EXCELLENCE & ETHICS

Updates from April, 2013

• 

  Abuse or motivation? I know it when I see it. Do you? By Matt Davidson, Ph.D., President, Institute for Excellence & Ethics (IEE)

  Matt Davidson posted in Character Blog, Character For & From Sports at 1:59 pm on April 5, 2013 | 0 Permalink | Reply
  

  Some years back I was involved in a year-long study of an elite prep school men’s basketball program. The school had a mission dedicated to whole-person development, in which competitive sports, music and the arts featured prominently within a rigorous overall college-prep curriculum.  As a social-scientist interested in both excellence and ethics it was a unique opportunity to examine the crossroads where an uncompromising commitment to excellence meets an uncompromising commitment to integrity and whole-person development.

  The study involved significant embedded observations with the team, interviews with coaches and players, and the analysis of significant data gathered from microphones that the coaches wore in practice and games.  (Imagine that coaches—or parents or teachers—somebody recording and analyzing your every exchange! It was amazing). I remember a point when a team member contacted me very concerned because the coaches had been yelling and screaming at practice and he had great concern that would present the coaches in a bad light. You can’t be a coach dedicated to ethics and whole-person development if you scream and yell, right?  Some on our team absolutely believed that to be the case; I was not one of them. Coaching intensity is essential for high performance; I firmly believed that there was a place for yelling and displays of passion and emotion. I reserved judgment until studying the tapes and integrating it into my lived experiences with the coaches and players.

  What we found was very nuanced:  coaches screaming at the whole group regarding attitude and effort; coaches exhorting players to play harder, be tougher, to do it over, to do it better; coaches harping on little details.  Like a parent disciplining a child, they almost always went to players that they had gotten after to explain further their expectations and motives for getting on them.  What was NOT part of the yelling was equally important.  They were not attacking players personally; they were not cursing; they were not denigrating them, embarrassing them or confronting them.

  Coaches offered sound insight into our questions regarding the type, timing, and intent their yelling and overall motivational strategies. They could differentiate why they communicated with one player one way and another player another way. It was not indiscriminate yelling; it was not vitriolic rage and personal attack; it was differentiated instruction. They knew when to speak softly, how to comfort the player and the group, and then how to move their teaching to crescendo with effect.  As a former athlete and coach I certainly did not think the yelling was inappropriate, let alone abusive.  I absolutely felt that it represented an intensity necessary to bring out the potential for excellence in the individual players and the team. These weren’t  5-year old t-ball players; they were competitive, elite student-athletes.

  In 1964, in an attempt to define pornography and obscenity, Justice Potter Stewart famously said, “I know it when I see it.”  When the video of Rutgers basketball coach, Mike Rice, went viral this week I knew abuse by a coach when I saw it.  I was not only aghast to see Rice yelling homophobic slurs at his players, kicking them, shoving them, throwing basketballs at their chests, legs, and head; I was angry as hell.  I love and defend good coaches. There’s no defense of Mike Rice’s behavior. He’s a bully and his tactics were abusive. Period.  Here are the two main criteria by which I draw this conclusion on the Rice tape, which was not my conclusion in the tapes from the basketball study discussed above.

  1. Bullying involves a real or perceived imbalance of power, where the one with power attacks the less powerful or powerless.  Rice had the power: not only because he determined who would play and how much they would play, but because he held the ultimate power: the scholarship.  Complain to the assistant coach or AD and you’re done. But they could still transfer, right? Remember, we’re talking real or perceived power. No doubt the players had more power than they believed or used. (As I watched the tape I literally wanted one of the players to charge the coach and knock him on his arse!).  As in cases of domestic abuse, the belief that somebody holds power over you is real.  And really, if you believe that should you try to get out of the situation that the coach will tell the next inquiring school or coach that you’re just soft, a head-case, or not a character-guy, one can see why the players believed the coach has the power and thus endured this bully.

  The powerlessness of the players in this case and in other similar is made worse by the complete and utter moral failure of the athletic director to stop the abuse.  When the AD chose to become a bystander to the abuse, he became part of the abuse. And what was the message to the players when the assistant coach brought concerns to the AD and was subsequently dismissed?  I highly doubt they thought the AD was a neutral arbitrator. Tim Pernetti is hardly the only AD who has failed to protect the student-athletes. Far too many AD’s—and frankly speaking the NCAA itself—are deeply compromised by the conflict of interest that exists between their job to protect and promote the well-being of student-athletes and their job to make lots of money off of college athletes.

  High school and AAU coaches don’t stand up to these coaches because they want their players to get scholarships (and they often covet a chance to follow one of their players into the elite coaching opportunities). Parents are also often accomplices to these crimes because they are over invested and beholden to AAU and high school coaches and they choose to ignore or justify these bullying behaviors to get or keep a scholarship or to get their kid to the professional ranks.  So when you can’t trust your coach, assistant coach, AD, high school coach and AD, AAU coach or your parents I think it’s not so hard to believe that they believed they didn’t have power to stand up to Coach Rice.  My disbelief and frustration that the players didn’t just deck the coach, quickly changed to anger at those who created and sustained the reality that made this possible.

  2.  Bullying usually takes two general forms:  psychological and physical.  You’ve got both on full display in the Rice video. The instruments of psychological abuse are verbal and emotional in nature. The humiliating, dehumanizing, vindictive exchanges exact a deep emotional toil. I can already hear it from “that coach” or “that parent”:  “Come on, man; these are big boys. You’re not going to tell me he hurt their feelings.”  College athletes are amazing physical beings; but they’re still essentially young adults and they’re most definitely human beings.  Years of working with athletes at all levels makes me absolutely convinced that psychological abuse is real. I’m not convinced that his tactics “did no harm”;  and I am absolutely sure they did not do “maximum good” in pursuit of excellence or whole-person development. And maybe the tape doesn’t show physical abuse, but it clearly shows physical intimidation and a persistently aggressive and hostile atmosphere which most definitely was unjust, unfair, and unhealthy.

  I’ve already heard current and former coaches hedging on this case, mostly by decrying Rice’s use of homophobic slurs as always and everywhere wrong, but then claiming that you need to build relationships if you’re going to drive kids hard in pursuit of their best. Going out for pizza and a movie so you can continue your abusive practices isn’t my idea of balancing pursuit of excellence with whole-person development. This is akin to an abusive husband taking his battered wife out to dinner or on a lovely vacation. It doesn’t undo the abuse; it makes it worse by revealing the deep-seated hypocrisy and manipulation at play.  Bottom line: coaches must view student-athletes as an end, not as a means to an end.

  Unfortunately, I think the type of behavior we observed from Rice is far more prevalent than most would want to admit. And, in my experience, female coaches are now often as likely to engage in these tactics as men.  Let’s be clear:  every coach who kicks over a garbage can, breaks a clipboard, throws their team out of the gym, or screams about poor execution or effort isn’t an abusive bully.  So too, every player who gets upset from constructive criticism, doesn’t like the coaches style, or a coach getting after them hasn’t necessarily been “abused.”   But we can’t simply operate under the “that which does not kill us makes us stronger” mentality of coaching. And just because your coach did it and you turned out alright doesn’t make it right either.  The ends don’t justify the means. All that motivates is not moral.

  Three practical suggestions for moving forward:

   1. Develop an approach to coaching and player development that integrates the development of performance character and moral character. This idea grew out of the basketball study described above. Great coaches develop both excellence and ethics. Moral and performance character are interconnected, inseparable, dynamic forces that coaches must balance. You can’t unhook them; you can motivate in a way that violates respect and decency; so too if you love players you must push them. Mike Rice’s approach unhitched performance character from moral character.  Develop both moral and performance character with intensity and intentionality; beware when the weight of your foot is disproportionately on either—especially performance character.

  

  2. Make this a topic of an Intentional Culture Conversation within your family, your team, and amongst coaches, trainers, and administrators. We developed Intentional Culture Conversations for use in our work when the topic clearly has the potential to contribute to or detract from the mission and goals of the organization, but where the topic is complex and not clear-cut.  In this case an Intentional Culture Conversation must be engaged regarding the line between abuse and motivation, about the balance of excellence and ethics, and about how we empower all stakeholders to stand up, speak out, and stop abusive coaches.  The pursuit of excellence that also seeks whole-person development is as much art as science. The discussion may not lead to clear and obvious policy, but to ignore the issue and hope it doesn’t eventually emerge as a problem is just foolish. Assuming we all understand what is expected is ridiculous.  We must beware of simple, easy, and obvious answers—which are often also wrong (for example, no yelling by coaches, no intense coaches, get rid of the scoreboard, or make all sports like intramurals).  Let this terrible incident be the start of something good. Start the conversation.

  3. Define abusive coaching behaviors so you’ll know it when you see it.  Once you think about coaching that balances moral character and performance character, and once you’ve engaged in an Intentional Culture Conversation with your stakeholders, then I recommend that you create a checklist outlining a checklist of coaching behaviors that constitute your definition of bullying. Because it’s such a complex and nuanced area, many will not want to define the abusive, bullying behaviors. But this is a mistake that lets the bullies hide and the puts the good coaches at risk of being misunderstood (think of the coaches in our study above). You may not get agreement on everything, but you must be prepared to identify it—for coaches, for players, for parents, for AD’s.  This will create an awareness of what to look for, of what to avoid, and will more quickly allow stakeholders to speak up to fix the problem or to better clarify your standard. For example, here’s my coach’s bullying behaviors checklist:

  • Does the coach….
  • Ridicule, embarrass or demean players
  • Make verbal attacks personal
  • Exhibit intimidating, threatening, and/or aggressive confrontational style with players
  • Humiliate players publicly or privately
  • Engage in emotional games, like not talking to a player, or having them sit away from the team after a bad performance
  • Grab, push, shove or hit players
  • Make clear to players that there is no way out or around the coach

  Mine isn’t the only checklist. But take note of how even this simple checklist forces you to accept or reject mine, which ultimately leads to the clarification of your own.

  Players don’t always appreciate (or even like) coaches, especially since most of coaching is getting more out of you than you think you’re capable of, pushing you beyond your limits, targeting your weaknesses for development .  A good coach is like a good parent: your kids don’t always like you; they often resent your standards and expectation. But if you do it the right way for the right reasons years later they understand and appreciate you—and usually adopt your standards and values.  But a bad coach is like a bad parent: they leave pain, scars, and resentment that last a lifetime. It’s a fine line between motivation and abuse—it’s also a slippery slope, so be careful and get intentional.

  

   

  Reply Click here to cancel reply.

  Name (required)

  Email (required)

  Web Site

   
• 

  Keeping sport healthy for kids and families, By Matt Davidson, Ph.D., President, Institute for Excellence & Ethics (IEE)

  Matt Davidson posted in Character For & From Sports at 3:46 pm on February 28, 2013 | 2 Permalink | Reply
  

  I’ve always loved sports. From my earliest memories of childhood what I enjoyed most was having a ball, a bat, or a stick in my hand.  I loved to compete, but I also enjoyed countless hours by myself practicing the games.  I loved to take whatever game I was playing (usually whichever one was in season) and break it down into its component skills, to practice it over and over until I had it mastered.  Give me a rubber ball and a glove and a wall and I was happy; give me a basketball and a place to dribble and shoot and I was content—for hours upon hours.  I would imagine the game in my head; I wanted to know and practice everything I could. I loved to prepare my mind and train my body to be strong, to run fast, to jump high.

  Growing up in as a kid in the 70’s and 80’s sport was an important part of life in America. But nothing like what kids growing up today are experiencing.  When I think about how things are today as that sport-loving kid of yesteryear I’m jealous: what I wouldn’t have given for an ALL ENTERNTAINMENT AND SPORTS NETWORK! Wow! I mean, are you kidding me?  We only had one or two games a day on the weekend. Highlights from games didn’t come until the 11PM news.  There were no facilities devoted to hockey, basketball, or soccer—at colleges, sure. But not for kids, like there are today.  The leagues, the coaches, the equipment, the competition—every part of sport has changed and evolved and intensified. And as kid I would have wished for the world to be so (if I could have even imagined it as a possibility). But as a parent, it does concern me.

  As someone who has coached (and now coaches my own kids) and who has worked with coaches and student-athletes, and who has studied (and work to improve) the culture of youth sports I know that while sport still has an incredible power for good, it has a lot of potential for harm.  Our nonprofit Institute for Excellence & Ethics (IEE) works with coaches and student-athletes from youth sport levels through college.  I see the full range, coaching my daughter’s fifth-grade Catholic school team and working with highly competitive collegiate athletes.   As a parent of four children (three girls and a boy ranging in age from 5-10), I’ve gone from studying the culture of youth sport to being a part of it. And I’m shocked by the gap between what we know about the dangers of youth sport and how little parents know about it. I’m amazed at how few parents know the odds of their kid getting a scholarship (to say nothing of playing sports professionally).  I’m horrified by how few know the research on overuse injuries, burnout, and dropout. In fact, most kids drop out of sport because it’s not fun anymore. I believe skateboarders and snowboarders and extreme bikers have gained so much momentum because they figured out that parents don’t know anything about this stuff, there’s no way they can do this stuff, and they’ll basically leave you the heck alone to have some fun with your friends.

  Bottom line, today’s sports culture is not the sport culture that most of today’s parents grew up in. In order to keep sport positive for parents and kids it’s imperative that parents educate themselves and form their own intentional approach. Here are a few of the books I think are must-reads for any parent with kids involved in sport:

  • Game on: The All-American Race to Make Champions of our Children, by Tom Farrey
  • Until it hurts: America’s Obsession with Youth Sports and How it Harms Our Kids, by Mark Hyman
  • Positive Coaching and Positive Sports Parenting, by Jim Thompson.
  • Season of Life, by Jeffrey Marx
  • Inside Out Coaching, by Joe Ehrmann

  There are plenty more excellent resources on the topic; these are a few of the best and most recent. The first two books (Game on and Until it Hurts) are fairly current and deeply convincing in their chronicling the impact on youth of out of control parents and coaches. The others tell of the problems and offer more balanced approaches that respect kids and the game.

  For those who don’t have time or desire to read those books, here’s my quick distillation:

  1. In alarming numbers parents and coaches are ruining sport for kids by applying too much pressure, too much training and competition, too much specialization (i.e., having kids concentrate on one sport year one in hopes of a competitive advantage).
  2. Too many parents and coaches see sport (and unfortunately, their kids) as a means to an end—championships, scholarships, and a professional career in sport, in spite of the fact that it often leads to kids hating sports and their parents and coaches, if often leads many kids to dropout of sport, and it rarely leads to the ends these coaches and parents desire so badly.
  3. Too many kids are being injured physically and psychologically by the pressure and abuse inflicted by well-meaning but misguided parents and coaches.

  So, should you yank your kids out of sports and activities all together?  That’s not my conclusion or recommendation. On the contrary sports are an amazing medium for developing character, for teaching kids important values, for engagement that is healthy and is a protective factor against many youth development risk factors.  However, sports—like most everything in life—is not good in and of itself, but only good when we intentionally use it the right way in pursuit of the right goals. I think back and wonder what path I would have found in life if my parents had prevented, discouraged, or not supported my interest in sport. Sport gave me direction; it was my passion; it was the reason for working hard in school and for focus and discipline in the other areas of my life. I think too about my own son, who by temperament and passion for sport is basically a mini-me; removing sport activities from his life would make him a very different, and I believe less-healthy boy—in mind, body, and soul. He recently listed his goals in life as follows: 1. Play in the NBA. 2. Become a priest—after playing in NBA. Both lofty goals, but in his mind interconnected, not incompatible.

  For parents intentionality is the key. As parents we must be intentional about our goals for sport and about our approach to sport. Here’s an example: as a fifth grade girls coach at my daughter’s Catholic school, I wrote a letter at the outset of the season to parents explaining to them my goals and approach. It clearly communicated to them that my goals were:  Fun, Fitness, Fundamentals, Fairness, and Faith.  I wanted for them (and I believe based on the research and my experience) that at this age the following should be true of the sport experience for kids:

  1. Sport should be fun. Sport is supposed to be fun. It’s why kids play and when it’s no fun they quit.  The rest of life you will work; what’s not healthy or good is when parents, coaches (and oftentimes kids) make sport into work, when it becomes a grind with no joy and no fun. Sport is organized play. It should be fun not the sort of heavy, serious, dire thing we often turn it into.
  2. Sport should build fitness. The single most important thing for kids now and later in their sport careers (wherever that might lead) and in life is the fitness habits derived from sport.  I want to develop strong healthy kids, kids with agility, kids with flexibility, kids with endurance. The obesity epidemic in this country is real. But preventing problems is motivating; we have to approach sport and fitness as a lifetime habit that allows you to be healthy, strong—more fully and completely human.  By the way, if fitness is the goals, then kids should be moving constantly at practice not standing around listening to coaches talk at them—it’s no fun and it’s not good for fitness!
  3. Sport should develop the fundamentals of the game. Sport is fun when you know how to play the game and you get good at it. Throwing out the balls and letting kids do whatever they want isn’t coaching. There’s a place for this (I don’t run practice in my driveway; I let my kids and our neighbors play whatever they want however they want). Practice should be fun and fast and competitive (for fun, fitness and fundamentals). Coaches should be organized and disciplined and demand excellence. This is the chance to really push kids. But what matters is doing the skill right, targeting weaknesses for development, making it more and more challenging. The best athletes target their weaknesses, focus on growth and improvement, and receive deliberate practice with feedback from experienced coaches. It’s not that winning and losing don’t matter; it’s just that if you practice right winning and losing will take care of itself.
  4. Sport should be fair.  Sportsmanship is essential and the expectations must be taught—to parents and kids. I make it explicit to our parents. I tell them: “We cheer for our kids not against the other kids. We don’t get on the officials or referees. Do not be screaming technical advice to the kids. I’m the coach, you confuse and overwhelm them.” I also tell them everybody will have equal playing time. Equal playing time should be the norm for kids up until at least sixth or seventh grade; that’s what I believe is fair and healthy for kids. I also have kids play different positions so they have fun and so that they truly get to experience the different positions and opportunities. You can’t tell which kid will get bigger, which position or skill set might really fit for a kid, and which sport or position your kid might really excel at. (Remember: Michael Jordon, Wayne Gretsky, and so many other superstars played—and loved—different sports than they eventually excelled at).
  5. Sport should build and support faith development.  Whatever your faith perspective, when it is done right, sport has the potential to support faith development.  Faith requires hard work; it requires trust and focus and it is needed most in adversity—so too with sport. Sport SHOULD NOT compete with or detract from faith and religion.  Kids and parents shouldn’t have to choose between going to church or going to a game. Parents must help kids make the faith connections. For example, I believe the parable of the talents (Matthew 25: 14-30), is a great guide for approaching sport with your kids:  “We have all talents and abilities. I don’t how much or which specific talents God has blessed you with. I just want you to do your best not to bury or neglect your talents; and to do your best. Let God take care of the rest.”

  I truly believe sports are an important and vital protective factor in the lives of kids. However, as parents we must be intentional in our approach if we hope to ensure that it is positive and productive, that it is aligns with our deepest values, and contributes to the goals we have for our children.

  ———————-

  The above piece originally appeared in the winter issue of Mater et Magistra, Volume 6, number 1

  

   
• 

  Educating for Conscience AND Competence

  Matt Davidson posted in Character Blog, Character For & From Sports, Excellence & Ethics in Business, Intentional Family Culture, Power2Achieve Community at 4:06 pm on October 12, 2012 | 0 Permalink | Reply
  

  When it comes to the development of character, ethics, and integrity we would do well to heed the wise advice of Blaise Pascal, who famously observed, “the heart has its reason, which reason cannot know.”  Ethical development that targets the head and neglects the heart, tends to create ethical legalists who can reason themselves into or out of most any action or inaction.  Thus, it is critically important that we educate for conscience; essential that through education and advocacy we cultivate self-awareness and awaken the values voice inside every individual.

  The development of conscience must be an essential focus of values education; and yet, as Mary Gentile has argued in her book, Giving Voice to Values, the development of conscience alone is insufficient. Conscience—a sense of right from wrong—also requires a sense of competence—a sense of practical know-how.  Competence speaks to what Gentile and others have referred to as “post-decision making” when we know what we ought to do and need to figure out how to make it happen within the challenges of the real world pressures and stresses (Gentile, 2010).

  In our work this has meant that we distill complex and multifaceted moral and performance character values into their more specific competencies. Our operational definition of character as “values in action,” gets calibrated by a focus on the development of specific character competencies.  Competent: “able to”; incompetent: “unable to”. Organizations want and need “individuals who are able to …”, for example, give and receive constructive criticism, manage priorities and reduce stress, be fair to all involved, continue trying in the face of difficulty, and so on.

  Competencies are process skills that connect awareness and sensitivity, to reasoning and judgment, to behavior. The development of competencies requires action and reflection, practice with feedback, real-world simulation that targets practice of essential skills in settings that are similar to the real challenges one would face, and yet still safe enough to allow the development of mastery.  When skills for each of these processes are fully developed and become automatic, cognition and action become intertwined and an individual consistently engages in positive behavior (see, for example, review of related research in Narvaez, 2006).

  The development of competencies has meant the ability for us to teach general skills universal to all settings, while also targeting the development of skills specific to particular settings—be they in school, sport, or work.  A contextualized view allows us to approach each situation as having its own challenges and requisite skills.  We simulate for the most common situations you will face in this specific context. Too often training for ethics and character is too amorphous to teach or learn—certainly to assess.  IEE’s research-based tools distill theory and research into replicable guides for thinking and behavior.  Consider, for example, our Win-Win Negotiation Tool, which provides a guide for effective negotiation—a complex and critically important skill.

  
  

  Our work has been focused on developing a battery of Tools within each of our Excellence & Ethics Focus Areas.

  

  In essence, Excellence & Ethics tools, like the Win-Win Negotiation Tool, define standards and expectations. These “tools” represent what Mary Gentile would call “scripts” that guide implementation, thereby ensuring a more efficient and consistent standard of output. Clear and concise (i.e., simple, concrete, memorable, action-oriented) tools become models to guide behavior across the organization. Consistent and pervasive use of the tools over time leads to individual and organizational habits.

  The support for and value of our work has increased in school, sport, and workplace settings as we have begun to develop both conscience (a belief that I ought to) and competence (a belief that I am able to).

  Note: This blog excerpted and adapted from a paper delivered at the Baum Symposium on Ethics at Drake University, October 3, 2012.

  

   
• 

  Care-frontation: Making Peace with Conflict

  Matt Davidson posted in Character Blog, Character For & From Sports, Excellence & Ethics in Business, Intentional Family Culture at 9:52 am on September 21, 2012 | 0 Permalink | Reply
  

  Conflict is inevitable for any group individuals who share space and goals.  Conflict isn’t bad or good necessarily, it simply is.  Conflict is a byproduct of human relationships and human performance.  Put any group of individuals together in community; allow for personality and ability differences; factor in limited time, money, energy; account for the toll exacted by the day-to-day grind; and you’ve got a cauldron for conflict. Should you aspire to lofty individual and collective goals, you will have added a conflict catalyst to the conflict cauldron.

   Show me individuals thriving in any role—parents, spouses, siblings, teachers, workplace leaders, coaches, teammates; priest or rabbi, politician or physician—any individual, thriving to any degree in any role or setting and you will see individuals who manage conflict well. Where individuals and organizations are surviving, not thriving, where there is inconsistency in the quality of human interactions and performance, poor conflict management is likely part of the equation.

  You have humans, you share space, you have some task to perform: you have conflict.  Thus, managing conflict is an essential element of a positive and productive culture of excellence. Too often, however, our approach to conflict is focused on avoidance and dismissal—avoid conflict at all costs, and if you can’t make it go away.  We often speak and operate in terms of conflict resolution, rather than conflict management. In the former, we seek to resolve it, or make it go away. In the ladder we accept it and manage the type and nature and net costs of this inevitable byproduct of human interaction.

   Even in contexts where the goal is enjoyment and the relationships are familiar (i.e., friends or family gathering for food and fellowship), conflict doesn’t disappear. However, in contexts where our goals are challenging and our relationships are contingent, even utilitarian in nature (i.e., individuals with particular skills hired to help us thrive as an organization), then the nature, frequency, and intensity of conflicts are likely to increase. An intentional culture of excellence must proactively establish and develop the habits needed to efficiently and effectively navigate conflict—or suffer the real costs to the individuals and the organization.

  In his book, Caring Enough to Confront, David Augsburger argues that when we see confrontation as rooted in caring, when we understand it as “care-frontation”, then we can begin to experience conflict as “natural, normal, neutral, and sometimes even delightful.”  How could conflict ever be delightful?  When it removes for the confronter the acute pain and recurring aggravation, along with the deep wounds and heavy burden that festers and grow when suppressed. Or, when it removes for the confronted the tangible tension and persistent awkwardness and provides them with something new insights into how to better exist and work with another.

   Augsburger argues that “care-fronting unites love and power…concern for relationships with concern for goals.”  Love and power, relationships and goals:  I want the best for you, therefore I expect the best from you. I challenge you because I love you. I challenge you to make you the best you.

   When confrontation is re-framed as care-frontation it goes from something to be avoided—a win-lose, angry and argumentative, attack the person not problem reality—to something healthy and productive and worthy of the energy required. Confrontation becomes care-frontation when we speak the truth in love, expressing our deepest beliefs and needs while still respecting the deepest beliefs and needs of the other(s), holding self and other accountable out of mutual respect and for our mutual benefit.

   Here are some simple—though not necessarily easy—steps to transform confrontation into care-frontation:

  1. Attack the problem not the person. The goal isn’t to be right; the goal is to get it right.
  2. When in doubt, do it. Conflicts delayed and deferred make little things into big things.
  3. Use I-statements that honestly and respectfully express your thoughts and feelings, are solution-centered and clarify the goal or expectation (e.g., I think ___because…I feel ___ because…I intend to ___ because…).
  4. Avoid You-statements that blame, insult, attack the personality and/or character of others. You-statements divide, distract, and disrespect. They sound like “You never, you always, you should have, you won’t, you don’t.”
  5. Seek win-win solutions by clearly expressing your needs (I want), their needs (you want), and working together to find creative solutions that satisfy both (we could).
  6. Accept that mistakes and missteps will happen; be ready to apologize, make up for, and move on from mistakes—they too are inevitable byproducts of human relationships and goal attainment.

  Conflict is neither bad nor good;  it simply is. Conflict simply is an essential part of goal achievement and human interaction. Turn confrontation into care-frontation and you’ll begin to more fully realize your human potential and performance goals.

  

   
• 

  There are no innocent bystanders: Why I mourn for Coach Paterno and all at Penn State University, but support the decision of the trustees

  Matt Davidson posted in Character Blog, Character For & From Sports at 7:45 pm on November 10, 2011 | 4 Permalink | Reply
  

  I struggled as to whether I would write on the disturbing case unfolding at Penn State University. On the one hand, this is a case that is at the core of our organizational passion and expertise.  What we are witnessing and trying to make sense of as a nation lies within the cross hairs of character and culture—the very topics to which we have dedicated our lives and work at IEE. On the other and, in this media-saturated world we are bombarded with information, information that is often incomplete and inaccurate; and too often analysis and commentary offered at these times risks contributing more heat than light.

  Here’s at least one reason I decided that I needed to share some thoughts: my eight year-old son.  Since around the age of four he has exhibited a passion and exuberance for sport. Any game, anytime, anywhere, he’ll play it, watch it, or talk about it.  He can be heard day and night rolling on the floor, commentating the actions of a game, mimicking every gesture and phrase common to sport.  First hugs of the day with him are followed with either an update from some game the night before, or questions about who won or lost. He’s simply got the bug for all things sports. It’s beautiful; it’s pure and simple.

  But of course not everything in sport is pretty and nice; much is ugly and downright unethical. But still it gives us a context to talk about that too. Sometimes I hope he won’t see the ugliness and that the purity of his viewpoint on sport and people and life could be preserved forever—but I know it can’t.

  This morning he snuck down quietly to the basement for a stolen few minutes of Sports Center—one of his  great pleasures in life already.  We immediately hustled to tell him to turn it off, knowing that the Penn State story would dominate. Before we could, he ran up the stairs saying, “Dad, Joe Paterno got fired? But why?” I wasn’t ready. I should have been, but I wasn’t. Once again, I hoped he hadn’t seen it and that it would go away. But it wouldn’t.

  So I shared the following explanation with my son and my nine year-old daughter:  “Coach Paterno didn’t actually do anything illegal. There were some people at Penn State who did some bad things, and Coach Paterno and others knew and didn’t do enough to make it right.”  And then I said, “At work we sometimes say it this way:  ‘There are no innocent bystanders.’  When you stand by and watch something bad happen and don’t do anything about it, you’re not innocent. In fact, you’re as bad as the person who did the bad thing. That’s why he got fired.”  They seemed to understand that well and we talked about where and when they need to be ready to intervene like the playground, etc.

  Throughout the day as I listened to commentaries and talked with colleagues, I became unsatisfied with my response.  Why after all of the media attention was I really unsure as to who did what and who knew what? How was it that I again and again it seemed like Joe Paterno was the victim, not these young boys, who were at the time of their abuse not much older than my own son?  Why hadn’t I told my kids the whole truth? What was the truth?

  As an act of conscience I decided to read the transcript of the grand jury testimony.  If you can’t bring yourself to read it, I understand that: it’s human depravity and sickness at its worst.  Let’s just say that it wasn’t until I did that I realized that my response was inadequate, my explanation too clean and easy.  What Coach Sandusky did was pure pathology and sickness—done to the most vulnerable, done using all the trappings of power and prestige and materialism that would literally seduce those at risk boys into allowing this predator into their lives.

  But it was the words I shared with my kids this morning, the words we have shared with so many through our work here at IEE that hit me hardest as I read the testimony:  “There are no innocent bystanders.”  As I read the grand jury testimony the gravity of the moral meltdown hit me.

  As I read the transcript I compiled a list of people who knew something about Mr. Sandusky that are named in the report: a wrestling coach, an assistant principal at the local school, a 28 year-old graduate assistant, the father of the graduate assistant, Coach Paterno, AD Tim Curley, VP Gary Schultz, the Executive Director at Second Mile, the Penn State Campus Police, Child Protective Services, the University’s Counsel lawyer, Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare, two custodians, the custodian’s supervisor.  I’m sure if I combed the report again I would find people I missed who knew something.

  If I was from the list above to put together a logical web of colleagues and family members I would easily come up with a constellation of people who knew something that would number in the 100’s. If I were to make a list of places where the victims reported being with Mr. Sandusky they include college and pro football games, Penn State athletic facilities, offices and buildings, restaurants, local parks, and local schools. And again, were I to create a web of people who in these various settings would have seen something, sensed something, wondered something it would likely number in the thousands.  If I were to read the report again I would find in almost every case an example of where these individuals did something—but nobody, nobody did enough.

  This is not an attempt to engage in shameless self-righteousness and moral indignation pointing the fingers at “them” and what they did or didn’t do.  We must avoid this at all costs.  What we are learning in this case has been learned from world wars and holocausts past and present, from every form of human rights movement, from school shootings and acts of hazing and bullying be they in the school or in the workplace:  (1) human beings are painfully slow to intervene and to act upon what they know and believe to be wrong. (2) There is a collective instinct NOT to intervene. (3) We are all to some degree tainted and corrupted by the instincts of self-preservation self-promotion, which leads us to override the voice of conscience. (4) Our individual and collective conscience is weak, terribly weak!  And, (5) unless or until someone speaks out and steps in, there is a herd instinct NOT to step in.

  There were many with the chance to speak up and step in; no one did so with enough moral conviction to awaken the moral voice in every one. Thus no one person is to blame for not responding more fully; we are all to blame.

  Moral meltdowns such as this seem so obvious fix or avoid.  We draw them up like football analysts playing Monday morning quarterback. Should have seen this; should have done that; why didn’t they just; if they had only done. It all looks so clear when we can rewind it, slow it down, dissect it.  It seems so easy when we’re not tired, scared, worn down and weak.

  I truly think our pain and embarrassment of what is happening at Penn State is at some level the realization that we are looking on something that could have very well happened in my community, that I could have been that person who turned away, who sheepishly thought, “who am I?” “what could I possibly do?”

  We all have a responsibility to learn and grown from this tragedy.  Conscience and character are muscles, muscles that must be exercised regularly.  We cannot expect to be ready for great moral challenges when we neglect to work out on the smaller daily moral challenges.  How often do I ignore offensive humor; how often have I turned away, driven past someone or something, failed to help,failed to call, failed to do something? We have all failed and sadly, we will fail again.

  I failed this morning with my kids.  I will return to this issue tomorrow with my children to help them grow more fully from the deeper lessons and truths of this story. What I said to my son and daughter wasn’t the wrong but it was cleansed beyond effect. I failed to honestly convey what was that was done wrong and to whom it was done. As a result they will likely not learn vitally important lessons that they need to protect themselves from the Coach Sandusky’s of the world, and to prevent themselves from making the same mistakes that have been made by Coach Paterno and others at Penn State.

  Tomorrow morning I will tell my kids that an assistant football coach at Penn State did inappropriate sexual things to young boys; that he gave the boys tickets to games, and jerseys, and bought them meals so that he could trick them into letting him do things they didn’t want to do.  I will tell them that Coach Sandusky is a sick man and that there are other sick men out there like him; that they should not fear people, but that they should be careful too. I will also tell him that many people at Penn State, including Coach Paterno, knew something had happened to these boys and none of them did all that they could do to stop it, and to save these boys from this coach—and to save this sick man from himself.

  There are indeed no innocent bystanders in this case. Joe Paterno may not be guilty, but he is not innocent either. But neither are any of the others in this case. He may be getting too much attention, but as an old coach he knows very well that coaches get too much credit when teams win and too much blame when they lose. He has certainly known the thrill of victory; and this defeat is no doubt pure agony for him and his family.  He has had many victories, but I’m sure even he would acknowledge having learned more from his defeats. In time we will all hopefully learn from this defeat along with him.

  I cried this afternoon as I read the grand jury testimony. I thought of my own son and I cried. How could he? How could they?  How can we allow such terrible things to happen each day in our homes and school and communities to the most vulnerable?  I mourn for Coach Paterno and for the entire Penn State community but I believe the trustees did the right thing. I particularly mourn for those boys.

  I am reminded of Arthur Miller play, All My Sons. In it the father commits suicide after realizing that his actions, his moral failures, done for self-preservation and the benefit of his own sons, lead to the death of 21 American Pilots. A famous quote from the play, gives us all plenty to reflect on in light of the incidents at Penn State:  “You can be better. Once and for all you can know there’s a universe of people outside and you’re responsible to it.” The father in the play realizes, what we must all realize today:  “They are all our sons and daughters.”  Coach Paterno has been father to so many young men, father to so many student athletes and coaches.  He has done so much good for so many but he also knows that “from those to whom much is given, much is expected.”

  I am sad tonight. I am sad to have witnessed again the depravity of mankind and how one person’s sickness can affect so many. I am sad to see that we all lost in this battle. It is a loss will burn in my belly for a long time. I realize once again that there are no innocent bystanders and  I recommit to stand up for what is right, to speak up on what is wrong, to risk self-preservation and self-promotion for the good of humankind.

  For tonight I’ll just go home and watch a few minutes of a game with my son and hope he doesn’t see the tears run down my face or sense the depths of my sadness.

  

   
• 

  The case FOR competition

  Matt Davidson posted in Character Blog, Character For & From Sports, Excellence & Ethics in Business, Intentional Family Culture at 2:12 pm on January 13, 2011 | 2 Permalink | Reply
  

  A recent article in Ed Week’s teacher magazine argued for putting the kibosh on classroom competition, citing numerous ways that it was harmful to the classroom climate and individual psyche.  In response to that article, I’d like the make the case FOR competition—a case we originally made in the Smart & Good Report (page 19), which was informed by my previous work with David Shields and others at the Mendelson Center for Sport, Character, and Culture at the University of Notre Dame.

  I’ll only add the following the following points to what we originally wrote:

  1. Our work in schools and with sports teams since the time of the report’s publication  only reinforces our belief in the importance of competition as a valuable opportunity for building moral and performance character, for overall engagement, and enhanced achievement.  In particular we have found in our work with high school students that their engagement increases exponentially in an assignment or activity when there is an element of individual or team competition.
  2. The key to using competition to develop the culture and character of excellence and ethics is our intentionality in its use.  We must have a rationale for its use and what we hope to develop from it, and we must focus on teaching the moral and performance character NEEDED FOR competition.  If it is misunderstood, poorly designed, and left unmonitored completion can run amuck and lead to problems; but that shouldn’t surprise us, nor does it suggest that competition is the problem.

  The devil is clearly in the details when it comes to discussion and use of competition. I’m hoping that re-sharing what we wrote in S&G helps to provide some useful guidelines in the use of competition.

  —————————————————————————————————————————-

  The Case for Competition:

  5 Ways It Can Aid the Development of Performance Character & Moral Character

   At first glance, especially when there’s plenty of evidence that students cheat to get ahead academically, athletes use steroids to break records, and companies bend and break the rules to beat their competitors, the very nature of competition might seem to be antithetical to the development of performance character and moral character.  Because of the all-too-common cut-throat competition, many see competition as a necessarily war-like relationship: I win only when you lose, all means are justified, and only one thing ultimately matters—winning.  In this view of competition, all individuals—even classmates and teammates—are adversaries vying for limited external rewards (e.g., grades, playing time, promotions, championships, etc.).

  However, this notion of competition as inherently adversarial is really a corruption of competition’s root meaning.  In Latin, “com-petere” means “to strive with.”  In this original meaning, we compete with each other, not against one another.  We achieve our individual best through the challenge and support of others: I realize my personal best (which doesn’t necessarily mean I win) when your best effort pushes me to excel beyond what I would have achieved in isolation.  In this way, competition is an extension of a community that supports and challenges.

  At every level of performance competition, new levels of excellence are achieved when participants find good competitors.  Clearly, in any competition, we are striving against our personal limitations and against the marks set by other competitors. However, the goal should not be simply to win, but to pursue excellence. If schools want to foster, across all areas of school life, a culture of positive competition that promotes the pursuit of excellence and avoids the dangers of destructive competition, they must establish supportive institutional structures (and eliminate negative ones) and work to cultivate in students a positive perspective on competition.  What follows are 5 ways for young people to understand competition as having great potential to support their development of performance character and moral character:

  (1) Competition gives me unique opportunities to develop my performance character and moral character.

   (2) Being a good competitor requires that    I develop the self-understanding and skills for managing the powerful emotions and potential pitfalls of competition (e.g., stress, frustration, resentment of others, anger at perceived unfairness).

   (3) Competition is a partnership, a form of cooperation between competitors where I show respect and care for the other by agreeing to play fairly and give my personal best so as to bring out the best in others.

   (4) Seeking out good competition is a chance for me to realize a level of excellence I would not achieve in isolation; winning and losing are less important than whether I give my best effort and learn or master something that contributes to my pursuit of excellence.

   (5) The outcomes of any given competition can serve as a benchmark in my quest for excellence; engaging in post-competition reflection allows me to analyze what worked well, what improvements are necessary, and what next steps should be taken.

  

   
• 

  100% of whatever you've got—Developing the performance character to outperform your resources

  Matt Davidson posted in Character Blog, Character For & From Sports, Excellence & Ethics in Business at 10:43 am on September 3, 2010 | 1 Permalink | Reply
  

  I went for a run the other day late on a hot afternoon after returning from several days away working with schools.  I knew it wouldn’t be an easy run for me, but I knew that I needed the run to get my head clear and so that I’d be ready to go the next day.  While out for the run my mind was running much faster than my legs: most of my thoughts were basically mental whining on my part about how tired I was, how hot it was, and how old was, and about why in heck I ate those chips at lunch, etc., etc., Amid the sweat and tears (starting to make a pretty pathetic run seem glorious, aren’t I?) I recovered an idea about our notion of performance character that was relevant on that run, and I think relevant to those we teach and coach:  performance character isn’t simply about giving 100% all the time, because when it comes to giving our best effort in pursuit of excellence, we’re often drawing upon energy for excellence reserves that are much less than 100%. 

  We define performance character as the “character needed for excellence in any area of endeavor”.  We’re talking about putting values in action such as grit, perseverance, work ethic, positive attitude.  These “willing values” are what we need on a day and in a moment like I described above when you must do what you don’t want to do when you don’t want to do it. Performance is the outcome–the grade, the test score, the final scoreboard. It’s important, but doesn’t tell us if you have “performance character” those qualities needed to maximize your potential for excellence.  (You can win by 40 and not ever draw upon your performance character, right?).

  We first “rediscovered” the idea of performance character (rediscover since the character connection to excellence certainly preexisted our work, the field of character education was just predominantly focused on moral character) in our work with sports and character.  Coaches talked a lot about the character needed for success in sport, the character that enabled a team or individual to “outperform their resources.”   The idea of performance character has proven a sticky one that resonates deeply with those in all walks of life.  It’s easy to see the importance of performance character; it obvious that our work as teachers and coaches is next to impossible if those we are working with will not continue giving effort, persevering through difficulty, or striving to maximize their potential for excellence.

  The more I work on the development of performance character with teachers and coaches and with myself, the more convinced I am that the test of performance character is precisely when we don’t have 100% to give.  I’ve done plenty of runs when I was well rested, had good nutrition, when it was perfect temperature outside (although in my current sleep-deprived, hectic life, here in Upstate New York, I don’t see many those perfect days!). Heck it’s easy to give it your all on those days. That’s the point: performance character isn’t a sometimes ideal that we go after as if we’re trying to plan the perfect moment to summit a mountain.  It’s an all the time struggle to do the best we can given the circumstances and what we’ve got to offer.

  Developing performance character means that we find really good Public Performance opportunities to work out our performance character muscles (this can be that last lap when you’re tired and you just want to go home; or it can be one more draft on a paragraph that you’ve revised 25 times, but still isn’t clicking).  I wouldn’t have likely worked out my performance character muscles if I hadn’t been out running—putting my weakness and humanity on display for all to see.  Sport gives us plenty of Public Performance/Presentation, which is good. But the glorious moments of “the game” often require less performance character than the inglorious moments of practice.   Bottom line: we need opportunities for Public Performance/Presentation to draw out our inner reserves.

  Developing performance character requires utilizing Self-Study to monitor how we react or respond when “we’re in the red.” What do you do when you’re tired, frustrated, hurting and think you can’t do it anymore?  Do you simply quit. Do you lash out at others? Do you beat yourself up? Can you find little ways to keep yourself moving forward through the pain to your goal?   It’s a scary feeling to get in that uncomfortable spot in your mind when you just want out; if you can stay there, study it and maybe understand it; you’ll discover a limitless power source.

  Developing performance character also requires use of good Other-Study examples, and here the obvious ones aren’t always the best.  I love Hoosiers and much as the next guy, but that’s a pretty view of performance character, when in reality it’s much, much, more gritty.  Use Other-Studies that draw out the gritty, difficult, but absolutely essential elements of giving 100% in a moment where all you’ve got to draw upon is 75, or 50, or 25% of your normal reserves.   Everybody loves the “pull it out at the end against all odds in front of the sold out stadium story.”  We have to draw more attention and teach from the “pull it out on a Tuesday afternoon when you’re tired and distracted by other things and you still stuck with it even though nobody would know if you didn’t story.”   (And if we want to connect to the real world, we should study the performance character needed by the worker who gets up every day at 5AM and does their work well day after day after day; or, study the performance character needed to be a single parent juggling life at home and work. Which is often nothing like the glory of sport whatsoever, but very much like the inglorious preparation required for sport).

  Finally, developing performance character requires Support & Challenge.  Don’t simplify performance character to a “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” hero complex.  I’m sure that if I’d had a running partner out there with me on my run, I would have been able to get out of my own self-pity and pulled it out. I would have drawn energy from their example and gotten more out of myself simply by keeping up with them.  Performance character isn’t just about personal reserves; it’s about surrounding yourself with others who know how to support and challenge you to get the most out of what you have to offer on any given day, in any given circumstances.  In fact, the “so what” of this story may well be that the way to routinely outperform your available resources is seeking out the Support & Challenge of good coaches and teammates capable of helping get more out of yourself than you believed you have.

  Performance character: the character needed to outperform our resources. Is it in you and your team?