Article archive / April 1, 2011
Originally published: . Volume 2, No. 8. Source pages: 2.
Senator Mount seems poised to offer a bill for an omnibus board as her solution to on-going conflict between the LSBEP and LPC boards, conflicts that often wind up in front of the legislature.
Fighting it out in front of the legislature is pretty much the way things are done in a free society. Citizens, members of public boards, and Joe the plumber, all have the right to fight about issues as long as they want to, because that is what helps social order, and a legislator’s job is to somehow arbitrate, facilitate, and judge these disputes.
Putting that aside, Senator Mount has an excellent point. She is rightly concerned about our state’s underserved mental health needs. And she is correct that long-standing, entrenched conflicts that waste time and resources should be a focus for change efforts.
Her first solution was a very good one. In her resolution (SCR 100) she asked the board members to work to hash things out, but the results were disappointing. Now she feels that her only option is to consolidate the two boards. It seems this is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. (How can three psychologists, who have to coordinate with six other people who do not understand our science and profession, do the work of the five psychologists we have now? Five who work very hard just to keep up.)
On the other hand, I think Senator Mount’s first approach was an excellent idea. But the approach needed the touch of a real psychologist, because while the goal was admirable, the execution flagged. First, the “Working Group” met for only a total of 18 hours, less than one-half a normal workweek. Secondly, teams with serious conflicts must have an experienced, neutral facilitator trained in group process, consensus, creativity and conflict resolution. The composition of the group, as well as the time format, should have been designed with a plan for change in mind, rather than based solely on past political characteristics. Optimally, all team members’ strengths and weaknesses should be measured, and gaps in the team’s overall ability to accomplish its goal, filled. These are just a few things to note, there are many more.
When people have intractable conflict, they require time and help. Reframing problems for creative solutions and releasing fixed ideas calls for a systematic process. What we needed was a real psychologist to consult with the Senator or the Working Group, and a planned change effort.
An omnibus board will dilute the diversity and the unique contributions of both professions. So we should rework the Working Group and the Senator’s original request. And this time, design an effective intervention. This time apply the scientific knowledge and psychological techniques that we know lead to a greater degree of creativity and win-win problem-solving.
Then, if that doesn’t do the job, we can always regress to politics, and fighting in the war room.
This article is part of a historical newspaper archive. Read the original issue for its original layout, photographs and graphics.