People Skills_How to Assert Yourself, Listen to Others, and Resolve Conflicts

by Robert Bolton PhD

  How the assertion is sent is as important as the phrasing of the assertion message. During a well-delivered assertion message, one’s body language enhances one’s verbal message. When you send an assertion, your body language should demonstrate that you mean what you say, that you are not ambivalent about it, and that you expect to get your needs met. At the same time, assertive body language communicates respect for the other person.

  Body language can transform speaking the same sentence into a submissive, aggressive, or assertive act. For example, Clara and her boyfriend Don had a date for dinner and a show. He was to pick her up at 7:00 P.M. at her house. He arrived at 8:15. There was no phone call saying he would be late and no explanation at the door. Using identically worded messages, Clara’s body language could have made her confrontation submissive, aggressive, or assertive.

  Clara’s Verbal Message Clara’s Body Language

  When we … uh … set our date for … uh … seven o’clock and … er … you come at eight-fifteen I feel … uh … frustrated because I couldn’t continue painting my room once I got dressed up.

  Voice soft. Hesitant speech. Lots of “uhs” and “ers.” Didn’t look Don in the eye. Slumped posture. Fidgeted with jewelry. Stood at a distance of five feet.

  With such submissive body language it is unlikely that Clara would have been taken seriously enough to get her needs met.

  Had Clara been aggressive in getting her needs met, the same message could have been spoken with very different nonverbals:

  Clara’s Verbal Message Clara’s Body Language

  When we set our date for seven o’clock and you come in at e-i-g-h-t-f-i-f-t-e-e-n, I feel frustrated because I couldn’t complete painting my room once I got dressed up.

  Clara’s voice was loud and shrill. Her speech was rapid. She emphasized the word “you” and spit it out like an accusation, She emphasized the time of arrival and dragged out the pronunciation of that time as her lips curled in a sneer. She stood two feet from Don, pumping her forefinger at his chest as she talked. Her hostile stare was directed unwaveringly at his eyes. She rolled her eyes in disbelief when Don apologized and explained why he was late.

  Obviously, this type of body language does not foster a cooperative spirit. It defeats the purpose of an assertion message. Don may continue to arrive late for dates just to get back at Clara. Or he may come unreasonably early—for spite. Or he may submit but increase the distance in the relationship.

  Had Clara been assertive, the body language might have been something like this:

  Clara’s Verval Message Clara’s Body Language

  When we set our date for seven o’clock and you come in at eight-fifteen, I feel frustrated because I couldn’t complete painting my room once I got dressed up.

  Clara’s voice was calm yet serious. She was about a yard away from Don, with both feet planted flat and firmly on the floor. Her eye contact was steady and firm but not hostile. She leaned slightly forward, demonstrating the energy she had on this issue.

  When you send an assertion message effectively, your body language and your verbal language are harmonious, reinforcing each other.

  Let’s examine some of the elements of assertive body language:

  Posture. Face the other person squarely. Stand or sit erectly, leaning slightly forward at an appropriately close distance. Keep your head erect. Place your feet firmly on the ground (even if you are sitting). Maintain an “open” position, with arms and legs uncrossed.

  Eye contact. Look directly at the other person’s eyes when you are asserting. This helps convey the fact that you mean what you say. Your goal is not to overpower the other with an aggressive stare. A serious, steady look into the other’s eyes, sometimes relieved by an occasional glance away, helps communicate your intensity of purpose without being aggressive.

  Facial expressions. Your facial expression should match your message. People commonly smile or even laugh nervously when they are telling another person they are angry about something the other did. This results in a double message, with the smile and/or laughter undermining the verbal message. Many people are not aware that they are smiling at such times. Practicing before a mirror or receiving feedback from a role-playing session can help you know whether you engage in inappropriate smiles or other facial expressions that undermine your assertions.

  Gestures. Some people are rigid and statuelike when asserting. Their physical rigidity impedes their assertion. A message that is emphasized with appropriate gestures acquires added emphasis. Some gestures, however, undercut assertions. Especially emphatic gestures or excessive use of gestures of any kind are likely to distract from the message. Pounding the table and pointing one’s forefinger at the other are likely to increase her defensiveness. On the other hand, shrugging one’s shoulders, covering one’s mouth while speaking, fidgeting, tinkering with jewelry, shifting from one foot to another, pacing, and similar movements significantly diminish the impact of an assertion.

  Voice. A whispery monotone or a singsong voice will seldom convince another to vacate your personal space. Robert Alberti and Michel Emmons, two of the pioneers in assertion training, write:

  Voice is one of our most valuable resources for communication…. Does your inflection really emphasize what you want to? … How about volume? Do you ordinarily speak so softly that others can barely hear? Can you bring out a shout when you want to? Or is your conversational volume always so loud that people think you’re always angry? Get control of your voice, and you’ll have harnessed a powerful element of your developing assertiveness.

  I almost always begin an assertion in a calm yet firm voice. People often ask how I can be so calm. There are two reasons. I did a lot of venting of emotion when I wrote out the assertion—thus, much of my feeling has already been discharged. Then, too, I have asserted successfully so often that I expect that the other person will find a way of meeting my needs.

  Breath. Having sufficient breath is more important to an effective assertion than most people realize. When you have little air in your lungs, your chest cage sinks and you look less assertive. Also, the diminished air in your lungs leads to diminished energy—and you want all the energy you can have for your assertion. Inadequate amounts of air in the lungs may lead to increased anxiety, which blocks your assertive power. Finally, a full chest of air is needed to produce the vocal quality desired for your assertion.

  When people become anxious, as most do when asserting, they tend to hold their breath to some degree. Many people’s assertive body language increases enormously when they learn to plant their feet firmly on the floor, refrain from slouching (which makes breathing more difficult), and fill their lungs with air before asserting.

  While the asserter’s body language affects the other person, it affects the asserter, too. I find that by squaring my shoulders, straightening my back, placing my feet flat on the floor and filling my lungs with air, I develop more inner assertive resources. I tend to be less anxious and depressed and become more determined and confident.

  Being Silent

  After sending your brief assertion message with appropriate body language—stop. Be silent. Your silence allows the other to think about what you said or speak whatever is on her mind. The other person’s first response is usually defensive. Sometimes the other offers excuses, sometimes she attacks, sometimes she withdraws. A defensive response is to be expected. It is an unusual situation when it does not come. The silence allows the confronted person to express her defensiveness, which normally needs to be vented before she willingly tries to meet the needs of the asserter.

  Later on in an assertive interaction, silence enables the other person to arrive at a solution that meets both persons needs. In one of our workshops, a Canadian college president commented, “The theory you gave us stated that the other person should come up with a solution that is satisfactory to the asserter. But that never happens to me.” I suggested he role-play the situation. In the role playing, he never allowed enough sile
nce for the other person to volunteer a solution. I pointed this out, and the situation was role-played again. This time, when silence was provided, the other person suggested a satisfactory solution. In subsequent dealings in real life, the college administrator reported how valuable he found the silence which followed an assertion message.

  Reflectively Listening

  to the Defensive Response

  Once an assertion message has been sent and silence has been provided, it is almost certain that the person to whom the assertion was addressed will make a defensive response. Instead of reasserting or explaining your assertion or becoming aggressive at that point, as commonly happens, it is most important to “shift gears” and listen reflectively to the predictable defensive response. As Figure 10.1 indicates, this shifting back and forth between assertion and listening normally takes place several times before the assertion is completed.

  Reflective listening at this time can accomplish one or more of four things. First, it helps diminish the other person’s defensiveness. As the recipient of the assertion expresses her defensiveness and that is reflected back with respect, her defensiveness subsides. The vicious cycle of increasing defensiveness is broken and constructive conversation can begin again.

  The defensiveness-reducing power of effective listening responses is truly remarkable. For many people, it must be seen to be believed. In our courses, people can watch the dramatic effects on videotape and hear other participants tell of their experiences. Readers of this book may not find the printed page convincing. They will have to rely on their own experiments with these skills.

  Figure 10.1. The increase and decrease of defensiveness in the assertion process as the asserter “shifts gears” between asserting and reflective listening responses. (Adapted from a similar chart by Thomas Gordon, Ph.D.)

  Then, too, there are times when the data we receive from our listening modifies our need to continue the assertion. For example, my son had a junior driver’s license and was required to be home with the car by 9:00 P.M. When he returned from high school basketball practice at 9:30 P.M., I confronted him. He informed me that the law states that students with junior driver’s licenses could not drive after 9:00 P.M. except when returning from school activities. Since his arrival home at 9:30 was OK with me as long as it was legal, I had no further reason to assert.

  A third value of listening to the other’s response after an assertion is that you sometimes discover a strong need of the other person which conflicts with your need. You may decide to switch to collaborative problem solving. That is what occurred when a dormitory counselor sent this assertion to the custodian of his building: “When you leave the floors and sinks dirty, I become irritated because I have to work in an unclean environment.” In listening to the custodian’s response, the counselor discovered that because of cutbacks in the college budget, the janitor had to clean twice as many square feet as he had previously. He also had a need not to work overtime. The counselor realized that collaborative problem solving (a skill described in Chapter 14) was more appropriate than assertion in this case. Together, she and the janitor found a way to meet both of their needs.

  Finally, when you assert to someone you are likely to receive a lot of data about how that person perceives you and your relationship. Because the words are spoken from a defensive stance, they may seem much more extreme than the other person actually feels. Still, they are important clues and too valuable to ignore. Much of this data would probably go unspoken if it were not for the assertion that you sent. If you reflect rather than defend yourself, you will be alerted to many ways the relationship can be improved. (During an assertion, however, do not respond to these issues except by means of reflective listening. Once the assertion is over, probably on another day, the two of you may wish to look at some of the issues that cascaded out of the other’s mouth when she was most defensive.)

  While you will find some occasions when your need to assert is modified by data that you receive from the other person, and though you will sometimes discover that the other person has a strong need that makes problem solving appropriate, most of the time the key result of your reflective listening will result in the diminishment of the other person’s defensiveness.

  Handling hostile responses. The finest assertion message is often received as a hostile blow. Instead of really listening to the assertion, “most people are searching for a counterblow at the time the information is being presented to them.” The counterblow contains words designed to put you “on the defensive and inflict damage.” The person usually does not deal with the subject matter of your assertion but picks an issue selected for its ability to inflict high damage on you with relatively low risk for herself.

  Joan, a first-line supervisor, confronted Mike about his performance on the assembly line which affected the output of several people. He reacted with hostility and she listened reflectively to his defensive responses.

  Joan: When you produce thirty percent less this month than in previous months, I feel annoyed because it lowers the productivity of our unit and I get less pay.

  Mike: The others sure were right. You are just a castrating female who is hostile to all males.

  Joan: You think that what I said about your productivity is a smokescreen for my anger toward you because you are a man.

  Mike: You said it! You women libbers are nothing more than a bunch of aggressive bitches.

  Joan: (Who does not consider herself a women’s libber): Women today are really pushy and you are sick of it.

  Mike: Yeah. Why don’t you stay home and take care of your kids like a mother should.

  Joan: You feel I should be taking care of my kids and not be working.

  Mike: I sure do. What’s going to become of these kids who have no mother to come home to after school?

  Joan: Mike, when you produce thirty percent less this month than in previous months, I feel annoyed because that lowers the productivity of our unit, and I receive less pay.

  Let’s examine Joan’s responses in this interaction.

  First, she reflected Mike’s content and feelings, with special emphasis on his feelings. She made three consecutive reflections. There is no magic to the number three. Sometimes, one reflection is all that is necessary before reasserting. Sometimes, five or six are required before a person’s defensiveness is lowered sufficiently to make another try at communicating the assertion message.

  Second, Joan did not allow herself to get sidetracked into a discussion of her femininity, her character, women’s liberation, or the care of her children. She knew she would get into a “go-nowhere” argument if she took up any of the gauntlets he flung down. She also knew that commenting on any of these topics would divert the conversation from her assertion, so that her needs would go unmet. She steadfastly refused to be drawn into a discussion of the topics Mike initiated. Her interaction was limited to an assertion message and reflective listening responses.

  Thirdly, she treated Mike with respect. She didn’t use judgmental words, even when she was being attacked personally. Her tone of voice was free of condescension and sarcasm. Her posture and facial expression assertively indicated that she was serious, but it was definitely not aggressive. Though it was difficult for her, Joan really tried to understand Mike’s frame of reference.

  Finally, Joan reasserted. She repeated virtually the same words that she used in her opening assertion. She realized that Mike, like most people, wouldn’t really listen to her first assertion message. He might hear the words but not really listen to her concerns. So she was prepared to send the message again. As she planned this assertion, Joan had guessed that Mike would give her a hard time at first. She also realized that she might let some judgmental words slip into her assertion message, so she memorized it and disciplined herself to say exactly the same message again.

  After Joan restated her assertion, Mike became defensive again. She reflected his resistant statements and then sent the same assertion message once more. After sev
eral more cycles through this process, Mike came up with a solution that met Joan’s needs. She thanked him and suggested that they meet in a week to see if Mike’s solution worked as well as they both thought it would. When Joan met with him a week later, Mike’s production was the highest it had been all year.

  Some people hearing about this interaction said Joan “should never have let Mike get away with saying all those things.” Joan, however, was elated. She asserted, got her needs met, and improved a working relationship with one of her most difficult employees. “One of the biggest payoffs,” she added, “is that I feel so good about myself. I’ve felt kinda high all week.”

  Dealing with questions. In addition to showing hostility there are many other ways in which people react to an assertion message.9 Some defend themselves by means of questions. A person may not consciously know what she is doing, but her subconscious probably knows that the use of questions is a way of derailing assertions in a nonconfrontative way. After all, while you are answering questions, you aren’t asserting and the other person is not coming up with solutions about how to vacate your space and meet your needs. I follow a rule (which occasionally has to be broken): Don’t answer a question when you are asserting; reply with a reflective listening response instead. Every question can be converted into a statement and reflected back to the other person. For instance.

  Gail: Did you always do the dishes when you were a girl?

  Mother: You doubt that I lived up to the standards I expect of you.

  Further information is rarely needed in assertion situations. When more data is appropriate, it should be given nonjudgmentally, specifically, and succinctly. Then provide silence for the other to take the next step in the conversation.

  Sidestepping debates. Some people respond to an assertion by debating. A person relying on this defensive approach often uses mental quickness and verbal ability to win arguments even when they “don’t have a leg to stand on.” They give the impression that they are very objective, striving only for a clearer understanding when all the while they are avoiding the action that will terminate their trespass on your space. Debates are win/lose affairs: if she wins, you lose; if you win, she loses. In either case, the assertion usually gets sidetracked, so your needs are not met and the relationship suffers because no one likes to lose. By refusing to engage in a debate and by using reflective listening responses, you can get your needs met and probably strengthen the relationship at the same time.