From time to time I encounter people who characterise what I do as ‘touchy-feely’ – often without having any direct experience of what I actually do. This has caused me to reflect on the issues raised by the use of this and similar phrases.
The key issue is power. Touchy-feely is a derisive term which I suspect is linked to gender, and is code for “don’t be such a girl.” (I wonder if male facilitators encounter this as often as female ones?) Chambers dictionary definition: “involving emotion and personal contact as distinct from intellectual activity.”
The phrase usually surfaces when someone is convinced that they know the solution, they know how things should be done and feel threatened by new ideas or ways of working.
Here is a story of a foiled attempt to undermine a process for opening up a difficult discussion.
We were working with a major utility to rebuild a badly fractured relationship with a contractor, managing a substantial part of the utility’s on-the-ground operations.
An acrimonious relationship had developed over many years between the two organisations leading to all sorts of accusations and innuendo circulating between the two organisational cultures. The contract was due for re-tender and the incumbent contractor chose not to submit a bid.
Three days before they were due to start, the winning contractor rang up the incumbent contractor and asked if they could buy their heavy equipment.
The proverbial hit the fan then, the head of the utility was sacked putting the replacement CEO in the position of begging the previous contractor to stay on after all.
My business partner and I had the job of running a series of partnership building meetings between the two erstwhile ‘divorcees’. We worked closely with the new CEO and the contractor to design a series of workshops. The intention was to move from the “master-slave” relationship that had characterised the previous era to a partnership model.
A draft agenda for the first meeting was sent out. The contract manager on the utility side responded by sending around his own agenda which consisted mainly of reviewing a long list of details of the contract. We were told by other people that he thought the whole process of trying to work together as a team was a crock and that the meeting would be ‘touchy-feely’ with “lots of holding hands.”
Armed with this information, at the start of the meeting I asked everyone to stand up in a circle. I then instructed people to hold hands. To my amazement, they did. I said, “I heard that people were worried we would be holding hands, so now we have that out of the way we can get down to business.”
We took the power back and were able to run a series of very tough but productive meetings. I need to remember that when I feel attacked by the “touchy-feely” demons it is an attempt to undermine open discussion and to maintain the status quo. I now see this language as a flashing beacon to remind me that every attempt to railroad a ‘solution’ through, without real discussion, without engaging all players, will fail.