We Object to Misbehavior in Real-time

We object to misbehavior in real-time

Prevent Vs Object IN REAL-TIME
We can’t PREVENT misbehavior; it is a given. It WILL happen, on occasion between people, especially when we disagree. When our ideas are threatened, we can become defensive and offensive, resulting in angry, and incivil behavior. We can, however, OBJECT to this misbehavior in real-time, as it occurs rather than complaining about the person later. For this reason, we have produced Object123. A simple toolkit designed to object to misbehavior, in real-time, thus nipping any potential for long-term conflict or disputes in the bud.

Disagree & Object
Firstly, we understand the difference between disagreeing versus HOW we disagree during a disagreement. We disagree with the content as usual, but we OBJECT, in real-time to how someone disagrees with us (misbehaves). In effect, we are having two conversations simultaneously. If you are taking offense to how the other is behaving during the conversation, you can switch to Object123, and use the first of the Stop-The-Line conversation buttons to slow or ultimately stop the conversation or meeting as needed.

Stop-TheLine Conversation Buttons

Safe Space
By beginning this process, we are entering into our safe space where we remain until we resolve the misbehavior issue, and only then do we resume the actual conversation, discussion, or disagreement.

Simply CAUTION! the offender. The offended person should receive an acceptable acknowledgment of the offender’s misbehavior or a satisfactory explanation that justifies their behavior. If the offended person is not satisfied, he or she can escalate to an objection.

Simply OBJECT! to the offender’s misbehavior now and expect to receive an acceptable simple apology or a satisfactory explanation for their poor behavior. If still not satisfied, the offended can escalate to a stop.

Simply STOP! the offender now and expect to receive an acceptable apology consisting of: 

1. What was said, 

2. Why it was said and 

3. What the offender will do next time.

Final Democratic Process
If still unsatisfied, the offended person can escalate the issue to the final democratic process. This process uses a team of our peers (NOT HR or management) to adjudicate our dispute. This could be done as needed on the day, for example, or on a Friday afternoon during a weekly debriefing.
Of course, all participants would need to agree to use Object123 beforehand, and it would apply to every member of the organization, from the Janitor to the CEO.

We object to misbehavior in real-time

Victim Blaming

When it comes to the abuse of a victim, the politically correct squad has set up what seems to me to be a barrier or no-touch zone for looking at the victim’s role in the abuse. I know this is very controversial, but I am willing to broach this subject here, at the risk of becoming a victim myself…ha!

So, we have the abuser and the abused and a framework that allows this behavior to exist. Let’s identify all three components here.

The Abuser

The abuser is offensive in their behavior, which usually has a measure of anger attached to it and results in the following misbehaviors:

The behavior of the abuser usually stems from anger and results in the above misbehaviors.

The Abused

The abused person is usually submissive in their behavior, stemming from many well worn sayings that seem to be designed to keep the abused from speaking up to stop abusive behavior.

The passive misbehavior of the abused usually stems from these implied misbehaviors resulting in being submissive.

The framework

Putting it all together with implicit intimidation and implicit submission, and we have what seems to be a perfect marriage that sustains the misbehavior of the abuser. That does not mean we are always one or the other. We can go from one to the other on different occasions during the day. For example, I might come from a framework that allows my boss to abuse me and then go home to a similar framework that allows me to abuse my wife or kids.

The goal here is to change these behaviors by adapting a new framework designed for us to object to misbehavior as it occurs. Object123 is our proposed FRAMEWORK we use to object to misbehavior that leads to abusive and submissive behavior.

Tackling Misbehavior in Real-time

Sports Academy: Teaching the lost art of the tackle
We Tackle Misbehavior in Real-time

If a soccer player gave away a free-kick during a tackle, you wouldn’t wait until the end of the game to blow the whistle. You wouldn’t wait until the end of the first half to blow the whistle. Of course, you would blow the whistle instantly in real-time to penalize the offending player.

Why is it that we delay dealing with misbehavior in the workplace? Because we are so unsure of the right way to approach it, I believe. I bet you could ask any two people in any organization how they should tackle misbehavior from a colleague, and they would not have the same two answers. Try it in your organization. My bet is that they would more likely reply “it depends”.

This lack of consistent procedure in organizations creates uncertainty in teams and results in us walking around on eggshells, afraid of offending each other and afraid of being accused of misbehavior.

Object123 is our solution to this uncertainty, by agreeing to tackle misbehavior in real-time and holding anyone that fouls to account.

Caution! – Penalty! – Disqualification!

Caution – Penalty – Disqualification

What if we agreed that there were explicit rules of engagement while having a conversation, discussion, or disagreement? And we also agreed that there would be consequences if we infringed upon these said rules.

As in soccer and many other sports, the first infringement or misbehavior is just a mild caution, but a penalty could result if continued. And if this was not enough deterrent for the offender, a disqualification could ensue.

Nothing is startling about what I just said here: just about every sport in the world has them but try to apply this to a relationship, either business or personal, and people could think that I am crazy.

Well, crazy or not, that is precisely what I am proposing. To design and apply a simple accountability system for how we interact. Reasonable, right? Overdue? I dare say.

Object123.com is my proposal for how we should behave while engaging.

Why Have Rules of Engagement?

Burgas Municipality News : Prestigious free wrestling tournament "Olympic  glory" will be held tomorow in hall "Mladost"

I suggest that it works like this:

  1. Negotiations
    Being in a relationship or partnership of any sort means we will have to negotiate, propose, and agree to a countless number of issues; that crop up from day to day for the life of the relationship.
  2. Free and Fair
    If we want a free and fair negotiation, we will also have to agree to some rules of engagement. E.g., no spitting, biting, or scratching 🙂
  3. Breaking the Rules
    A violation of these rules is considered an offense, resulting in a caution, penalty, or disqualification by a referee/or each other. Ultimately we are accountable. We are responsible if we break or bend these rules.
  4. Rules Revised When Needed
    We can revise the rules when needed if we both agree to the changes. The better the rules, the better our negotiations, which leads to even better rules.
  5. In Contempt of Our Agreed Rules
    Failure to continue endorsing our agreed rules of engagement would result in contempt and would be grounds to end any agreements formed in the relationship or partnership.
    Basically, it would be time to say goodbye.

Let the negotiations and agreements for the first rules of engagement begin! I just happen to have a few that I have prepared earlier, I call them Object123 .

How to Really Tame a Shrew

Is it possible that we were and are tamed by conversation? I suspect so. I also suspect some of us have been tamed more than others, which would explain why some adults are still almost feral with their poor behavior and ill-temper.

Never fear, however, as I have come up with a simple tool to help those of us that still need some taming training. I call it Object123.com, and it could quite possibly make up for any lack of conversation taming we should have received previously.

Once agreed to, this behavioral tool can help us bring each other into line quick smart, as we learn to object to any ill-tempered misbehavior we produce, especially during disagreements.

Once tamed enough, we can then enter into some extreme, productive, and exciting negotiations and proposals that I believe all good conversation is supposed to entail.

Let the real taming and conversations begin!

Accountability Will Outshine Any Ego

How do we deal with John’s misbehavior and ego?

Imagine we are in a company design meeting. You are new to the company but speak up with your suggested solution for a long standing problem on the company’s website? John, a leading Tech Designer stands up shouts out;
“Yecch! That won’t work!”
What happens next could well decide the fate of you, your idea and possibly the fate of the company, depending how big the problem is.

This scenario, I believe would happen countless number of times, in millionions of organisations, all around the world with no real standard way to deal with such disagreements. So, if this was you being browbeaten by John how do you go about dealing with this now apparent disagreement?

If we were an organisation using Object123 we would have a simple process for you to apply. You could instantly Caution John on his tone and volume and use of absolute language.
“I would like to Caution you John on your use of tone, volume and absolute language!”
At this point John could simply retract his statement and acknowledge his misbehavior reiterating in a more acceptable way;
“Okay. Can I more accurately say that, in my view, your idea will not work because of …..”
And so the disagreement can start on an even footing and if you can counter his argument, (now, without having to deal with his emotional browbeating) then we can have a meaningful and fair discussion.

However if John did not receive your Caution well and made another gafuffel sound;
“Hugh!”
And refused to give an adequate explanation for his outburst, then you could escalate your Caution to an Objection;
“I object!”
And then you can expect a simple apology from John for his obvious use of tone, volume and absolute language. But, if still no contriteness from John other than continuing to disagree vehemently with your suggested idea, then…..

You could now escalate it one more time to a Stop in real-time, during the meeting and now, unless John gave a definitive explanation for his behavior or an acceptable apology to you the meeting would now be called to a pause or conclusion in order for you and John to deal with the alleged misbehavior. Where by you would both front up to a team of peers to adjudicate your behavioral dispute and their decision would be final.

Now you might think this John guy has some serious behavior and ego issues or you may even side with him, who knows? But either way this process will sort out the sheep from the goats. But somehow I doubt any such scenario will get to a Stop because the ramifications of such high standards of accountability will outshine any ego, in my view.

Welcome to Object123 – it’s how we behave!

This Sentence Could Change the World

“I agree with the content of your point but I object to how it was delivered”

Why is this sentence so important? Because it then allows us to have a duel conversation. One on the merit of the contents of a conversation and two, on the merits of the behavior while delivering the content.

Now add a few basic rules of engagement and we end up with Object123.

My belief is that we confuse these two premises and mix behavior and content together, during a disagreement and end up with a mess or war.

Every dictionary on the planet contributes to this error by not separating out “disagree” vs “object”, going on to define the verb “object” as: “To disagree with something or someone…” How I can disagree with something is beyond me? I can only disagree with the maker or user of the thing, I believe. And making no differentiation between disagree and object is, to me, clearly not helpful.

I believe the proper definition of the verb to object is to disagree with one’s behavior, not someone or something, period.

Taking offense

Taking offense, whether it is at work or at home, is not an uncommon experience. So you would think that we would have a commonly agreed-upon solution to approach this problem, when it occurs.

But ask any two random people, in an office or at home, how they should behave when they have been offended or when they have offended another and you will find a different answer every time. Well that is my bet. No structure seems to exist. It’s either “suck it up buttercup” or be equally or more offensive in return.

I am amazed by this lack of preparation. Even in the most advanced organizations and behavioral thinking, this gap in how we should behave when we misbehave, seems to exist.

Here is where Object123 comes in. A simple, memorable tool to use, in real-time when we have taken offense.

Stop-the-Line Conversation

Stop-the-Line Conversation, using Object123

“Stop-the-Line manufacturing is a technique introduced by Taiichi Ohno (of Toyota Production System fame) in which every employee on the assembly line has a responsibility to push a big red button that stops everything whenever they notice a defect on the assembly line.”

Initially, people did not understand the idea as the dogma at the time was to keep the line moving at all costs. Taiichi’s idea was by stopping the line and fixing inefficiencies you were proactively building a better process.

Some managers took up his idea and some did not. The managers that took up the idea their productivity dropped by a shocking amount. They were spending so much time actually fixing defects on the line rather than just using Stop-gaps to keep the line moving. The managers that did not take up his idea thought they were vindicated for taking their stance.

Before long though, something strange started to happen. The managers that took up Taiichi’s ideas and fixed the defects on the line as they went, started producing their goods faster, cheaper, and more reliably than stubborn conservative Stop-gap managers. To the point where they caught up and out performed them. This went on to make Toyota one of the leading car manufacturers in the world.

Now, imagine if we did that for all our conversations? Where we all could push an imaginary BIG RED button during our conversations when ever we felt offended by someone’s behavior. Where we could adjust and fix each other’s offensive behavior, in real-time rather than using the Stop-gap method we all use during conversation today, that results in inefficiencies and defects in communication?

I am suggesting that Object123.com is that BIG RED BUTTON for Stop-the-Line Conversation.
Where we could stamp out Stop-gap misbehavior such as the following by Cautioning, Objecting & ultimately Stopping, in real-time when needed:

We Object to the OFFENDER’S use of STOP-GAPS
We Object to the OFFENDED’S use of STOP-GAPS





Integrity is Not Blind

I prefer all leaders and followers, for that matter, to qualify their thoughts as opinions rather than dress them up as facts. For example, I used “I prefer” but I could have said what “I think” or “in my opinion”, etc etc.

This would open us all up to be more easily challenged, I believe, as unfortunately there are far too many charlatans out their trying to seduce people to endorse their dogma, ie the blind leading the blind.

I don’t think anyone should take the risk of being either. That is, the blind leader or blind follower, and that, to me is integrity.