I’ve tried to say what I was thinking three times now, and each time you’ve started talking over me. I don’t know whether you’re aware that it’s happening, but I’m finding it frustrating. If there’s something important about what you’re saying that I’m not understanding, please share it. And then I want to be able to finish what I’m saying.
Here’s what I’m noticing. I ask you if you are feeling hurt by what I said, and you say, “No, no, no, of course not. I’m not that kind of person.” But then you keep acting toward me in ways that people act when they’re hurt or mad at me. At least that’s how I’m seeing this. It seems to me the best thing to do is to try to figure out what I’m doing that might be upsetting to you. Otherwise, I don’t think we’re going to get anywhere.
Hang on a second. Several times now, when I’ve said the things that are important to me, you’ve gotten very angry to the point where I feel threatened. I don’t know what’s causing your response. If you’re upset, I’m interested to hear why. If you’re trying to intimidate me into changing my mind, it won’t work. I really do want to know what’s upsetting you, and I want us to find a way to talk about it that doesn’t feel intimidating to me.
Naming the dynamic between you can be enormously helpful in clearing the air. It draws what you are each really thinking and feeling but not saying onto the table for honest discussion. And it can stop frustrating interactions in their tracks; often the other person is not aware that they are doing something that is upsetting to you. However, it does take the conversation off the substance, and sometimes, it can escalate tension. So naming the dynamic is probably best thought of as something to try when nothing else has worked.
Now What? Begin to Problem-Solve
Often simply sorting out the Three Conversations and bringing to light the heart of the matter for each person clears up the issues between you. But not always. You’ve come a long way in understanding each other’s stories, and untangling what’s happened. You have a better grasp on the feelings involved. But at the end of the day, you still need to decide how to go forward together, and you may not agree on how to do that.
This is the time for problem-solving. Fundamentally, problem-solving consists of gathering information and testing your perceptions, creating options that would meet both sides’ primary concerns, and, where you can’t, trying to find fair ways to resolve the difference.
It Takes Two to Agree
Difficult conversations require a certain amount of compromise and mutual accommodation to the other’s needs. If you find problem-solving difficult and anxiety producing, it may be because you are focused on persuading them. Those caught in this trap struggle like a fish on a hook, desperately trying to satisfy the seemingly insatiable demands of the other and reach some reasonable agreement on how to move forward. And no wonder. This frame gives the other side total control — until and unless they are satisfied, you must continue to struggle.
Describing the pattern this way illuminates its flaw: there are two people involved, and there will be no agreement unless both concur. You need to persuade them no more and no less than they need to persuade you. Thus, you always have the option to turn the tables, to invite them to persuade you and insist that they do. As long as you are open to persuasion, and prepared, if absolutely necessary, to live with no agreement, you can do this as firmly as you would like: “I understand that you are determined to have your article reviewed this week, and I’m still not persuaded that I should spend my vacation doing it.”
For many people, realizing that they don’t have to agree brings a sense of great liberation, relief, and empowerment.
Gather Information and Test Your Perceptions
Henry had planned this weekend away with friends months ago. He worked extra hours all week finishing up the new displays and work schedules. It was Friday morning when Henry’s boss, Rosario, approached him in the back room.
“Hank, I’ve got big problems with this supplier. We’ve got to get it figured out over the weekend, so that we’re sure we’ve got the stock to handle the holiday rush next month,” she explained. “I’m really sorry, because I know that you had plans this weekend. But I need you to stay. I’m sure you can reschedule with your friends, right?”
Propose Crafting a Test. Rather than explode or argue, Henry decided to learn more about why Rosario was so concerned. As Henry and Rosario sorted through their stories, they discovered that they had different assumptions about their relationship with the supplier in question. Henry believed that even if they ran into problems down the road, the supplier would work with them to rush their order overnight. Rosario has had too many bad experiences with suppliers over the years to believe that anything other than getting it right the first time would ensure that the holidays would go smoothly.
Divergent views are often rooted in one or more conflicting assumptions or hypotheses. If these can be identified, then you can discuss what would constitute a fair test of which assumption is empirically valid, or to what extent it is valid. Henry suggested that they call the supplier and ask about the availability of the stock in question, and whether someone would be willing to work with them if they ran into problems in the coming weeks. Rosario wanted to make sure they asked a series of what-if questions and established a personal relationship with someone on the other end who could take responsibility for making it work. To be persuasive, of course, such a test needs to satisfy both parties that it is fair and adequate.
Say What Is Still Missing. As you struggle with conflicting perceptions and conclusions, each of you needs to say unambiguously where the other person’s story still doesn’t make sense to you. As you follow their reasoning, what’s missing that would make their version make sense? So Henry might say, “I think I understand now why stock problems caused us to lose money last year. It does seem that we need to get it sorted out early. Yet right now we’ve got a thirty-day head start on the problem, so I’m not understanding why this weekend is going to make the difference.”
Say What Would Persuade You. Being open to persuasion is a powerful stance to have. It allows you to be honest and firm about your current views, and to listen to theirs. “Based on my understanding, it seems to me that my assistant manager, Bill, has the training to do the inventory this weekend, giving me a head start on the problem next week. Is your understanding different? Maybe you’ve got concerns about Bill that would be persuasive to me.”
Ask What (If Anything) Would Persuade Them. “I have offered a number of what seem to me good reasons why it doesn’t make sense for me to cancel my plans and work this weekend. Yet you remain adamant that I stay. Is there a reason I haven’t heard? If not, I’m wondering if there is anything I could say that would persuade you otherwise and, if so, what it would be?”
Ask Their Advice. “Help me understand how you would feel and how you might think about the situation, if you were in my shoes. What would you do? Why? Could you imagine a way of staying that would not end up making it more likely that something like this would happen again?”
Our experience has been that people who understand that persuasion must be a two-way street rarely find themselves in situations like this. Their reputation for not being a pushover gains them both general respect and a wider berth from those who might otherwise be inclined to try taking advantage.
Invent Options
Let’s come back to your neighbors with the barking dog. When you finally raise the issue, you learn that they feel the dog’s barking is important for security reasons, and that the reason he’s left outside at night is that they fear he might accidentally hurt the new baby (whom he adores). This makes sense to you, and you are able nonetheless to share how frustrating and exhausting it is for you to be kept awake. When it comes time to figure out what to do about it, you may get stuck. Your answer (get rid of the dog) isn’t so appealing to them, and their answer (wear earplugs or close the windows) seems ridiculous to you.
Many difficult situations are amenable to c
reative solutions that meet most of everyone’s needs, but which may not be obvious and may take some effort to find. This calls for determined joint brainstorming. “I wonder if we can work to find a creative way to meet both interests here. What do you think? Are you willing to try?” Odds are, persistence will pay off.
Brainstorming might yield some useful ideas. For example, your son might spend time with the neighbors’ dog so that the dog gets more exercise and attention during this busy period with the new baby. This might also meet some of your son’s interests in getting a dog of his own. Or your neighbors might decide to get a second dog to keep the first one company, or to bring the dog indoors after 10 p.m. and close the door to the baby’s room. Or perhaps they’ll ask you to call when the barking starts to bother you, so that they can address the problem right away and you don’t spend another sleepless night.
What’s more important is that you both recognize that if you are going to continue to live next door, you need to work together to find a solution that satisfies everyone — you, them, and the dog.
Ask What Standards Should Apply
Generally the best way to manage conflict in a way that safeguards a relationship is to look for standards or fair principles to guide a resolution, rather than trying to haggle with or intimidate the other person. If you can’t find a creative way to solve the problem, ask what standards of fairness should apply, and why. In the case of the dog, there may be a local ordinance pertaining to noise, or a method other dog owners in the neighborhood have used to keep their pooches quiet. Industry or local practices, legal precedents, and ethical principles all offer ways to settle the matter without anyone having to back down or lose face.
Not all standards are equally persuasive, of course. Some will seem more directly on point, more widely accepted, or more immediately relevant in terms of time, place, or circumstance. This is one more topic for discussion as you explore the relative fairness of different standards.
The Principle of Mutual Caretaking. One dynamic to remember at this stage of a difficult conversation is the tendency we all have to believe that our way of doing things is the “right” way. This can lead us to ascribe the problem to something wrong with “the way they are,” and to suggest a “solution” that boils down to doing it our way: “If you would just change, there wouldn’t be a problem.”
The frustration is understandable, but the argument is not persuasive. Both the challenge and the spice of relationships is in people’s differences. Occasional frustration is the price of admission. And as we’ve noted, no relationship will endure if one party always gives in to the other. A good resolution will usually require each party to accommodate somewhat to the other’s differences, or perhaps to reciprocate — going one way on some issues and the other way on others. This is the principle of mutual caretaking.
If You Still Can’t Agree, Consider Your Alternatives
Not every conflict can be resolved by mutual agreement. Sometimes, even after highly skilled communication, you and the other person will simply fail to come up with an option that works for both of you. Then you’re faced with a decision: Should you accept less than what you want, or should you accept the consequences of not agreeing?
Let’s come back to Henry and Rosario. Rosario’s the boss. Henry’s a valuable employee. If they can’t arrive at a solution to the problem of whether Henry will work the weekend, then they each face some choices. Each needs to think about what they will do if they can’t arrive at a solution together.
If you are going to walk away without agreeing, you need two things. First, you need to explain why you are walking away. What interests and concerns are not met by the solutions you’ve been discussing? Let’s imagine Henry decides to take the weekend off despite Rosario’s continued insistence that he stay. Rather than just storming out, Henry should be clear about his feelings, interests, and choices. He might say, “Rosario, I really am sorry. I want very much to be a good employee, and to help out when I can. Normally, I’m happy to work weekends and nights — I hope you’ve seen that in the past. It’s simply a matter of notice. I feel badly about leaving you in the lurch; at the same time, these plans are really important to me, and I gave you plenty of notice and worked hard all week so that I could go away. So I don’t like the choice, but given the choice, I’m going to go.”
Now Henry needs the second thing: a willingness to accept the consequences. He may return on Monday to find that he no longer has a job. If he can live with that, or indeed prefers that, then going off with his friends makes sense. And as often as not, he may return to find Rosario is both unhappy and more respecting of him and his time. Perhaps she will even apologize, or ask to talk about how to avoid such situations in the future.
If Henry can’t live with the possibility of losing his job, then his best choice is probably to work the weekend. He’ll feel disappointed that he didn’t get to spend time with his friends, but he’ll know he handled the conversation skillfully and made a wise choice in the end.
It Takes Time
Most difficult conversations are not, in actuality, a single conversation. They are a series of exchanges and explorations that happen over time. Assuming that Henry and Rosario work things out this time, there will be plenty of other issues that arise between them. Work demands will continue to be high, and they’ll have to work together to figure out ways to balance this with Henry’s personal commitments. Michael and Jack, the friends arguing over the brochure in Chapter 1, will need to find ways to repair their friendship, and explore whether and how to work together in the future. You and your neighbors will have to try out having your son care for the dog, or letting the dog inside at night, and see how it goes. And however it goes, you should have follow-up conversations to check in and, if necessary, look for new ways to cope.
12
Putting It All Together
Jack would like to take another crack at a conversation with Michael.
“I thought that once we got the brochure out of the way, things would settle down between us,” he explains. But months later, Michael remains distant and the friendship has become awkward. Jack knows he should talk to Michael, but about what? Jack believes that the bottom line is this: Michael was just being a jerk.
Step One: Prepare by Walking Through the Three Conversations
In preparation for his conversation Jack sat down and walked himself through the Three Conversations, making notes to himself about how Michael might be seeing things, and what they’ve each contributed to the problem (an abbreviated version of Jack’s notes is included on p. 218). Along the way, Jack made a few discoveries. He realized that Michael probably didn’t know Jack had put aside other things and had worked through the night. Jack doesn’t really know whether Michael meant to intimidate him. He saw the ways in which he had contributed to the problem by not raising his feelings with Michael at the time, or as soon as the brochure was done.
Jack’s Preparation Notes
* * *
What Happened?
* * *
Multiple Stories
* * *
What’s my story? I interrupted important work to do a favor for a friend, who then overreacted to an insignificant mistake, and bullied me into redoing the whole job. I got no thank you, and M. took no responsibility for having signed off on it.
What’s his story? Michael was counting on me to get it right, and I let him down. Then I argued with him about it instead of making it right.
Hmm. This has some truth to it.
* * *
Impact/Intent
* * *
My intentions:
Help a friend.
Do a good job.
Persuade M. that the mistake wasn’t a big deal(!)
Impact on me:
Felt bullied.
Unappreciated.
Frustrated.
M.’s intentions?
Get the brochure fast.
Make sure it’s right?
Intimi
date me?
Impact on M?
Frustrated?
Disappointed?
In tight spot with client?
* * *
Contribution
* * *
What did I contribute to the problem? I didn’t tell Michael I was upset at the time, or later. I did make the mistake. I didn’t ask M. more questions to understand his predicament.
What did he contribute? Michael also didn’t catch the mistake. He didn’t call earlier, so it was a rush job. He kept asking, “Are you going to redo it? Yes or no?” which felt like bullying.
* * *
* * *
Feelings
* * *
What feelings underlie my attributions and judgments?
Angry
Frustrated
Disappointed that this didn’t go smoothly, and that Michael has hired someone else.
Hurt
Guilty— I wish I’d handled this better.
Embarrassed/Ashamed— what a stupid mistake!
Difficult Conversations: How to Discuss What Matters Most Page 22