Love in Organizations

[Eric Hansen]

This was the theme of our Monday evening workshop with Roger Harrison this week. One of the questions I asked myself (and heard others ask) is “What do we mean by love.”

I think we need to take that question seriously, to have a dialogue to see where it leads us. So, this is my attempt to start on online dialogue about love in organizations – love in the workplace.

I went to C.S. Lewis and his book “The Four Loves” as a place to start. I thought it would be simple, a little explanation of how Lewis distinguishes “Need Love” from “Gift Love” and then perhaps a paragraph on each of the four loves: affection, eros, friendship, charity. (You can find a simple explanation of this book on Wikipedia here.)

And then a question: How do these loves relate to that idea of “Love in Organizations”

But I got stopped because my memory of what Lewis called “Need Love” was faulty. I thought he simply disparaged need love as a hunger, a craving to be loved, and not love at all. In re-reading the introduction, I learned that Lewis also thought he would be able to “write some fairly easy panegyrics on [Gift Love] and disparagements of [Need Love]. Reality, Lewis found, is more complicated.

While Need Love can be “a tyrannous and gluttonous need for affection,’ it is also a form of real love. It is not selfish for a child to turn its mother for comfort, Lewis said, nor for an individual to crave the company and affection of fellow humans. We need each other. A lack of Need Love, Lewis said, “is a bad spiritual symptom, just as lack of appetite is a bad medical symptom, since men really do need food.”

And so as I think about this I think I have a habit of denying my own Need Love. Asking myself “Why,” I come to the conclusion my behavior is grounded in fear. Fear of loss of control, fear of openness, fear of vulnerability. These fears are justified, in a way. Like an amoeba sending out a pseudo-pod, I test reality. If I find my environment to be too acidic, I pull back. If my openness and vulnerability are not acknowledge, I retreat. I am (perhaps) overly sensitive to a poisonous environment.

So, here’s a question: What would happen if I could learn to live openly, vulnerably, in the midst of all that acid?

Hmm. I may have strayed off topic here. Still, proceed at your own risk.

[Eric Hansen]

So, not to make this a conversation that is just between me, but one reaction I noticed is that, after posting this and after sending another email in which I was a little vulnerable, I wanted to pull back ... I wanted to retract what I had written.

I don't know if that's a human thing, a guy thing, or an Eric thing. My sense is that it is a human thinkg -- that we all pull back from being vulnerable.

[Dan Joyner]

Eric
What you are saying here is at the core of what it means to “Be in Community” Thanks for sharing your thoughts about this… What you are doing is what builds community!

I too struggle with the idea of a virtual community. The questions I hear myself asking, often, are around the isolation – intimacy paradox. As I sit here and as I experience this; I’m noticing the energy I get from my thoughts… Sometimes there is a clear distinction – Seeking intimacy enlivens my experience while creating measurements to define my isolation deadens my experience… Maybe it starts with listening to your own thoughts and noticing your experience.

I have two questions that may spawn more questions:

“What could happen if we became a “social network” that was alive?”

The more fundamental question might be “Why are we here?”

[Randy Weeks]

I've read that attachment several times, Eric, and shared it with a number of friends. It reminds me to slow down enough to find or foster in myself an awareness of appreciation, affection, even fondness for a person or group with whom I find myself connected at any time. Another practice of depth over speed.

I think you do a good job of asking the question, "What would happen if I could learn to live openly, vulnerably, in the midst of all that acid?"

Just asking it helps connect and create some context.

It's easy sometimes, though, both online and person, to leave it at that: to acknowledge that it's important, helpful, whatever, and nod my head in my agreement as if this is all just something to LEARN instead of something to LIVE, so in fear of acid, exposure or criticism, I find myself in a virtual margin all over again, even while seated in a small circle, or writing about something that matters to me.

I say I am willing to substitute agenda and advice with curiosity, and that I am willing to have a new kind of conversation. I realize, however, that it's critical take time to connect with myself, as well as those in the present space, before I can feel into what matters, what I appreciate, what I love about him, her or them, so that I can be present to the process instead of just saying I "know" a certain thing to be true.

It's like the question, "What is my contribution to the problem I'm describing?"
Once I take time to get connected to my current answers to that Q, I am present and more willing to engage instead of give lip service.

The idea of intimacy in business and associational life, of love as an intentional awareness, feels awkward... feels like words that don't fit in our mouths very well except when talking about family and personal matters.

I like what Dan has asked: “What could happen if we became a “social network” that was alive?” and "Why are we here?"

Creating connections that matter in this virtual space, or at least using it to nurture and extend those we love in the personal world, continues to feel like a struggle to me, too.

Love is one of those words that deserves to be reclaimed, evaluated, tried on and re-printed in our internal dictionaries. It's a big enough fire to bring to this online space in the hope of igniting an aliveness among us online that reflects the connections we share in our personal times together.

I appreciate your sharing this with us.