Bridges are needed
We all need a bridge from where we are to where we want to get to. This is as true in business as much as in family. When someone wants something, usually it’s expected for them to go for what it is they choose to achieve or have.
An oftimes forgotten part of the equation is that the receiving or affected parties are an important part of it all. Actually, the success of the endeavor depends on it. Permit me to explain.
In a business deal, say a contract for widgets between entities or one company acquiring another; both parties play an important part in the transaction. If one company wants the widgets, they research to decide the best widgets, who has those and how to get those in the most economical way.
They pick a company and enter into a negotiation to obtain said widgets in the way that works the best for the researching company. The company they reach out to is also a part of the equation.
Without their efforts for the transaction; saying yes, making the order, doing it well, getting it to its destination; then the whole process would not be complete nor satisfy either party.
If it didn’t work, then both would be left in their corners so to speak, just as they had been before, no worse, but no better either. Some would argue that both are in a worse place. Businesses can make bridges through transactions, but all transactions aren’t bridges.
A transaction might only be a transaction, each receiving and that’s the end of it. Bridges are when the good thing that is happening, is not for only one side, but because the transaction is actually good for both parties.
And usually both parties know it, create it and accept it as it is. These are the types of transactions that create bridges that end up enlivening both companies, growing the companies relationships and just making the world a better place because it happened.
The business bridge is conducted through transactions but is chosen by and equally good for both, in fact makes things generally better. I mean like a healthy meal is better than a candy bar in the long run.
A candy bar is good at the moment, a meal does good for the body in the long term. The bridge in relationships isn’t transactional at all, just like the bridge in business isn’t about the transaction; it just happens to be the method business entities can use to associate.
In fact what is good in business is less good in relations because in a connection between two people if it's just about the transaction, then it serves its purpose and is done once the transaction is complete like a business. It’s the same with family and friends. Sometimes we paint ourselves, or someone else paints us into a corner so to speak.
The bridge in relationships is the reaching out to the other person just because it's a good thing to do; not because you should, or just for them, or because they need it or worse because you’ll get something from it whether it's what they need or want or not.
Friendships don’t last in transactional space so well; whereas a bridge in a relationship is the coming part way, opening the door and going through it, going part way to where the person is so to speak. I guess it could also be literal.
This is beautifully demonstrated in the Prodigal Son story. When the son was some distance afar off still, the father, having seen him coming part of the way, ran out to meet him, kissed and hugged him. This is the bridge happening.
Both have to participate, if only one, the good connection doesn’t happen. The thing is, there has to be movement from both parties/sides. One person alone will never create a bridge and that lack of association can’t enrich anyone if it's not present.
In fact, many of the problems in relationships are the transactional methods used and the unhealthy connections made when only one side goes the whole way. When both sides of the bridge aren’t completed, the ‘good’ hasn’t happened.
Doesn't mean the person building isn’t creating value for themselves, it's just not complete, nor a ‘bridge’ without the other person as well. When building a bridge in engineering, both sides come out to meet each other and when both sides connect, the bridge is there, even for others.
The very same principle is true for people, both sides have to reach out and connect, both not just the instigator. What if the Father in the story was in the attitude of, ‘well, he can grovel at the door if he dares come this far and he better or I won’t even open the door.’
Some of the problem is ego, not every time, but when our egos don’t have a good enough excuse to shift elsewhere, we stay in our silo, happy enough in our corner, not building our part of the bridge to something new and better-gaining the growth and change.
How many sons would reconnect with their fathers to make things right in time yet the parents won’t build the other side of the bridge or vice versa. How many prodigal sons would and are lost not because they didn’t see the error of some behavior, but the price and journey is so great it is literally insurmountable.
How many sons come up the path and lose courage, or get talked out of it, or don’t finish the journey all the way to the house. Or the price is so high, it's not right to purchase. The bridge started by the son was met somewhere out in no man’s land by the bridge of the dad.
The bridge was needed for both sides. Both are edified. Both are better for the connection, not just with each other but on several levels. When painted into some corner it's the bridge of both in the relationship that gets the other out of where they are.
