Showing posts with label organizations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label organizations. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 22, 2014

Why Predators Are Attracted to Careers In The Clergy

Cardinal Bernard Law - April 2002

This is excellent article that outlines why religious organizations make the perfect home for predators. The most common example, and one used in the article, are the priests who molested so many children over the last several decades.

However, there are also lower profile situations we all have encountered. Dennis Merzel lost his sangha as a result of his predatory behavior with female students. And most notorious in integral circles is Marc Gafni - who began his career of predation as a Rabbi. After losing all credibility in the Jewish world, he reinvented himself as an integral teacher. Even then he continued to be predatory with female students (sexual relationships he justifies with his own brand of spiritual bypassing).

Anyway, this is good, important stuff.

Why Predators Are Attracted to Careers In The Clergy


Some further insight into a serious phenomenon


Published on April 20, 2014 by Joe Navarro, M.A. in Spycatcher

The eye-catching headline read, “Which Professions Have The Most Psychopaths?” (The Week, October 30, 2013) What ensued was quite a dialogue on the internet, as everyone seemed to have their own favorite picks or a personal horror story. The article stimulated debate, but unfortunately did not add clarity to a worthy subject. And that subject is: Why would a so-called “psychopath” be found in greater numbers in one profession versus another?

According to the article, CEO positions attract the most psychopaths. Perhaps so, if one considers the history of Enron, Bernard Madoff, and movies such as “The Wolf of Wall Street” (2013). But the one career that caught my eye, and that thirty years ago probably would have escaped me, is that of the clergy (8th in line behind law enforcement, according to the article). I say thirty years ago because prior to the revelations relating to Catholic priests abusing children, one would not think of predators going into the clergy, yet that is a reality. Which begs the question, why a so-called “psychopath” would be attracted to the clergy? As it turns out, there are good reasons for this; that predators understand all too well – but first some caveats.

Unfortunately, the term psychopath is bandied about too much, making things murkier. There is a huge difference between a psychopath as defined by Robert Hare, a sociopath, someone with antisocial personality disorder, someone with conduct disorder, an aggressive narcissist, or someone with dissocial personality disorder. Unfortunately most people, even many clinicians, don’t differentiate, and we should. Too often these terms are lumped together, as in the above captioned article, and that can be confusing. There are distinctions between all these terms, and so rather than use this vague and overused term (psychopath), I will call these individuals predators, which encompasses all of the above noted disorders and pathologies.

I should also note that I am not writing this article to criticize any particular religion, because any religious group, as history has taught us, can be taken advantage of by predators or malignant zealots. Rather, it is an analysis of why predators would choose to imbed themselves within a religious organization or seek to be part of the clergy – so that we can be more aware in order to protect our loved ones and ourselves. Knowing what we do now, it is fitting that we examine predators among the clergy and how they would use their office or a religious organization to take advantage of others.

Having said all of that, we need to be reminded that predators seek to be in organizations (any organization) for a variety of reasons that are both useful and beneficial but that may not be clear to us; including of course so that they can better conduct their predatory activities. The reasons vary, but here are just a few:
1. Organizations provide a convenient infrastructure from which a predator can prey on others for financial gain or to otherwise exploit others (sexually, mentally, physically).

2. Membership in a legitimate institution, be it a club, a branch of the military, or a corporation, gives legitimacy to individuals. We are more respectful and trusting when we are told a certain person is a VP or head of sales for XYZ company rather than just a stranger off the street.

3. Organizations give predators ready and easy access to an identifiable pool of individuals or potential victims. A cable television installer, for instance, can gain access to a home, assess the level of security, appraise what is of value, or determine if the person lives alone.

4. Organizations give predators access to potential victims they otherwise might not come into contact with, or might have to spend a lot of time finding. Predators may even find potential victims conveniently working two cubicles away.

5. Alliances are easy to make in an organization. These can serve to provide the predator information about exploitable weaknesses of others, as well as proprietary, personal, or sensitive data otherwise difficult to obtain.

6. Colleagues within an organization can serve to warn or protect the predator as a result of conspiratorial alliances or because they have a fiduciary interest in those predatory practices (predatory accountants protecting predatory CEOs).

7. Some organizations can be very financially rewarding for predators where they can exercise their anti-social traits (e.g., lack of conscience, indifference to others, bullying, cavalier attitudes, minimal concern for the welfare of employees, narcissism, sense of entitlement, placing profits over people). Often a similarly calloused and indifferent board of directors, interested only in profits, rewards these predators and their anti-social acts. It is a toxic but profitable symbiotic relation that is all too often familiar.

8. Organizations often try to “handle” negative things in-house to avoid bad publicity, so they are reluctant to report even gross criminal misconduct on the part of the predators in their midst; preferring to transfer them, fire them, or have them leave quietly.

9. Organizations are sometimes structured in such a way that the predator merely has to take advantage of existing weaknesses in the organization in order to profit – as we saw with the banking debacle of 2008.

10. Predators know that in civil lawsuits victims will go after the corporation with the deeper pockets rather than go after individuals with limited financial resources.
As we can see, there are a host of reasons why predators join organizations and if you think like a predator, it makes perfect sense. But there is something disturbing about why they would choose the clergy, or for that matter join a religious organization of any kind. It is disturbing because most of us don’t think about these things. Most people don’t think like a predator, but below are some insights that should make you think. These insights are based on conversations I and others have had with predators who intentionally sought to join religious organizations and from studying such individuals:
1. As noted earlier, within organizations, predators have access to a ready/available pool of potential victims. Within a religious order, those potential victims are identified for the predator, who knows how often they will get together and where (Sunday worship service at 11:00 am, at the local chapel, for example). Metronomic frequency of meetings creates opportunities for the predator to exploit directly, or even at a distance, such as committing burglaries based on knowing precisely when no one is home.

2. Some religious organizations require members to expose their faults, sins, or frailties in public. This is “manna from heaven” for predators who then use that information to better access or target their victims. Information like that serves to provide all the exploitable weaknesses a predator needs. As one predator told me, “With that kind of information I know exactly who to target and when.”

3. People gossip in most organizations, and in religious organizations it is no different. These informal social channels can be very effective in divulging who got promoted and has extra cash; who is going on vacation; whose spouse is overseas for seven months; who is naïve or gullible: who needs financial help; or who is having marital problems and is now lonely or vulnerable.

4. Within a religious organization, individuals of different social strata associate with one another with greater ease than in society. This gives the predator of low social status access to people who often live and socialize within restricted or gated communities and who otherwise would be impossible for them to target. In other words, if you can’t afford the country club, you can have access to those same socially higher-status people at a church gathering. This is a favored technique of conmen, grifters, and swindlers especially for Ponzi or pyramid schemes.

5. Many religious organizations preach forgiveness, even for felonies. For predators this is truly a godsend. This means that if they get caught, they can ask for forgiveness and chances are it will be given, in a pious but naïve effort to help the lawbreaker “learn from his mistakes.” Unfortunately, the predator sees this as an opportunity to sharpen his skills and to do his crime again, perhaps this time more carefully.

This apparently is what happened so many times with Catholic priests who were eventually convicted of serial child abuse. They were systematically “forgiven” along the way and thus they left behind a Grand Canyon-sized “debris field of human suffering” – namely children scarred for life, not to mention the trauma of the childrens’ families and the crisis of faith triggered among many devout Catholics as these transgressions were exposed.

If you are only casually familiar with what went on with the priests and the thousands of victims, you must read the Pulitzer prize-winning book Betrayal: The Crisis in the Catholic Church, by the superb investigative staff of The Boston Globe. And if that doesn’t rake at your heart, then Sacrilege: Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church, by Leon J. Podles should make you cringe, cry, and cogitate.

6. Because religious organizations preach brotherly love, even when someone has done horrific crimes, there will be those gullible enough to defend the predator or willing to look the other way. The book Betrayal, by the Boston Globe has account after account of exactly that kind of sickening indulgence. But you don’t only have to look at religious organizations; just look at how many still defend, poodle-like, Jerry Sandusky, the convicted ex-football coach at Penn State, even after so many revelations of child abuse. In the book, Betrayal, there is example after example cited of parishioners, even fellow priests, staunchly defending priests convicted of serial offenses.

7. Another advantage for the predator in a religious organization is that if caught, he or she can very conveniently say it was “Satan's” fault. Whether cheating, taking advantage of the elderly, conducting financial shenanigans, or even abusing children, the predator merely has to say that the “devil” tempted him or her and that’s that. Predators know they can rely on a certain portion of the population to buy into that argument, and so they use it.

8. If the predator is in a position of authority within a religious organization, he or she can claim persecution by the “enemies” of the church or the organization. Any outside scrutiny subjecting the predator to the sanitizing rays of light is thus characterized as, “them,” the unbelievers “against us.” This often compels the group to “circle the wagons” in support of their leader, as we saw with David Koresh and Jim Jones. And of course they will argue that it is we the “outsiders,” who are distrusting of the leader/predator, and who don’t understand, because we simply don’t have “faith,” or we are (the more trendy) “haters.”

For the religious-based predator it is very convenient to label these individuals enemies of the: “the church,” “the Lord”, “the congregation,” “the prophet,” “the leader(s),” “the free practice of religion,” and an attack on the “the anointed,” “the faithful,” or the “righteous,” on and on. Once you label something an “enemy,” it truly does bring the true believers, as Eric Hoffer warned us, further together. This is exactly what happened when inquiries were first made of Warren Jeffs – later convicted of sexual assault on two girls. This is exactly the argument made by those who supported Jim Jones, many of whom are now dead as a result of his command to his followers to poison their own children and themselves.

9. If the predator becomes a leader within the organization, or if lucky, becomes the head of a church or religious group, then he or she is immediately cloaked with power and authority (moral power) that mere corporations don’t have. Keep in mind that most people still have a high respect for their church leaders and are willing to give them greater latitude and the benefit of the doubt.

10. Predators soon realize that the ability to invoke a deity in their defense is a powerful card to hold that trumps all other arguments. They can always say, “I was moved by the lord,” to do this or that, “I was commanded by God to,” do this or that, or “it is the will of the lord,” to do this or that. That is a tough, faith/emotionally-laden argument that is difficult to refute; especially for believers that are already vested having spent time and money in an organization. Thus the rape of children is justified merely by invoking the ostensible desire and will of a deity. And let’s be clear, predators love that they can do that. Once again, this is precisely what Warren Jeffs did with the assistance of repugnantly complicit mothers who willingly offered up their daughters for his sexual pleasure. Fugitive cult leader, Victor, Arden Barnard is alleged to have invoked the same defense, that he had a right to sexually abuse children because it was “God’s word.”

11. There is, it should be noted, no religion or sect that screens for psychopathy as defined by Robert Hare that I am awware of. All you need is to be ordained, or you declare yourself a religious leader and the way is clear for the predator. And so while some organizations, such as in law enforcement, screen for pathologies by using psychometric tools, very few religious organization do so. Which is why the predator would benefit from joining or leading such an organization. Across the planet, there is almost no scrutiny or due diligence that is or will be conducted. To connive, or to “con,” the predator merely needs his victim to have faith and trust in the predator something that is often easily achieved with the vestments of a legitimate religious organization.

12. To be a predator is to overvalue yourself at the expense of others – a key component of both the pathologically narcissistic and the predator (see Dangerous Personalities). Here is where a predator has an advantage because in a religious organization, this overvaluation of self is potentiated by the title that is either conferred, that comes with the office, or bestowed through ordination. For the predator, it is tantamount to being told, “you are” therefore “you can.”

13. Predators know or soon learn that society tends to revere and not question religious authority. People of high status such as famous coaches, TV personalities, politicians, and so on are often given great latitude to the point where allegations of misconduct, even serious criminal offenses are often ignored (Jimmy Savile in the UK; O.J. Simpson in the US).

14. Parents may be more trusting of a religious leader than of the average person. As history has taught us, they may dismiss allegations made by their own children as to sexual abuse by a religious leader or they will remain quiescent so as to not “rock the boat.” It is very tough for parents, especially those from humble background or who are deeply religious, to go up against a popular or charismatic leader, “the church” or a large, well-financed religious order. Often, as we now well know, the fear of retribution, being ostracized or socially marginalized, or excommunicated keeps victims and parents silent.
So, where does this leave us? With the reality that predators are all around us. Anywhere from 1% to 4% or perhaps more of any population, according to researchers, is made up of individuals who are social predators (DSM V, 2013, 659-663). They may seek to join organizations for the additional benefits these organizations bring. It is not the organization; it is the individuals who seek to use those organizations for predation and that is the problem. Individuals who seek religious organizations because there they can more easily target victims and do so much more harm – that is our reality.

We cannot prevent all crimes, nor can we always know how predators will come after us, but knowledge helps. If we are sensitized ahead of time to how predators think, how they use legitimate organizations, and take advantage of others, perhaps then we can protect one more child, or perhaps even ourselves from these social predators.

* * * * * * * * *

Joe Navarro, M.A. is 25 year veteran of the FBI and is the author of What Every Body is Saying, as well as Louder Than Words. For additional information and a free bibliography please contact him through

Psychology Today: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/spycatcher or at www.jnforensics.com – Joe can be found on twitter: @navarrotells or on Facebook. His latest book Dangerous Personalities (Rodale) is available on Amazon.

Thursday, March 14, 2013

Beryl Nelson - Diversity - It's Not Just About Being Fair


Beryl Nelson gained her undergraduate degree in Math at MIT and went on to obtain an MS in Biology at the University of Utah with an NSF Graduate Fellowship. 

In 2009, Mrs Nelson began working for Google in Hyderabad, on the engineering productivity team. It is from there that she was offered her current position at Google Krakow, as an Engineering Manager for one of the teams in websearch.

In addition to her main work, Mrs Nelson has also become interested in the published research on the data on diversity within business and its practical applications.

She has designed and co-presented diversity sessions at Grace Hopper India and Grace Hopper US, at the ACM India conference 2011 and internally within Google.


Diversity - It's Not Just About Being Fair 

Presented by: Beryl Nelson 
Google Tech Talk
March 8, 2013

ABSTRACT

Why should it matter whether you work in a team in which people all think the same way, or have different life experiences and points of view? And what can you personally do to improve diversity in your organization?

Beryl will open her talk with some of the wealth of research and data available about the value of a diverse team composition in terms of financial results and innovation. However, making a diverse team effective is not simple. The second part of the talk will include data relating to barriers to the effectiveness of diverse teams. One of the most difficult problems to deal with, and to measure, is unconscious bias. Why is it that 52% of Fortune 500 CEOs are over 6 feet tall (182.8 cm), and about a third are over 6 feet 2 inches (187.8 cm)? Imaginative researchers have found statistical methods that can measure unconscious bias and other barriers to effectiveness. People who are aware of these barriers can find ways to overcome them, as Beryl will show with a few examples. Finally, the talk will also focus on recommendations to interested individuals on what they can personally do to improve the diversity of their teams.

A presentation for "Voices - Creating Global Connections" organized by Global Tech Women for International Women's Day March 8, 2013.

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

TEDxKoeln - Adriana Lukas: Balanced Asymmetry of Networks or How to Avoid Hierarchies


In her talk at TEDxKoeln Adriana Lukas outlines the five laws of heterarchy - "Those might one day help write recipes for building a society of peer to peer interactions." P2P does rely more on heterarchical structures, but there are inherent hierarchies in most (if not all) systems.

The P2P Foundation Wiki offers this definition of heterarchy by Timothy Wilken:
"Heterarchy is a very different breed of organizational strategy than hierarchy. It is a horizontal system with only one level of organization. All are equal within the heterarchy. Individuals within the system see each other as being on the same level. “We are a team.” “Its like a family rather than a job.” “We all respect each other.”

Heterarchy is ideal for communication and discussion, because it allows for the sharing of responsibility and authority within an informal environment. Task assignments following open discussions, produce more cooperative working relationships. In a setting where associates feel valued, openness and integrity emerge. Individuals often take much greater roles in the tasks of their departments. In this setting, there is less conflict, and this usually results in improvement in efficiency, productivity, and quality of work-life. Heterarchy creates a feeling of oneness — a feeling of community. Members of a heterarchy strongly identify with the whole system. Morale and espirit de corps are optimized. Because heterarchy is highly inclusive, all feel that they are a part of the system. This is in strong counter distinction to hierarchy's exclusiveness. Individuals within heterarchy tend to protect the system. Individuals within hierarchy often ignore the system, and sometimes even attack it. The wholistic focus of heterarchy is on the needs of the whole organization. This wholistic focus leads to collective decision making and collective responsibility.

Decision making in heterarchy is slower. It takes time to gain the consensus of all the individuals within the heterarchy. However, implementation is much more rapid because the attitudes of those responsible for implementation have been considered in the decision making process. This not only eliminates conflict, but also encourages all members to feel responsible for the successful implementation of the decision. Anyone who has ever built a house knows it is much less expensive to erase lines on a paper, than to demolish mortar, brick, and stone." (http://www.synearth.net/Restricted-Confidential/OT.pdf)
 TEDxKoeln - Adriana Lukas: Balanced Asymmetry of Networks or How to Avoid Hierarchies



TEDxKoeln - "Stories of(f) Balance" brought together passionate listeners and speakers, well able to not only be multiplicators of ideas but also to act on them, in an exchange of moving stories and bold ideas and thus TEDxKoeln joins the global discourse of concerned citizens.
I'm not sure why people are so phobic about hierarchies -  some systems function better with hierarchies and some function better with heterarchies. I'm not convinced that heterarchies are better than compassionate hierarchies - as is true in many things, both are probably useful in certain situations, even within the same system.

Monday, October 10, 2011

Michelle Holliday - Organizations and the Mindful Practice of Authentic Dialogue

Interesting - I had not heard of the Thrivability Montreal conference, but it sounds cool. The post comes from a (new to me) blog called Solarium: Ideas, Conversations, Events, for Cambrium Consulting. Back in February, Michelle Holliday did a TEDx Talk on Thrivability and the Future of Humanity (see below).

ORGANIZATIONS AND THE MINDFUL PRACTICE OF AUTHENTIC DIALOGUE

Posted by Michelle Holliday on 06 Oct 2011


Last week’s Thrivability Montreal was a fantastic gathering, full of energy and important insights.


We had gathered to explore the question: What if our organizations were designed to support the mindful practice of authentic dialogue?


To offer some context for our conversation, I opened the evening by describing the machine metaphor that dominates business today, as well as the emerging story that portrays organizations instead as living systems. I explained how this new paradigm points the way to better business results. Not only that, I shared my conviction that the mechanistic worldview in general is the root cause of every major challenge humanity faces and that, conversely, the new, life-centered story is critical to the very survival of the human race.


Introducing the evening’s topic, I explained my strong belief that authentic dialogue is an important part of that new story. Every living system is a web of dynamic relationships. The more open and free-flowing those relationships can be, the more the living system is likely to be resilient, adaptive and creative. So, as a simple set of principles and processes specifically designed to support open, free-flowing relationship, authentic dialogue offers a powerful path to resilience, creativity and adaptability - very desirable qualities in these challenging and fast-changing times.
Read the whole post.

Here is her TEDx Talk.

TEDxConcordia - Michelle Holliday - The Pattern of Living Systems




Friday, May 27, 2011

Buddhist Geeks #218: Liberating the Soul of Organization (Brian Robertson)

On this week's Buddhist Geeks, Vince speaks with Brian Robertson on the "soul" of an organization - Robertson is the founder of HolarcracyOne, a consulting firm.

Buddhist Geeks 218: Liberating the Soul of Organization

BG 218: Liberating the Soul of Organization

24. May, 2011
by Brian Robertson









Download

Episode Description:

We’re joined this week by Brian Robertson, founder of HolacracyOne, a company whose aim is to liberate the soul of organization. We discuss with Brian the main principles and practices behind Holacracy—a system that Brian helped develop as a new operating system on which businesses can run. He distinguishes between what he calls “predict-and-control” management practices and “sense-and-respond” processes, which are much more like the dynamic steering of a bicycle.

We also look at the parallels between the practice of Holacracy and the practice of meditation. Brian’s description of Holacracy as a practice which encourages people to be ruthlessly present with current tensions and to not identify with the roles that they fill are two striking examples of meditative principles applied to business. We conclude our discussion by exploring what he calls “the tyranny of consensus”, seeing that even with a group of highly conscious individuals we may not have the collective skills to really give life to the organizations we’re a part of.

This is part 1 of a two-part series. Listen to part 2 (airing next week).

Episode Links:

Transcript


Tuesday, March 09, 2010

International Network on Personal Meaning - Meaning Conference 2010

Here is the recent announcement for the Meaning Conference 2010, sponsored by International Network on Personal Meaning. Check out their website for some cool content.

By the way, August in Vancouver is awesome (I lived in Seattle for many years).

As a note, their website seems a little out of date, with only the 2008 conference posted. The info below came from the Adult Development listserve and was posted by Michael Lamport Commons, Ph.D., so I trust it is valid. If this sounds interesting to you, I'd contact them.
Meaning Conference 2010

The International Network on Personal Meaning (INPM) is pleased to announce the 6th Biennial International Meaning Conference to be held August 5-8, 2010 in Vancouver, Canada. The main conference theme this year is:

Creating a psychologically healthy workplace: Meaning, spirituality and engagement

In the context of the workplace, a growing number of organizations are recognizing that mental health and employee engagement play a key role in generating corporate wealth. This conference explores the idea that meaningful employment holds the key to personal and societal well being, organizational excellence, and national prosperity. In today’s highly competitive global economy, building human strengths and fostering resilience at the personal and organizational level are more important now than ever before.

Like all previous Meaning Conferences, INPM brings together a diverse group of the world's leading thinkers, research scientists, and professionals to tackle the challenge of creating positive organizations that can flourish and thrive in a difficult and uncertain economic time. The 2010 meeting in Vancouver will adopt a strengths-based framework for understanding how to develop the full potential of people and the organizations in which they work. Examples of "psychological capital" to be examined include meaning, spirituality, creativity, trust and authentic leadership.

Consistent with previous INPM meetings, the 2010 conference will place a premium on providing delegates with opportunities for active and extensive interactions with speakers and other delegates. Through the principle of collective strategic networking, we hope the conference will facilitate a new vision for the 21st Century and help define what it means to be a psychologically healthy workplace.

Through invited addresses, paper and poster presentations, workshops, case studies, and open sessions, a wide range of workplace issues will be explored.

Submit a 300-word abstract to Dr. Paul T. P. Wong, Conference Chair before April 30th , 2010. Graduate student submissions are encouraged.

CE credits will be available. This conference is ideal for all those who are concerned with positive organizational development. We welcome participation by psychologists, counselors, coaches, human resource specialists, organizational scholars, business consultants, occupational health & safety personnel, and leaders in business, industry and non-profit organizations. Students and individuals interested in developing a fulfilling career or vocation are also welcome.

Mark on your calendar for Aug. 5-8, and register for the conference online.