Finding Higher Common
Ground on Values
© 2005 by Corinne McLaughlin
People care deeply about moral values.
Values shape our vision of a preferred future. The question of the hour,
however, is: Which moral values should be promoted by government
and public schools? Is there any consensus on this question? And if
there’s a consensus on values, how can they be applied to specific
political issues?
Actually there is a great deal of evidence
for consensus on values world-wide: The Institute for Global Ethics in
Maine, founded by Rushmore Kidder, researched values around the world and
found there are five core values that all societies agree on:
love/compassion; truth/honesty; fairness/tolerance;
responsibility/accountability; and respect for life.
Surprisingly, schools in such diverse area as
liberal Berkeley, CA and conservative Kansas City, MO have found they can
agree on common values to be taught in their schools when they dialogue
together in a professionally facilitated process. The Partnership for
Character Education, based in Washington, D.C., has had a great deal of
success bringing together principals, students, teachers, parents, and
community members to explore common ground on values.
At the 1992 Parliament of the Worlds’
Religions, hundreds of representatives from most of the major religions
built a consensus around key values they had in common: non-violence,
tolerance, truthfulness, respect for life, equal rights, solidarity, a
just economic order, and partnership between men and women.
When we look for the common threads in moral
values, we find there is actually more agreement than differences among a
wide variety of people in the U.S. For example, Character Counts, a
coalition of the largest and most influential, educational and youth
organizations, such as YMCA, 4-H Clubs, the National Educational
Association and the American Federation of Teachers, found a consensus on
core values to be taught in the public schools: trustworthiness, respect,
caring, fairness, responsibility, and citizenship.
The consensus building process is often
called a “multi-stakeholder dialogue”—a dialogue among many people who
have a stake in the outcome. Finding higher common ground among
participants through dialogue and deep listening, where everyone is heard
and real concerns are shared, can cause dramatic breakthroughs, even among
groups with very diverse views.
Even in intractable conflicts around specific
policy issues, such as abortion, common ground can be found using a
professionally facilitated process. Both Search for Common Ground in
Washington D.C., and Public Conversations Project in Boston, for example,
have found common ground in dialogues with pro-life and pro-choice
opponents on this issue. Both sides found that instead of arguing about
when the fetus in the womb became life, they could expand the time frame
of their discussion and focus instead on the cause of pregnancy. Both
sides found common ground on preventing unwanted pregnancies, and they
have created a joint campaign to reduce teen pregnancies. Both sides also
wanted to make adoption more easily available.
Public Conversations Project has also hosted a
series of dialogues between an inner-city Islamic mosque and a suburban
Jewish synagogue and found surprising commonalities. Search for Common
Ground convened many dialogues with a broadly diverse spectrum of
religious and political leaders on the highly divisive faith-based social
services issue. They came up with 29 consensus recommendations, many of
which were incorporated into governmental initiatives.
Another pioneer in finding common ground, The
Institute for Multi Track Diplomacy in Washington, D.C. (on whose board I
served for several years), works in many conflict-ridden areas and has
found similar results through multi-stakeholder dialogues among diverse
adversaries. When there is professional facilitation that brings together
all sides in a conflict, creating a safe space where people really listen
to each other, opponents can hear each other’s pain and understand their
values and point of view. This often leads to amazing breakthroughs in
seemingly intractable conflicts.
For over 60 years, MRA (Moral Re-Armament), a
spiritually based organization with offices all over the world, has helped
resolve conflicts in many countries around the world using a deep
listening and dialoguing process. Its recent “Hope in the Cities”
initiatives have helped promote racial reconciliation in Richmond, VA,
Hartford, CT, and Portland, OR through public dialogues to find common
ground.
The listening process is transformational. It
tends to draw people out, as a safe space has been created for deeper
reflection on an issue. Some people would call this creating a “sacred
space”. Each participant learns to respect other people’s perspectives
even if they’re totally different from his own. Others may have had
different life experiences, a different journey that had led them to the
opinions they have. When there are many participants in a dialogue with
many diverse values and perspectives on an issue, each person can then see
more of the big picture, and so get closer to the full truth about an
issue.
Several years ago I coordinated a national
Task Force on Sustainable Communities for The President’s Council on
Sustainability, which brought together members of President Clinton’s
cabinet as well as CEOs of major corporations and national environmental
organizations to build a consensus among adversaries on environmental and
economic issues. Several members of this Council actually said that the
consensus-building process transformed their lives. It was powerful for
them because they had never sat down with their adversaries for an
extended period and dialogued in this way before. When they got to know
their opponents as human beings, underneath their differences, they began
to understand each other better. What they found was that both sides
essentially wanted the same thing: to build healthy communities that were
economically viable and environmentally sustainable for future
generations. This motivated them to find innovative approaches to achieve
these common goals.
For example, they recommended policy
incentives such as trading pollution credits or renting products (such as
carpets) rather than selling them, so that the component parts could be
returned to the manufacturer and totally recycled. They focused on
creating tax and other incentives to promote “smart growth” that protects
the environment (which they call “the green infrastructure”) and
eliminating disincentives to creating healthier communities.
The Center for Visionary Leadership, which I
co-founded with Gordon Davidson, ran a series of year-long citizen
dialogues in Washington, D.C. on racial healing, where we invited both
blacks and whites to dialogue with each other. We asked people to share
their stories and their life experiences, which were often very painful.
People were often carrying much anger and fear. But in these dialogues,
both sides learned a great deal from each other, and found that we
actually had many values in common, such as the need for love and
understanding and the need to be treated fairly and respectfully.
The staff of our Center worked on a year long
project for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,
researching the key values and principles behind their most successful
programs to help housing residents become economically self-reliant and to
prevent violence and drug abuse (see our guidebook for H.U.D. called
The Spirit of Success: A Guidebook to Best Practices ). In interviews
with hundreds of people at housing developments around the country, we
found that these projects had key values in common: partnership,
collaboration, inspiration, empowerment, and whole systems approaches. In
each program we researched, it was the values-based side of it that
created its effectiveness. A firm basis in values gave people something
more important than just financial incentives to make the needed changes
in their lives.
In our consulting and training work for
business, government and non-profit organizations at our Center we focus
on the underlying values held by our clients and by their organizations.
We ask people, “What’s important to you and why? What values or
principles do you want to steer your life or your organization by? What
is the inner compass or direction that is key for you?”
We help people look at their life journey and
the key turning points in their life that have related to leadership and
values. We utilize effective techniques we’ve developed to help them
prioritize their values and make real commitments to them. Participants
get very clear about what’s their number one value, what’s next most
important, and so on. They then create a clear vision statement for
themselves or their organization based on their values, and develop
strategies for accomplishing their mission.
In 1998 we hosted the first Spirituality at
Work conference ever held in Washington, D.C. with CEOs of major companies
and nationally known authors who care about the “double bottom
line”—profit and values. We asked business people, “Is money the only
thing that makes you feel happy and fulfilled or do you feel greater
satisfaction when you take care of your people, your community and the
environment?”
Many speakers at the conference from business
and government spoke about the need to create a deeper sense of meaning
and purpose in their work. They spoke of their need to bring their whole
selves to work, body, mind AND spirit, by living their values at work.
Each defined spirituality in complimentary ways: Some spoke about
spiritual values as the importance of doing high quality, honest work with
a lot of integrity. Others valued how they treat their workers, or how
they protect the environment or volunteer in their community. Some
discussed meditation, prayer and spiritual study groups in their
workplace. The conference was very intriguing to the major media —we were
interviewed by many newspapers and TV shows. It was very exciting and
inspiring to hear people’s personal journey, how they applied their values
at work, and the emerging consensus around spiritual values in the
workplace.
In April 2000, we organized a leading edge
conference in Washington on Values and Spirituality in Governance, with
several congressmen, best-selling authors, and activists from around the
country who presented values-based solutions to social problems ass well
as techniques such as conflict transformation for creating a new politics.
We called it “Re-Igniting the Spirit of America” because we can renew our
democracy if we can build a consensus around our values, and more
importantly, embody them.
A diverse group of spiritually-oriented political
leaders, authors and activists from around the country met together
several times over a two year period leading up to the conference and we
built a consensus on how our moral values might be translated into
politics:
1) Empowerment: supporting citizens in
connecting with their purpose and passion and providing opportunities to
develop their full capacities to participate in society.
2) Respect and Compassion: recognizing the
innate value of all people, appreciating diversity, and providing for
those who truly cannot support themselves.
3) Collaboration: promoting communication,
cooperation and community among similar and diverse groups.
4) Equity: providing equal opportunities for
education, meaningful work and entrepreneurship.
5) Common Ground: promoting non-violence and
dialogue to build consensus on mutually beneficial solutions to divisive
issues.
6) Whole Systems Thinking: focusing on
emerging opportunities and the interconnection of all aspects of an issue.
7) Stewardship: recognizing that humans are
an interdependent part of the web of life and that we have a
responsibility to protect the environment and ecological diversity.
8) Positive Solutions: promoting best
practices that are just and sustainable— effective and proven solutions to
social, economic and political problems
9) Balancing Rights with Responsibilities:
protecting individual rights, as well as encouraging a sense of
responsibility to give back to society.
10) Political Courage and Honesty:
encouraging elected officials to embody their values and speak their
conscience.
Most spiritual traditions respect the grain of
truth on each side of a conflict and promote healing, reconciliation and
forgiveness. The training of initiates in ancient mystery schools included
training in paradoxical thinking--holding two opposite ideas at the same
time. The Taoists teach about yin and yang--the polar opposites—that are
held in a dynamic balance. The Buddhists teach about the Noble Middle Path
between the pairs of opposites. In the Jewish Kabbalah, The Tree of Life,
the middle pillar shows the path of balance between the opposites.
A common mission and goal can be especially
helpful in transcending different lifestyles, as volunteers who recently
helped victims of Hurricane Katrina learned. The media reported that
traditional, middle class Methodists from Kentucky worked hand in hand
with free-spirited, tattooed hippies from the Rainbow Family to set up a
camp in Waveland, Mississippi to serve food and medicine. The barriers
between people come down more easily when there is open-hearted serving.
They find appreciation for common values such as compassion, hard work,
and flexibility.
As Einstein said, we can’t solve a problem on
the same level of consciousness that created the problem. We have to find
higher common ground. Thomas Jefferson noted that, “Law and institutions
must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind.” If we are to
keep evolving as a society, our institutions need to reflect the changes
in our consciousness and a new consensus in our values. Otherwise our
institutions will become rigid and crystallized, holding back the evolving
life within them. If we are willing to dialogue with others with
different views, openly searching together for common ground, we can forge
a new consensus in areas where there now seems so much conflict, and so
create a better future for us all.