There are no complex rules of engagement to learn with Disputz. One lets the other know, in real-time, when one is offended, and there can be only one of two results; the objection is sustained or overruled. For example, when one objects to poor behavior or attitude, in real-time during a disagreement, the objection is either sustained and acknowledged by the offender, and we move on. Or, the offender will overrule the objection and it is escalated to be reviewed by our peers.
Agreeing that one is held to account for one’s behavior and attitude during a discourse means one doesn’t have to think for others or second guess when delivering a message. The listener is responsible for what they hear and see and is empowered to speak up, when they deem the speaker’s attitude, or behavior is inappropriate, knowing the Disputz Network has their back, when needed.
By agreeing that our unresolved disputes will be openly displayed to our peers, we believe it will be enough to weed out most uncivil behavior beforehand when challenged privately. On occasion, around one dispute in 25 would be likely to be posted on the Disputz Network to be reviewed. And only one in 70 to go to the Zoom video review. (This to be tested)
Finally, by agreeing that our organizational peers, with whom we respect and are respected by, may well be reviewing our behavior and voting us out, should allow one to take control of one’s ego, once and for all, we believe.