Balance with the Positive to Avoid Focusing on the Negative

I find myself returning to the internal dialogue that reminds me of my negative or self-doubting narrative rather than my self-affirming story. I find that my negative voices are louder than my positive ones, and so I lose confidence and my classroom persona is diminished—I am unwilling to push myself as a teacher, failing to try something new or push boundaries, since these classroom behaviors all carry risks. The technical term of this phenomenon is asymmetric effect with a negative bias—a term I introduced in chapter 10. This process highlights why humans naturally focus on negative in a given situation rather than the positive.

Humans anchor on negative emotions more frequently than they do on positive ones. Positive emotions dissipate more quickly than negative emotions. The older we are, the more worried and concerned we are about having negative experiences. Thus, through the aging process, we risk less and learn less and take fewer chances so that we don’t have a negative experience.

The goal, then, is to remind ourselves that we possess a positive story, not just a negative one. We need to think about what we’ve done right as teachers—our strengths, our successes. In this way, we can continue to take risks and stretch ourselves.

Label Your Affect to Avoid Losing Perspective

J. K. Rowling, noted author, has had a major impact on the reading habits of a generation of children. Seldom had there been an author who caught the imaginations of millions of children through books. Obviously, millions of adults also indulged themselves in the world of Harry Potter and friends.

In 2008, Rowling was awarded an honorary doctorate of letters from Harvard University for her written work and her impact on society overall. As Ms. Rowling approached the podium to speak to the audience of well over twenty thousand students and guests, one could observe that she looked nervous. Throughout Harvard Yard there were large screens where guests could view Rowling as she spoke. The camera had the ability to zoom in on the author to see her splotchy skin, with nerves emanating through the skin. You could virtually see her heart beating. She held onto the podium so tightly it looked as though the podium might begin to rock back and forth.

After acknowledging the other dignitaries on stage, she metacommunicated with the audience. Rowling opined, “Ever since I was invited to speak and receive this award I have been apprehensive and somewhat off-center. You see, I am most likely the least educated person here today.” As Rowling spoke, you could see a transformation of her countenance right before us. She began to feel calm and grounded. She felt in control of herself and the crowd.

What Rowling had done was label her affect. She had communicated to her audience and to herself that she was right there, in the present. She wasn’t focused on the future or the past. In reality, what we know is that fear appears within us as we obsess about the past or the future. Notice that Rowling had initially become obsessed about the future and what her feelings and thoughts would be like when she appeared at Harvard speaking. She had created the feelings and emotions she expected to have at Harvard back when she received the invitation to speak. The process that took place cognitively was what is called “affective forecasting.” Humans believe they can predict what they will feel like, what they will look like, and what their experiences will be like. In truth, they are terrible at predicting accurately their emotions and feelings in the future. When they walk into those feelings they project, they seldom get it right. But they continue to forecast their affect.

Rowling had experienced one of the more central behaviors of humans in attempting to predict the future. After those months of worry, she used “affective labeling” to bring herself to the present, where her oration on innovation and creativity entranced the audience.

Embrace Clarity and Simplicity to Avoid Ambiguity

The problem here is the confusion and misperceptions caused through ambiguous behaviors and messages sent by those acting unintentionally. I’ve written about this outcome before. It is near and dear to my heart. I have caused pain in the process of intending a different outcome. I use my humor to tease and to create endearment. Not everyone experiences it that way.

I remember reading in my teaching evaluations on more than one occasion that a student was frightened to come to class. Each has communicated in different words, but the feeling and meaning seemed the same. One response was representative of the other. “Professor DeLong, when you make fun of someone in class it’s hard to trust you. I come to class in fear that you may tease me or make a sarcastic comment about me. I just don’t find the classroom a safe place. As these words hit the page, I feel a sudden jolt of embarrassment and some shame.”

This is what I know and believe: If we send ambiguous messages or act in ways that are unclear or confusing, the receiver will conclude that something is wrong or that the receiver did something wrong. The receiver will surmise and conclude wrongly that there are distance and doubt about the nature of our relationship.

There have been situations when I was running to one classroom after concluding a previous class experience of teaching. My mind is focused on the next class. I’m focused on getting to class, adjusting the technology, setting up the boards, organizing my teaching notes, buying a bottle of water, meeting a student’s parents, taking attendance, and other immediate matters. I am unaware that as I left the previous class a student walked up to me as I was gathering my papers and told me that he had really liked the case we studied that day. I barely acknowledged the comment. I barely even looked up from the table in front of the class. Once I put the papers in the manila folder, I turned quickly and headed for the swinging doors in the Aldrich classroom.

The thought pattern that transpires internally with the student is as follows: “I wonder if Professor DeLong didn’t hear me. If he did hear me, he just blew me off! What a jerk! Couldn’t he have just acknowledged me? Why was he in such a hurry and not interested in me? I made a comment in today’s class and thought it was worthwhile and moved the discussion along. Maybe it wasn’t that good after all. But my friend in class told me she really liked it. I thought up to now that there was a chance for me to get a “1” in this class. Maybe I’ve been fooling myself.”

As I step back and analyze this interaction that took all of two seconds, I wonder why I didn’t at least say “Thank you.” I’m not sure why I behaved as I did. But I did what I did. I wonder how many ambiguous messages I’ve sent in the past month. Most important: Every student in both classes that day could write a chapter in a book describing a time when he or she communicated an ambiguous message that was interpreted in a way that wasn’t the intended meaning of the sender. Each student in the two classes could write another chapter describing a time he or she misinterpreted a message sent by a boss, a parent, a friend. In both chapters there was pain caused that wasn’t intended.

I could have simply stated to the student who paid me the compliment, “Thank you. I’m pleased that it resonated with you. I’m sorry I’m so rushed right now, but I have to get to the next class. Let’s catch up another time.” Given the amount that all of us are attempting to accomplish each day, we are always running faster and faster, often with little understanding of the way our behavior is interpreted by others.

The goal is not to please and live just for others, to meet their needs, to create a smooth and silky life methodology in hopes that we are loved by everyone. But the goal might be to be understood, to communicate in ways where our intentions shine through. The goal could be to deactivate ourselves and put our best selves forward in order to leave a trail of speaking with truth, with support, in a direct manner that is simple and clear.

Assist the students by telling them to find one other person they don’t know. Find another student to join their group. Find a third and so on. Each group should find an open space in the classroom where the group can discuss specific questions provided by the instructor in class. Have the questions on a handout or prewritten on the board.

Tell the students that after they have written down their collective answers, they are to select one of the group members to communicate to the rest of the group the three key learnings. Step by step. With clarity and simplicity. This approach will counter the confusion that may arise if students are lost in the instructions. Manage the ambiguity through structure.

Use the Magic of Horizontal Communications to Overcome the Power of Least Interest

Humans want symmetry in relationships. What doesn’t work in relationships is when there is asymmetry or perceived asymmetry in a relationship. We want to be talked with, rather than talked to, by another person. We don’t want another person to communicate that that person is more important, has more power, and has more control and influence in the relationship.

Naturally, when a student walks into my office, there is asymmetry because of my position or perceived knowledge or the understanding that I will be evaluating the student. The student is coming to my office, so I’m in a secure place that is familiar to me. The student can feel intimidated, less sure of herself, on foreign territory. In the office I have all the symbols of status, such as awards I’ve hung on the wall or the obvious location of my office in the corner of the building. I also know that when the student enters the room, the student wants something from me. The student wants information, more insights into my thinking, an answer to a question.

My operating principle to deal with the asymmetry in the relationship is to ask three basic questions at some point during the meeting. First, I’m going to ask the student, “How are you?” Second, I’m going to ask what I can do to assist or help the student. Third, I ask the student for feedback on how I might improve my teaching style or how I can enhance the classroom learning environment. The students who respond to the final question by saying “Everything is just fine” don’t meet my expectations. I want the students to learn how to give feedback when students are in conversation with those in authority. I want them to learn that they shouldn’t silence themselves because of fear of retribution or because they are intimidated.

A piece of the rationale for doing what I do with students during office visits is to teach courage. I want to teach them that they are attending a graduate program that is founded on the importance of general management. The school assumes that students want to manage and inspire others. We also assume that part of communicating is to be honest when communicating in all directions. When I was in the working world of Wall Street, I saw professionals lie to one another and speak ill about others to others. I witnessed subordinates agreeing with their bosses when I knew the subordinates not only didn’t like their bosses but didn’t believe in what they just agreed to. My hope is that those small interactions in my office give students reps in speaking truth to power.

When students, partners, employees, or children act out, part of the motivation is to test a relationship. One person in the relationship believes he or she has less power in the relationship. The person in a relationship who has less interest in the relationship has the most power. When we act out, we are trying to discover the nature of the relationship and whether or not there is symmetry in the relationship.

A way to reduce those feelings of insecurity and imbalance is to understand that there is a higher likelihood of keeping balance in the relationship if we talk with rather than to the other person. Talking with another person infers equality. Sharing information rather than telling another person infers respect. Remaining deactivated by empathizing with another, by listening, by being direct quietly rather than acting hostile creates symmetry. The concept of the “power of least interest” is basic and fundamental to our ability to form relationships that are meaningful, that create connection, that create reasons for living and loving. The ability to notice when you are becoming activated, finding yourself talking down to others, using your finger to make a point, yelling at another person, demanding of others rather than requesting—these are all signs that you have moved beyond or beneath the expectations of communicating with rather than to others.

Keep Conversations Small to Cure Experiential Avoidance

Last year I was mentoring an assistant professor on ways to enhance his teaching. After observing a couple of classes, I set up a follow-up meeting with this professor. The meeting was set up for three days from the previous observation. At the last minute, I needed to rearrange my schedule and cancel the feedback session. There was a part of me that was relieved that I could put off the meeting. I had seen some behaviors that had me worried about his ability to manage a classroom.

When I rescheduled to meet in two weeks, I felt immediate relief. I could literally feel the anxiety leave my body. The tension dissipated, and I felt compelled to move to the next agenda item on my “to do” lists. I forgot about the meeting I needed to have for about two hours. But then what I experienced was the tension coming back that I previously had thinking about the meeting I needed to have with my colleague. But the anxiety was more acute. The proverbial “rock in my shoe” felt larger and more annoying.

I called my psychiatrist daughter and told her of this experience. I told her that every time I delayed having a conversation I needed to have, she began to chuckle. She informed me that the phenomenon I just described was in fact a normal response when we delayed having a conversation. She called it “experiential avoidance.” She suggested that each time we delay a conversation we know we need to have, the greater the tension. Sara mentioned that in time, if I delayed the conversation endlessly, I would begin to see this heretofore small conversation as a major event. Major events that we have created in our heads and that we feel in our hearts seldom turn out as planned.

One reason these events seldom play out as we think they might relates to the aforementioned cognitive distortion of affective forecasting. Another reason they often go awry is that the more we plan for these events in our heads, the more times we practice how we think the scene will play out. Once we are in the moment of that scene and the scene goes in a different direction, we try to steer it back to the one we planned. The more we have practiced with the end in view, the more we don’t want to cede control or at least share responsibility for the conversation.

When we practice experiential avoidance, rather than giving direct and timely feedback, we delay the process of helping to develop the other person by simply putting off the interaction. The longer we delay having the conversation, the higher the probability that we won’t ever have the conversation or that it will do harm to the relationship.

Somehow we seem to slip through life avoiding conversations that could cause tension or could be unpredictable. We will fall short as teachers and leaders if we choose to avoid these important opportunities to create clarity.