Sonnenberg, Frank K. (1993). Trust me... trust me not. Industry Week. 242(15), 22-24, 26, 28.
These were all articles I researched in Minneapolis while I was in visiting in the States while living in Russia. I later tried to categorize them into files and that's how I ended out with this "trust" file. I don't think that trust was a theme I went out looking for in the first place. For those of you knew to this blog, I was trying to make sense of my life and it seemed that there was too much political fallout from things interfering with my life.
***
"Employees in organizations marked by low levels of trust usually operate under higher levels of stress, spend a great deal of effort covering their backsides, justifying past decisions and conducting witch hunts or looking for scapegoats when something doesn't work out." (p. 24).This didn't describe the Vienna mission because if you didn't fairly quickly internalize the mission's values and norms and let yourself be pretty much be totally submitted to the mission (so that the mission didn't have to worry about trusting you, because they knew virtually everything about you), then you'd end out more or less where I was.
The thing is that the mission, I think, assumed that the problem was that I was too distracted by everything external to the mission and when they had pretty much reigned me in in every way they could think of and that still didn't work then they resorted to telling me that I was "standing up on the inside" (the words of my mentor, via a sort of parable/fable told me more than once at the end of my time with the mission). But they erred in assuming that I was just a secretary. They really didn't understand my mental abilities, and that's what tripped them up and that's what allowed me to get out of there without completely submitting. So my cover, if you will, was being a "dumb blonde." I did have all my books up in my office at one point (just before being sent back to the USA), though, but I guess they didn't take that seriously or something.
Of course, there's the issue of what they really wanted too, and they maybe didn't really know what I wanted. I just took things at face value that I was told I was to be a secretary and I would have some off time that I would be able to work with Austrians. I wasn't told that if I worked as a secretary my whole identity would have to be wrapped up in being a secretary, and the folk at the Austrian mission somehow missed the agreement that I would spend some off time working with Austrians. I came there trusting them, but they couldn't accept that arrangement because they weren't in control and it wasn't agreed to by them; my sending mission is the one who had agreed to it and the Vienna mission didn't like that, I guess.
***
"Furthermore, in organizations marked by low levels of trust, employees have so much difficulty exploring the full range of options or responding creatively to problems at hand that new challenges are avoided. Employees are so afraid of being reprimanded for failure of ridiculed by their colleagues that they shy away from new activities that will require new ways of thinking. Their defensiveness and mutual suspicions limit them to the restricted set of alternatives they have all agreed upon, which are designed to minimize their vulnerability. Exploration, innovation, and creativity become dangers in this kind of environment." (p. 24)
You have to keep in mind that I am discussing these texts only for myself, because my experience of the mission was way different from most other people's. So don't think that anyone else would think the same thing, because probably most everyone else would say the exact opposite, although it's possible that a few people might say that they could understand how I might see things the way I am, whether or not they agree.
I absolutely had terrific difficulty exploring options or responding creatively to problems at hand. The only problems I could deal with were things like filing systems or the organization of supply cabinets. Whoopee! I was at the bottom of the organizational power chart. No one would listen to me for anything. I wouldn't be reprimanded for my work, though. The more time went by the harder it became, I think, to try to win their trust and get a good position or the position I was supposed to have when I came to Vienna to work with the mission in the first place.
I was strong and it was only as I began to flag and faulter that then I began to shy away from the things I knew they didn't like - like attending the Austrian church.
***
Next the author discusses "the rings of trust." You start at the center, the rod, and move outward through 3 concentric circles.
"The rod, at the center of the ring, represents the beginning of a relationship and depicts the history of those involved. We generally start off with some preconceived notion about others..." (p. 24)
The odd thing is that I'm not sure that the problem was the preconceived notions about one another (me and the mission) was the problem. Rather, it was what we learned about each other once I arrived there. I felt misled because the things I'd been assured of were not so and I did not like the dishonesty and deceit of the mission and I did not trust it nor agree with its ways nor perceived need for this kind of blatant unbiblical behavior. I'm not sure what the mission thought about me. If they were concerned about my father's work it probably thought I would be too hard to control and so too much of a (national) security risk (and the staff military chaplains could possibly have contributed to that sentiment). If they just wanted a mission in their image they might have been very upset.
***
"The first ring around the rod represents the characteristics that lead to trust. They are the attributes, such as integrity, reliability, and openness, that allow us to build trusting relationships. Once these characteristics are demonstrated, they become part of a person's or organization's track record. When those actions are repeated time and time again, the relationship is strengthened and becomes the foundation of the next phase." (p. 26)I think that for the missionaries who make it through the socialization process they see the mission in all these positive ways, but I didn't. The very first summer I was there I personally experienced the mission lie to me multiple times, and I've already shared these here more than once. That's not integrity. The mission moved me around from job to job and I was hardly even in the job I was supposed to be in. What kind of reliability is that? And there was never any complaint about my work, nor about my attitude! I always had a good attitude and was social and helped out. So it was just that they couldn't get to me and this security thing that they couldn't really control me and have my full and total submission. So they didn't like it and they made me pay for it. They didn't have openness either and that's why I couldn't understand them. Oh, if I'd talk with them (when I bothered to) they'd have some mumbo jumbo think to say that didn't really mean anything. But they were not really open. No one else got moved around like me. No one. Period. And that's nothing to build a trusting relationship on.
***
"The second ring, consistency, allows us to anticipate probable actions. It provides a degree of comfort [by] helping us to maintain the relationship even through difficult times." (p. 26)There was never any consistency in the relationship between me and the mission. It did have a few brief interludes of reasonably good high points, though, generally because I was doing something I thought was using more of my skills on mission trips. But the problems always remained, so when I returned back home everything would be just as usual.
***
"The third ring is faith; as it is added to the other two rings, everything that came before it is strenghened. This ring, which does not adhere to the others, but rather encompasses them, is the stage at which actions are so predictable that we don't consciously have to think about the relationship. Trust has become so integral a part of the relationship that we expect it to work. At their peak, relationships imbued with trust are welded together by a faith so strong that it is very difficult to destroy them. It is at this stage that people allow themselves to become entirely vulnerable to others." (p. 26)This is pretty much how the Vienna mission members were supposed to operate among each other as part of the mission, and I think they did. The mission made sure they did, I think, because it was a security issue. But they didn't feel it as a negative thing, unless somene had something to hide, I suppose, which is what the security aspect of it would have been meant to catch.
I didn't think I had anything to hide, but I refused to let anyone but God have that kind of power over me, because once you're in that kind of relationship I think you're hooked into it and I think it would be just about impossible to entertain your own thoughts or opinions with any conviction and have them conflict with the group. You'd have to stifle them, but that kind of thing would come to light eventually and then you'd have a nice talk about it to put it in perspective so you could keep on with the work. And before you know it your disagreements are not so important after all.
It's not like working at a seminary where you just don't teach everything, but you can still have strong opinions. The seminary doeson't control your every thought like the Vienna mission did. It's totally different.
I just couldn't do it, I didn't think it was biblical and the deception of the mission was a huge red flag. The mission did great work, but I don't like how they work. And I don't like that they have political ties either (get the military chaplains out of there)..
In any case, it doesn't take much for you to imagine, I guess, that I absolutely could not be vulnerable. Being vulnerable was how they sort of sucked you in. That's how I thought while I was there. So I ended out not ever being vulnerable and when I left they still didn't know what I was thinking. If I had been vulnerable it would have been a whole lot harder than it was for me, I am very sure.
***
Here are a few of the traits from the frist ring..."Integrity. In assessing people's integrity, ask: Do theyhave a good value system? Are they honest, straightforward, and nonmanipulating?...
Confidence.... It is important to determine whether the people you build relationships with are comfortable within themselves and believe in themselves enough to admit their faults and errors. Ask yourself, do they always have to be right?
Openness. Opennesss. Openness in relationships is built upon some existing level of trust. You feel comfortable confiding in people knowing they would never break our confidence or use the information against you later. If they respond to that openness as expected, trust is enhanced and intimacy and honesty grow. It is not enough to be totally open and honest with your employees. This philosophy must be demonstrated to your customers and suppliers as well." (p. 26, 28)
Integrity! Despite the fact that the mission was comprised totally of conservative Evangelical Christians and mostly of advanced degree (Th.M. or higher) theologians the lifestyle use of deception for security and even just with me, presumably for socialization is despicable! What kind of integrity is that for a Christian mission?! It's terrible! And that was my early reaction and one of the main reasons I sort of put on the brakes and started observing them and trying to figure out what was going on. They were lying to me and not giving me enough work to do, which was a waste of my supporters' money which was stupid and idiotic. I'm not into that kind of gamesmanship. Just get to the point and tell me what you want and get it out. That's not integrity. I know a lot of non-Christians that have a lot more integrity than those people.
Regarding confidence, the leaders of the mission didn't always have to be right depending on the issue. If it was something like the staff's field of work, then the leader might defer to the staff and admit error. The leader might admit error if it were in, for example, a more mission-wide area of concern, but he might somehow hedge it to maintain his image.
I think that virtually everyone (except me) at the Vienna mission experience this openness as a kind of big happy family. Once you got through the initial socialization period then you would be accepted by everyone and begin to be a part of this. I think, though, that one probably grew into it as one internalized more and more of the missions norms proved oneself and values, proved oneself a valuable worker, and got to know the people in the mission better.
Again, I didn't get that far with the mission. I learned early on that I couldn't confide in other missionaries because it would come back to me, in one way or another. For example, I confided in a couple secretaries that I was experiencing some stress from the office. I was recommended to jog, that some of the men jog as a way to relieve stress. So that's why I started to jog, and I also bought a bike and I biked some. A certain herb blend was also recommended that Austrians take for stress. So I tried that. Then the U.S. military chaplain/H.R. director called me saying I had culture shock and wanted to send me to the U.S. for counseling. How do you think I felt about those secretaries about then? What was my trust level vis a vis them at that point? Do you think I'd be sharing anything personal with them again any time soon? I don't think so! So much for openness! If there was any hope for openness it was just flushed right down the toilet.
It looks like me and the mission are stuck at the center rod as far as trust is concerned. What do you think?
***
I was looking through the letters I had written mom and dad while I lived in Vienna (my brother sent them to me from mom's stuff from after she died). I was writing all upbeat so that no one really knew what I was thinking, but I can still sense a change from the earlier letters to the later ones. So I could use them to point that out and discuss the various things. Some of the things I write about doing I'd forgotten. But the thing is that my migrains is not good and that will take some concentrated mental power for when I'm feeling pretty good. It appears that the Botox shot worked about 3 weeks this time. I hope it works longer next time, but I guess they only do them every 91 days, so I have to wait awhile for the next one.
