CHAPTER 3

How Responses Are Shaped: The Power of Connections

To better understand connections and the power they hold in our everyday life, we begin with evaluating our emotional response at the earliest stages of our lives—when we are babies. Our brains recognize and tune in to the people whom we depend on. Edward Tronick and his team at Harvard demonstrated this phenomenon through their now-famous Still Face Experiment.1 They found that when humans are disconnected, they go through a sequence of automatic behaviors to gain back the connection. The experiment begins with a baby and the mother in a room interacting and playing. Then, the mother is asked to act as non-responsive—to have a still face. When the baby tries to make a natural connection, the mother does not respond at all; not physically nor verbally. This creates a sequence of reactions.

First, the baby tries to attract the attention of the mother by reaching out with her hands, without sound, making eye contact, and pointing. Being unsuccessful in getting a response from the mother, the baby automatically moves into the next level of reaction. The baby starts to shriek as a signal, pushing for connection. What the baby is really trying to say is, “What happened to you? What’s going on? Can’t you hear me?” Being still unsuccessful as the experiment forces the mother to remain non-responsive, the baby moves to the next stage of automatic reactions. The baby turns away from the mother and shuts down. After a short period with the mother’s continued non-responsiveness, the baby enters into the final stage by crying. The mother is finally permitted to respond to the baby, at which point, all is forgiven, and the baby stops crying and re-engages with the mother. The disconnection has been repaired, and the bond has been restored.

A similar sequence of actions can be observed when we view adults in professional settings where a connection has been broken. Initially, adults send signals through their facial expressions, body language, meeting behavior, or moving their chairs around—any nonverbal manner to indicate their need for attention (in the disconnection sense). Next, they turn to vocalizing their emotional state through a combination of blaming, judging, defending, lecturing, and complaining in order to bring attention to the disconnection. Whether for pursuers or withdrawers, adults in conflict will literally turn their body away or leave by withdrawing from the situation in order to preserve the connection. In essence, when we shut down and say to ourselves, “Well, I am not going to talk to you. I am not going to respond to you. I have better things to do than helping you.” We shut down our own emotions to somehow change the situation, but that does not help. As the last stage, assuming the connection has not been repaired, we witness fear and panic, demonstrated it through angry e-mails, all capital letters, or raised voices, resulting in responses such as yelling, screaming, crying, or stonewalling.2 All these behaviors are a sign of desperation to reconnect.

Lola reflecting on her own experience, remembers occasions when she reached the last phase, that of feeling helpless, alone, and desperate for connection; those were painful moments that often resulted in locking herself in the office and crying. Not everybody cries, of course. Some people become angry, shout, or become extremely defensive. But underneath, they share the same feelings of fear and panic.

Do you recognize the sequence of behavior? Have you ever experienced these feelings yourself?

The experiment ends with the mother reaching for the baby. Her face and eyes are open, and she smiles; all of her nonverbal cues send a clear message of, “I am here.” The mother becomes available, the baby responds, and the connection is repaired. There is joy again, the bonding is restored, and safety forms the foundation of their relationship once again. The EmC process seeks to enable emotional connection that has been broken in the conflict. Simply put, the process is a roadmap that allows for identifying emotions and fears, the indication of needs through sharing individual vulnerabilities, and the affirmation of those needs, which provides the opportunity for repair and reconnection. Just as with the baby, the process allows for feelings of happiness, safety, and confidence to return almost immediately upon reconnection. By giving space and words to what we feel is happening when we experience a disconnect, we allow for a path toward the restoration of the connection. Mario Mikulincer, in his series of studies, indicates that when people delve into their emotions to understand what they need to feel safe and connected, they are able to regulate their emotions and convey clearly their needs, they are able to pull people closer—responsiveness and emotional accessibility form the basis for secure bonding.3

Nurturing Connection and Emotional Safety

Charles Darwin, famous for his contributions to the science of human evolution, once said, “Survival goes to the most nurtured.” We also can see the same phenomena in the dynamics of team behavior.

As a team leader, keeping healthy connections between team members makes them feel emotionally safe. This feeling of safety is critical to their ability to form secure bonds, engage in creative work, and trust each other, especially during times of difficulty and uncertainty. We do this by first helping team members become aware of their own emotions and reactions to stress.

Why focus on emotions? Because our emotions tell us what matters and orient us in the proper direction. Emotions steer us to what is worthwhile and away from danger. They are our survival compass. In our work with teams and organizational leaders, we find that emotions in business settings are often dismissed or, at best, given little attention. The workplace emphasizes the habit of separating emotions from cognition when making decisions and analyzing problems; we often use the language of logical or dispassionate analyses, ignoring the emotional component. But, in research and practice, this approach proves to be a mistake because emotion and cognition have to work together for us to respond appropriately to complex and challenging situations. As with the case of the baby, if there is continued or repeated disconnection that does not provide the baby the validation for safety, over time, the baby develops set reactions that carry into adulthood. These reactions in adults are often verbalized, such as: feeling abandoned, not being seen as good enough, not feeling acknowledged or valued, feelings judged, or demeaned. These feelings, when formed, become part of us and, at times of stress or conflict, are triggered.

In the EmC process, we refer to these as raw spots, experiences from the past that become painful again in a similar situation. Some triggers could be a raised tone of voice, a disapproving or angry facial expression, particular words, and behaviors. The triggers create an instant disconnect based on our raw spots. For example, being left out of an e-mail could be interpreted as being deliberately excluded—triggering feelings of exclusion or of not being valued—whereas it may have simply been a mistake. The raw spots for the individual emerge out of the experiences where he or she may have been left out of decisions or information in the past. Studies show that in attachment relationships, in only 100 milliseconds, we are able to read facial expressions, and in 300 milliseconds, we are able to feel what we see on the other person’s face.4 In essence, we can pick up facial cues almost instantaneously. Negative facial expressions can trigger immediate panic as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)5 studies of the brain show the facial expressions of rejection are processed in the same area of the brain as physical pain. Thus, in a manner of speaking, seeing a rejection on your boss’s face is the same as stepping on a nail.6 Other triggers may include unusual and surprising decisions, disproportionate actions, or obvious disengagement.

We have all experienced moments of disconnection at work and can relate to how painful they are. The inability to reconnect or the lack of knowledge about how to reconnect and to heal these painful moments creates additional raw spots that can be triggered whenever we are confronted in moments of stress or crisis. Raw spots can also occur when our emotions or needs are dismissed or ignored. The failure to address our needs, in a sense, scrapes our emotional skin raw and creates a relationship injury. Although our natural response is to keep our distance or become aggressive toward others when hurt, this behavior does not heal our raw spots and only makes matters worse. From our experience, the only way to reduce the impact of the raw spots on our reactions is through bonding conversations, which lead to reconnection.

Identifying the Triggers

The first step in healing a relationship injury is to identify the triggers. Let us look at Linda and her team to see what were some of the triggers during the conflict:

For Linda: Ann and Bob’s absence during the conference call

For Ann: Linda’s decision of changing the calls to be every Monday morning

For John: Linda’s action of interrupting and canceling the conference call

For Bob: Evelyn’s words that Linda was furious

For Alan and Evelyn: Linda’s raised voice and her facial expression of looking angry

As we can see, people at work impact each other in numerous ways. They react to inputs during a moment of stress from the vantage point of their perception of the individual or individuals with whom they seek attachment. Triggers can be minute actions that, at times, are invisible or inconsequential to someone else. However, they carry loud messages to the person being triggered. It is important to recognize that it takes courage for individuals to share their triggers and raw spots. The EmC process is oriented toward creating emotional safety so that such sharing can take place. The individual can then reframe the conflict in terms of the negative cycle that is feeding the conflict and taking over the relationship. This reframing removes the blame away from the individuals and aligns them against the cycle, not each other. This critical focus on the negative cycle helps team members feel united and less threatened, thus increasing their willingness to continue the process and positively engage each other.

In the EmC process, we provide a list of 16 separate raw spots and three levels of emotions, so that team members have an extensive language to express their experience properly. A full list of raw spots is included in Appendix A. Here are a few examples of the raw spots for the various members of Linda’s team:

Linda’s raw spots were not being valued or appreciated for her work and communicating her needs, but being ignored.

Ann’s raw spots were not being valued or appreciated for her work and being judged as not good enough.

John’s raw spots were not being valued or appreciated for his time when someone turns away from him by canceling the conference call right in front of him. He felt that someone close to him was telling him that he did not deserve Linda’s time to hear his report.

Bob’s raw spots were being judged as not good enough. Just because the call was not on his calendar, he did not deserve respect or consideration to be informed. He was being judged for something that he did not even know that he had missed.

Alan and Evelyn both felt the same raw spot of someone close to them is being aggressive or intimidating toward them.

As the facilitator, Lola observed changes to the face and body posture of each of the team members as they shared their raw spots and triggers. The EmC process helps to maintain a level of safety for each individual as they share emotional experiences (raw spots, triggers, and emotions). We do this for each person before turning to the next individual. Doing so provides the space for each person to be heard, validated, and reassured—at which point, we often observe team members becoming calmer and more reflective. After we have identified triggers and raw spots, we then explore emotions, which we will cover in the next chapter.

Questions for Reflection

Here are some questions for you to use to reflect on the key concepts in this chapter:

1. In thinking through a conflict or a relationship crisis, can you name some of the actions or words which were triggers for you?

2. In relation to these triggers, can you outline some of the raw spots that were touched?

3. How did the triggers and the raw spots impact your interaction with the other individual(s)?

4. Can you observe when others get triggered by something you said or did?

5. Can you follow through to observe which raw spots may have been touched in them?

Summary of Chapter 3

In this chapter, we began with the review of the Still Face Experiment with the baby and the mother, which illustrates the four levels of response: reaching, pushing, withdrawing, and overwhelming panic. We discussed how these responses carry forward to adulthood and form the basis of our reactions in moments of disconnect with those whom we seek attachment. We discussed the importance of recognizing emotions in the workplace and the role they play in our ability to form secure bonds or to find ourselves amidst periods of disconnect. While the content and our objective goals and aspirations are critical in business, the role of emotions has been generally downplayed, leading to disconnections and ineffective workplace behaviors. We learned through various studies that rejection from or disconnection with individuals who are important in our life, be they at work or at home, is painful. In fact, fMRI studies show that the pain of rejection is processed in the same area of the brain as is physical pain. We are hurt when we lose connections. The inability or the lack of willingness to properly address the depth of the emotions, the pain of rejection, and the nature of the disconnection occurs regularly in many workplaces. As was the case with the baby, the adults at work react improperly by protesting the continued disconnection. The perpetual negative cycle that is created and fed through ineffective strategies to reconnect causes further conflicts.

A primary goal of the EmC process is to uncover the underlying key triggers and raw spots that have resulted in the formation and continuous feeding of the negative cycles experienced by those in conflict. The EmC process provides extensive language and situational safety to help individuals properly distinguish and share their raw spots and triggers. This allows for a shared understanding of the negative cycle as the primary opponent in the battle to gain reconnection—thus removing the burden of blame or defense from individuals so that a path forward can be explored.

..................Content has been hidden....................

You can't read the all page of ebook, please click here login for view all page.
Reset
18.208.172.3