For this challenge, I will tell you about a medium-sized printing company in Chicago, which I refer to here by the fictitious name Ink Printing. The company is a commercial printer, whose customers range from large corporations to small business owners. The owner lived in Los Angeles, and had a number of other printing companies.

Alberto, a customer service representative (CSR) for the company, had worked at Ink Printing for six years. He had started as a printer on a large press and through hard work had risen to his current position in the customer service division. Alberto was good with people and enjoyed his CSR job. Primarily, he serviced the company's small business clients: graphic designers, museums, retail shops, automotive repair, and others. Whenever a print job was completed, he contacted the client to ensure that the client was satisfied. For the most part, the customers were happy campers but, needless to say, not all. So, Alberto attended one of my company's one-day seminars on "Conflict Resolution for Professionals." He was an active participant, taking many notes and asking lots of questions. He took part in the role-playing with gusto and, learned how to resolve issues professionally. At the beginning of the class, he had described how very uncomfortable conflict made him. But he left the session more at ease, as he now had communication tools and a process, The Working Circle, and so felt better prepared to address conflict.

Dissatisfied customers would contact Alberto via e-mail, telephone, or by coming into the office. Alberto's supervisor, Gina, was a relatively pleasant woman, who gave Alberto some latitude in settling customer issues. And because she was a very busy woman, she preferred that Alberto take care of many issues without involving her. Company guidelines allowed Alberto to resolve issues/credits and other problems to a limit of $500. Above that amount Alberto had to get approval from Gina. Alberto also had to complete prescribed paperwork, in detail and accurately, whenever he issued a credit or refund.

The client that caused Alberto much consternation was a hotel in the Windy City. Recently, the hotel had ordered 25,000 copies of a new brochure. The job had been completed and picked up the previous day, so Alberto added his follow-up call to his to-do list the day after. Before he got to the phone to do so, however, he got a call from the marketing rep at the hotel, who wasted no time in letting Alberto know how angry she was as soon as he picked up the phone.

"What the hell are you doing there at Ink Printing? Are you all idiots? The job is a total train wreck," the rep shouted into the phone.

This was not how Alberto anticipated the call would go, for sure!

The reactions I describe in this challenge took place in very short time frames, because Alberto did not have the luxury of sitting and reviewing The Working Circle and developing a game plan. He had to, literally, think on his feet, recalling what he had learned in my class.

"I am so sorry that the job did not come out the way you wanted. Can you tell me what the problem is?" Alberto asked.

"What's the issue? You should know! Don't you have quality control there? Doesn't anybody know what they are doing there? I have 25,000 pieces of crap, and I have an event in two days that I need the material for!"

Having someone screaming in his ear was the kind of conflict that made Alberto the most uncomfortable. To help himself, he grabbed his diagram of The Working Circle and glanced at the questions, even as the customer continued to yell at him.

"Do you hear me, or are you deaf?" she shouted.

Alberto quickly put into play what he had learned in the seminar about dealing with exactly this kind of situation.

When someone is agitated and angry, the last thing you want to tell the person is to calm down. That kind of comment boomerangs instantly. Think back on a time when you were excited or upset and someone told you to calm down. I'll bet you got more annoyed and, probably, angry at the other person. Instead, when another person is haranguing you, take this twofold approach: offer empathy and set boundaries. I want to leave Alberto's story for a moment to explain this in greater depth.

Attempting to problem solve while agitated yourself is virtually impossible. Likewise, trying to calm down another person who is upset is not easy. The most effective method to get another person to calm down is to demonstrate empathy. Yes, I know this is difficult to do, especially when the other person is yelling at you or being abusive, but it's critical to a successful outcome.

Showing empathy in the face of conflict is one of the most challenging skills to develop. I certainly recall having to learn it, yet once I did, it quickly became evident how extraordinarily effective it was. To help you be able to show empathy, I want to introduce a communication tool called active listening. The key is to zoom in on what you believe the other person is feeling and then simply acknowledge that feeling. Don't admit guilt or wrongdoing; don't defend; don't attack. Simply, acknowledge.

If you reiterate accurately what the other person seems to be feeling, nine times out of ten, he or she will cool down—usually apparent because they will sigh, lower their voice, stop the verbal assault, and maybe even apologize (though don't count on it!). Most important, you must express empathy sincerely; it must not seem phony or rehearsed—sincerity is the key to success here.

I want to reiterate here the two keys for successfully resolving a conflict with an angry person: offer empathy and then set boundaries. Active listening helps you do both, express empathy and let the other person know that he or she won't be allowed to speak to you disrespectfully.

Another communication tool, one that is highly effective in setting boundaries, is the "I" message. Basically, by delivering "I" messages you tell the other person what you need, want, or feel in order to move forward in the conversation. You let the other person know all this without defending, blaming, attacking, withdrawing, or even agreeing with him or her. You simply state where you are coming from and the result you are looking to achieve from the dispute.

The easiest way to think of "I" messages is in terms of "I need, I feel, I want." You are telling the other person how you feel about what is transpiring between you. This is another difficult skill to learn, as our temptation is to tell the other person how they make us feel, as contrasted with how we feel. Here's an example of what I mean—I have taught this skill to kids of all ages.

Two 11-year-olds were arguing, and I was teaching them how to deliver "I" messages. I asked one child to tell the other how he felt.

"I feel that you are mean and not fair," he said.

I explained that those were not feelings; they were accusations. I asked him to try again.

"I feel bad that you did not give me a turn at the game," he then said.

Success!

Adults do the same thing: we think we are telling someone else how we feel, when in fact we are telling them how they made us feel. There's a very big difference. Once you tell people what you think they did to you, or how they made you feel, they have to defend themselves.

Let's say you were arguing with a friend, and the last comment she made left you feeling rather hurt. (Notice my language—I did not say "she hurt you.) You want to say something in response, and you also want to reach some kind of resolution. Consider the difference between these two statements:

The first response would likely aggravate the situation, because your friend would probably react by denying, attacking, or defending herself. The second comment simply states how you feel, not what your friend did. No one can refute what you feel; they can only deny what they did.

The key here: If you want to move to resolution, own your reactions. That increases the chances that the other person will own up to his or her actions and reactions, too.

It's also important to be aware that telling another person that he or she made you feel a certain way actually gives that person enormous power over you. In a conflicted situation, you do not want to give anyone power over you. Keep your power to yourself!

Let's put the two keys together—offering empathy and then setting boundaries when someone is being verbally abusive:

Meanwhile, back at Ink Printing, Alberto had just gotten an earful from the irate customer. He looked at his diagram of The Working Circle, and remembered the skills he had learned.

"Do you hear me, or are you deaf?" the disgruntled customer shouted.

Alberto now faced a choice about how to react. Let's refer to the Masculine-Feminine Continuum as a reference:

The two critical aspects of this conflict are that the customer had a valid complaint, and that the customer was abusive, which is never acceptable. If, in a situation such as this, you react by attacking, you cease to be customer sensitive, and will make the situation worse. If, on the other hand, you react on the withdrawing side, you're essentially telling the customer it's okay to abuse to you. (In my opinion, it is never okay to let anyone be abusive to you.)

"Do you hear me, or are you deaf?" the disgruntled customer shouted.

Here's how Alberto responded: "I understand how upset you are, and I certainly want to take care of this issue immediately. I also need you not to raise your voice at me, so we can move ahead and resolve the problem."

There was a moment of silence on the other end of the phone. The active listening ("I understand how upset you are...") and the "I" message ("I also need you not to...") had the desired effect.

Alberto took advantage of the calmer moment to say, "Please tell me exactly what happened to your print job, and let's see what I can do to ensure you have what you need for your event."

Note here that Alberto still did not acknowledge any wrongdoings on the part of Ink Printing; he was problem solving.

The customer continued: "Well, in the first place, the colors are off. And in the second place, the folds in the brochure are not where they should be."

At this point it was clear that Alberto had effectively defused the situation enough to move into problem-solving mode. Again referring to The Working Circle, he moved on. At this juncture, Alberto did not have to go through the Circle question by question. The hotel was a new customer for Alberto's company, and he knew that it was nonnegotiable to lose the client. He also knew from experience that he had some latitude in resolving this issue, while also recognizing that there was a nonnegotiable deadline looming.

Here's how he proceeded—his game plan: He said to the client, "If you give me no more than half an hour, I will check the job, see what we sent to you, and look at the original order."

"I want it fixed, and I want it fixed immediately" the customer said firmly.

"I know you do, and I do, too." responded Alberto. "Just give me half an hour."

"Okay," she agreed.

Alberto hung up, and immediately did as he had promised.

As he ran down the hall, he ran through his responses to the questions of The Working Circle: