracy’ by Jitske Kramer of 2019 (Sorry, no translation folks but a free dutch pdf instead
). Among many other fine points and facilitation techniques written in this short piece, it describes the resistance line as a progression of behavior when feedback (often given with positive intent in the beginning) is not acted upon (Dutch visualization of the “Sabotagelijn’ and here an English depiction). When you try to give feedback, and nobody reacts, we shift a little to the right on this line, i.e. we might make a joke about it. But for every time we feel we are not listened to, despite our (good) intentions, we get a little more disappointed and relatively benign jokes start to become sarcasm, we progress towards gossip, to active resistance and finally ‘war’ or ‘leaving’.
I can recognize the various stages of this ‘resistance line’ from my own experiences (of not being listened to) and seeing it happen all around me: if you work with a larger group (currently I am trying to tackle a whole new group of 80 disgruntled IT-people), people are all over the place on this line: some close to leaving, some in open state of war, some just very explicit (the shouters – thank god for those!) and the majority in different stages of (silent) resignation or even passive resistance (not reacting to anything but that which impacts them directly) – this last group is the most difficult to help.
Of course, going towards the left on this scale, needs more than just good listening skills. Often work has to be done on making sure feedback is formulated just well enough, so it has a chance of being understood and received constructively as well. This second part - learning to give feedback that lands well - is often the most difficult part in my experience. Too many times have I heard “Yes, but he/she needs to start listening to me!”, while a more constructive “what can I say, so I get understood better?” attitude, often creates faster and better results.
I feel that the most challenging is identifying where people are on this line and finding out what happened that they progressed (that far) to the right. Basically you have to take one step back to the left at a time, slowly increasing trust again (psychological safety) and using your listening skills all the way. Sociocratic methods help big time, especially the rounds, but other (NVC) methods work as well (think South-Africa just after apartheid). In my current situation, helping the 80 in need, my main approach is focusing on well-being, letting the steam out of the kettle by running sociocratic meetings (without saying so explicitly) and identifying small, but important, improvements. It’s going to be a long process, but already now, I can see that checking in and out, talking in rounds and making sure the reaction-rounds hold space for everyone’s voice (NO discussions!), creates relief (wow! I can say something without being interrupted!) and the first signs of hope for a better future. Just last week I sat with 12 hardcore IT-people with no sociocratic experience whatsoever, checking in as (whole) people and reacting with full-blown human emotions. I was very much impressed by them and contemplating that such simple meeting structures and tools can create so much good stuff…