Dialogue in Craft Brewing

What is dialogue, really?

Dialogue can be a tangled mess

Two recent Twitter threads can hopefully serve as catalysts to much needed problem solving in the craft beer community (and perhaps American society). BeerKulture and TheThirstyWench published articles and shared them on Twitter. Recapping them here will not do them justice. (Very) basically, the latter took on misogyny and the former racism.  Some interesting twittering followed. There were several calls for conversations to take place to address and fix the these social abominations.

On the surface, it is great to know that people are pushing for dialogue.  My worry, though, is that "dialogue" is not fully appreciated for what it is, what it does, and what it takes. There is no magic wand to make things "right" or get rid of the nastiness. Just talking in a group won't do; if not done properly, then things can get worse. Still, success isn't impossible. We can tackle difficult subjects and inspire, if not bring about, positive change through talking and listening*. It takes hard, dedicated work that will provoke intense reactions. What the craft beer community seems to want is Dialogue (with a capital "D").

"Dialogue" has been conflated with restorative justice methods, debate, discussion, conversation, and other practices. If it's anybody's fault, we are to blame; the conflict management community for not speaking up. This is the main reason for this article.

So, what is Dialogue? As a conflict management specialist, there are varying models. My former workplace, @Meta-Culture, utilizes one model for interfaith Dialogue. We engage other models depending on the situation. The @PubDialogues uses a "pop-up", world cafe model. But they all share core principles, and start out as tangled messes, like some of the utility poles I saw in India (actually, the one above is in Kathmandu).

Dialogue is different than debate (where arguments are presented and a “winner” is chosen). It is not advocacy or a platform. It does not lead participants to a presumed solution. Grandstanding is not tolerated. People don't talk over others. The goal of Dialogue is to solve a problem, not force arguments. It is a facilitated group effort to overcome challenges at their core. Why facilitated? Without an experienced facilitator, well-intentioned conversations can turn into rallies, partiality, bullying and unchecked aggression. Topics of conversation would tend to be myopic or unfocused, cluttered or quiet. A facilitator tracks ideas, allows everyone a voice, utilizes conflict management techniques, provides clarity and keeps things civil. 

Dialogue requires more than discussing something, talking over an issue or airing grievances. In order to effectively engage in problem-solving, some things need to happen:

• Understand the problem (REALLY understand it)

• Make sure the problem is not a symptom of other problems

• Understand those other problems

• Identify those affected

• Communicate ideas for solutions

This isn't all, but sustained Dialogue is the best way to get started.

The craft beer community may just be the most suitable community for Dialogue efforts on social issues.  It is collaborative, social, passionate, and connected. So, is the craft beer community ready for dialogue? Because things can get dicey right out of the gate and steam can be lost quickly. Those Twitter threads, when looked at through a conflict management perspective, reinforce this question.

Dialogue is challenging, difficult, frustrating, straining, rewarding and most likely not what is expected. Each participant may feel like walking out at some point. The phrase, "I just don't understand why we're talking about this thing" will be uttered. So will, "that's a stupid question" and "no, no...you're so wrong". Dialogue is not straight forward. It takes time, patience, energy and sacrifice.

The core of Dialogue is inquiry. Questions. Lots of them. And lots of different types of, and motives for, questions. Some seek information while others are designed to challenge current thinking. Some may seem easy, silly, defensive, dumb, aggressive, offensive or redundant. Every question asked in a dialogue is important and should not be dismissed. This can challenge listening*.

I could preface a Dialogue by saying, “now, try not to be offended” or “don’t take this the wrong way”. Well, to me, these suppress valuable information. Plus, I can’t tell you how to feel, or judge your feelings. Expect to be offended; just say so and we can address it. There will be a lot of "why" questions; the simplest, most annoying question ever—and most useful.

So, with this in mind, let’s look at an example of the types of questions that may be asked in a Dialogue for the craft beer community. Here’s a “simple” one.

What is racism?

I’m guessing your first thought is to define it. That’s fine.

Merriam-Webster

1:         a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

2          a: a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles

             b: a political or social system founded on racism

3:         racial prejudice or discrimination

Well, the definition is just one part. It doesn’t explain a whole lot. What else is racism? Rodney King being beaten by cops? Yes, that’s an example. What else IS racism? Let’s look at it from other angles:

• Could it be a response to something? What?

• What about a symptom? Of what?

• What does it require?

• Is it taught, otherwise learned or biological?

• Where does it exist? Not exist?

• When, how did it start?

• What purpose does it serve?

• How do some people think of it as good? Why?

• Is it an action, notion, idea, or something else?

That's just the tip of the iceberg. Responses to these questions will likely give rise to other questions. And the Dialogue can go like this for quite a while. Some take months or years. So, craft beer community, that's a basic introduction to Dialogue. If this is what you want, fan-frickin-tastic!  We're ready to help.

*Listening is more than just hearing the words of someone else. It requires an understanding of what someone is saying, why they are saying it, how they feel about it and the point they are trying to make. It also involves clarifying what you hear and interpret. It's a difficult skill to master, which is why having facilitators helps in a group setting. 

Internalizing Diversity and Inclusion for Craft Breweries

The Brewers Association recently published Diversity Best Practices for its members. This 5-part series is a great resource to help breweries with diversity and inclusion efforts. We encourage every brewery to at least consider such efforts laid out by the BA.

It is important to point out that with diversity comes difference, and differences can–and often do–increase conflict opportunities. This isn’t to say diversity is bad. On the contrary; a diverse team expands talents and problem solving, enables progress and exposes more people to more experiences. But only if it the differences that accompany diversity are managed properly.  Just having diversity is not good enough, and the BA knows this. 

In the A Diversity Framework for your Hands section (“hands” meaning your work team), the BA suggests using “training and other workforce education efforts to minimize bias and to productively anticipate and resolve conflict.” This is precisely what we do here at OvalOptions. Our services (mediation, training, consulting, coaching, facilitation) help clients understand, embrace and manage differences, thereby enhancing diversity and strengthening their team.

Additionally, the BA says, “Use organizational climate and job satisfaction surveys to regularly ‘take the temperature’ of your workforce.” Again, that’s what we do. Whether it’s a one-time survey, or through our VENTIT(TM) program, we help clients “read” their workforce, understand that reading, and suggest and provide methods that are appropriate for each situation.

Through our various services, we have helped breweries overcome significant challenges, from trademark infringement to partnership disagreements.

Approaches to Dispute: The Big Five

Which is Right for You? It Depends

There are five basic methods for addressing disputes. Each has their benefits and challenges. Choosing which is right for you is not easy; problems can be complex, emotions high, communication murky, and relations strained. Some problems may require more than one approach. We help clients understand, choose, and apply the most appropriate to their situation.

Let’s take a look at the Five.

Avoid

We’ve all done this. You need to talk to someone about a sensitive subject, but keep putting it off. That’s avoidance. In certain cases, avoidance is not a bad idea. Avoiding a dark alley at night is probably a good idea. Yet, rarely does avoiding a situation change it.  Disagreements, disputes, and problematic issues tend to develop more potency as they linger.

Accommodate

This is basically giving in to demands or requests. Much like avoidance, issues tend to linger and build after “giving in”. And like avoidance, it has its place. Example: A mugger with a gun to your head demanding your wallet. Probably best to give it. Again, though, the problematic issue goes unaddressed. 

Compete  

In the above example, the mugger is Competing. This is a win-lose scenario in that at least one party believes the loss from one necessarily means the gain for another. Therefore, the goal is to win or make the other party lose. Sporting events are the obvious example. So, too, are presidential debates with the catch being that the issues tackled in a debate are rarely addressed, and never resolved. The focus is on winning, not solving problems

Compromise

A common favorite in politics that, at face value, seems to aim at solving a problem. But Compromise is a lose-lose scenario. Lost in its ability to resolve disputes, the key factor in compromise that gets overlooked is that each party gives up something. The focus is on resolving the dispute not solving the problem. In politics, the game is to demand more than what you need because you know with Compromise you’ll have to give up something. Better to have extra, “fluff” demands to give up and keep your core demands.

Collaborate

The best of the five for solving problems. Parties agree to work together to solve a problem, drawing from the strengths of each. Even if the problem proves too difficult to overcome, other benefits from Collaboration emerge, including opening communication, developing positive relations, learning new skills, and building bridges. The biggest challenges to Collaboration are that it is difficult and voluntary; forcing it damages its effectiveness.

---

OvalOptions is Expanding its Office and Services

In January, OvalOptions moved from its Denver office to the Clear Creek Office Building in Wheat Ridge. The new office has space for in-house trainings, conferences, meetings and dialogues. We extend sincere thanks to the Conflict Center for providing us office space over the last several years. The new location is significantly larger and provides several benefits to our clients.OvalOptions will host events throughout the year and offer its rooms for others to use when appropriate. Having events in house increases their frequency and reduces costs. For example, the main obstacle that has faced the Great American Brewers Dialogue is finding an affordable venue that would allow inexpensive (or free) admission. The new space provides a remedy.In addition to the new location, OvalOptions is rolling out two new services.

• Workplace Investigation addresses sensitive and important personnel issues, such as allegations of discrimination, contested work assignments, co-worker conflict, sexual and other harassment, and disputes over reviews and promotions.
• VENTIT™ combines the informational resource aspect of an Ombudsman office with dispute management and coaching services. Its three-tier approach provides clients’ staff a confidential avenue to vocalize, express and vent complaints to an outside party.  Callers can receive tips and guidance, and if needed engage more in-depth services.

For more information, please contact OvalOptions: Help@OvalOptions.com 720-220-8683 

Please "Have a Beer" Responsibly

Pub Dialogue2

The new #OpenYourWorld Heineken commercial is turning some heads. Instead of depicting upscale parties, a fun night out or just fun times between friends, it highlights the differences between people that make us unique, and which make us uncomfortable. Addressing and living with such diverse differences is a source of social and political tension. What this commercial suggests is that we can all sit down and talk about these, civilly, over a beer. Key word is "can". While the commercial does not illustrate bringing opposing views together over a beer as being easy, and tensions can be sensed, there are many things that can go wrong if such an exercise was followed without taking precautions.

We believe discussing issues is paramount to human society, and must not be engaged in lightly.A little bit of booze could loosen some personal taboos and open the door to flexibility and empathy, but this should not be relied upon. Alcohol can also increase aggression, limit tolerance and weaken and complicate communication. Beer does not automatically open your world.Even without alcohol, communication is vulnerable. Communication is very difficult to begin with. There are many moving parts, subtle signals, nuances and unconscious reactions. Add value differences and emotions to this complex mix and things can go wrong quickly and intensely. Sober, tipsy or drunk, communication can (and has) gone haywire.It is also important to realize that things won’t change in the time it takes to share a beer. People won’t suddenly understand each other in 30 minutes or an hour.

The goal should go beyond achieving a sit-down.How issues are discussed and what happens afterword are critical. Sitting down and talking is a good start, but it must be an enjoyable experience first, with participants leaving feeling good about what happened. This means debate is a no-no, as are preaching, lecturing and ad hominem phrases. Curiosity is as important as honesty.The commercial does not outline the selection of its participants. It seems they are strangers, but it also seems that they have agreed to some sort of experiment. This may indicate that the participants are flexible to experience something new and willing for an adventure.This is not to say that sitting down two strangers to talk about contentious issues over a beer is impossible or a bad idea. Far from it, but certain protocols must be in place and followed for such an occasion.

An experienced facilitator can help keep participants on topic and civil while allowing each to voice their positions and interest. The facilitator can take notes on hot-button topics and what issues may need more attention, while helping clarify comments and reactions.Since starting ourPub Dialoguesseries in January 2012, we have come to realize that having our participants come to agreement is not only impossible, but unwanted by the participants and, really, by us. It is perfectly OK to have differing viewpoints. What divides us and pushes our positions to extremes is how we discuss these differences, their source, effects and problems they encounter.  There is an unseen line on both he Left and the Right that when crossed, discussion ceases, problem solving diminishes and divisions widen. What we realized is that while we cannot/do not wish to erase differences, what we can and want to do is bring the extremes of each issue close enough together so that they can and are willing to discuss issues civilly. From there, we can cultivate cooperation, creativity and solution development.

What is the Craft Beer Revolution?

freestate

Jim Koch, founder of Boston Beer Company (makers of Sam Adams), claims the revolution is slowing down. His New York Times op-ed explains his perspective, with the main reasons being pressure in various forms from multinational brewers, some “slack government antitrust oversight”, and distribution control. He has his points, and his article has its critics. A Men’s Journal articleasked Greg Doroski, head brewer at Threes Brewing, to respond to Mr. Koch’s opinion. His take is that while he agrees with Mr. Koch that such external threats exist, some threats internal to craft beer are just as real. After all, Boston Beer is larger and its influence stronger relative to almost all craft breweries.

It seems Mr. Doroski feels that infighting for shelf and tap space threatens the industry. And then, of course, a very big breweryresponds.We can discuss endlessly about who is right and who is wrong, but I want to venture to question part of the premise; what is the “craft beer revolution”?  On the surface, the answer seems obvious; the increased number of craft breweries in the U.S., currently hovering somewhere around 5,000. And we can discuss theBrewers Association definition of “craft brewing”. But that gets us away from the “revolution” to qualifiers and into the weeds. The above opinions and articles concentrate on one area of the beer industry: external sales. Indicators used to gauge craft brewing focus on the normal channels of consumerism, like retail, bars and restaurants. But it seems to me that the “revolution” is not about shelf space, tap handles or percentage of market.It’s the brewery tap room. Sure, not every brewery has, or is allowed to have, a tap room, depending on various state laws. But it’s the reintroduction of the old-school beer/brewery model that sparked the revolution.

It’s these public yet intimate places that brings strangers together from all walks of life. Before these, restaurants and bars attracted clientele with a dedicated theme or image. The sports bar, the honkytonk, the Jimmy Buffett bar, etc. all served the same drinks, perhaps in varying formats. Each venue had their own homogenous clientele.  Bikers go to biker bars, for example. The introduction libations unique to a locale broke the homogeneity and started the craft beer revolution, which continues to attract consumers.My first experience of the revolution was at Free State Brewing in Lawrence, KS back in the 1990s. Little did I know that my first step into that brewery signaled the end of my Budweiser days. I ordered the Copperhead Ale and never looked back. But I remember thinking that while the beer was so different than Bud, and quite delicious, there was something more. Free State was, and still is, a brewpub; a restaurant and brewery. And I saw KU students, “town folk”, businessmen, government employees, attorneys, musicians, and tourists all enjoying the same place. In many cases, they were interacting…civilly…and willingly!  I mean, KU and Lawrence are quite liberal and smack dab in the middle of “red-state country”. It was quite rare to see the Left and Right sharing something in common, talking and laughing together. But, there it was right before my eyes.

Differences didn’t matter once you walked into Free State, and while I haven’t been there in over a year, they probably still don’t. (If you ever go there, get the black been quesadilla and an Ad Astra ale). I live in Denver (well, Lakewood) now, and I’ve seen that Free State experience come out this way. Now, before you jump on me I know Free State didn’t start this revolution, I’m just using it as illustration. In Denver, Strange Craft Beer Company is where “strangers meet friends”; Comrade Brewing invites you to “join the party”; you can drink Bierstadt’s and Hogshead’s session beers all day with much impairment, thereby extending time you spend with strangers and friends. Plenty of breweries in Colorado exemplify this revolution; as well as breweries in Oregon, California, Massachusetts, etc.The effects of the craft beer revolution started with a trickle into retail, restaurants and bars. Now it is a torrent, influencing breweries to take a dip into the promising, and I contend perilous, current.  The heart of the revolution is the small, local business providing their neighbors with the “social lubricant” called beer. The soul of the revolution is the common ground within their walls, where we all can have a good time and make new friends.Is this revolution slowing down? I don’t think so. But if breweries get caught up in the fight for shelf space and tap handles, then they risk losing the momentum and ignoring epicenter of the revolution. Do you disagree? Well, let’s hit the nearest brewery and discuss!

BrewDog, Lone Wolf and the Forest

The recent uproar in the brewing industry involving trademarks centers on BrewDog Brewing and pub owners in Birmingham (UK) after the latter named their pub “Lone Wolf”, which is also a name on one of BrewDog’s labels. BrewDog challenged the pub’s usage and rather than fighting it in court, the pub owners decided to change the name to “The Wolf”.Sounds like an easy solution, but the fervor escalated to a David v. Goliath altercation. The pub owners had spent money branding under “Lone Wolf” and now they had to scrap all of that and start over.  The blowback to BrewDog calls them hypocrites and betraying their own modus operandi; namely not being a faceless, monolithic corporate entity that preys upon and squashes the little guys.  Yet BrewDog retracted  the challenge, essentially removing obstacles to the pub using “Lone Wolf”.  The reasoning was that their challenge was issued by “trigger happy” lawyers, which was not met with sympathy to say the least.But this incident highlights the various factors that make trademark a sensitive and tense subject. On the one hand, it’s such a complicated forest of issues that researching trademarked names takes time, money and expertise; something many small and new business owners do not have. On the other hand, these same complications require an established business to employ such experts to dedicate time and energy to policing their trademarks.  So, one could blame BrewDog for employing a legal team; one could also blame The Wolf owners for not researching trademark database for “Lone Wolf”.Or we can blame neither and accept that such incidents are a part of the harsh realities of business. All is not lost, though. It may be better to focus on how individuals view and address such incidents.  In short, such incidents are going to happen. So, how to deal with them?For starters, let’s evoke the phrase, “don’t hate the players, hate the game”.  Realize that trademarks are notoriously tricky, confusing, and open for interpretation and, therefore, argument. Points of contention will spring up, but the key is not to automatically succumb to escalating that contention into conflict and litigation. Focus on the problem, not the person. A telephone call can do a lot; if not resolve the issue, then to open communication lines, restrict confusion and rumor, and bring personal interaction back into the fold.What could have a phone call done within the above situation? It would not have solved the problem (i.e. one name, two products), but it could have mitigated consequences. The Wolf owners would probably not have abandoned their original branding efforts, and BrewDog would have avoided the publicity mess.The point is that while a problem or dispute exists, there are others ways of addressing it than the usual. Lawyering up is common, and in certain cases necessary, and it comes with some baggage. An attorney’s job is to advocate for their client, not necessarily to solve problems. The default reaction to disputes, especially involving trademarks, is through litigative means. While this may be necessary, it does not have to be the first step. A cease and desist letter not only reveals a problem, it’s an escalation that usually elicits strong emotions (worry, defense, anger to name a few). It also just about promises an expensive and lengthy dispute.There are other means to address a dispute. Mediation, facilitation and settlement conference are just a few. They aim to address problems, find solutions and mitigate or avoid damages. They can be engaged at any time during the life of a dispute, and do not automatically rule out litigative options (unless agreed to and authorized by all parties). In the end, a litigated dispute can take years, cost over $100,000 to each party, cause tremendous amounts of stress, and generate a solution that may not be satisfactory.Or, mediation can cost $5,000, take 2 weeks, relieve stress and generate amicable solutions while maintaining positive relations between the parties. Sure, some mediation cases do not achieve agreement (89% success rate), but it is certainly worth a try.Oh, and if you are in disagreement with another, don’t air it on social media, that just invites trouble.

---

 

Jefferson County Mediation Set for Increased Footprint Under New Contract

PRESS RELEASE---

Denver, CO (February 6, 2017)  Heading into its 24^th year, Jefferson County Mediation Services (JCMS) is set to expand its reach and services under a new contract managed by OvalOptions for Conflict Management. JCMS, the largest community mediation program in Colorado, serving thousands of citizens each year, operates under a contract with Jefferson County to serve its offices, citizens, groups and businesses with mediation. The new contract with OvalOptions enables JCMS to expand its exposure, reach and effectiveness.Mark Loye started JCMS 23 years ago and has grown it to manage 1,600 case/year. Further expansion requires more diverse and flexible capacities. Enter OvalOptions, a Denver-based conflict management firm of which Mr. Loye is co-owner. The sub-contractors utilized by Mr. Loye have been hired by OvalOptions, thereby affording them benefits and opportunities to enhance their skills and training without disrupting JCMS operations.OvalOptions brings more resources to JCMS and other mediation programs, and seeks to increase JCMS case load by 20% and savings by 30% in 5 years. Key areas of expansion include mediation awareness, increased dialogue and enhanced communication skills throughout the community. Doing so helps alleviate court congestion, avoid and diffuse business disruptions, decrease lengthy lawsuits and minimize legal expenses for and within the county.The JCMS program utilizes highly motivated mediators trained in mediation, who have varied professional backgrounds, including communication, education, environmental sciences, health, human resources, law, counseling and business.  In 2015, JCMS saved the county over $200,00 in actual costs, over $600,000 in cost avoidance and helped Child Support Services collect over $500,000 in child support payments. Find out more: http://jeffco.us/mediation-services/about/More about OvalOptions:  Based in Denver, CO, OvalOptions is a consulting firm focused on dispute resolution services operating in conjunction with, parallel to, and outside of the court system. OvalOptions helps clients find the most appropriate solutions for their situations. You can find them online at www.OvalOptions.com, on Facebook at www.facebook.com/ovaloptions or follow on Twitter: @OvalOptions.OvalOptions is also the parent company of the Brewery Mediation Network, offering mediation and other dispute resolution and communication services to Colorado’s craft breweries.  www.OvalOptions.com/BMN  Twitter: @BeerMediator

---

 

To Make Change, Change the Change

What we have here is failure to change

Many people see change as a top-down approach: change policy and everything else will follow. A border wall will stop immigrants from seeking a better life; marching will persuade against such a wall. What the top-down approaches miss is the “down” portion. Such actions do not seek and do not address the personal aspects of change. The individual is the key to changing the “top”, and while the sought change may take more time to achieve, it is more durable and more accepted. Change in the individual leads to change in the overall. We see this in targeted messaging used in political campaigns, which typically base their messages on demographics (but not solely). For example, all women receive the same message, or all African-Americans, or all males between 18-30 years old. Yet, personal interaction is removed and personal understanding is never attempted. It fails to effectively change the individual. Consequently, nothing changes and the roots of contention sprout the same arguments over and over and over again.

Personality Goes a Long Way

However, during the 2016 presidential campaign, some politicians utilized a more refined tool of targeting.  Alexander Nix of Strategic Communication Laboratories (SCL) bases his company’s data mining efforts on the principle that personality shapes behavior. Psychographics is what Mr. Nix calls the focus on personality targeting over demographics. “Personality drives behavior”, he stated at the 2016 Concordia Summit. “And behavior obviously influences how you vote.” This strategy was employed by Senator Cruz, and later, Donald Trump. The results speak for themselves.People may demonize and blame Mr. Nix for who is in the White House, but that misses an important point. Some may curse the use of technology to understand, and possibly exploit, personality.  It is worrisome that technology can analyze and base messages on psychographics. But again, the main point is overlooked.The important point, and what the election results illustrate, is the power and salience of our personalities, how they affect our behaviors and how our behaviors influence change. And it is here that we invoke the late Harold Saunders, founder of the Sustained Dialogue Institute and former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence. His focus was on achieving and sustaining peace through personal dialogues, and from these “grassroots” efforts for larger change can begin.So what does this mean?  Well, personal dialogue involves personal interaction and when people interact their personalities are illustrated. Perhaps more importantly, your personality is on display as well. And it is here where change must be rooted.   The old adages, “Be the change you want to see” and “treat others the way you wish to be treated” hold true here for they address the main challenge to instituting change: Why would someone else change, or listen to you, if you aren’t willing to change or listen?The purpose here is not to declare all efforts to change that do not include dialogue are wrong. Or that the current movements are invalid. Rather, it is the importance and power personal introspection and understanding. If personality is key to change, with Mr. Nix providing convincing evidence, then we should understand our own personalities. Only then can we begin to understand others and their motivations. If you want equal rights, then be prepared to treat others equally, even if (and especially) when you disagree with them. If you want to be heard and understood, then prepare to listen and learn.The goal is to create honest and open dialogue where both/all sides strive to listen, learn, educate and understand, which constitute personal change. But this is not easy. Allowing for and accepting personal change is a conflict within one’s self. To change is to declare that the current status as unacceptable or undesirable. The ego suffers a strong blow. We are resistant to change and tend to subconsciously become defensive and lash out, thus threatening the dialogue process.  Our old habit is to debate.

I Must Break You

According to Charles Duhigg, author of The Power of Habit”, habit is, well, powerful. The cue > routine > reward cycle can be so engrained within us that we don’t recognize it, and it becomes difficult to break or change. It requires self-awareness, analysis and understanding. For example, a cue may be a post (a political stance) on Facebook that triggers the routine (opposition to this stance) to produce the reward (feeling of “doing right”). And on Facebook, this cycle continues along this one post. Facebook is full of such posts, and consequently, many cycles of habit. One routine begets others, and down the rabbit hole we go.Enter Einstein: “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”. What has our habit to debate changed? Why do we keep debating if nothing changes? Why does the same cycle of change keep churning? So, why do we keep relying on debate? This habit is difficult to break because the reward is internal.There are steps to take that can, over time, allow for personal change in the form of progress and improvement. Realize that habit can be changed, that personal interaction is imperative and that you are a root from which change can grow to the “top”. To break the habit, recognize where it lives. Instead of offering counterpoints, as per the example, ask for clarity or more detail. Granted, Facebook is not  the best place for this to occur, but it’s a start. If such point/counterpoint occurs in person, then breaking this habit is much more salient. It takes practice, but changing yourself can change others, and changing the national habit of debate to that of dialogue can start cultivating change.

The roots of change

Understand your motivations, reactions and responses  We often pigeonhole ourselves into positions and lose touch with our interests. That is, the core reasons for our struggle are clouded by our efforts and strategies utilized to achieve victory.  Ask yourself, “why am I encouraging this or discouraging that?”  Then ask of the answer, “why is this so?”.  Other questions include: Why do you react the way you do? What feelings are brought up? Why those feelings? Why are you mad, sad, happy, irritated, etc.?  Do your response reflect your proposal or your reaction?  These questions are not the one-and-done type. They are asked to invite more inquiry, more discovery. They must be asked again and again with the goal of understanding yourself.Realize the reasons you are expressing Why do we express our thoughts? What’s the purpose of communicating to someone: Is it venting, or antagonizing, or grandstanding, or persuasion, or pontificating, or something else?  What do you seek to accomplish through expression? Is it working?Recognize and try to foresee impact  Our words, actions and inactions affect others. In order for the effect to match our motivations, we must know the audience, context, message cycle (word selection > message encoding/sentence structure > transmission > medium > reception > decoding > interpretation > possible impacts), and language (verbal and body).  Seek to understand motivations of others  Even if you have mastered the process of understanding your motivations, what you’re going to say, why you’re going to say it and at least the medium-term effects, others may not possess such insight and skill.  Why are they expressing? Are they influenced by their emotions? What impact do they wish to achieve? Did I offend them is some way I didn’t realize?Ask questions to learn, not to badger  Questions can sometimes be used, and received, as tools to ridicule, judge, entrap and challenge. The “gotchya” question is a manipulation of inquiry and good mechanism for the other party to refuse answering more questions. Asking such questions damages your integrity and reputation.  Instead, ask questions of genuine curiosity with the goal of learning something. Enhance your knowledge and, therefore, improve your proposals. Not to mention strengthen your integrity.Challenge your beliefs  We sometimes hold onto beliefs as a source of comfort, but haven’t asked ourselves why we believe such things. The reasons for a belief could be buried in time, altered by experience and perhaps not really a belief at all, just a form of rote memorization and habit.  “Reality Check” your proposals Think ahead and put your proposal in place. Who does it affect? How? Who would challenge it? Why and how? If you hand a magic wand and instantly change things to your vision, would you have any complaints? This extends beyond the present one step to the next 10.Listen Seems easy enough, but in reality it takes considerable effort. If you find yourself thinking of a reply, then you’re not listening. If you interrupt, then you’re not listening. Dedicate your energy to hearing what is being said, then rephrasing it in your own words. Communicate this rephrasing back to the speaker to a) make sure you heard correctly and, b) demonstrate that you are indeed listening. 

---

 

Women’s March — The Next Step and Where It Can Lead

Looking Forward

As I write this, the Women’s March is currently taking place across the country and the numbers are staggering. So far, it’s been peaceful and I am unaware of any counter protests. My hope is that the day remains peaceful and the message is effective. To do so, however, requires more than a march.  To effect change of this kind is not a grassroots effort. It is within the grassroots: Within individuals. And to begin change it will take individual efforts to communicate with other individuals on a personal level. Face-to-face conversations and dialogue of curiosity* aimed at understanding. This is not easy. It is not quick. It is not straightforward.In mediation we help parties to understand their own interests AND those of the other party. While the first task seems easy, it can be just as difficult as the second. Understanding one’s own interests requires introspection and personal challenging of positions. It most often requires a recognition or realization that s/he is wrong, which meets resistance.  Many times a party is so focused on her/his position that they forget why they took such position in the first place, or their reasoning is influenced by emotion. This is not wrong, and emotions ought to be acknowledge. Yet, allowing their total influence just makes progress more difficult.If a goal of the Women’s March is for Trump to leave office…and he leaves office…then what? Does this really resolve the issue? If the issue is his removal, then yes it does. If the issue is working towards (inter)national equality, then it really does not. There are more steps to take. And this leads us to the second effort: Understanding the other party’s interest. Like the first, this effort is not easy. Making it more difficult is the fact that the other party is not really a party—it’s a widely held (loosely or tightly) belief. Such belief could be, and most often is, tied up in a labyrinth of other issues.To assume that some people believe in inequality is a mistake. Just like assuming those who voted for Trump also support inequality; there’s more to their vote than just one issue. (For over a century political strategies included the “single issue platform” and we have learned to vote according to one, perhaps two, issues. Yet there are many more that need to be considered).  We do not know the narratives or backgrounds of, and influences upon, other people. Much like the scene in Good Will Hunting, does reading “Oliver Twist” encapsulate the identity and personality of all orphans? No. It takes time, effort and intense curiosity* to understand anyone, including those who support President Trump and/or inequality. This takes practice. Yes, practice. It is easy to fall back into positions and ignore, forget or lose sight of interests.Below is a quick list to practice to assist in effecting change. It is part of the next step and not a checklist for completion of the goal:

• A position is the outward efforts used to secure or promote an interest. Often, positions are confused with interests, but they can be quite different. Try to find your interests in (much) smaller issues, such as your favorite restaurant, or sports team, or pair of shoes
• Do not assume you know what the other person believes or is thinking. Would you be comfortable with them doing so about you?
• Do not assume you know why they believe, think or act as they do
• To address a problem, it must first be understood. To understand it, it must be identified. To be identified, questions of curiosity* need to be asked
• Such questions should be asked of one’s self as well. Every time an answer is given, ask “why is that?” Sounds annoying, and it is, but it is also crucial
• Separate the person from the problem. Once a position or argument moves to ad hominem attacks or assumptions, progress is at best halted, and more often than not, it is destroyed
• Recognize a false dichotomy. Much of the world is not “either/or” as there are important factors between the extremes. We see this a lot in political arguments: If someone does not agree to A then they oppose B-Y, and are therefore in the Z camp. This false dichotomy divides America more than anything else. Find the in-between
• Recognize that the other person is just that: A person. Chances are they are not the devil incarnate, hold Nazi beliefs or want to live on welfare their whole life. They share many of the same interests as you. It’s up to you to find and illustrate these
• Be curious*, refrain from judgment and welcome questions from others, keeping responses on topic and away from personal attacks

* Curiosity.  In the political climate, we tend to ask questions in order to find out if the responder is either with us or against us. The “got ya” questions run rampant in this type of atmosphere, but they don’t really accomplish anything aside from perpetuating a false dichotomy and stagnating efforts of progress. Questions of curiosity seek answers for themselves and not to judge. They help us learn and we must ask such questions with that goal in mind. Learning to improve ourselves, not pigeonhole others.Example: Mr. Trump’s comments about women that were recorded on a bus. Many judged him on the spot and resisted his campaign. I am not saying these people are wrong. I would encourage questions of curiosity: Why would he say such things? What happened in his life that would lead him to feel it is OK and proper to say such things? What was his goal to say what he did?  Did he actually do what he said he did? And, what influenced him to act the way he said he did? In other words, what shaped his personal identity that affected his actions and words?  From these questions we can learn more about external influences on Mr. Trump—and since these are external to him, then they are capable of affecting anyone. We must strive to understand those so we may address them and effect change.

---

 

Debate and Dialogue

Differences in Structure, Practice and Goals

Remember those presidential debates? You know the ones, where Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were asked questions that they didn’t answer and instead talked about each other?  Yeah, I tried to block those out of my mind, too. But, they happened and had at least some influence in deciding the next president of the United States of America. Think about that: three televised debates of limited duration, scope and depth influenced our election. Again. Since Kennedy vs. Nixon, televised debates have garnered more salience in deciding who holds public office.  As if debate by itself was not bad enough.As conflict management specialists, we see debate as, shall we say, not the best method to resolving disputes or finding solutions to problems. This isn’t to say that debate is always bad. It does have some merits. It forces debating parties to hone their message, strengthen their argument and probe for weak spots in their opponent’s arguments. Those watching can consider points, counterpoints or the lack thereof. They could glean new information or perspective. In the end, debate could enhance knowledge of debated issues and shed inconsistencies. Except in today's world, it usually doesn't. Debate has several definitions, most of which describe it as a "discussion of opposing views" or "opposing arguments". That is, the focus is on the nature of opposition to determine which side is the stronger. And this seems to be widely accepted practice of debate. In most cases debate focuses on probing others’ statements for weak spots. It follows Sun Tzu: don't attack the strong points, attack the weak points. The aim is to win the battle, not to understand why there is a battle.We saw this in the presidential debates where the chief weak spots were the candidates themselves. The hierarchy of priorities went, from the top down: Attack opponent, attack opponent’s past, attack opponent’s message, attack opponent’s associates, attack opponent’s experience, promote own message, promote themselves, promote something else that sounds good, address the question, address the issue. That does not set up a clear, or even murky, road to solutions. In fact, there is no road. Consequently, important issues are not only ignored, they seem to be relegated to trivial nuances. And by example, this influences the public spheres of interaction: citizens engage in similar debates, thus getting everybody nowhere and increasing tension. In the end, Americans focus on probing for weak spots, attacking messengers and their message, and reshaping priorities instead of understanding issues and developing solutions. Winning the debate becomes the goal, improving and strengthening ourselves, each other and the country be damned.Dialogue is quite different, and more difficult. Within a debate, a strong, well-articulated argument with no weaknesses is avoided by the opponent, who then engages another tactic (e.g. attack the messenger). Within a dialogue, that same argument is greeted with “excellent point. How do we engage that?” Ideas are recognized and analyzed, not to solely find weaknesses, but to improve on them. Dialogue engages brainstorming, creative thinking, critical analysis and application.Because the goals of debate and dialogue are different, so, too are their procedures, expectations and outcomes. The goal of a debate is for participants to convince the audience to accept their argument over their opponent’s, usually by any means necessary. An argument in debate need not be complete, truthful, accurate, fair, relevant or logical. It just has to persuade. The topic of debate serves only as a launching pad from which the audience is launched far away.Dialogue aims for participants to discuss issues critically, openly and honestly with respect, civility and patience. If they are not actively looking for new viewpoints and ideas, then they are open to doing so. This means that contentious topics are not avoided, and polarized positions are not taken for granted. “That’s your opinion” becomes, “please help me understand why you think/believe that.” While participants should not aim to persuade others, they should be flexible in their stances, positions, and opinions. Understanding an issue and the various perspectives of that issue is paramount in dialogue. Differences do not equate to division. Disagreement offers opportunity. Dialogue participants understand that the best solutions can come from various viewpoints effectively engaged.The difficulty resides in the openness of participants. Disagreements tend to make people defensive and emotional. Animosity can creep in bringing resentment and  distrust. Critical analysis can erode into cynical opposition, leading to debate. In many situations an impartial or neutral facilitator is needed to manage the dialogue. They are not there to direct conversation, but to keep it on track, civil and engaging. A facilitator will keep track of points of view, ideas, points of contention, areas of commonality and side issues that can affect the current topic. This takes practice and a good facilitator goes unnoticed during a dialogue or meeting, until afterwards.In dialogue, agreement is not necessarily the goal. Good conversation, challenged opinions and increased communication are the primary motives for engaging in dialogue. From there, participants can discover, create, improve and implement solutions. The biggest difference between debate in dialogue is that debate focuses on opinions, viewpoints, and arguments. Dialogue focuses on the challenges, problems, and issues that underscore those opinions, viewpoints and arguments.  Debate seeks to win/persuade; Dialogue seeks to inform and solve. 

---

 

Can Craft Breweries Save America?

Craft brewing in America is booming, providing consumers a diverse selection from over 4,000 breweries. But some of those breweries have potential to offer the American public something else: A conduit for national (and personal) progress. If 2016 has taught us anything it is that America has communication problems. From our private lives to political leadership, America is drowning in oceans of cynical opposition and blame; that differences equate to division, and division creates “sides”, and those sides must do battle to produce a “winner”. When we concentrate on debate, we sacrifice truth, accuracy, and finding and creating solutions. Debate often serves as a roadblock. Winning is not solving.America’s Founding Fathers knew that debating each other was perilous.  As Benjamin Franklin stated, “We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.”  Infighting and banter would have, literally, led to their deaths. Instead, they sat down, face to face, to discuss differences and create new avenues, which led to independence and, later, the Constitution. And they did this without telephones, telegraphs, planes, trains, cars, the Internet and social media.Their conduit was public spaces: Local taverns and inns, many of which were small breweries.  While there, they engaged in Dialogue: In-person discussions that were honest, contentious and civil. They didn’t abandon debate, but they didn’t rely on it. They invited critical analysis and kept cynical opposition at bay (for the most part). Their dialogues contained more than critique; they invoked critical thinking, they looked for new insights and various perspectives, and cautioned against hubris to reac historic solutions. America today lacks the overall awareness of dialogue, acknowledgement of its benefits, and the skills to engage it. Thankfully, however, the safe spaces our Founding Fathers used have returned. Enter craft breweries. Many are local businesses. They are popular and public. They attract people from all walks of life. The ethos of a local craft brewery is community, and that of the craft brewing industry is comradery. Community and comradery are ingredients of a great recipe. When mixed with Dialogue they can generate progress, problem solving and unity.Yet, Dialogue is tricky and difficult, and should not be engaged haphazardly or on a whim. Since dialogue often includes contentious issues, emotions can run high and, if not managed properly, can derail the endeavor making matters worse.  Dialogue participants must understand that their ideas, emotions, beliefs and interests will be challenged, not for ridicule, but for understanding. They should not see Dialogue as an opportunity to convince others and “win” the argument, but rather to understand perspectives and recognize obstacles. Cynicism may pop up, and it must be properly managed to minimize its impact.  Participants must realize that Disagreement is required, but Division is not. They must also be flexible with their positions, consider suggestions, and allow for personal change (albeit not instant). And they must treat others with respect and maintain civility. But first, they need to meet, in-person, and in safe spaces. Using “out-person” conduits, such as social media and the Internet, we further our division by communicating to each other, not with each other. As a result, we focus on that we disagree, and ignore how we do so.  In-person Dialogue aims not to eliminate disagreement, but to enhance how we understand, learn from, and overcome our differences so that they won’t divide us.  Intense, critical, curious and civil discussions over a pint of craft beer just may save America. If dialogue participants disagree on everything else, at least they can agree on having a locally brewed, delicious beer. From there, once a commonality is recognized, anything can happen. More commonalities emerge and problem solving begins. Once again, America looks to local breweries to begin its (re)unification.To help spark the dialogue movement, we have created the Pub Dialogues in the Denver metro area. This somewhat monthly event has garnered large and small crowds, but after each session participants cheer the event. Many admit that they anticipated shouting matches and didn't know they could actually talk to "opponents". We applaud their openness and flexibility to experiment with face-to-face dialogue. Every "side" is allowed to speak uninterrupted.  Participants gain insight to others and better understand various perspectives. Perhaps the biggest benefit is that they experienced civil dialogue; that they can get past disagreement and onto problem solving. And that is the primary goal of the Pub Dialogues; to help people recognize that people can resolve issues among themselves and not rely on social media, presidential debates and cynicism.

---

 

Top 7 Mistakes in Communication

We all make communication mistakes. Some are so small that we don't even realize we're making them. Yet, small mistakes can add up and start to wreak havoc on conversations and relationships. Here are the top 7 mistakes:

1. Ignoring what the other person is saying/Dismissing their concerns. If you do it to them, then you’re permitting them to do it to you. Nothing is gained and three things are lost: time, energy and your integrity. Listen to for their concerns. If you don’t understand, then tell them so.

2. Focusing on faulty argument. This mostly applies to online comments, but happens in face-to-face discussions as well. The issue at hand disappears and energy is refocused to discrediting the other person, their stance and/or their argument.  The structure of an argument becomes more important than the subject. The core issue or problem remains.

3. Debating. This is the chain reaction of #2. Debate is about winning an argument to influence others to support your claim, regardless of accuracy and truth. The topic of a debate is rarely analyzed, making improvements difficult if not impossible. Debate is zero-sum, win-lose enterprise that accomplishes nothing else. Parties become fixated on arguments rather than subjects.

4. Using “you” statements. The subject of conversation switches to the person, usually laying blame at their feet. It is very easy to engage the “you” statement or to become entangled in its web. When someone uses it on us, we feel obligated to defend and retaliate. And the original subject vanishes from discussion. Example: “How did you break your leg?” is accusatory and focuses on the person, not the injured leg. It announces that you broke your leg on purpose. “What happened to your leg” shifts the focus on the method of breaking.

5. Emotions can run high. This does not have to be a bad thing, though. It’s important to recognize emotions (yours and theirs), and not try to stifle them or let them run wild. Understanding what you’re feeling, and acknowledging what others feel, can go a long way.  Sometimes yelling is just venting frustrations with little to no animosity towards anyone. Yet, yelling is rarely received as such. Many people don’t respond well to yelling. They either yell back or start ignoring. When you notice your voice starting to get louder, pause and try to understand what’s persuading you to yell. “I’m feeling a bit frustrated by…” is better than yelling.

6. Sticking to your guns. It’s ok to be wrong and uninformed. How we deal with each affects communication. If it’s more important to you to win an argument than solving a problem, then people will start to ignore you and your concerns.

7. Assume motives of others. Try as you might, you do not know what’s going on inside someone else’s head. It may seem that someone is acting out of revenge, animosity, civility, love or indifference, but you really don’t know. A wrong assumption often leads to bigger mistakes and conflict. Example: Your spouse didn’t respond to your text. S/he is ignoring you. OR, they are driving. OR, they didn’t hear the notification.

---

 

Post Election: Now What?

Ok, the election is over. Now what? This is a great time to consider what this country should become and it starts with you.Roughly 120,000,000 people voted: Trump won the electoral race, Clinton the popular vote. Clearly, America is divided. What we do next, as “winners” and “losers”, can help heal this country, or drive it deeper into the abyss. And Americans share more interests than we think.For Trump supporters: Here is a great chance to start the healing and rebuilding to make America greater. You have about 60,000,000 people who are devastated, sad, scared and disillusioned. They are not wrong. What do you do? The easy thing is to gloat and kick them when they’re down, but that’s unpatriotic. It’s un-American. Americans pick each other up after a defeat. They teach and learn from each other. They sympathize and, if possible, empathize with their fellow citizens. They move forward, leaving no one behind.For Clinton supporters: It was not an evil conspiracy. There are about 60,000,000 people who felt disenfranchised, lied to, betrayed and threatened. They are not wrong. You have a choice: to work with the new president, or expend energy opposing everything. The current Congress chose the latter, angering many and stalling this country. Cooperating won’t be easy, which is why it must be done. You have four years to work this out and take the high road.Some quick tips:

• When disagreements arise, let’s understand the situation and focus on substantive issues
• Abandon the personal attacks and superficial jabs.
• Restrain from saying, “you’re wrong”, because what you’re really saying is “I’m right” and “me being right is more important than whatever we’re talking about”
• Use “I” statements. “I feel this policy is bad because….”. Or, “I think the best course of action is…”
• Listen. This sounds easy, but it can be difficult. The goal is twofold: to understand what the other person is saying, and to signal to them that yes, you are listening. Reframing is a good way to accomplish this: “If I’m hearing you correctly, you’re saying….” It’s not repeating what they say, but putting it your own words. If they say, “no, that’s not what I said” then ask them to explain it
• Dialogue, not debate. Debate is used to determine a winner in an argument, not to find the truth or seek solutions. Dialogue is an effort to understand a situation and develop solutions. Again, this can be difficult, which is why it must be done

You may feel like you have won or lost the election. You didn’t. For a vast majority of us, we didn’t win or lose anything; we aren't moving into the White House. On top of that, each candidate will forget about you soon, if not already. It’s up to you. It’s up to us. Take back the power politicians have used to manipulate us and how we treat each other. We all want the same things: security, family, health and shelter, but differ on how we attain them.  Don’t let politicians and “elites” use these differences to drive us apart. That’s not the American way.Cheers and Beers!

Pre-Election 2016: The Power

In everyday life, how much do you care about total strangers? It’s safe to say that you don’t really think all much about them. Apart from brief encounters (at the market, while driving, etc.), your feeling towards strangers is most likely indifference.  You don’t know enough about them to like them or hate them. There’s nothing wrong with indifference. Ascribing “like” or “hate” to everyone you encounter just doesn’t make sense, but we still teach our kids to be polite to strangers.And for the most part, we are polite. We don’t really take notice of this because it is so common. What we do notice and remember, however, are the exceptions; the rude customer, a snappy waiter, or the slow poke in the left lane. Being polite, or not being rude, is the downhome American way.  It’s one of America’s best attributes, and it holds up well through our differences. Even Red Sox and Yankee fans can get along…sometimes.So why do we get so worked up over Donald and Hillary? Why does the fervor over who supports whom create so much animosity and disgust? The overarching answer is simple: because we allow it.  Office seekers have been playing with our emotions, identities, fears and hope for so long that we overlook their meddling hands. There is a reason why this election campaign has seen so many personal attacks by both candidates, the media, supporters and bystanders. Mudslinging is all we know these days. Politicians have skillfully maneuvered us away from the intricacies of policy, governance, foreign relations and domestic liberties, and towards the simplistic ad hominem attacks prevalent in just about every political (and many non-political) topics.  And this has carried over into our social interactions, about which politicians care very little.So here we are, giving one stranger (Donald or Hillary) the absolute power to dictate how we, as individuals, treat each other.   They push our buttons, buttons that they have installed on us. They diverted our attention away from issues and problem solving and onto demonizing each other under the guise of protecting us. But here’s the thing: They are only as powerful as we make them. The real power in America resides in its people, individually and collectively. The strength to listen, learn and teach. The power to innovate, invent and create.Each of us has our own agency. Our power resides in how we think, feel, behave, interact and socialize. We have the power to build, shape and improve our society. We have the power to ignore (and punish) mudslinging, to actually analyze our situations and come up with solutions. You have the power over yourself, your buttons and your attitudes to be nice, respectful and civil to your fellow citizens. We are actual power of the U.S.A.  The stranger who takes office will very quickly forget us; your friends and family will not. Will indifference matter then? 

The People Ingredient: A Craft Brewery's Biggest Threat?

By Jason Gladfelter, Director of Brewery Mediation NetworkThis article expands on the article written by Ed Sealover published in the Denver Business Journal Aug. 5th: "What Ails Colorado Brewing". Craft brewing is (still) booming. The Colorado economy alone sees $1.15 billion from the burgeoning brewery business, and currently there are more than 300 brewing licenses in Colorado, according to the Boulder-based Brewers Association. The craft brew business certainly looks delicious…from afar.Yet growing pains persist. Sure, it has high-profile enemies in the form of big-brewer buyouts, trademark disputes and the forecasted bubble burst, but perhaps the most crippling threat resides within the industry and individual breweries themselves: your crew and you. Internal friction, poor communication and disjointed operations can cost a brewery dearly and even lead to its demise.  If this is uncomfortable for you to hear, good. That means you must keep reading.Every brewery has a People Ingredient, which has two main components: the obvious (people) and the formless (their interactions).  While it is common knowledge that breweries hire qualified individuals, it is also important to keep them, to utilize their skills and benefit from their role and input on the brewery team.  How?  That's a great question, and this is where the tricky part comes into play.Interpersonal interaction, communication and cooperation face obstacles, and the devil is in the details.  These terms are not new, but are taken for granted or misunderstood.  What does communication actually entail?  What are considered "interactions"? And does cooperation mean more than just getting along?The keystone is communication. We must pay heed to what Sun Tzu said: "know the enemy and know yourself." In this case, the enemy is poor interpersonal skills, and yourself is…well, yourself.  How well do you communicate? Communicating is more than using the correct words; it includes listening, understanding the process of word selection, the words you select, your state of mind, your overt and latent emotions, the medium used, knowing your audience, and why you feel compelled to communicate at all.  This is not easy, to say the least. Even the best businesses can suffer from fragile internal dynamics, miscommunication and misunderstandings that can decrease productivity and foster disappointing results.While poor communication and disjointed operations can plague any company, the craft brewery industry is especially vulnerable to these common pitfalls. Many breweries start out as small businesses, without the budget or scope to maintain full-time staff to manage the daily facets and dynamics of internal communications, or install and maintain special systems for grievances and feedback.  Often that responsibility falls on the brewer, the owner, a board member or shift supervisor – if there are any.  And their glasses already runneth over with their primary responsibilities. Furthermore, many small craft breweries are formed by close knit groups where established relationships are plunged into unfamiliar waters. Emotions can affect difficult business decisions, and vice versa, making sticky situations almost immovable and especially frustrating.  Fortunately, there are processes craft breweries can acquire and utilize to prevent and avoid potential internal disasters.In a March 8, 2016 Forbes article, Harpoon Brewery CEO Dan Kenary discussed his leadership lessons and revealed that he and his business partner couldn’t co-exist. Eventually, Kenary’s passion for beer conflicted with the need for profits. He realized the salience of the People Ingredient. His employees became his partners and culture came first.David Lin, Chairman of Comrade Brewing, understands the importance of the People Ingredient. With a background in hospitality management and sporting an MBA, David hires people "who are smarter and more talented" than himself and "there's no shortage of those people."  He applies the age old motto: "treat people like you would want to be treated." While this is great advice with a strong foundation, keeping up its practice in a business setting can be difficult. Especially if starting a brewery involves outside investors.Brewers focus on creating beer they love: Investors and owners rightfully seek return on investment and to keep costs low.  Disagreements and disputes between the sides ensue.  Egos and judgements inflate. “Brewers are not managers,” a brewing industry profession once told me. Add to that its reverse, “managers are not brewers,” and we get a recipe for toxicity and damage.  But they need each other.Or as Tim Myers, Strange Craft Beer Company owner deftly puts it: “being an awesome home brewer doesn’t make you an awesome business partner…breweries that have great recipes but no business savvy have had to find out how to survive.”Myers should know. He spent 18 months in conflict with a Boston home brew shop over trademark and other legal issues. Now he is parting ways with a business partner and friend of 12 years.  “We were a textbook case for everything that could go wrong, would go wrong.” he adds.  “Two buddies going into business together is almost as risky as a couple thinking that having a child can save a marriage!” Myers describes themselves as naïve, thinking they knew everything needed to open a brewery. They didn’t have responsible partner practices, they had no operating agreement and “while we were frenetically running and trying to expand the business, things failed.” He currently spends “too much of his time” negotiating a buyout. Hardly a yellow brick road.“I’m happy we’re still alive,” says Myers, adding that having business experience in one industry doesn’t prepare you for the craft brewery business. He wishes he had spent time and money using business or communication consultants on crafting an operating agreement, as well as a buy/sell agreement.  “If we had written and verbal communication plans in place and had agreed on a set of solutions while we were all on the same page, it would have changed everything.  When forming a partnership, everyone assumes it will be rosy; no one talks about the ‘what if’s.’  It’s not a negative process to plan for the future, it’s looking out and protecting each other.”  One such plan is inserting a mediation clause into written agreements, whereby parties utilize mediation if/when disagreements and disputes arise. Mediation is the middle step between DIY and securing legal advocacy, and it can save time, money, stress and your business.“Failure is a good teacher, instant success isn’t,” so says Bill Eye, current head of Denver's new Bierstadt Lagerhaus. At age 53 he is considered a veteran amongst the younger craft brewers.  Eye is another example of a passionate brewer who had to learn from what he describes as “lost dreams”.  He is emphatic in proselytizing a philosophy rooted in cynicism yet yearning for the positive.   “Too many brewers and business partners become at odds for it to be a coincidence.  Before forming a partnership, you must examine your goals or become victims of circumstance”.The circumstance Eye refers to is the reality that brewers have the passion: they speak and live the culture before ever attempting to make it a career – they go to conventions and tastings and collaborative festivals. They follow their artistic motivations. Then the reality of needing capital causes the search for a financial partner, who naturally wants return on her/his investments. The beer makers want something more esoteric – they want the lifestyle that goes with the beer making:  “I love the feeling of walking around the bar and seeing people enjoying my beer; it’s so validating,” says Eye. “But the investors don’t need that, they just want the beer sold and distributed”.  Eye adds “It’s not wrong, it’s just the reality”.This is where the cycle of incommunicado begins, and it manifests itself in completely different approaches, from day-to-day to long-term.  It leads to animosity, grudges, hazy perspectives, misunderstanding, dropped duties and lost jobs. It creates a culture where money is expected to trump everything and brewers feel resentful and are lead to believe they don’t have value and are not protected.  “Business people can’t be successful without us,” says Eye. “We really do have intellectual property and knowledge that should be valued as much as the money side”.His lessons learned?  Mandatory must-do: operating agreements that are symbiotic as well as balanced (“So I won’t lose control”), goals that are delineated in advance, business plans that are joint-collaborations, and partners who understand with whom they are going into business. This takes intense, interactive strategic planning meetings to discover, understand and prepare for the details of running a brewing business. Not many individuals have all the answers, or even all the questions. Pooling intellectual and creative resources can address this challenge.“There is more than one way to do things; every brewer in the industry has an opinion on nitro beers or Vermont style IPAs. We can disagree at fundamental levels, but the best way to flourish as an industry is to come together and share our points of view,” says Adam Dunbar, Mountain West District Manager for Green Flash Brewing Co. Dunbar loves his position, the company and the infrastructure at Green Flash. But after intense frustrations at a prior position – experiencing what he now considers a lack of communication, confusing hierarchy and vague strategies—he relishes the current family-oriented culture and clear structure at Green Flash. Communication is collaborative (weekly meetings, sharing ideas openly and honestly). He describes fluid working conditions and more of a flat hierarchy, and tools such as a best practices procedures and a manual.  Adam would like to see more in-person brewers’ summits and fewer blog, Facebook and online complaints.  “At the end of the day we will learn something and it will be beneficial. Let’s face it, our brains are wired differently and we should find solidarity in coming together and talking shop.”“Mario”, a self-proclaimed beer geek with a science and business background, entered the craft brewery world believing he could truly pair his academic acumen with his hobby.  Within a few months, he was out. The main reason: communication. “I was a manager yet didn’t know what the strategy was.” Mario sees most of the craft beer industry made of young, non-corporate-trained people. There’s a lack of organizations structure and no communication processes. There is little planning and communication of goals and objectives, making it difficult to impossible for employees to do their jobs effectively.  Mario goes on to say that brewers need to hire consultants specialized in business conflict to train them in planning, strategy, communication and conflict management.  They need to be able to “keep their employees from feeling like they’re shooting from the hip”.  “Sometimes a little corporate-type of structure is a good thing,” he says. His biggest piece of advice: “don’t wait until you need mediation, put in practices to avoid going out of business.” Of course, mediation is always an option.These cautionary tales serve as critical advice, but more importantly they highlight the need to dig deeper into, and understand, a brewery's People Ingredient.  Brewery owners and staff must respect the importance of communication and interaction and the details therein. They must not ignore the ‘soft skills’ designed to strengthen intra-brewery communication and relations.  Talented, artistic individuals and experienced business people require strong communications and interactions to become a symbiotic and successful team.  After all, what can make or break a brewing business is its skill set involving personal interaction, conflict management and communication. But it's tricky once we start peeling back the layers.Communication, for example, has many layers aside from personal exchanges; operating agreements, best practices, team cohesion, organizational structure, planning, strategies and objectives, training and development as well as conflict management and problem solving. Honest feedback and constructive criticism are always "welcomed", but they are still difficult to absorb and provide. It helps to have constant or continual personal interaction, if for no other reason than to keep people connected. Mike Sardina at Societe Brewing outlines some of their practices to foster interpersonal relationships. "We have a staff appreciation day each year, and we sponsor group outings whenever possible.  We have a 'beer with a brewer' program where one of our Tasting Room staff members will go out for a beer with one of our Co-Founders or with a brewer or with me personally." Even if they engage in no shop-talk, these measures help improve interactions.Adopting and honing skills to improve intra-brewery relations, can literally be the difference between thriving and failure. This is a difficult task in no small part due to the personal introspection, criticism and learning, as those profiled have experienced.  There is no shame in admitting mistakes, ignorance or lack of skills. It just means that you're wiser than you were yesterday and can improve.  Not easy; but to quote Sun Tzu again, "…If you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every battle; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles." The battle here is against the erosion of the People Ingredient.  Knowing yourself is the first step to better understand, manage and enrich your People Ingredient. And your brewery will thank you for it.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Jason Gladfelter is Director of the Brewery Mediation Network and a principal at Oval Options for Conflict Management, an organization that helps business, communities, and families find better options for resolving their conflict through mediation, strategic planning, evaluation, arbitration, facilitation, coaching and training.  He has more than 20 years of experience in team leadership, management and customer relations positions through his extensive work in the retail, sales and training industries. He is a Cicerone® Beer Server, has written over 3,000 beer reviews and is a home brewer.  Jason is also working on implementing a series of Brewer Summits. Twitter @BeerMediation About Oval Options: Oval Options (www.ovaloptions.com) is a Denver-based Conflict Management and Mediation firm. We help clients find the most appropriate method for resolving disputes. Our pool of practitioners covers a wide range of industries including domestic (divorce/child custody), health care, elder care, estate, construction, community mediation, craft brewing & wine, and housing.  OvalOptions is home to Brewery Mediation Network which helps connect breweries with affordable dispute resolution methods. It handles all types of disputes, including the most noticeable (Trademarks) to the most common (partnerships).  The Network also makes available facilitation, coaching, consulting, team building and other trainings to breweries in areas including:

• Strain between owner, brewer, staff and/or investor

• Trademark disputes

• Co-worker tension and disagreements

• Brewery-Distributor relations

• Brewery-Neighbor relations

• Private/Domestic disputes of brewery employees

How to Speak to a “…Lives Matter” Supporter, Because You Must

Black Lives Matter and All Lives Matter. Which do you support? Don’t answer just yet. Let’s take a look at the controversy surrounding them.Black Lives Matter has been criticized for concentrating only on black lives. Retorts like, “what about other lives?” and “why are blacks so special?” are popular. Perhaps the most common response is “All Lives Matter”. Here is where a dispute is born, and the hyperboles starting spinning out of control.The message behind Black Lives Matter is not obvious to many people, mostly because three words are not enough. The intent behind Black Lives Matter is “working for the validity of Black life". To bring awareness to the fact that black lives have NOT mattered—and there’s plenty of evidence to back this up.But this intent is not easily or readily perceived. While Black Lives Matter supporters insists “black lives matter” intends a “too” on the end, many All Lives Matter supporters hear/see “only” at the beginning. It’s intent versus interpretation. Some say that “all lives matter” as a response to “black lives matter” is dismissive to the injustice blacks endure. But All Lives Matter supporters claim that their intent is to advocate equality across the board. And back and forth we go.Is it “Black Lives Matter, Too” or “Only Black Lives Matter”?Is “All Lives Matter” dismissive of injustice towards black lives, or is “All Lives Matter” an advocacy for equal rights?The intent and interpretation dilemma is in full force here. There is misunderstanding on both sides. How is the audience to know intention if it's not expressed? Sure, the audience could ask clarifying questions if they don't understand something. Although, this assumes that they realize they don't understand.  The onus is on the speaker to get her/his message across with clarity. And using only 3 words makes this difficult. On top of that, the tendency in today's world is to interpret things in negative light.  Unfortunately, this dilemma is a diversion.  Time, energy and thought are diverted to arguments over what each phrase really means and what the "other" phrase indicates. People are hastily dumped into one of the interpreted camps: The "only" or the "dismissive". You either think that black lives matter only, or you think nothing is wrong. Each claims the other perpetuates the problem. The hyperboles combine with impersonal assessments, quick judgements and bias to add venom to words and sustain aggression.Now we see arguments of Blue Lives Matter as anti-black. Black Lives Matter as anti-police. The extremes are even more polarizing, which pulls the middle further apart. At worst, it confuses people who are not familiar with any of this.Yet, after all of this back and forth, the root problem persists. It hides underneath its symptoms, which act like layers of camouflage. Racism is the most obvious symptom. Many claim it to be a root problem (as evident by both sides' accusations), but it actually comes from somewhere. We are not born racists. Racism is learned.  The charge of racism has been leveled by both sides and the staunch line in the sand has been drawn. The worst thing to do is alienate potential partners in a struggle against a root problem. Another symptom is trust, or more accurately, mistrust. The above dilemma has only fueled the fire of mistrust between police officers and civilians (and quite possibly black and white). When two distrusted parties, suspicious and nervous of each other, come together in a power infused moment involving guns, not much good can come from it.Still another symptom is righteousness. Some Black Lives Matter and All Lives Matter proponents focus mostly, perhaps only, on their position being correct; commonly done by claiming the other is wrong. Their goal is to win the argument, not address the problem. We need to understand the horror of not mattering, where it comes from and how it subsists. We need to understand that many people will never fully appreciate this horror (because it's almost impossible to imagine if it is not experienced). We need to understand that there are a few very bad apples of every color, and not let them obstruct progress. We need to understand that a vast majority of people want equality. And we need to understand that it's an uphill journey to achieve it.As humans, we need to figure out exactly what the problem is. It’s going to take time, there are a lot of weeds and overgrowth in the way, but we can do it. We can start by asking these questions: 

• Who teaches racism (and other biases)?
• How is it taught?
• Why is it taught?
• Where does it originate in our species history?
• Do we inherently fear or mistrust “others”?
• How do we overcome that?
• Do we somehow gain some sort of satisfaction by being racist? (why do we do it?)

As Americans we need to pool our resources to dig at these questions and defeat the root problem. We are all in this together. America is a melting pot of various backgrounds, experiences, thoughts, histories and philosophies. Currently, we are throwing away this most advantageous aspect of our country. Let's refocus and not  do that. So, who do you support? How about both. Or neither.  The problem with labels is that they always create in- and out-groups.  Instead, let's focus on similarities and common goals.Note on Title:  The title of this piece is a slant on Ann Coulter’s book, “How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)”. The “if” part always bothered me, because when finding solutions is a priority you must talk to a liberal (or conservative). Focusing energy on ridiculing the other draws energy away from solving problems. So I used “because you must”, because…well you must talk to the other side. How? By understanding their views, ideas, thoughts and energy to seek a common solution. You may just find that you have more in common than previously thought, and fewer differences.

What does beer mean to you?

July 6, 2016

What does beer mean to you? Sounds like a silly question. After all, beer is just a beverage. Sure, water means life…but beer? It’s just water with extra stuff in it.

Yet, it’s so much more. You don’t just throw the ingredients in a blender and hit “puree”. Brewing beer is a science. Dr. Paul Ogg was instrumental in teaching me that. He took the time to explain the many nuances in brewing chemistry and biology in both scientific and layman’s terms. He didn’t have to, but he started in on me the first time I met him. We were taste testing Jeff Griffith’s beers at Golden City Brewing when Jeff was head brewer there. I sat next to some guy—Paul—and started in on the beers. Jeff wanted honest feedback, and Paul gave it to him and explained what his feedback meant and where it came from. His main questions were, “what do you smell?” and “what do you taste?”. Sounds simple, right? But the answers were not easy to articulate, and he helped me understand what I was smelling and tasting and why. I was overwhelmed by his knowledge then, 10+ years ago, and now.

Paul died today. A knockdown, drag-out fight with a rare cancer took him. A couple months ago, some mutual friends of Paul decided that if we couldn’t help him, we’ll help his family. Medical bills, travel expenses, lost salary and financial support for his two girls, at least, needed attention. The scientific lessons Paul schooled me on years ago gave way to social lessons today. His friends started where they knew they could: Beer.

Within days the #BiggestSmallBeerEver campaign was underway, led by Paul's brewery, Declaration. Over a hundred breweries from all 50 states joined in to brew a beer based on a recipe drafted by Paul. The goal was to raise awareness; awareness for several things. That craft beer is alive and well.  That cancer can strike anyone, anytime without remorse, discrimination, or humility. That beer is powerful communal tool. The fact that over 100 breweries participated in that campaign, with very little notice and by those who never met Paul, says something about the latent power behind beer. It’s a common bond, a similarity between people separated by great distances, that can bring them together without reservation, question or hesitation.

So, what does beer mean to me? It means togetherness: “Let’s go grab a beer.”  Hospitality: “Come on in, want a beer?” Familiarity: “Game’s on Sunday. Of course we’ll have beer.” Relaxation: “Calm down. Have a beer.” Adventure: "We're going to visit every brewery in this city!" It’s so many other things and a celebration of Paul’s life: “Cheers, my friend. Godspeed.” 

Alan Simons (Dry Dock Brewing), Dr. Paul Ogg (Declaration Brewing), Me (drinking what they brew)