Engagement through the eyes of Einstein's fish
Have you heard the principle or theory on
intelligence based on a fish as told by Albert Einstein? Einstein is well
known for the quote, if you judge the intelligence of a fish by the ability to
climb a tree it will always think it's stupid.
Now let's use the same or similar analogy and use it with regards to the role of engagement. Let's take this quote and change it to if you try to engage with a fish in the same way as you do with everyone else you won’t succeed.
The main point here is that, it’s not the fish that's wrong or at fault it is your methodology and systems. For engagement with the species and to get the best out of the fish you have to see the problems through its own environment not yours.
It is really frustrating when organisation and experts who try to engage after everything they are told continue to miss the point and insist on doing things in the same old way. When asked to adjust there, methodology it is the fish that’s the problem. They want the fish to participate but only if it comes out of the water.
They expect the fish to speak the language of the land, they expect this fish to be able to travel and attend meetings within their own time frames and venues. These fish are only hard to reach, as the people who trey to engage often don't take time to understand or see things from the fishes perspective.
Is it the fish that has the issue or you? As a local authority or someone working with one remember you have a duty under a plethora of legislation, with the Equality Act being most relevant. You are responsible under section 149 (the public sector duty) for ensuring the fish can participate in society, make sure it’s not discriminated against and advance its opportunities for ensuring participation with fish and others.
Now say I asked you to consult with a fish? To ensure those things are happening. Think what environment, needs, mediums it needs to be able to participate. Do you even speak fish? Can you swim? Perhaps you need to learn more about fish and its needs and environment and their needs before you truly understand how best to get the information you need. At least be prepared to dip your feet in the water. The picture you see from the outside is not the same picture the fish sees through the refracted bowl of its home.
You may ask why? Does it actually matter? Well life and society has a structure we all fit in to a chain. Even the fish has a purpose without it there wouldn’t be a balance. A break in the food chain, which has a consequence on other matters and for other species further on the link. Even us humans.
But really? Yes here’s an example say you consulted with fish about traveling on a set of roads. So you as someone who it also effects are participating too. On your forms you say the roads are really in a bad state due to potholes. Fine everyone knows this. However for the fish to travel along the same roads. His whole life and
environment are affected by this experience. Where to you its inconvenient, to the fish due to the movement and being thrown around and not having the same core muscles which the state of the roads don’t help, and being a fish who can't control the environment around himself the difficulties become much more pronounced.
Now read the last paragraph again but this time instead of fish use the words a person with disabilities. Even the scenario of traveling at the end. In this case a real scenario. Change the fish to a person strapped down in a wheelchair with poor core muscles. How do you think traveling on the same roads feels to such communities?
Sometimes it helps to see and understand difficulties if you picture and see the view from a completely different perspective. So next time you’re thinking of engagement or consulting particularly with hard to reach communities, please think of the fish.
Now let's use the same or similar analogy and use it with regards to the role of engagement. Let's take this quote and change it to if you try to engage with a fish in the same way as you do with everyone else you won’t succeed.
The main point here is that, it’s not the fish that's wrong or at fault it is your methodology and systems. For engagement with the species and to get the best out of the fish you have to see the problems through its own environment not yours.
It is really frustrating when organisation and experts who try to engage after everything they are told continue to miss the point and insist on doing things in the same old way. When asked to adjust there, methodology it is the fish that’s the problem. They want the fish to participate but only if it comes out of the water.
They expect the fish to speak the language of the land, they expect this fish to be able to travel and attend meetings within their own time frames and venues. These fish are only hard to reach, as the people who trey to engage often don't take time to understand or see things from the fishes perspective.
Is it the fish that has the issue or you? As a local authority or someone working with one remember you have a duty under a plethora of legislation, with the Equality Act being most relevant. You are responsible under section 149 (the public sector duty) for ensuring the fish can participate in society, make sure it’s not discriminated against and advance its opportunities for ensuring participation with fish and others.
Now say I asked you to consult with a fish? To ensure those things are happening. Think what environment, needs, mediums it needs to be able to participate. Do you even speak fish? Can you swim? Perhaps you need to learn more about fish and its needs and environment and their needs before you truly understand how best to get the information you need. At least be prepared to dip your feet in the water. The picture you see from the outside is not the same picture the fish sees through the refracted bowl of its home.
You may ask why? Does it actually matter? Well life and society has a structure we all fit in to a chain. Even the fish has a purpose without it there wouldn’t be a balance. A break in the food chain, which has a consequence on other matters and for other species further on the link. Even us humans.
But really? Yes here’s an example say you consulted with fish about traveling on a set of roads. So you as someone who it also effects are participating too. On your forms you say the roads are really in a bad state due to potholes. Fine everyone knows this. However for the fish to travel along the same roads. His whole life and
environment are affected by this experience. Where to you its inconvenient, to the fish due to the movement and being thrown around and not having the same core muscles which the state of the roads don’t help, and being a fish who can't control the environment around himself the difficulties become much more pronounced.
Now read the last paragraph again but this time instead of fish use the words a person with disabilities. Even the scenario of traveling at the end. In this case a real scenario. Change the fish to a person strapped down in a wheelchair with poor core muscles. How do you think traveling on the same roads feels to such communities?
Sometimes it helps to see and understand difficulties if you picture and see the view from a completely different perspective. So next time you’re thinking of engagement or consulting particularly with hard to reach communities, please think of the fish.
Comments
Post a Comment