Chapter 12: Managing Interpersonal Conflict

Description

12-5 Constructive Conflict Skills The collaborative, win–win conflict style described earlier in this chapter has many advantages over win–lose and lose–lose approaches. Why, then, is it so rarely used? There are three reasons. The first is lack of awareness. Some people are so used to competition that they mistakenly think that winning requires them to defeat their “opponent.” Even when they know better, there is another factor that prevents many people from seeking win–win solutions. Conflicts are often emotional affairs in which people react combatively without stopping to think of better alternatives. Because this kind of emotional reflex prevents constructive solutions, it’s often necessary to stop yourself from speaking out aggressively during a conflict and starting an escalating spiral of defensiveness. The time-honored advice of “stopping and counting to ten” applies here. After you’ve thought about the matter a bit, you’ll be able to act constructively instead of reacting in a way that’s likely to produce a lose–lose outcome. A third reason win–win solutions are rare is that they require the other person’s cooperation. It’s difficult to negotiate constructively with someone who insists on trying to defeat you. In this case, use your best persuasive skills to explain that by working together you can find a solution that satisfies both of you. 12-5a Collaborative Problem Solving Despite these challenges, it is definitely possible to become better at resolving conflicts. We will outline a method to increase your chances of being able to handle your conflicts in a collaborative, win–win manner. In a longitudinal study following one hundred couples who had conflict skills training, researchers found that the method works for couples willing to focus on improving their relationships. As you read the following steps, try to imagine yourself applying them to a problem that’s bothering you now. Identify Your Problem and Unmet Needs Before you speak out, it’s important to realize that the problem that is causing conflict is yours. Whether you want to return an unsatisfactory piece of merchandise, complain to noisy neighbors because your sleep is being disturbed by their barking dog, or request a change in working conditions from your employer, the problem is yours. Why? Because in each case you are the person who “owns” the problem—the one who is dissatisfied. You are the one who has paid for the unsatisfactory merchandise; the merchant who sold it to you has the use of your good money. You are the one who is losing sleep as a result of your neighbors’ dog; they are content to go on as before. You are the one who is unhappy with your working conditions, not your employer. Realizing that the problem is yours will make a big difference when the time comes to approach the other party. Instead of feeling and acting in an evaluative way, you’ll be more likely to state your problem in a descriptive way, which will not only be more accurate but also reduce the chance of a defensive reaction. After you realize that the problem is yours, the next step is to identify the unmet needs that make you dissatisfied. For instance, in the barking dog example, your need may be to get some sleep or to study without interruptions. In the case of a friend who teases you in public, your need would probably be to avoid embarrassment. Sometimes the task of identifying your needs isn’t as simple as it first seems. Behind the apparent content of an issue is often a relational need. Consider this example: A friend hasn’t returned some money you lent long ago. Your apparent need in this situation might be to get the money back. But a little thought will probably show that this isn’t the only, or even the main, thing you want. Even if you were rolling in money, you’d probably want the loan repaid because of a more important need: to avoid feeling victimized by your friend’s taking advantage of you. As you’ll soon see, the ability to identify your real needs plays a key role in solving interpersonal problems. For now, the point to remember is that before you voice your problem to your partner, you ought to be clear about which of your needs aren’t being met. Make a Date Destructive fights often start because the initiator confronts a partner who isn’t ready. There are many times when a person isn’t in the right frame of mind to face a conflict, perhaps owing to fatigue, being in too much of a hurry to take the necessary time, being upset over another problem, or not feeling well. At times like these, it’s unfair to “jump” a person without notice and expect to get full attention for your problem. If you do persist, you’ll probably have an ugly fight on your hands. After you have a clear idea of the problem, approach your partner with a request to try to solve it. For example, “Something’s been bothering me. Can we talk about it?” If the answer is “Yes,” then you’re ready to go further. If it isn’t the right time to confront your partner, then find a time that’s agreeable to both of you. David Sipress/The New Yorker Collection/Cartoonbank.com. All rights reserved. Describe Your Problem and Needs Your partner can’t possibly meet your needs without knowing why you’re upset and what you want. Therefore, it’s up to you to describe your problem as specifically as possible. The best way to deliver a complete, accurate message is to use the assertive message format discussed in Chapter 11. Notice how well this approach works in the following examples: Example 1 “I have a problem. It’s about your leaving dirty clothes around the house after I’ve told you how much it bothers me (behavior). It’s a problem because I have to run around like crazy and pick things up whenever guests come, which is no fun at all (consequence). I’m starting to think that either you’re not paying attention to my requests or you’re trying to drive me crazy (thoughts), and either way, I’m getting more and more resentful (feeling). I’d like to find some way to have a neat place without my having to be a maid or a nag.” Example 2 “I have a problem. When you drop by without calling ahead, and I’m studying (behavior), I don’t know whether to visit or ask you to leave (thought). Either way, I get uncomfortable (feeling), and it seems like whatever I do, I lose: Either I have to put you off or get behind in my work (consequences). I’d like to find a way to get my studying done and still socialize with you (intention).” Example 3 “Something is bothering me. When you tell me you love me and yet spend almost all your free time with your other friends (behavior), I wonder whether you mean it (thought). I get insecure (feeling), and then I start acting moody (consequence). I need some way of finding out for sure how you feel about me (intention).” After stating your problem and describing what you need, it’s important to make sure that your partner has understood what you’ve said. As you can remember from the discussion of listening in Chapter 8, there’s a good chance—especially in a stressful conflict—that your words will be misinterpreted. It’s usually unrealistic to insist that your partner paraphrase your statement, and fortunately there are more tactful and subtle ways to make sure that you’ve been understood. For instance, you might try saying, “I’m not sure I expressed myself very well just now—maybe you should tell me what you heard me say so I can be sure I got it right.” In any case, be absolutely sure that your partner understands your whole message before going any further. Legitimate agreements are tough enough without getting upset about a conflict that doesn’t even exist. Consider Your Partner’s Point of View After you have made your position clear, it’s time to find out what your partner needs to feel satisfied about this issue. There are two reasons why it’s important to discover your partner’s needs. First, it’s fair: Your partner has just as much right as you to feel satisfied, and if you expect help in meeting your needs, then it’s reasonable that you behave in the same way. But in addition to fairness, there’s another practical reason for concerning yourself with what your partner wants. Just as an unhappy partner will make it hard for you to become satisfied, a happy partner will be more likely to cooperate in letting you reach your goals. Thus, it’s in your own self-interest to discover and meet your partner’s needs. You can learn about your partner’s needs simply by asking about them: “Now I’ve told you what I want and why. Tell me what you need to feel okay about this.” After your partner begins to talk, your job is to use the listening skills discussed earlier in this book to make sure that you understand. Negotiate a Solution Now that you and your partner understand each other’s needs, the goal becomes finding a way to meet them. This is done by developing as many potential solutions as possible and then evaluating them to decide which one best meets everyone’s needs. Probably the best description of the win–win approach was written by Thomas Gordon in his book Parent Effectiveness Training. The following steps are a modification of this approach. Identify and define the conflict. We’ve previously discussed identifying and defining the conflict. These consist of discovering each person’s problem and needs and then setting the stage for meeting all of them. Generate a number of possible solutions. In this step, the partners work together to think of as many means as possible to reach their stated ends. The key concept here is quantity: It’s important to generate as many ideas as you can think of without worrying about which ones are good or bad. Write down every thought that comes up, no matter how unworkable. Sometimes a far-fetched idea will lead to a more workable one. Evaluate the alternative solutions. This is the time to talk about which solutions will work and which ones won’t. It’s important for all parties to be honest about their willingness to accept an idea. If a solution is going to work, everyone involved has to support it. Decide on the best solution. Now that you’ve looked at all the alternatives, pick the one that looks best to everyone. It’s important to be sure that everybody understands the solution and is willing to try it out. Remember that your decision doesn’t have to be final, but it should look potentially successful. Follow Up the Solution You can’t be sure that the solution will work until you try it. After you’ve tested it for a while, it’s a good idea to set aside some time to talk over its progress. You may find that you need to make some changes or even rethink the whole problem. The idea is to keep on top of the problem, and to keep using creativity to solve it. You can expect and prepare for a certain amount of resistance from the other person. When a step doesn’t meet with success, simply move back and repeat the preceding ones as necessary. Win–win solutions aren’t always possible. There will be times when even the best-intentioned people simply won’t be able to find a way of meeting all their needs. In times like these, the process of negotiation has to include some compromises, but even then the preceding steps haven’t been wasted. The genuine desire to learn what the other person wants and to try to satisfy those wants will build a climate of goodwill that can help you find the best solution to the present problem and also improve your relationship in the future. 12-5b Constructive Conflict: Questions and Answers After learning about win–win negotiating, people often express doubts about how well it can work. “It sounds like a good idea,” they say, “but . . . . ” Four questions arise more than any others, and they deserve answers. Isn’t the Win–Win Approach Too Good to Be True? Research shows that seeking mutual benefit is not just a good idea—it actually works. In fact, the win–win approach produces better results than a win–lose app-roach. In a series of experiments, researchers presented subjects with a bargaining situation called “the prisoner’s dilemma,” in which they could choose either to cooperate or betray a confederate. There are three types of outcomes in the prisoner’s dilemma: One partner can win big by betraying a confederate, both can win by cooperating, or both can lose by betraying each other. Although cynics might assume that the most effective strategy is to betray a partner (a win–lose approach), researchers found that cooperation is actually the best hard-nosed strategy. Players who demonstrated their willingness to support the other person and not hold grudges did better than those using a more competitive approach. © 2003 Bruce Kaplan from cartoonbank.com. All rights reserved. Isn’t the Win–Win Approach Too Elaborate? The win–win approach is detailed and highly structured. In everyday life, you may rarely use every step. Sometimes the problem at hand won’t justify the effort, and at other times you and your partner might not need to be so deliberate to take care of the problem. Nonetheless, while learning to use the approach, try to follow all of the steps carefully. After you have become familiar with and skillful at using them all, you will be able to use whichever ones prove necessary in a given situation. For important issues, you are likely to find that every step of the win–win approach is important. If this process seems time consuming, just consider the time and energy that will likely be required if you don’t resolve the issue at hand. Isn’t Win–Win Negotiating Too Rational? Frustrated readers often complain that the win–win approach is so sensible that only a saint could use it successfully. “Sometimes I’m so angry that I don’t care about being supportive or empathetic or anything else,” they say. “I just want to blow my top!” At times like this, you might need to temporarily remove yourself from the situation so you don’t say or do something you’ll later regret. You might feel better confiding in a third party. Or you might blow off steam with physical exercise. There are even cases when an understanding partner might allow you to have what has been called a “Vesuvius”—an uncontrolled, spontaneous explosion. Before you blow your top, though, be sure that your partner understands what you’re doing and realizes that whatever you say doesn’t call for a response. Your partner should let you rant and rave for as long as you want without getting defensive or “tying in.” Then when your eruption subsides, you can take steps to work through whatever still troubles you. Is It Possible to Change Others? Readers often agree that win–win problem solving would be terrific—if everyone had read Looking Out Looking In and understood the method. “How can I get the other person to cooperate?” the question goes. Though you won’t always be able to gain your partner’s cooperation, a good job of selling can do the trick most of the time. The key lies in showing that it’s in your partner’s self-interest to work together with you: “Look, if we can’t settle this, we’ll both feel miserable. But if we can find an answer, think how much better off we’ll be.” Notice that this sort of explanation projects both the favorable consequences of cooperating and the unfavorable consequences of competing. You can also boost the odds of getting your partner’s cooperation by modeling the communication skills described in this book. You’ve read that defense-arousing behavior is reciprocal, but so is supportive communication. If you can listen sincerely, avoid evaluative attacks, and empathize with your partner’s concerns, for example, there’s a good chance that you’ll get the same kind of behavior in return. And even if your cooperative attitude doesn’t succeed, you’ll gain self-respect from knowing that at least you behaved honorably and constructively. In Real Life Win–Win Problem Solving © Jason Harris/Cengage Learning It is 7:15 a.m. on a typical school day. Chris enters the kitchen and finds the sink full of dirty dishes. It was her roommate Terry’s turn to do them. She sighs in disgust and begins to clean up, slamming pots and pans. Terry: Can’t you be a little more quiet? I don’t have a class till 10:00, and I want to catch up on sleep. Chris: (Expressing her aggression indirectly in a sarcastic tone of voice) Sorry to bother you. I was cleaning up last night’s dinner dishes. Terry: (Misses the message) Well, I wish you’d do it a little more quietly. I was up late studying last night, and I’m beat. Chris: (Decides to communicate her irritation more directly, if aggressively) Well, if you’d done the dishes last night, I wouldn’t have had to wash them now. Terry: (Finally realizes that Chris is mad at her, responds defensively) I was going to do them when I got up. I’ve got two midterms this week, and I was studying until midnight last night. What’s more important—grades or a spotless kitchen? Chris: (Perpetuating the growing defensive spiral) I’ve got classes, too, you know. But that doesn’t mean we have to live like pigs! Terry: (Angrily) Forget it. If it’s such a big deal, I’ll never leave another dirty dish! Chris and Terry avoid each other as they get ready for school. During the day, Chris realizes that attacking Terry will only make matters worse. She decides on a more constructive approach that evening. Chris: That wasn’t much fun this morning. Want to talk about it? Terry: I suppose so. But I’m going out to study with Kim and Alisa in a few minutes. Chris: (Realizing that it’s important to talk at a good time) If you have to leave soon, let’s not get into it now. How about talking when you get back? Terry: Okay, if I’m not too tired. Chris: Or we could talk tomorrow before class. Terry: Okay. Later that evening Terry and Chris continue their conversation. Chris: (Defines the issue as her problem by using the assertive message format) I hated to start the day with a fight. But I also hate having to do the dishes when it’s not my turn (behavior). It doesn’t seem fair for me to do my job and yours (interpretation), and that’s why I got so mad (feeling) and nagged at you (consequence). Terry: But I was studying! You know how much I have to do. It’s not like I was partying. Chris: (Avoids attacking Terry by sincerely agreeing with the facts and explaining further why she was upset) I know. It wasn’t just doing the dishes that got me upset. It seems like there have been a lot of times when I’ve done your jobs and mine, too. Terry: (Defensively) Like when? Chris: (Gives specific descriptions of Terry’s behavior) Well, this was the third time this week that I’ve done the dishes when it’s your turn, and I can think of a couple of times lately when I’ve had to clean up your stuff before people came over. Terry: I don’t see why it’s such a big deal. If you just leave the stuff there, I’ll clean it up. Chris: (Still trying to explain herself, she continues to use “I” language) I know you would. I guess it’s harder for me to put up with a messy place than it is for you. Terry: Yeah. If you’d just relax, living together would be a lot easier! Chris: (Resenting Terry’s judgmental accusation that the problem is all hers) Hey, wait a second! Don’t blame the whole thing on me. It’s just that we have different standards. It looks to you like I’m too hung up on keeping the place clean . . . Terry: Right. Chris: . . . and if we do it your way, then I’d be giving up. I’d have to either live with the place messier than I like it or clean everything up myself. Then I’d get mad at you, and things would be pretty tense around here. (Describes the unpleasant consequences of not solving the problem in a mutually satisfactory way) Terry: I suppose so. Chris: We need to figure out how to take care of the apartment in a way that we can both live with. (Describes the broad outline of a win–win solution) Terry: Yeah. Chris: So what could we do? Terry: (Sounding resigned) Look, from now on I’ll just do the dishes right away. It isn’t worth arguing about. Chris: Sure it is. If you’re sore, the apartment may be clean, but it won’t be worth it. Terry: (Skeptically) Okay, what do you suggest? Chris: Well, I’m not sure. You don’t want the pressure of having to clean up right away, and I don’t want to have to do my jobs and yours, too. Right? Terry: Yeah. (Still sounding skeptical) So what are we going to do—hire a housekeeper to clean up? Chris: (Refusing to let Terry sidetrack the discussion) That would be great if we could afford it. How about using paper plates? That would make cleaning up from meals easier. Terry: Yeah, but there would still be pots and pans. Chris: Well, it’s not a perfect fix, but it might help a little. (Goes on to suggest other ideas) How about cooking meals that don’t take a lot of work to clean up—maybe more salads and less fried stuff that sticks to pans? That would be a better diet, too. Terry: Yeah. I do hate to scrub crusty frying pans. But that doesn’t do anything about your wanting the living room picked up all the time, and I bet I still wouldn’t keep the kitchen as clean as you like it. Keeping the place super clean just isn’t as big a deal to me as it is for you. Chris: That’s true, and I don’t want to have to nag you! (Clarifies the end she’s seeking) You know, it’s not really cleaning up that bothers me. It’s doing more than my share of work. I wonder if there’s a way I could be responsible for keeping the kitchen clean and picking up if you could do something else to keep the workload even. Terry: Are you serious? I’d love to get out of doing the dishes! You mean you’d do them . . . and keep the place picked up . . . if I did something else? Chris: As long as the work was equal and you really did your jobs without me having to remind you. Terry: What kind of work would you want me to do? Chris: How about cleaning up the bathroom? Terry: Forget it. That’s worse than doing the dishes. Chris: Okay. How about cooking? Terry: That might work, but then we’d have to eat together all the time. It’s nice to do our own cooking when we want to. It’s more flexible that way. Chris: Okay. But what about shopping? I hate the time it takes, and you don’t mind it that much, do you? Terry: You mean shop for groceries? You’d trade that for cleaning the kitchen? Chris: Sure. And picking up the living room. It takes an hour each time we shop, and we make two trips every week. Doing the dishes would be much quicker. Terry: All right! The plan didn’t work perfectly. At first Terry put off shopping until all the food was gone, and Chris took advantage by asking Terry to run other errands during her shopping trips. But their new arrangement proved much more successful than the old arrangement. The apartment was cleaner and the workload more even, which satisfied Chris. Terry was less frequently the object of Chris’s nagging, and she had no kitchen chores, which made her happier. Just as important, the relationship between Chris and Terry was more comfortable—thanks to win–win problem solving.