Unlocking How A Litigator Navigates Conflict With Ursula Taylor

* Website

Skot Waldron (00:05.538)
I’m Skot Waldron, and when I’m not hosting Unlocked, I’m speaking at events all over the globe, helping leaders and teams communicate better, build trust faster, and actually, enjoy working together. I know who would have thought? I’ve spoken for companies like the Home Depot, I’ve spoken at national architectural firms, at their sales training, off-sites for major pharmaceutical companies, companies and industry associations have thousands of attendees who have read my sessions with 99% of them saying they found the sessions valuable 97% saying they’d actually attend again. I’ve had caterers come up to me afterwards and thank me because they actually got something they could use when they went home or when they went back to their own jobs. I mean, if every keynote delivered those types of numbers. Nobody would secretly be refreshing their email under the table. And let’s be honest, that’s a little bit of my nightmare. Maybe a little bit of yours. Yeah, something that keeps me up at night.

If you’re an event planner, looking for a speaker who’s easy to work with and delivers actual value that people can take away and use on Monday. Let’s make your event unforgettable.

All right, y ‘all. I got an attorney on the show. Yeah, an attorney. And it’s pretty fun talking to attorneys. I’ve got clients that are attorneys too and they’re fantastic people. So, the attorney world is awesome. But Ursula is a little bit different. Ursula, I think you’re gonna get a little bit of a vibe here that Ursula Taylor is not your typical litigation and she set that up at the beginning. We’re going to talk a little bit about that. But she has a philosophy about conflict because that’s a world she comes from that, it can be an opportunity, that it can be beneficial to go through the conflict, to understand the goals of what we’re trying to achieve and to really excel at being good at conflict. And when we get into this idea of what she talks about, you’re gonna go, oh, okay, yeah, I could do that. And that’s what I want you to hear.

So, Ursula Taylor, she has a business called Conflict Reimagined. So, Conflict Reimagined, y ‘all, her whole thing is conflict. Ursula is a consultant and former litigator, now facilitating more efficient and effective paths for conflict resolution and ultimately peace by utilizing objectives and methods that are not yet integrated into traditional legal systems. Ursula assesses, mitigates and resolves actual or potential disputes by understanding the real sources of conflict as a form of human emotion. Ursula helps organizations realize conflict as opportunity.

And that’s what we’re gonna talk about. So here we go.

Ursula, it’s so good to finally be recording. Thanks for all the patience with my technical glitches. So, I’ve never had a professional litigator on my show before. So yeah, I know, I know. So, pressure’s on, you’re the first. You might be the last, but if you’re so awesome, I might go out and recruit more litigators to be on my show.

Ursula Taylor (04:25.947)
Of course. Well, good day. Thanks.

I’m not really like the rest, so I don’t know. I don’t know if that strategy will pan out for you. Yeah, well try it.

Skot Waldron (04:41.942)
No?

Okay, here’s the first question. You’re not like the rest. What makes you different? What makes you not like them?

Ursula Taylor (04:58.131)
Well, sure. mean, first of all, and that’s not meant as any disparagement of a professional attorney. Yeah. But, well, first of all, I’m not practicing anymore, right? I made the choice to close my litigation, my law practice, and open this consultancy. I think what makes me different is that my unwillingness to continue in that practice because I…

Skot Waldron (05:03.148)
No, no, no, of course, of course not.

Ursula Taylor (05:25.809)
understand it as limited and inefficient and not aligned to actually supporting teams and organizations in efficiently and effectively resolving conflict or finding solutions to the problem of conflict. And I think that it’s one arrow in the quiver. And there are times when litigation makes sense,but I find it to be too small, too limited, too confined, and not actually getting to the root of what drives every dispute.

Skot Waldron (06:05.55)
Hmm. So, what is it doing instead? Like what’s litigation doing? That’s the opposite of what you’re talking about.

Ursula Taylor (06:13.589)
Sure, it’s perpetuating the energy of the dispute. It’s perpetuating the conflict. It’s a lot of doing, a lot of stuff, a lot of paper, a lot of writing, a lot of depositions and discovery. It’s focused on facts, laws and arguments, which is not the root source of a dispute. It’s not what sustains a dispute. It’s a distraction that keeps us in a dispute. And what conflict really comes from always, or tension, is human emotion. There are human emotional drivers that unless and until those are addressed, you’re really not resolving disputes. You can come to a ceasefire. You can force a judgment because you’re unwilling or unable to do it differently. You can force a judgment. It’s not going to address the emotional drivers. And you may find yourself in a pattern of a similar conflict throughout because you’re not really getting to what’s got you in that place.

And it’s a lot of money and a lot of uncertainty and you lose control once you bring in a judge and another party and the attorneys. And there’s no real end. Meaning, arbitration is great because those are really hard to appeal or append. But in a legal process, what you get from the trial court is a record for appeal, you know? And you can go up and down to the appellate court.

And the limitation ends up becoming just the appetite, the budget, those sorts of things.

Skot Waldron (07:49.176)
Okay. So, I’m thinking about this, and I love kind of what you said, like litigations built around facts, laws and arguments. And you said that the art of conflict is really the understanding of human emotion. Do litigators not tap into the human emotion stuff or are they really just focused on the facts, the laws and creating an argument? But it seems to me, like I would say.

Well, they have, aren’t they playing off the emotion of the other side? Aren’t they like, like how did those things play into litigation versus what you do?

Ursula Taylor (08:25.683)
Right. Absolutely. Right. Absolutely right. A good trial attorney understands and integrates the human emotion, but not from the perspective of like an awareness. It’s from the perspective of trying to recruit the jury or recruit the judge or the arbitrator into the emotional story. Everybody’s pretending like it’s about finding facts, laws and arguments.

And look, I’m not suggesting that judges and arbitrators aren’t doing their job in terms of really trying to distill it down. But I think the best judges and arbitrators are those that are very self-aware of their own emotional triggers, their own sort of proclivities. They’re just very self-aware, conscious people. Because what the trial lawyers are doing is they are endeavoring to tell a story that is 100 % driven by emotion and to recruit the judge or arbitrator into that, to be part of it, to beat out the other side in that effort. It’s not about actually feeling into that emotion and creating a space for folks to transmute and resolve like you would in more of a healing modality.

Skot Waldron (09:41.72)
So how is, how is conflict the idea of conflict? I mean, that’s, that’s kind of what you’re basing your whole brand on right now. And what you’re doing right now is talking through conflict and we’re going into organizations and helping them resolve conflict. you come from the world of conflict. Means, litigation is basically the understanding and of conflict, moving through conflict, understanding the conflict. And then how do you talk about conflict now as opposed to when you’re a litigator?

Ursula Taylor (10:21.577)
Right? You know, when I was a litigator, I was subscribed into the idea as most humans are that blame, and fault is real. That blame and fault is a real thing. And we need to figure out who to blame and who’s at fault and who’s right and who’s wrong. But what I also know as a commercial litigator supporting businesses and realizing their business goals and functions is that nobody really cares.

Nobody’s in the business of being right or, you know, or making someone wrong. That’s not what drives profits. That’s not what drives the bottom line. And that’s not ultimately what makes people feel fulfilled or happy. What people want, what organizations want when they face a litigation is solutions. They want out. They want an end. They want an answer. And they haven’t been able to do it for themselves because they’re not honoring and seeing and appreciating the human emotional drivers and they pick up the phone and they call the litigation attorney who’s not specifically trained in this, although as we talked about, the best ones do understand it. And we’re in this place where we’re sort of perpetuating conflict. So, it’s a real, a very practical, logical, business-oriented foundation to what I do. But as I, you know, I’ve always been an intuitive person. I’ve always been able to sort of see and understand what’s underlying the dispute. And it’s what allowed me to be a good litigation attorney, but I just felt really stifled because it’s, I just got to a point and you know, clients will call like and can you handle this dispute? like, why is this a dispute? Don’t you hear what this is here and there? And you want to spend like X amount of dollars resolving something that’s worth like a 10th of that. Do you know what, what are you doing? So, it’s a little bit of that, kind of like almost annoyed energy that got me started but then as I move into it, you, Sstart to realize that blame and fault is kind of this like limiting illusion. And it’s really just awareness and finding solutions. And that’s what people want, but the block, the real block is everybody’s own, unfelt, unsaid emotional stuff.

Skot Waldron (1W2:37.336)
So, when you’re thinking about the blame and fault thing, because I think blame and fault is, again, it’s not the thing that people want. It’s not the thing that people are craving or that’s going to drive profits or whatever. But when stuff happens that isn’t going as planned, when we’re disappointed, which happens all the time because missed expectations lead to disappointment, we tend to find somebody to blame.

Who’s at fault? And you see a lot of this and I’m hearing a lot of this in the sports world, mostly because one of the teams I follow is in the gutter right now. And everybody wants to blame somebody. It’s like, is it the coach? Is it the players? Is it the front office? Is it the recruiting team? Like who is the blame for the crap season that everybody is having right now? And, and then like coaches in coaches out, like somebody’s heads getting chopped off and like we’re blaming them and then what happens? Probably not much, you know? So you see the blame and the pointing the fingers and all the stuff happening all the time because somebody needs a scapegoat or somebody needs somebody to take the hit. mean, what is that and how do we get past that?

Ursula Taylor (13:39.668)
Yeah, it’s a natural human reaction. And look, I’m not suggesting that like, you know, I’m not trying to shame or judge anyone who engages in that. It’s very natural kind of human way of being and doing like my kids do it all the time. I’ll be like, how did who put this like who spilled this? It wasn’t my fault. Like, I don’t care. Clean it up. You know, so it’s a little bit like that. We can do blame and fault. We can do blame and fault all day. But is that going to be the thing that like leads your team to the next win?

Is that going to be the thing that differentiates you? What if we, can engage in your blame and fault, but what if you stop yourself and say, but what can we learn? What can we learn? Because every challenge, every loss, every setback can be an opportunity to learn. If you allow yourself to step into that, the block is probably shame. The block is probably guilt. I need to engage in blame and fault because I’m feeling ashamed.

I’m feeling guilty. This can’t be on me. know? it’s that, oftentimes it’s some kind of a projection of our own underlying sort of fears or unworthiness in that way.

Skot Waldron (15:04.45)
I’ve heard that, recently from, another consultant that I was working with and listening to recently. And she was, she was saying a lot of the blame really results from shame of our, our own, right. Is I’m blaming you for this thing, but I might, it’s probably because I feel a little bit of shame myself or what this is creator, the outcome that’s happened and, and…

You know, it’s a pride thing too. we don’t, we don’t love being wrong and especially in a high-stakes situation or when something really goes wrong. That’s scary because now our livelihood is going to be affected and all the things that we do. So that’s, that’s a problem. but you said something really smart and this is how you, your whole platform, right? Is goes from, you know, conflict is an opportunity. What can we learn from this thing? You know, so. But I’m going to hang on this.

Ursula Taylor (15:34.421)
Right?

Skot Waldron (16:01.902)
blame thing for just a second, because in order to learn from something, we have to understand what went wrong. And so where is the, in your eyes, like this line between, Hey, I’m not here to blame anybody. I don’t care who spilled the thing. I just need it cleaned up. We need to understand why it spilled in the first place, you know, kids. So what, what do we as leaders do?

Ursula Taylor (16:03.871)
Yeah.

Skot Waldron (16:28.992)
in order to make sure we’re creating an environment where it’s like, hey, I just need to know what happened y’all. you know what, how do you play that balance?

Ursula Taylor (16:34.741)
Mm-hmm.

Yeah, I mean, that’s a beautiful question. I’m so glad you asked it because you’ve got to get conscious and aware of, can skip over it. Like stop the blame and fault and you can make people be quiet and you can make people sort of repress and you can force a conversation that people aren’t really in because they’re still in blame and fault. I would suggest that you need to create a space to feel and release and forgive the shame, the shame and the guilt.

Skot Waldron (17:06.968)
For yourself? Yeah.

Ursula Taylor (17:08.149)
for yourself, for your team. So an effective leader would say, you know, would own those, some of those feelings. I’m really bummed. I’m really disappointed. You know, I’m feeling X, Y, or Z, but let’s, I don’t want to stay in this. I want to forgive this. I want to learn from it. And I want to grow and onto the next. That, that’s what, that’s what a strong leader would do would be to show everyone in the team or the organization. I feel bad about this too.

It’s disappointing, kind of take accountability and own some of that, create a space for everyone to have that. And maybe even say, but shame and guilt isn’t what’s going to move us forward. There’s an opportunity here if we want to embrace it. Let’s think about what happened. Let’s think about what went wrong and let’s make ourselves better. Because when you stay locked and blame and fault, you’re really just staying locked in the shame and the guilt. And that is like preventing you from having a kind of a clarity or an more expansive view of like what happened, having that sort of open and curious, huh, like that’s really interesting. I didn’t even realize I was doing that. But you’re not going to say, huh, I didn’t even realize I was doing that until you can unlock sort of like the upper layers of the shame and the guilt and the pride and the stuff like that. the conflicts and opportunity, if you’re willing to kind of go into it on a deeper level, do you have to have leaders who are doing it for themselves? And then that spreads out into the team.

Skot Waldron (18:32.558)
When you’re working with organizations on conflict management and how they understand and go into conflict and resolve conflict, are you working with those leaders first then to help them process and go through these things and then moving to the team level? that kind of what you believe is your philosophy?

Ursula Taylor (18:51.093)
If possible, it really has to start with the leaders, the executives, the founders, the CEO type people. If at all possible, if I’m working with more of a middle management, then I’m talking more of like a multi-layered thing, cultivating some awareness of the fact that everybody they’re reporting up to is a human with their own layers of stuff, right? And helping them create space to see that. mean, but backing way up, I mean, it’s really a highly customized individualized thing. I’m not gonna open up a meeting with a new group that doesn’t know me and doesn’t know each other with, let’s talk about where we have shame. You’ve got to build into that slowly. have to first cultivate just that trusting relationship between and amongst them, which requires some of that with me. So I work in different ways and it really depends on the organization. It depends on the people. It depends on how well they know each other and what kind of dynamics they have going on.

Skot Waldron (20:01.39)
What type of, I want to get, I want to bridge this world of like past litigation experience to helping teams now resolve conflict. What litigation kind of tools and resources are using to in your practice now that are helping teams move through this litigation, I guess, internal litigation or conflict issue more.

Ursula Taylor (20:28.083)
Yeah, I mean, think the biggest thing that’s helpful is that I come from that world. You know, I’m not a Buddha sitting in a meditation room trying to tell corporate executives like how they should lead their teams. The people who lead meditation groups, you know, on a cliff in California probably know what I’m talking about to some degree, but they’re not going to have any likeness or they don’t speak the language and have the empathy. The fact that I worked and lived in that world and saw sort of.

I don’t want to say the suffering, but in some ways the suffering and the inefficiency. And I understand and can speak the language and understand business processes and understand, you know, how, how disputes and tensions can externally and internally can hold organizations back. And I think the ability to say, okay, let’s talk about the alternative. Let’s talk about what litigation would be and what that would look like. And let me give you that perspective as someone who’s not trying to prosecute your claim and bill X amount by the hour. You can pick up the phone and call the litigation attorney who wants your case and get their opinion. Or you can talk to me first. And I can give you some perspective as someone who will not prosecute or defend your claim for you in that way. I’ll speak about it and we’ll think about it as one arrow in the quiver and we’ll understand it as a path because I think it’s important to understand the alternatives.

And sometimes it does make sense. Sometimes it does. And then I can support people in connecting them with trusted counsel.

Skot Waldron (21:59.33)
Well, surprise, I know you’re going to be surprised, but I did not go to law school and I am not a litigator. there’s, and I imagine there’s a lot of people out there who are not, but there’s a lot of people out there who lead companies, who lead teams and they need to understand how to do this. Ursula. So what’s like, I don’t know. What’s a helpful kind of low-hanging fruit tip?

Like, is there something we can use in our day to day to help us move through conflict better or to help us see it as an opportunity and shift our mindset around this? You know, cause there’s a lot of people out there also that avoid conflict at all costs. They’re like, I just want everybody to be happy. Let’s just smooth it over. Let’s just sweep that under the rug. Whatever. Okay. So we can talk about that in a second, but I want to know, you know, for me as a leader who isn’t a litigator, what do I do?

Ursula Taylor (22:41.758)
Yeah.

Skot Waldron (22:56.619)
in this situation.

Ursula Taylor (22:57.161)
Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I think the low hanging fruit would be, when you feel yourself irritated, annoyed, defensive, reactive, upset, we have this idea that we need to go to the other person, or if we’re afraid of conflict, we’ll have this idea that we need to kind of like avoid it. When you feel that in your body, like physically in your body, you’re annoyed, you find yourself, you hear yourself grumbling, you hear yourself, you know, take a beat and reflect inward on you. Drop the other person for a minute. For one minute, drop the other person. And maybe it’s a mindfulness exercise. Maybe it’s just one minute of closing your eyes and think about what is happening with me. What am I feeling? And try to just, try to just bring yourself down into more of a regulated state and try to ask yourself the question and give yourself the answer. What do I need? depending on what’s at stake and what’s being triggered or touched and how big it is, it could just take a minute or it could be something that’s kind of bigger for some people. But what do I actually need? What do you need from sort of a professional sort of practical. And if you can’t answer that question because you’re like, I need that person to shut up. You know, I need that person, you know, it’s like, what do really need to do your job? And sometimes there’s like a boundary that you need to articulate to another person. There’s something, you know, you want to get to a place where you’re answering that question, like an Excel spreadsheet. You’re just like, you know, it’s just cut and dry. It’s neutral and grounded. And if you’re amped then you’re needing a little more space and time. So the core of what I’m getting to is like, take the space and the time for self awareness, to know yourself before you engage with another, with your counterpart or coworker or whomever.

Skot Waldron (25:06.978)
There I am. Okay. Did you finish that thought or do you want to you did finish?

Ursula Taylor (25:10.453)
I did finish that thought and then you were listening and frozen.

Skot Waldron (25:15.886)
Okay, well I’ll clip it there. I got it here. That was a big drop. wow. Okay, we’ll keep going here and assume we’re all good. Okay. All right. Where did you end that thought?

Ursula Taylor (25:33.791)
So I ended that thought with what folks really need is to take a minute to assess themselves, cultivating self-awareness. Where am I at right now?

Skot Waldron (25:42.638)
Mm-hmm. Okay.

Okay. Once we’ve taken this internal inventory of ourselves, we’ve kind of learned, Hey, what do I need? Or I would almost say that the internal reflection will potentially reveal what, if I’m, if I’m aware enough, okay. This takes a lot of practice, but what I’m afraid of maybe, or what I’m trying to prove or.

Ursula Taylor (26:15.413)
Mm-hmm.

Skot Waldron (26:18.764)
those types of things, then I can start to come from a place. Now, once I’ve done that, what’s my next step? Do I go to the person? Like, do I go directly to the source? Like, what am I supposed to do after that?

Ursula Taylor (26:27.887)
And yeah.

It depends. It depends on the situation. Yeah. It depends on the situation. if there’s fear, if you’re like identifying what you’re afraid of, then you’re doing great. Like you’re, you’re most of the way there, right? And then there are strategies to sit in that fear and kind of release some of that energy of that fear and bring yourself back to sort of a feeling of, a minute, I’m not going to die. I’m okay. I’m safe. There are strategies for sort of sitting with that and releasing some of that energy and then you’re in a space where you can go to the other person. It’s all about the awareness. The awareness is what it is. Bringing your own awareness to your fear is most of what you need to kind of release that, but old habits die hard, right? And so we go back into the habitual kind of fears and the patterns built around it. And that can include our communication style and how we deal with other people. But once you’ve kind of like unlocked a little bit of that from your awareness, there are strategies for dealing with the other side. It’s basically when you’re not carrying that emotional charge, there’s not a propensity to ping pong that back and forth. So the more you can become aware and deal with your emotion, you’re not going to be as triggered by the other person. And it’s not going to perpetuate back and forth and amplify back and forth, which is what we see in a litigation process.

I’ve seen like even the lawyers getting involved and that their backs are up. And it’s just kind of like the energy of it is just going back and forth. But if you’re kind of aware and you’re sort of releasing it, you’re going to the other person, they might be still kind of amped. But if you’re not like, you’re not giving it back, it’s going to have nowhere to go. And there are strategies for sort of allowing them to then have space to release some of what they’re dealing with. And that comes like a really simple, a really simple technique is to mirror their body language, mirror their cadence, mirror the tone of their voice, mirror, just mirror back to them, even repeating the last three words of what they say. And what that does is psychological. creates a feeling of sameness. It starts to create a feeling of trust and safety. They start to then from there, you can give them space to speak, more listening, less talking. And through these feelings of sameness and the focus on them, they start to feel heard, they start to feel safe. And now they’re suddenly in a place where they can begin to like feel and release some of that emotional charge. So those are just some strategies, self-awareness, acknowledging fear, and then a focus on the other end sameness. Those are just kind of like some basic things. There’s a lot more to it.

Skot Waldron (29:11.374)
Mmm.

Ursula Taylor (29:21.897)
And when you’re dealing with teams and organizations, you’re talking about patterns and habits that start with individuals and perpetuate out. But those are some basic principles.

Skot Waldron (29:32.642)
That’s so good. That’s really good. and to sum this up, this wasn’t going to be wrong, but this, I am interested since I brought it up earlier, the individuals that are conflict averse, you know, those individuals, what are you, are you, you encounter a lot of individuals like that that are, yeah, I’m, I don’t want conflict. I just want to resolve this conflict. And how do you help them through that process of like, Hey,

Ursula Taylor (29:54.867)
Yeah.

Skot Waldron (30:02.732)
Conflict is going to happen and we can see this as an opportunity y’all. So

Ursula Taylor (30:07.711)
Right, right. So it would be kind of that same, that same finding the fear, that self-awareness. Where do you hold fear? I’m afraid of conflict. What are we afraid of? And really going into it, going into the feeling of it. What’s the worst that can happen? Let’s sit in that for a second. Let’s feel into what that is. You’re still alive. You’re still okay. Fear of conflict is real and it’s very debilitating because what it does is it prevents people from speaking up from asking questions, from saying what they need to engaging. And most of the time, that bit of engagement is enough. But you’ve got to release the underlying fear. Because if you’re afraid of conflict and you go into a conversation with someone, you’re going to sound offensive. You’re going to have walls up. It’s going to be from that fear of conflict, but they’re not going to know that. They’re just going to feel discarded, maybe defensive, maybe kind of energy that it’s not going to feel good to the other person and it’s going to touch whatever energy is in them that’s fear-based or unworthiness or scarcity or you know. So fear of conflict affects and limits the person who holds it, but it also spreads to the other person. So having an awareness of that fear of conflict, whatever the fear is, fear of conflict, fear of being wrong, fear of imposter syndrome, that awareness is what can start to break that down and make your negotiations, your conversations, your dialogues more effective.

Skot Waldron (31:34.894)
Yes, exactly. And it goes back to the energy that I’m giving off. People will feel it. And that mirror neuron thing that you’re talking about, yeah. And our brains that, know, um, we give it back and people will reflect almost that idea and that attitude of what we are projecting, uh, which can cause a lot of issues in our relationship can cause a lot of damage when we’re trying to build things.

And really trying to build a healthy culture, which we’re all hopefully trying to do. Ursula, this is, this has been gold. This has been really, really good. I appreciate all your insights is if somebody wants to get in touch with you, they want to talk to you, they have some conflict they need resolved. They want to move through it better. where do they go? How do they get in touch with you to get more of that brain stuff that you have?

Ursula Taylor (32:32.725)
Sure, yeah, and I’d be happy to chat with any of your listeners gratis just as like an initial consultation. But they can find me through my website. It’s www.conflictreimagined.com. My email is just Ursula, ursula@conflictreimagined.com. And feel free to reach out, check out my website and you can read some of my articles and get a full picture of how I think and how I work. It’s really not modeled in our multi-trillion dollar litigation industry, but it’s the higher, better way for those who really want to be efficient and want to be better and stronger and get back to what they are set out to do in terms of their business and also personally.

Skot Waldron (33:22.712)
Very cool. And there’s even an article on there about, Barbie and Ken on your website. So they can, they can check that out too. All right. Little teaser Ursula. You did not let down the litigation community. have upheld everything that I imagined it would be. So I appreciate you being on. Thanks.

Ursula Taylor (33:27.891)
Yeah. Thank you, Skot.

Skot Waldron (33:27.891)
How many of you go into conflict, engage in conflict, and all you’re focused on are the facts, the laws, and the argument that you’re about to have? Like, how many of you are focused on that kind of stuff versus the human emotion.

I think that if we could shift our thinking a little bit. If we can shift our mindset around. First of all, focusing on ourselves, ’cause that’s really hard, ’cause really, we don’t wanna accept ourselves as the problem because then that gives me responsibility and accountability and things I have fix about myself. And we don’t
want to do that and make all the effort. It’s really easy, if I can just blame you for it, then you have to do all the work, and I can just keep living my life.

I mean, isn’t that easier? It sure is and I think that if we can reflect first on what we’re afraid of, reflect first on what we’re feeling, what’s that thing that meant, that will create a playing ground of psychological safety, of I’m on your team, of this isn’t a threatening situation, of hey, I’m humble enough to admit where I’m at fault. That’s really cool, it’s owning it. How can we own that piece of things?

Blame and fault, all that stuff is real. And we need to understand the problem,
but we need to move through it and not through a place of blame and shame, but
really a place of we’re going to build on this thing that we just did. I love what she talked about is what do I need and also the mirroring idea and how can we mirror those things. How do we be an example of what we want in our culture? Well, it starts with us, and we really need to focus on that. So super cool. I love this discussion. It was super good. And I appreciate Ursula for being on.