No stopping the wind
On March 30th 2021 we fulfilled a desire we had had for a long time: to talk to José Afonso about José Afonso. First, because he is our friend, then because he is our colleague and partner at Way Beyond and, above all, because he is, as João wrote the other day, "one of the most correct and wise people with whom we have had and still have the pleasure of learning and working".
"I will like it, even if in practice I don't see myself in what I see, but I accept myself as I am" (JA)
Angela - I think it's worth starting at the beginning, Joe - who is Joe? How does Joe describe himself? Tell us.
José Afonso - (laughs) Good question! That's called a trick question. I define myself as a normal, genuine, spontaneous person. Above all, true, in the sense that I have nothing to hide and, from that point of view, I think I am what is visible, what is in the feeling around me. I think that's what I am, I can't define myself in any other way.
I could define myself by what I've been doing throughout my life, I could define myself by what I'm doing now, by the dreams I haven't fulfilled yet, but... It's at this exact moment, the way I can define myself. I think that's what I am: genuine. What you are seeing, hearing and feeling, is what I feel I am. I don't know if I can go any further on such a difficult issue.
Angela - It's very interesting that Zé gives that answer because, in a way, it's the way we talk about you. There are some answers Zé gives us that are what we say amongst ourselves - "Look, Zé being Zé! So, this already translates a little of our understanding, of the relationship we have been building with you, in this history that Zé has, already with tradition, with the Escola [European Coaching], with Vítor, with João and now with us also at Way Beyond. When Zé speaks about himself in our training contexts, we can perceive a wealth of experience. We can see that Zé has been through many different contexts: from the military to the world of business.
José Afonso - (laughs) Thank you [the military experience]. And, in any case, with a lot of pride for what I did, especially what I helped to do. Despite hating the military.
Ângela - In this journey that Zé has been telling us about, from that to the relationship with his grandchildren (who serve as many examples and we have come to know them that way)... Throughout this journey, Zé, is there any moment that you would like to highlight and that was particular in terms of learning to build the Zé that he is today?
José Afonso - There may be several. As for the richness or variety of experiences, in fact, the merit is not mine. It is my identity card, it is my parents', it is the time when I was born, and I can't do anything about that. The truth is that the experiences that we have are worthwhile according to how we live them. I have lived all the experiences of my life, with more or less suffering, in some cases with more pleasure than others, always as if they were life lessons for myself. And if something has helped me to become who I am, probably the thing that has contributed the most is the great admiration that I still have today for my paternal grandfather, a man who died at the age of 102. He died on the day and at the time he wanted to die, I think it was he who touched the little button that made him go. I'll give you the example that I was in Lisbon, he, during the night, one night, got fed up talking about me, he was already very debilitated - he was 102 years old, mind you, we're talking about a person who had a very long life, very healthy mentally, but at a certain point with a broken leg that hadn't recovered, he got the feeling that it wasn't worth being here any more. He called for me during the night, my father phoned me at 7 a.m. the next day, saying "look, I think I should tell you this: your grandfather asked me a lot about you, he realised himself 'ah that's right, Zé is in Lisbon' and then he slept and woke up again with this and so I made a point of telling you this". I took the car and came to Leiria, I was with my grandfather for 5 minutes and from the moment he saw me, tears ran down his face, he shook my hand and said "Zé, go away to your life". I stayed with him for another hour or two, talking to him, and finally I went back to Lisbon. Halfway there, the telephone rang to tell me that he had just died. He was literally illiterate, but he had a vision of life and a wisdom to face the events of life, from high technologies - I am thinking of when Man went to the Moon, the way he dealt with that; when the first television appeared - and I always thought "how is it that a man who is ignorant, from the point of view of literacy, can interpret so genuinely, but with so much wisdom, so much practical usefulness for his life and for those around him. And so, I would say, it is not exactly an event but it is the immersion in my grandfather's experience, and it was he who very closely raised me, I was much more with this grandfather of mine than with my parents, even though we lived in the same village, but my father had a tailor's activity that forced him to be constantly in movement with customers, employees, etc. My grandfather was a farmer and I went with him to the fields, with him, with the snakes, with the sardines, with the rats and with the irrigation... I learned how to deal with things, the worst and the best. And I think that helped me a lot.
There was a principle that I learned very early on and that is very useful to me - when I was 17 I was a member of a Catholic youth organisation of which I ended up being national leader between 17 and 20, and which had a trilogy that I have never forgotten and I still maintain, and you will understand the importance it has had in my life: seeing, in the sense of perceiving, appreciating from a point of view free of opinions; judging, which is another thing that follows seeing; and then acting. This trilogy - seeing, judging and acting - I think was another life lesson I learned from Cardinal Cardijn, a Belgian gentleman who founded the Catholic Workers' Youth movement. And I think that this also made a deep impression on me.
And, if you like, a third thing which is when you talk about my grandchildren and I talk about my grandfather it's curious because I consider that the process of human development is very much an equivalent process, isomorphic, in a sense, to the development of the child. I, as an adult being, if I want to continue to call myself a developing child I can do so.
So, my grandfather, the seeing, judging and acting, and this idea that the process of human development in general, in organisations or as children is very similar, is learning about learning about learning; it's layers upon layers that presuppose the previous ones with their good and bad, with their positive and to be incorporated and with their negative, or considered as such, and to be rejected, that makes sense.
And, voila, these are the three pillars of my development.
Angela - Zé, in this journey and now touching here more this approach that brings us to our work and to what we are and what we do day by day... I know you already did your training as a psychologist later on, how do you jump from there to the Coaching approach and to this occupation, this way of being now in the world of work. What made you jump here?
José Afonso - It's a good question, but I don't know if I jumped here, if I jumped there. Before I started the psychology course I was already working in the area of human resources management. I was a labour inspector, I was a civil servant, I started by being a typist in the civil service and doing anything and everything, without interest in most cases, and then I entered companies and the idea that I always had was that a good part of the interactions established in companies, the power relations, the dependency relations, the relations of diversified but not necessarily antagonistic interests, as the Marxist theories also inspired me, at the same time as the Catholic theories, there was also a... Those two equally possible and perceptible worlds that I was encountering, always led me to feel that what it was about was each one managing, independently of one's own opinions, one's own perceptions, one's own judgements and one's own actions, to respect that of others. And I remember... I was in the army before the 25th of April and after the 25th of April, I followed that whole path that is difficult to describe in a few words but which is a path that leads from an extremely dangerous clandestine life in which anything that was done, and many things were done without anyone being very aware of it, was extremely risky, to a time when everything was allowed, even excesses, even exaggerations, even lack of respect. I think that here, both before and after 25th April, I have always understood that the actions that each one of us performs are very much related to the way we understand and judge reality - here is seeing, judging and acting - and, from this point of view, in organisations, when we are faced with a conflict, the conflict can only be truly resolved and overcome if, at each moment, I manage to put myself on the other's side. If you like, one of my greatest crowning achievements, if you will (I don't know what glory is, right?), one of the emblematic aspects of my stance were unthinkable and impossible negotiations that were possible and carried out with the most unimaginable adversaries: with the extreme left, with the Communist Party of the most hard-line trade unionists, always from the perspective of accepting that the other, from his point of view, is right and demanding that the other should also be respected. And two or three highly problematic negotiations, which nobody believed would be successful, ended up being successful a little because of this principle. And this principle has applied to everything. In psychology itself, I have always sought training in a non-analytic therapeutic approach, not in great depth, not in great whys, but in a functionalist perspective: this is dysfunctional, so what can we do to make it functional? To what end? So that I can be happier. Who's me? My client. Me who? My teammate that I'm a leader of or who's my boss, the trade unionist... So this idea that psychotherapy is just, barring that, for practical purposes, it's alternative learning that makes me more functional in relation to my life and how I want to live. In whatever sense it is, it's new learning. The very idea of pathology always gave me a bit of a chill "ah, that guy is pathological", I don't know what that is. Maybe there is, but that's not what the day-to-day life of companies and organisations is about.
Afterwards, my path in Human Resources was always guided by this sense that when each one within the organisation manages to position him/herself by accepting that the other has legitimacy, fantastic.
I may have already given this example of when my eldest grandson used a coin that I gave him for the first time to go and buy a bottle of water. And I didn't give him the value of the bottle of water, so he had to get change. And this was a significant step for him who was 5 or 6 years old. He goes and buys it and comes up to me in a rage and says, "Grandpa, you don't even want to know! You know the waiter turned to me and said 'so what do you want? This idea that this kid valued the idea of being treated like sir. What he valued was not having brought change, it was not an operation, a cognition, a reasoning, it was not a task well done, it was being recognised as a legitimate being, equal to the thirty-year-old who was in front or the fifty-year-old who was behind. He was addressed as sir, certainly for the first time in his life, and he appreciated it.
Well, maybe people need to be recognised in their legitimacy, even when we disagree with them, even when we have to give guidelines or admonishments or even punishments, but always from the perspective of respect for the other. And I don't want to commit heresy here, but I think this is what led me to psychology and coaching because what is coaching if not to accompany someone who wants to be more functional than he was before? I don't see much difference.
ANGELA - Here's Joe being Joe! Were you going to say something Joana?
Joana - Yes, but it doesn't really follow on from the questions that were asked. I'm delighted, I think that's the right word, to hear Zé. Always! And my delight comes from the way I follow Zé's reasoning or what I understand of Zé's reasoning and comes from the almost unhesitating choice of language, of an incredible, very careful choice of words, which not only brings this pleasure to those who love words - like us at Way Beyond - and, on the other hand, that each word could only be that one and could not be any other and that this does not happen by chance. And that is enough. Zé can talk about whatever he wants, for as long as he wants. It's wonderful! This is not really a question, it's a comment. This makes me think of a great awareness of his presence and participation in this world.
José Afonso - Many years ago, I was present at the preview of a film that, at the time, was a shocking film for the Portuguese reality at the time. It was 1975/76 and the director, António de Macedo, directed a film called "As horas de Maria". And I lived in Santarém and I went to the Rosa Damasceno theatre for the preview screening of the film, and then there was a debate in the local film club about the film that I found to be a good film, nothing out of the ordinary, not a masterpiece, but above all highly polemic and aggressive towards the Catholic communities in this country. I'm not a Catholic, I wasn't then, I was much earlier, but I respect it and, well... The impact of that film, for example, on my village community - I told him - is atrocious violence! He gave me an answer that shut me up "you're right, but I don't know how to get my message across in any other way. Bertold Brecht there are very few of them". I heard that and at the time I reread Bertold Brecht, now I don't remember, and I found it funny: Bertold Brecht has a very agile way of saying profound things with a language that everyone understands, even my illiterate grandfather. The words... I don't know... I began by saying that what characterises me is to be genuine, to be spontaneous. I don't worry about how my words or my actions look... I mean, I take care of that, I try not to upset anyone, not to shock anyone, but even so I am spontaneous. And because I'm concerned about others, what comes out spontaneously perhaps already carries that concern. I think that the way to talk about deep and difficult things is to be very, very down to earth in words, in concepts, in thought. I don't pretend to be erudite about anything, but when I talk about something, I mean, it is what I think at that moment, with the notion that I may be miles away from going into things in depth, from seeing things through to the end. But that's what I say: the form is not artificially cared for to serve the content. The content is this, the form is this; those who like it, like it, those who don't like it, I will try to understand why and what I want to do with it. But that is later. When I want to talk, I talk about what my soul puts out.
Joana - I think that's what is well understood, that's what I feel, at least, the beauty of what you're saying and that you're not thinking "I'm going to use this word or that one", but that genuine way of saying...
José Afonso - But that is how people here in my village (it is not a village, it is a city)... the simplicity of the face that I still am and want to continue to be is not necessarily incompatible with the library that I have back here, with the academic title that I have. No, people talk down to earth. I speak here with my next-door neighbour and the one across the way and the one in front the same way I speak with you. And people understand me. This makes sense to me because I am not looking for words for my poor neighbour to understand. No, he understands! And if he doesn't understand, he asks. It's as simple as that. From that point of view I think that words come spontaneously. That's why I don't like to speak foreign languages because to speak a foreign language, I have to think in Portuguese and then translate. There are two moments here and this is a big deal. I like to speak Portuguese because things flow from thought to language, as the Piagetians say.
Angela - I was listening to him and I was thinking that even the examples Zé brings to clarify the messages he gives us are very day to day, they're not sophisticated examples, they're sophisticated because they're so well found, in a simple action that any human being has like a child picking up a coin to go and buy a bottle of water. What I see spectacular every time I hear Zé giving examples in her interactions with us is the ability to go for very simple examples. An example of what I'm living now, in my everyday life, and translate that into more elaborate, more sophisticated learning that becomes very simple and very beautiful because, suddenly, anyone in the room understands exactly what we're talking about. And I think this is a knowledge that Zé uses very well and I think we all identify this side of him.
José Afonso - This is not knowing, it is being.
Angela - Yes, and being isn't knowing?
José Afonso - There is also something there, but I think it is different, I think it is a level above, perhaps, if there is verticality here in these things. It's another register...
When it comes to knowing... When I was trained as a trainer, I had a few run-ins with the trainers because what I was asked to do was to artificially mould my performance as a trainer to be understood by those addressed. And I would get annoyed with that, excuse the expression, because I would say "it doesn't make sense to me! I need to talk to the people in front of me" and share with them the reflection I would share over coffee with a friend, in a long conversation with a friend. Because knowledge is not in a drawer that you open, knowledge lives in us; I don't know if it lives in us, but it is inside what I think, what I say and what I do. So, this tendency to format my speech to a certain discourse has never worked well for me. Things, however sophisticated they may be, are all so simple, it is we who have the habit of complexifying everything. That's how I feel about things.
I remember something, maybe I've already told you. My father was 87 years old when, for the first time, he started word processing on a computer. He had never worked on a text, or a typewriter, he was not illiterate, but he had been writing his life story by hand in a huge book, just like the books he had when he was a tailor, a book with many lines. And one day he let it out that he had forgotten a passage, a piece of history between the birth of one of my brothers and the birth of the other, and so he had to rewrite the whole story, he had to buy a new book, and so on. And I thought "let's get this man to learn word processing and, since he has to rewrite his life story, use a word processor". And so he did: until three months before he died, every day he wrote a little piece of what became a diary, no longer the story, which he left and we bound for future generations. But it's complicated... Normally, people used to say, in other times, when user computing became so accessible, "Hey! This is not for these people, these people can't do it any more...". They can't?! But who said so?
In fact, I remember a scene with a colleague of mine. I had two economists, one of whom refused to work with computers for the rest of her life. She left my team because I pressured her, I would say so passionately, that at a certain point I told them "you can't even bring me a few more accounts without doing them on the computer". I found out that they did the maths with the calculating machine and then typed the plots and the results into the computer. And I found out because I looked at the results and discovered that one sum was wrong and my naivety led me to say "look, the computer must be broken, we'll have to check it! So show me how you did it". And they showed me and were embarrassed because what they were doing was what they did before and then typed. But, all people are capable of learning everything. This is very Skinnerian, maybe it's excessive, I don't want to go so far as to absolutise this principle, but it's good for me to hold on to this stick so that, when I face an 87-year-old man who is unhappy because he has to handwrite everything and still runs the risk of forgetting to write something, I can put a tool in his hands and believe that he will be able to do it. Nobody in my family believed it, he himself didn't believe it, after two months the story was half over.
Angela - Thinking about the future, thinking about the changes we're living now in this context, how does Zé see these changes in the world of work? These changes we're going through, obviously, I mean the pandemic, right?
José Afonso - Forty-some years ago, perhaps thirty-some, I am not quite sure of the dates, there was a French company that tried to put into practice the process of telework, which was not necessarily in each person's home, but telework centres disseminated in Bordeaux to avoid that there were about 1,200 workers who had to move in every day from the outskirts of Bordeaux. And the project was a flop, a failure at least in the initial years, due to the outright rejection by the unions and company managers, because it was considered unthinkable that people could work in those conditions, for various reasons that are not relevant now.
I always thought this was monstrous nonsense, that this was trying to stop the wind and you don't stop the wind, the future was teleworking. At that time, the big information technology development project in France, with something called Minitel, was on the crest of the wave of technology worldwide. And so, even the French were a little prepared for that, they were already getting their cinema tickets on the Minitel, they were already doing some things and, even so, it was the disaster that it was. But the truth is that last year, in the space of a fortnight, something that everyone rejected even in Portugal, and I know what I'm talking about, for the companies where I worked, both as an employee and as a consultant, I pointed out immense possibilities of telework, of tele-training and people rejected it and, suddenly, in a fortnight we saw the country champion of telework. On television, politicians, everyone was already talking about telework as if it were the most natural thing in the world.
What do I mean by this in relation to your question? I think that the human being has an unimaginable plasticity, or better, imaginable for those who want to take the position of what is possible. But I would say that not so much will change, we will continue to have face-to-face work, we will continue to have teams that meet from time to time, we will continue to use telework as a quick way to save everything - from energy, to travelling, to lost time - and we will manage to combine all this in a balanced way in a life that will not be very different. I hope I'm here in 10 years' time and laughing my head off at that question, Angela. I think it'll be the same, not the same, but the human being will find... this is like tectonic plates that have movement and then there's an aftershock - and we've had a big aftershock now - in three years time we'll be remembering. I am only sorry that it takes punches in the stomach to change what is obvious that it will have to change. Ten years ago, 20 years ago, it was already known that a lot of things had to change. When you think of the cost of a meeting in Geneva for two hours, sitting at a table, talking for five minutes, greeting people in a rush, and going back to the airport; and to think that most of the time in those meetings at a distance would allow exactly the same. It takes the jolt for us to believe that. So let the shake-up come! It's not the pandemic that's screwing up my life I haven't seen my family for ages, I finally met my newborn granddaughter because my daughters came here on Father's Day with their granddaughter to show her to me. It is not the pandemic that is welcome, but the human being sometimes needs shaking up and sometimes it happens. But in two years time we will all be happy in a new environment.
Ângela - From the perspective of interactions, namely in issues more of this work that require, perhaps, a greater physical proximity, I'm saying 'perhaps' because I don't know if it's necessary, how does Zé see this type of interaction in the future? About continuing to be virtual or do you think that there are areas in which there is much to be gained by being face-to-face?
José Afonso - Wait a minute! I want to follow the life of my grandchildren in person and, in a year's time, if they tell me that we are going to have group immunity and vaccines and "miracles", I think that, in three years' time, we are going to be hugging and kissing naturally. It doesn't cross my mind that it won't be like that.
102 years ago, many tens of thousands of people died here, in the area where I live, because of a much more violent pandemic. And my parents must have kissed and I was born. In other words, let's see, "teleinteraction" is a tool like any other. But it does not, of course, replace touch. In the relationship of support, of help, I still defend that it happens in the contact of proximity. I have no great doubts.
In fact, I was one of those who took the longest, many years ago, to internalise the idea that it was possible to do coaching by telephone or videoconference. I had some reluctance but when, for the first time, it had to be, here is the need, I did it thinking "let's see what learning this can bring". And it did. I am much more convinced if you tell me that a coaching process from A to Z done by teleconference is ideal? It is not, nor will it be, I believe. The classes are going to be face-to-face again, maybe not all of them, we can do a mix, why not?
Ângela - I was thinking precisely that, even in terms of mobility and internationalisation, namely in universities, seeking cultural diversity and experiences with foreign students, this context has facilitated and reduced costs. Of course, you lose a large dimension of interaction and lived experience in the country where you go. We gain other things but, perhaps, a more balanced relationship can be established here.
It's almost midday, Zé, it's gone by very quickly! I would also like you to tell us about your assessment of this collaboration with us and how you have seen us over this time, what evolution you have seen in us? What would you like to tell us about us?
José Afonso - Let's see, it is relatively simple and I said it in an implicit way, I feel that my time has come to an end, in this sense, my time for being present and useful, especially for training. I feel that you have today in your classes, in your courses, people with a spectacularly higher starting level than I had in my generation, in my time and than the School itself (European School of Coaching, now Way Beyond) had when it started. So, I think it has been, for me, fascinating, if you like, to accompany you. I mean, today, an Advanced Level course is given to students who, in the first lesson, are at a level of reflection about themselves that is much more evolved, deeper and more reflective than they were 10 years ago when the School gave its first courses. The fact that the School has managed to evolve in such a way that it has accompanied the development of its target public and continues to be the answer for this target public is, for me, a very positive sign of the evolution that has taken place. The School did not stagnate with its founders or in the approach paradigms of the beginning of its own existence and has been able to grow, through internal renewal, through the learning that each one of us has been doing over time. The energy with which I see you, the enthusiasm, the individual commitment to the project I think is the best sign of the immortality of Way Beyond, at least, of the long life that can be imagined because I don't know if there is eternity. I think that the School, you, me too - I think that while I was at 100% I accompanied this growth, I also contributed to this accompaniment of reality - and that is also why I felt that the time had come for me to withdraw a little because I am no longer able to give my body and soul in the way I have done over the years. This only represents a different scenario for me, but I think that the path has been well managed.
I was writing the other day, in some comments that you asked me for at a meeting, that Kurt Lewin's phrase "nothing more practical than a good theory" and I think that the great challenge that you have managed to overcome, I don't say overcome totally because I think that this challenge is never overcome, but you have managed to float on the wave, which is exactly to try to balance theory and practice in a very successful way. And that is what I think impresses me the most!
Angela - I have one last question: recognizing him as one of the most correct and wise people we have had and have the pleasure to learn from and work with, assuming these are characteristics that are scarce or at least difficult to find, what does Zé suggest for people to become more correct with each other, with the planet, with the world?
José Afonso - If each one of us manages to reinforce the pinch of acceptance of the other that we already carry in our origin... Is being a better person to agree with you or with you? No! It is to accept! In this I am extremely persistent, to the point of even considering myself a stubborn nag sometimes: when I have deep convictions, I defend them genuinely. But always with the notion that... it is the result of my trilogy - see, judge, act - and when I pronounce words, I am acting, I am putting out thoughts that result from this trilogy and I am always pulling my own ears because I will have to validate... I mean, this thing of acceptance, and we work on this distinction, it is not agreeing with anything, it is simply accepting the other, it is recognising the legitimacy of the other as a being as much as I want my legitimacy to be recognised.
I think that if we begin to accept ourselves and in this way reinforce the acceptance of others and not see in the acceptance of others a decrease in the acceptance of ourselves, if we manage to live with the other, I think that this is half the battle for the world to be different at all levels.
We talked earlier about a better world: we waste brutality on all possible and imaginary things. The meeting that takes place in Geneva or Brussels or London that allows me to have two hours at a table with people, that forced me to travel for practically the whole day... For what? If we manage to find, also from a practical point of view, ways of living well with the acceptance of ourselves and with the authenticity of what we seek... I will give you a personal example, which embarrasses me a little, but since you can't see that I am blushing, I have had company cars for the last decades, I changed my car every three years. Does that make sense?! The last car I had, I had it for 12 years and when I sold it, it was because it was no longer giving me the reliable warranty I needed. In other words, in the past, I would have had 4 cars. Does this make sense?! I think this is very much connected to the question of what do I need to be happy. Do I need to have a new car every three years? Have a house with three pools and wish for one more because the seasons are four?!
The history of having, the history of being, focusing our efforts on being - being a better person, a better husband, a better wife, a better neighbour - basically, going back a little to the origins of community life. The villager has two choices: either he cuts off the head of the neighbour who stole from him, or he befriends him. It can't be all or nothing, we can work on this scenario, we can give some help, trying to make the other more acceptable. But this genuineness is the way to lead us to a more reassuring world for the future, and this is what I wish for my grandchildren.
Joana - That's my question: what does Zé want to leave here? Basically, that was the last question we asked when we were last here? How would he like to be seen by his grandchildren, who are perhaps the people Zé talks about most?
José Afonso - I pass the immodesty but I would like my grandchildren to remember their grandfather as the wisest man they have ever met in their lives. This is a bit of a mania on my part. I am joking. I think the wisest man I have ever met, truly, was my grandfather because I admire him so much. What did I want? I wanted people to recognise in the grandfather they had, the colleague they had or the friend they had, that he never wanted to hurt anyone, that he always tried not to make others suffer, sometimes suffering a little more than he could suffer. The idea that everything that guy did was not with the aim of hurting anyone or hurting anyone, sometimes he was awkward in passing things on, sometimes he was not fair in his judgement. But someone who always tried not to disrespect anyone.
Joana - It's Joe!
ANGELA - Yes, it's Joe! Ten years from now we can have another conversation like this!
José Afonso - And why not?
Angela - Joe, thank you so much! It's been a pleasure chatting with you. See you soon!
If you prefer to listen rather than read you can do so here.
