Michael had been struggling. We had been discussing the three-world-model and he had found it interesting. He could see how distinguishing between organizational, professional, and private worlds would make the context of a situation visible. It was how to use that information that troubled him.

What he was seeing with the model was an ideal situation, the situation he hoped for. What he was seeing in the organization seemed to him to be worlds apart. The way things are handled in his organization seemed to him to be given. He could not see how the way things are done is triggered by individual decisions.

We decided to take a different approach to the choices we have. Instead of asking ourselves if we have a choice in a given situation, we reframed our reaction to a situation as the choice we make.

Speaking up or not speaking up in a meeting thus became two possible choices. Either of which meaning an acceptance of the comprise that comes with that choice.

With this shift in perspective, Michael started to realize the expectations and outcomes he had been attached to. And even more so, how avoiding to see his compromise pushed responsibility for the result away from him.

It had kept him stuck with the idea that he had no choice.