- March 14, 2015 at 1:44 pm #2025Jean Seville SuffieldParticipant
I had answered online but placing this here.
Dear Juan Pablo,
Options you may not have thought about! [Speculations only at this point]. Let’s call the entity or WGI – Entity
1. To close corporation WGI – Entity and liquidate its assets.
2. To reamain as autonomous corporation and continue a new course that would involve its members in a variety of activities. Whereas WGI – Entity would enourage its faculty and certified group and others to become members of WGI as official body and work directly with them, the Entity group would not be an offshoot, child, affiliate or anything else in relationship to WGI. It would continue to exist autonomously and offer other benefits to members.
I know there may be many other options but the above seem to be the extreme from one end to the other? Maybe yes, maybe no.
Perhaps some dialogue in the middle – moderate area – might be in order rather than ‘being right’ or ‘being
wrong.’ It does not matter who is right or wrong since it is all perception. I have been taught that if someone or a group of people perceive you or a situation in a certain way, then look in the mirror and figure out what you can change not how you wish to bend others to your will.
This whole discussion is not whether this or whether that – but HOW are we going to work together?
Because country X has problems and also Country Z, it does not mean that I, as country Y, have to bear the results of corrective measures imposed on me when I am operating quite well and within the paramenters set by WGI. Let’s look at each International Location [Name that makes more sense that ‘affiliate] and enter into negotiations to find ways to work differences out. [Which I believe is happening, Yes or No?]
What you have to remember is that the four to five year gap since Nashville has not helped our cause. Canada is concerned about the very situations both Brian and you have raised. People in Canada have gone on their own, too, in teaching the concepts each and every way. We have an added challenge with our French counterparts. Don’t believe Glasser’s answer woud be to round those who don’t agree and impose anything on them.
How do we become the exciting, vibrant, and energetic organization that everyone wants to join????? Let’s look at what and how we are doing things and move on . . .
I am moving on . . . This is so draining of energy…………….
As an aide to policies Brian mentioned. The PPP Manual of old was readable, simple, and informative. Like the way the US has modified and Canada is working on the sample model. We are in digital age so a manual or handbook would be fine.
- March 16, 2015 at 8:00 pm #2046Brian PattersonParticipant
It seems we need a Solving Circle! I have been surprised to see the seeming animosity in this discussion. (Maybe it’s just my perception in the two dimensional world of the internet.)
We need to look for the ‘and’ not the ‘either/or’.
Where is the shared vision?
- October 6, 2015 at 6:42 pm #2363Jean Seville SuffieldParticipant
I fully agree with the and/and in resolving and collapsing conflict! I hope that the time we take to revisit the vision etc. shall be helpful since most board members were not a part of it. In addition, it will provide a time and place to building a trusting relationship which is really one of the ‘key’ factors in being able to express onself without judgment.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.