System Laws are the hidden foundation behind trust or conflict

Everyone in a system has the right to belong. When this sense of belonging isn’t present, an individual tends to feel unsettled, as our subconscious relates belonging to our survival. The opposite of belonging, thus, is exclusion or being left out. It’s crucial for this first System Law to be met for individuals to enthusiastically and wholeheartedly engage in the system.

Example in a Work Setting: An employee isn’t automatically part of the management team. As such, their superiors might meet and discuss matters without including them. However, this is acceptable to the employee as long as they feel a sense of belonging to the overall system (i.e., the company) and don’t perceive it as a slight that they aren’t part of the management. But, if that employee has been eyeing a leadership role for a long time, this scenario might evoke feelings of exclusion.

Example in Personal Life: Two best friends have always celebrated their birthdays together. However, one of them now has a new partner and decides to celebrate her birthday just with close family for the first time in years, intending to strengthen family ties. If this isn’t communicated beforehand, the other friend is likely to feel hurt and left out of the celebration.

Every system inherently seeks a balance, especially between giving and taking. Fairness plays a pivotal role in this equation. It’s only natural to feel a sense of imbalance when someone consistently invests more into a system (be it time, energy, money, etc.) than they receive in return. Likewise, receiving too much without an opportunity to reciprocate can leave one feeling uneasy.

Workplace Scenario: Consider an employee who’s constantly burdened with increasing workloads and mandatory overtime. Yet, despite their extended efforts, they’ve seen no pay raise for a considerable period of time, and perhaps haven’t even received a word of appreciation from their superiors. As dissatisfaction grows, it sets the stage for conflict. In the worst-case scenario, the employee might even decide to resign.

Personal Life Scenario: Picture a group of friends who love going out together. Everyone chips in now and then, buying rounds of drinks. However, there’s that one person who consistently drinks on everyone else’s dime without ever reciprocating. This behavior disrupts the natural balance of the System Laws. Sooner or later, the friends might feel reluctant to invite this individual along if they continually fail to contribute their fair share.

The fourth System Law emphasizes the notion that those who have been part of a system longer deserve recognition and appreciation. The rationale behind this is straightforward: those who have been part of the system longer have often played a crucial role in ensuring its survival. Historically, during times of scarcity, decisions about survival didn’t necessarily prioritize the oldest individual but rather those who contributed the least to the group’s survival.

Workplace Scenario: Imagine an employee who has dedicated many years to a company. However, a newer colleague, who happens to have a personal relationship with the boss outside of work, gets promoted ahead of him. The long-serving employee feels his years of loyalty and hard work aren’t valued, and his seniority is overlooked.

Personal Life Scenario: Picture yourself waiting in line at the supermarket, and someone abruptly cuts in front of you without a word. They’ve disregarded the “earlier comes before later” principle. Even if you’re not in a rush and already have your items ready, an instinctual reaction often bubbles up – be it irritation, tension, or another emotional response. Deep down, something feels off…

The fifth System Law states that individuals with less responsibility in a system should recognize and value those with greater responsibilities. The same applies to commitment. If someone is less committed, they should appreciate someone who shows more dedication. However, those who demonstrate high commitment must recognize and respect those with greater responsibility, as the latter bear the consequences if things go awry.

Yet, it’s essential to remember that regardless of responsibility or dedication, the “earlier comes before later” rule must always be the priority. If a new leader steps in and immediately starts working tirelessly, it might not sit well with the veterans. The new leader should recognize and appreciate longstanding members before making changes

Workplace Scenario: Imagine a manager overwhelmed with tasks. An employee, seeing an opportunity to help, proactively takes on some of the manager’s duties without asking. While the employee’s intentions might be positive, they inadvertently strip the manager of their decision-making power (a higher responsibility) and exclude them. Even with the best intentions, this behavior can lead to conflict.

Personal Life Scenario: System Laws also play out in informal settings, like a club or association. Suppose the board members are on vacation, and in their absence, other members make a crucial decision about the club’s future. A conflict might arise if the board members feel sidelined, as their higher responsibility wasn’t taken into account.

The sixth System Law states that individuals with more expertise, whether from knowledge or experience, hold a higher position in a system. It’s generally accepted that they can contribute more insights or understanding than others.

However, an essential caveat is this: irrespective of one’s competence and knowledge, newcomers to a system must initially recognize and respect those who came before. For instance, by inquiring about the existing culture and processes rather than immediately highlighting their skills.

Workplace Scenario: Team members should acknowledge if a colleague, who possesses more expertise in a particular matter, is assigned the related task – even if they personally desired that role. But it’s crucial that the “earlier comes before later” principle is upheld. Meaning, a manager should first consult an employee who has been with the company longer before making decisions.

Personal Life Scenario: Consider parents who prohibit their young children from using specific household appliances (like the stove) due to safety concerns. If the kids ignore this rule and use the appliance anyway, they are disregarding their parents’ superior knowledge and expertise. Consequently, they should anticipate repercussions.

Systems need changes and the emergence of new systems to ensure long-term survival and continuity across generations. At first glance, System Law 7 seems to contradict System Law 4 (Earlier Takes Precedence Over Later).

In context, this law suggests that the new system can only thrive if those who came before it support it. This acknowledgment from the “earlier” members can only be granted when they’ve received recognition for their past contributions and expertise, and when no major violations of system laws are present.

Workplace Example: A leader introduces new work procedures. Those who do not adapt to the new guidelines will face challenges, both from the leadership and colleagues. Hence, it’s the leader’s responsibility to resolve any pre-existing violations of system laws and involve those who were there before in the change process. When the experience and expertise of the predecessors are utilized, the new becomes integrated with the present, paving the way for collective growth. The design of change processes, perhaps through systemic checks, is a topic extensively covered in coaching and systemic consulting training.

Personal Life Example: Consider a child whose parents have divorced, and one parent now has a new partner. Often, there’s an expectation that the child should adapt to this new scenario. If not, conflicts might arise with the parent or their new partner. However, this attitude can cause profound hurt and feelings of exclusion for the child. The child was there before the new partner and needs acknowledgment from both the parent and the new partner. Violations of the system laws from the initial family system must be adequately addressed. Only then can a blended family truly thrive and the new system be sustained.

Once you join a larger system, you must follow System Laws 1-7. If these aren’t followed, to the extent that the entire system is endangered, exclusion from the system follows.

Workplace Example: Consider a new employee who consistently arrives late, frequently calls in sick, and delivers subpar results. After the probation period, they aren’t retained, losing their position and no longer being a part of the company or system.

Personal Life/Sports Example: In a soccer team, if a player regularly indulges in a few too many drinks before a game and consequently doesn’t give their best during the match, they jeopardize the team’s overall success. Sooner or later, teammates will sideline such a “colleague”, and the coach will have no choice but to let the player go, as the well-being of the entire soccer team takes precedence.

Note: In such instances, it’s vital to address and resolve existing violations of the system laws. If left unchecked, these can leave behind toxic residues with severe implications for the entire system.

When certain behaviors cause negative feelings or repercussions, the hurt individual must voice their feelings. Resolving these feelings is only possible when they’re brought into the open.

If someone can’t address these issues, coaching and mediation can help. The goal? Rebuilding that lost trust and creating a space where they can comfortably share their experiences.

If someone’s been hurt, it’s their responsibility to initiate the conversation. By not doing so, or delaying until the conflict has escalated, it inhibits timely conflict resolution. And if it reaches that point, the individual must also own their part in letting it fester.

When a system goes against its core principles, you often need to handle the results and correct tangible issues. However, it’s essential to understand that superficial solutions, like monetary compensation or allocating a special project, won’t heal the emotional wounds or rectify the core issues. What really matters in balancing the scales is when someone in authority acknowledges their part, accepts the responsibility, and understands the anger it might have caused. A simple “You have every right to be upset…” can go a long way.

Example: Consider a situation where a manager promotes someone even when another employee was next in line. A common way to ‘remedy’ this might be to offer the overlooked employee a bonus or a raise. But such measures don’t genuinely address the root cause or dissipate the lingering resentment. Instead, it may even intensify those negative feelings. You can only change the system order, which prioritizes earlier members, under certain conditions. You must address and resolve any negative feelings.