When approaching a disagreement with your neighbor, customer, family member, or any other person, take a moment to consider: What is my motivation for having this conversation? Why am I approaching this person? What interests of mine are being affected?
Next think about the other person’s possible reasons for their behavior, (not just the offensive reasons) and approach the conversation with a presumption of good will. The most powerful interests are basic human needs, such as security, economic well-being, a sense of belonging, recognition, and control over one’s life. Think about whether the other may be seeking any of these human needs. Here’s an exercise that I hope will help.
- Think about You. What is the reason that the people problem is important to you/irritates you. Does it impact one of those basic human needs of yours such as security, economic well-being, a sense of belonging, recognition and control over your life.
- Think about the other person’s situation. Thinking about the other does not mean you have to agree with them. Rather, consider the situation if your roles were reversed and you were the neighbor/customer/family member complained of. As the other, why did you engage in the behavior involved? Why did you: install the fence over the boundary line, host the noisy party, threaten me, fail to fulfill the purchase order, open a probate estate instead of distributing the assets to the beneficiaries, transfer the money out of that account, or make a rude remark.
Make a list of all the possible reasons for the complained of behavior as if you were the other (yes, write it down). Think about all the possible reasons, putting yourself in their shoes for the purpose of the exercise.
-For example: Did you install the fence because you measured the distance and thought it was accurate/were told by the predecessor in title the location of the boundary? Did you host the noisy party because you were too busy enjoying yourself and didn’t think the sound was carrying outside? Did you fail to fulfill the purchase order because you were short of cash and needed to make payroll/didn’t have the raw materials/the employees misplaced the order? Did you not intend your remarks to be a threat but just a statement of your rights, because you felt a need to defend yourself?
3. Now approach with curiosity, an open mind, and a presumption of good will, remembering all of the possible reasons for the behavior. Use KINDNESS as the standard for your conversation. Think about how you react when people approach you with kindness rather than defensively or, worse, aggressively. There is truth to the saying that you can accomplish more with a carrot than a stick.
A. Be conscious of your tone of voice and body language. Tone of voice and facial expressions can speak louder than your actual words. Try it: say something nice in your meanest voice and angriest face while looking in the mirror. Your reaction? Say something mean with your kindest face in the mirror.
B. Approach the topic with questions and compassion. Use words authentic to you. For example: I’d like to learn about how the purchase order was not fulfilled; can you please tell me what was happening so that I can better understand you. NOT: Can’t you even fulfill a simple purchase order that I gave you months ago!
C. Listen to the answers with curiosity – as though you do not know the answers. Hear the answers open mindedly and ask follow-up questions to enhance understanding. Again, be authentic. For example: Oh, so you’re saying that you didn’t think it was a purchase order but a request for a quote? Ok so let’s look at what took you to that understanding so that we don’t run afoul of that problem again.
D. Don’t… Here again, the statements need to be authentic to you.
(i) Don’t threaten. There is always plenty of time to escalate a conflict, but once escalated it takes a lot longer to de-escalate it.
(ii) Don’t retaliate even if met with defensive remarks. If there is a history of communicating that is defensive it may take time to change the tone.
(iii) Don’t accuse the other of bad intentions or actions that you don’t KNOW firsthand that they have. These accusations are often just projections of your own human feelings.
(iv) Don’t use “you” words. Do use “I” words. For example: “I felt like you were ignoring my statements of the location of the property line/my need for the distributions to the beneficiaries/my need for the supplies. If I’m wrong about that please tell me.” Not: “You were ignoring my statements of the property line location.”
4. Don’t give up if one cooperative conversation doesn’t work. Try again with the same frame. The next step is not escalation. Don’t file a lawsuit to get the dispute resolved. The lawyer’s job is to advocate for your position in the dispute. Filing the complaint will necessarily pour gasoline on the dispute because complaints have to allege certain conduct to win.
Before you escalate, try the following:
5. If all these efforts fail, try a people problem solver, a mediator. Sometimes despite your best efforts there is too much heat in the conflict for the individuals involved to resolve it themselves. Involve a neutral outsider. This person could be a mutual friend or colleague that you both trust. If there isn’t anyone to fit that description, try a trained person.
It’s often easier to share our honest thoughts with mediators who are trained in people problems. A mediator is not on either person’s side and are unconnected to our pasts and futures. Mediators can play an invaluable role in returning the conflict-laden relationship to normalcy. These conversations are usually successful.
How do mediators help parties reach agreement?
Mediators employ a variety of techniques to get the parties to provide information and listen to one another. In the Mediator’s toolbox you will find the following.
A. Human Relations Skills. Mediators can build rapport and trust, identify emotional issues, defuse volatile emotions, and balance power.
B. Communication Skills. Mediators can help with focusing, re-framing, active listening, questioning versus interrogating, translating, and managing communications.
C. Process Control Skills. Mediators manage the process by controlling the information exchange, establishing, and following ground rules, and moving the process in a way that everyone feels empowered and treated fairly.
D. Creative Skills. Mediators help resolve conflicts by inventing options, going beyond boundaries, creating workable solutions, and synthesizing ideas.
E. Intervention Skills. Mediators can intervene as a neutral to the dispute and help the parties by reality testing, prioritizing of issues, identifying objective criteria, analyzing risk, problem solving, and strategic planning.
Listening and good communications are powerful skills. I hope that each reader finds this helpful,
Connie L. Rakowsky, Esquire