CHAPTER 6

Hidden Challenge #3: Rationalizing the Negative

PESSIMISM DOESN’T PAY

People have a hard time letting go of their suffering. Out of a fear of the unknown, they prefer suffering that is familiar.

—THICH NHÂT HAŃH, VIETNAMESE MONK AND ACTIVIST

RATIONALIZING CAN LOOK like using logic to sideline risk as you shield yourself from the trials and benefits of engaging in conflict and other challenging communication. One of the best ways to find courage to attack fear was offered to me in simple terms by one of the most savvy and generous communicators I’ve met, my friend Surge. We met in college at Purdue in West Lafayette, Indiana. We had many late-night phone conversations and weeknight dinners about the various slings and arrows of that time in our lives. Whenever I was at the end of my rope, he’d encourage me (and others he cares about) to “Work the problem!” rather than to ever give in to feelings of despair. At one particularly sorrowful junction in my life postcollege, I remember his empathy oozing through the phone with him still pointing to something to be grateful for: “Michelle, to feel this pain is also to know you’re fully alive.”

You’ve probably shared courage with more people than you know if you’ve ever listened to a friend and tried to feel what they’re feeling. It’s no secret that emotional conversations can be painful. When you mix in opposing sides it can be even more painful. Yet we need to think and talk about disagreeing and its importance in our lives. We need to engage in the difficult-to-discuss stuff with more skill derived from practice and less fear. Everyone needs to know how to disagree productively, so we can aspire to bridge gaps between differing belief systems.

CONFLICT IS WHERE MOST GROWTH OCCURS

The study of conflict was one of my first true loves. A preschool teacher sent a note home to my parents in the 1970s. It said, “Today, Michelle observed a schoolmate misbehaving and suggested we take a different approach with the child.” I had to laugh when this hint about what I’d end up doing for a living turned up in a musty box from the back of a closet. As a young teacher, I was hooked on any research I could find about negotiation. I remain eager to teach conflict management at every opportunity.

As a graduate school project, I designed negotiation training for manufacturing supervisors. The challenge was to get them to care what a 22-year-old had to say about the subject. It worked, thanks to a few great professors and people who invested personal time mentoring me as I prepared to teach. Dr. Jill Ihsanullah built my confidence by repeatedly encouraging me that this risky challenge was worth undertaking. She offered unfailingly wise framing of the communication challenges and accompanying emotions she knew likely lie ahead. I walked into that manufacturing plant prepared to face some tough judges of my presentation’s usefulness confident despite my nerves. It has brightened my life to teach others some of what Jill has taught me. It’s underscored the importance of seeking mentors who have traveled similar roads to those we embark upon as communicators whenever possible.

In the past few years, my team’s training reach has grown. Participants from many states and backgrounds want to gain skill in managing disagreements. Here’s what we tell them: conflict skills are never set in stone. They can improve with attention and effort. We guarantee this to those who take risks in the name of learning better ways. We coach them to ask for feedback about how they come across especially in stressful communication scenarios. We ask them to study their personality strengths and weaknesses. They choose goals to hold themselves accountable, and we do our best to offer a hand up.

I want to give you an idea of the type of goals folks are choosing. This is a benchmarking opportunity—feel free to adopt any of these as your own. None are easy, and all are worthwhile. In their own words, training participants seek to:

○ Leave “you always” and “you never” out of their speech.

○ Ask others for changes in behavior, not changes in their often long-held beliefs.

○ Share with others not only what’s wrong when in conflict, but what’s right or useful.

○ Point out areas of agreement.

○ Allow the other person to finish their sentence before speaking.

○ Focus on the present and future; don’t get stuck on past disagreements.

When training day comes, we remind participants they’ll get out of the experience what they put into it. RISK and ye shall be rewarded. Ask your questions. Disagree diplomatically. Test theories in your real life. Invite feedback. Some are ready, and they do these things in front of their peers despite some fear. Conversely, some sit on the fence throughout the training. We hope in that case for the best: that we’re planting seeds so they will later act despite fear.

Much of how we approach conflict as adults is shaped, for better and worse, by disagreements we see growing up. The ways we engage in challenging conversations affect self-esteem—our own and others’. Our debate style affects how people behave toward us and is even more critical if we have authority, because conflict left unattended or poorly attended creates havoc on teams and in families.

I hope you’ll refer to this chapter when you’ve got a disagreement or emotional conversation on your hands. You can consider new ways of approaching it—in other words, you can try some Pro Moves. You’ll be in learning mode. Invigorating! And you can do so with less worry when you prioritize the relationship or the positive outcome that’s possible. To call forth courage, I often think of how aviation pioneer Amelia Earhart framed it: “Decide whether or not the goal is worth the risks involved. If it is, stop worrying.”

OUR DIFFERENCES UNLOCK LEARNING

To better cope with tricky conversations, look at the roots of tension, what causes it. Competing goals or lack of clear leadership creates division on teams. Changes in the way we use time, money, or space start disagreements. Walls can form around various parts of an organization, team, or family.

As workplaces become more diverse, there’s a lot to disagree about if one doesn’t try to understand opposing viewpoints. You may differ in age, personality, ethnicity, gender, physical abilities, sexual orientation, work background, income, marital status, spiritual beliefs, geographic location, socioeconomic status, family structure, or educational background (whew, and even more) from people you partner with to achieve goals. This will be less likely if you’re in a geographic area with less diversity or if your organization hasn’t successfully reached out to diverse groups. You may find yourself in a position to speak truth to power about lack of diversity in a group to which you belong, and can call upon courage to take that risk.

Differences make us stronger as a species, but biological and cultural diversity can limit our ability to understand one another. Left unaddressed perhaps because someone rationalized it as not important or addressed clumsily or with ill intention, conflict becomes a damaging force.

Parker Palmer is an author and activist who has lived through many polarizing periods in US history. He writes about human differences in a way that speaks to me. I hope it will speak to you. We share this quote from his book Healing the Heart of Democracy: The Courage to Create a Politics Worthy of the Human Spirit often in harassment prevention seminars:

We engage in creative tension-holding every day of our lives, seeking common ground. We do it with our partners, our children, and our friends as we work to keep relationships healthy. We do it in the workplace as we solve problems. We’ve been doing it for ages in every academic field from the humanities to the sciences. Human beings have a well-demonstrated capacity to hold the tension of differences in ways that lead to creative advances. Creative tension-holding is what made the American experiment possible in the first place.

America’s founders—despite the bigotry that limited their conception of who “We the People” were—had the genius to establish the first form of government in which conflict and tension were understood not as the enemies of a good social order but as the engines of a better social order.

To squeeze the benefits out of tensions with others, know the two types of conflict—constructive and destructive. Constructive disagreement is called “substantive” because it’s interest-based. There’s a healthy energy around it. Parties discuss instead of defend positions. They try not to personalize the issue, so they can avoid being offended. They get creative with possible solutions. When both parties are heard and both get some of what they want, the relationship gets stronger. Substantive conflict is good for us and should not be rationalized away. It can be welcomed in our lives.

The other type of conflict is destructive and can involve deliberately wishing pain upon another or engaging in unintentionally harmful behavior. This type is called “personalized.” It’s position-based, often present when one party is giving up no ground. It can look like trying to wear the other person down with threats, silent treatment, nagging, or other detrimental tactics. If a solution is found, it’s often because one person concedes under pressure. The relationship is damaged as vendettas are created. In unintentionally harmful personalized conflict (such as one coworker offending another while not realizing it) there’s often room for the courageous people to bring dysfunctional behavior to light, so it can stop.

Substantive conflict, the good kind, is about a recognized issue. It starts with you, risk-taker. You’ll need to succinctly state the challenge to confirm that a problem has been identified. Then get communication flowing:

1. Invite the other person to talk at a time that works for them. Set a date.

2. Keep your beef with this person as confidential as possible, so you can honestly say you’re bringing the issue to them first.

3. Give your undivided attention to this discussion.

4. Like them or not, it doesn’t matter. Thank them for their time and state that you believe you can get to a better place through conversation.

5. Invite them to speak first after you mutually identify the issue. Say, “Please tell me how you see X.” Speak your respect for some part of their position (“You make a fair point that . . .”) and check to see if you heard them right: “So your main concern is . . .?”

6. Take your turn to speak because you deserve to be heard in equal measure.

The goal is not to make disagreement disappear, although it might do just that if you uncover information that contradicts assumptions. One or both of you may say “I had incorrect information” and change your mind. This takes a level of maturity that’s learned over time. The goal is to generate new energy, to move the conflict from “me vs. you” to “us vs. this problem.”

I acknowledge that all of this is more easily said than done! You know you’ve arrived at higher ground when you feel it. It’s a relief. It’s a metamorphosis. Destructive emotional states evolve to constructive states through mutual problem-solving if you can get the other person to talk. You’ll need to motivate yourself to initiate the discussion. Why you? Because you’re the one with the Pro Moves!

After workplace mediation meetings, I might offer both parties a less-than-one-page agreement to sign. “Going forward, Person/Team A will start or stop doing X. Person/Team B will start/stop doing Y.” We meet again in a few weeks to ensure that both hold up their end of the deal. This simple documentation is a good way to avoid regressing to less helpful behaviors.

SELECTING WORTHWHILE DISAGREEMENTS

Here’s a question I get a lot: How do you know if a disagreement is worth having?

Good question. First, become aware. What are you doing or not doing that contributes to the problem or is viewed as annoying? What is the other person doing or not doing? Describe the situation to yourself as factually and fairly as you can. You may want to put these behaviors on paper. Then, think about the importance of what you observe. If left unattended, could this disagreement be damaging? The Pro Move is to ask yourself whether the issue affects your own or the other’s reputation negatively. If so, you should address it.

Another test you can apply is whether or not the behavior affects the team negatively. If yes, it’s worth a conversation. Finally, does it affect external customers or people outside your family or friend group? If so, have a chat. These three simple questions help you know when to engage and when to wait. Recall what Lebanese poet Kahlil Gibran taught: rest in reason. But when it’s time to call on your courage, move in passion.

Think about your wants. What is your desired state? What do you want this person to do differently? What might they want you to do differently? You can’t tell someone how to feel or what to think, but you can ask for behavior change, and vice versa.

People are more willing and able to change if you raise their awareness about the impact of their actions. The Pro Move is to do that before you ask for any changes. Tone matters. Aim to maintain directness and blend it with diplomacy. Show interest in the other’s opinion. As you raise your game to avoid rationalizing at the wrong time, the easier life becomes and the more successful you can be.

Conflict should never be only about speaking your position. Listen carefully to the person to whom you’ve given your opinion, with your emotions and ego in check. It’s not easy, but it’s necessary if you want your views respected in return. Breathing exercises can help, and they can be done with only you in the know about how you’re staying cool.

I enjoy thinking about my conflicts and those faced by people I care about. At our company, we study the angles of disagreements daily. We meet very few people who share our curiosity. Conflict sure gets a bad rap. Mention it and walls go up. It’s feared due to the messy emotions it unearths. Despite its thorny exterior, disagreement arrives bearing beautiful gifts. We’ll end here with a love letter that illustrates what healthy handling of conflict can do for us.

Dear constructive conflict,

We’ve known you all our lives.

We watched our elders acknowledge that you’re vital to communication, or refuse to.

You were always present in our homes and schools.

You will always be part of our work lives and personal relationships.

You help us find our beliefs and push us to lift our voices for causes that matter.

You reveal others’ unique positions when we’re brave enough to listen.

Without you, we’d never admit that we see the world from one limited perspective, our own.

Because of you, we’ve learned our way is not the only way, there’s often more than one way.

You remind us that those we see as dead wrong or out to get us may have positive intentions.

You bring anguish at times, anger and shouting—but you should not be confused with abusive communication. You have the power to restore harmony.

You allow emotional release when we can’t find a solution and tears arrive.

You encourage us to find coaches and counselors to guide us through rough waters.

You help us identify our purpose.

You encourage tough discussions that lead to higher ground with coworkers, friends, enemies, strangers, and families.

You’re inescapable.

You’re a worthy puzzle that requires brain and heart working together to solve.

You shape our workplace culture.

You shape our family dynamics.

You’re never the same thing twice.

You keep us growing as communicators, and we’re grateful.

Love,
Michelle

CHAPTER 6 Pro Move

Why hold on to issues you’ve never taken the risk to air out? Find courage to request a conversation rather than choosing to run from disagreements or jump into them with boxing gloves. Consider your five options (compete, avoid, accommodate, compromise, or collaborate) and choose a method that fits the situation and your desired outcome rather than automatically engaging in your go-to style.

Think about a recent conflict you experienced. Name it: What conflict style did you use? Would another have served you better?

CHAPTER 6 Exercise

At the top of a fresh clean page, name the topic of a recent disagreement you have now or had in the past with another person. Under that topic, title one column “ME” and the next column “THEM.” Now, list a few respectable points of each position. (It’s usually easier to come up with good points of your own position.) Bravely take the risk to give their position some credit. Your ego is not always your amigo, so you may need to ask it to stand down as you consider the points you list under “THEM.”

From here, you have something you respect about the other’s position to speak aloud. This may help them in turn listen to you. It creates higher ground. Examples: “We both love our kid more than anything but disagree about where to send him to school,” “We both want this project to succeed but disagree about approach,” “We both want to be heard but keep interrupting one another.” Forge ahead, and hopefully the vibe will change from you vs. me to us vs. the problem.