.png)
The Business Side of Healing
During my military enlistment I learned early on that the path to success was paved with certifications and titles. Becoming the SME (Subject Matter Expert), Unit Trainer, or sole person who could operate a piece of equipment brought you closer to the next promotion and more importantly made you a valuable and irreplaceable member of the tribe.
I served as a Security Forces Airman and during my enlistment I was a flight level trainer and armorer. I held certifications as the Unit PT evaluator as well as entry controller, patrolman, resource protection, and BDOC (Base Defense Operations Center) Dispatcher. I completed SRT (Special Reaction Team) course and graduated from Major Accident Investigation School.
When I separated, I carried that same mentality into the civilian sector and corporate world and chased after business degrees and ways to add letters at the end of my name. This is where I learned about Lean Six Sigma (LSS) and eventually earned the opportunity to go through a formal green belt training program (that's right! One of only two people in my companies region to hold that title #irreplacable). The two most valuable lessons in that program are process mapping and root cause analysis. The latter, I have learned, transfers well into the healing space and allows us to better understand and regulate our reactions.
Root cause (RCA) is a structured method for identifying the underlying cause of a problem rather than only treating the symptoms. It is the process of asking why a problem occurred until you identify the fundamental condition, decision, process or behavior that allowed it to happen.
My favorite example of this involves our nation's capital when the stone at the Lincoln Memorial was deteriorating from harsh chemicals used when they cleaned it. The solution was obvious; switch out the chemical for a more eco-friendly product and move on to the next crisis. That may have worked, but the big brains in D.C went deeper and asked “why?” not just once, but five times!
Why was the monument deteriorating? Because harsh chemicals were being used frequently on the stone.
Why did it need to be cleaned so often? Because there were large amounts of bird droppings on the monument.
Why were so many birds gathering at that monument compared to the other monuments? Because they were feeding on a large number of spiders that were in that area.
Why were there so many spiders in that area? Well, the spiders were feeding on a huge number of insects, like midges and gnats, around the monument.
Why were there so many insects at the monument? Because the lights came on around dusk attracting the insects.
After their RCA was done, they realized the light schedule was the actual problem. By adjusting the lights to turn on later, the insects decreased which made the spiders leave and the birds followed them. Now the monument doesn’t need to be cleaned as frequently and the harsh chemicals won't deteriorate the monument. The lesson is the actual problems is often several layers removed from the surface level problem
Now how does that translate to healing in a trauma-heavy community? We can use the same root cause analysis and combine it with a reflective framework to help release difficult emotions that we often refer to as “triggers.”
This may be a stretch, but try to imagine a scenario where a Local Coordinator (LC) repeatedly becomes defensive when HQ gives feedback…I know, crazy right! On the surface the problem may be “This LC doesn't take feedback well” but if we stop there we are limiting our available options. If it's all on the LC and their ability to take feedback there are only two ways forward, either grow or go. What happens when we apply root cause analysis with a reflective lens?
Why is our feedback loop ineffective with this LC? Because the LC is defensive after receiving it.
Why are they defensive? Because the feedback feels more like criticism.
Why does criticism trigger such a strong reaction? The LC interprets it as “they don't trust me.”
Why does lack of trust feel so threatening? Because the LC’s leadership role has become tied to their sense of competence and belonging.
Why is the LC role carrying that much emotional weight? Because being needed by the IW community gives them validation, purpose, identity and connection they may not feel anywhere else.
In this example we are able to reframe the interaction and change the narrative from “That LC is difficult to work with” to “This LC experiences leadership feedback as a threat to belonging.” Once that is recognized the number of available options increase and there is a greater chance that the issue can be resolved and become less likely to reappear in the future. Understanding the root cause doesn't remove responsibility for the behavior. It gives us a better chance of changing the behavior.
HQ will still need to provide feedback to the LC, but knowing the emotional charge in advance allows them to more thoughtfully approach the conversation. For example, if an LC struggles with this, maybe feedback isn't sent via email and a phone call is a more appropriate space so it can feel like a conversation instead of a directive.
The LC also will have the tools to control their triggers. If they understand why they have a harsh reaction to feedback, they can adjust their behaviors from trigger-feeling-reaction to trigger-feeling-awareness-choice. The empowered LC who sits with those feelings can now work toward the realization that they can receive feedback without it determining their own worth and focus on the operational issue at hand.
On the other side of the fence, HQ may have something to work on also…
Why is our feedback loop ineffective with this LC? Because the LC is defensive after receiving it.
Why are they defensive? Because every interaction with HQ seems corrective.
Why does every interaction seem corrective? Because HQ primarily contacts the LC when something goes wrong.
Why does HQ primarily reach out when something goes wrong? Because the organization lacks a consistent relationship-building cadence.
Why does the organization lack a consistent relationship-building cadence? Because positive communication efforts are consistently deprioritized when HQ becomes distracted by escalations.
Power is in the reframe. Instead of asking “Why did they disrespect me” we can ask “What feeling did this situation bring up in me, and can I experience that feeling without requiring someone else to change in order for me to be okay?”
That's where RCA stops being a business tool and becomes a healing tool. Sometimes the problem we are trying to solve isn't the person, email, policy, or conversation in front of us. Sometimes those things simply exposed something we were already carrying. We can't always control the trigger, but we can become curious about what it is touching.
