Attacking and Saving Face

How we see ourselves is extremely important, both to us as individuals, but also to those we would like to have as friends, lovers, and mates. Obviously, no one likes to lose face, and yet in conflict, people often engage in putdowns, character attacks, and name calling. Not so obvious is the fact that we build our relationships with others based on our similarities and commonalities, as much as we do on our differences. If you can offer me something I don't have or can't get otherwise, that makes you particularly valuable to me, a difference I can live with! However, other differences can be sources of frustration, anger, and disappointment. While there may be some similarities that are problematic (we are both poor, unintelligent, etc.), there are other similarities that strengthen a relationship, such as interests, attitudes, values, and beliefs that we have in common. This is one reason why many people are attracted to others who have similar backgrounds and experiences.

A useful exercise that emphasizes our similarities and differences and makes apparent the role our face plays in our relationships with others is the "20 Statements Test." The exercise goes like this: You and another person of interest list (on your own) as many as you can answers to the question, "Who am I?" Try to list at least 20, although you may not do it all at once. You can still add later to the list when other ideas come to you. In my list, I might say:

I am a college professor
I like to write books and teach about conflict
I am a husband, father, grandfather, son
I like to mountain bike, exercise,
I like to fish in the summer.
I like to read mystery, action, and political novels
I like teaching online, maintaining a blog, and Facebook.
and so on

When I meet people, with some I can discuss college teaching, book writing, places to fish, an interesting author, or computer and online activities. If another person, puts down college teachers or intellectuals or liberals or fishing, I find myself less attracted to that person and perhaps even offended or upset by something said.

My wife and I each wrote our "20 Statements Test" before we married many years ago, and it is interesting how many of the statements rang true over the years. You could say that the answers to "Who am I" gave us a good idea of what parts of our self or face the other needed to accept and support and what parts resulted in conflicts sooner or later.

How do you support the other's face? You can signal ahead of time that you don't mean to attack the other person's face with what you have to say. For example, a woman could say, "I know how much you enjoy golfing, and you want to spend a lot of time at it, but now that we have decided to have a baby, I am going to need more help from you around here, which may cut into the time you will have to do some of the things you want to do." Note that she acknowledged something important to the other before making a statement that is potentially problematic for their relationship.

You can also support the other's face while talking to the person both generally and specifically. In a general sense, we all want to be loved, needed, valued, respected, appreciated, etc. So you could say, "I like a lot of what you did here and many of your ideas will help us a lot, but there is one suggestion that would cost too much for us to do at this time. Note again the person's attempts to show appreciation although the person could not follow though 100%.

In a more specific manner, we need to accept and support the items on the "20 Statements Test." If I like to play golf, your taking an interest in it would contribute greatly to our relationship. It becomes something we can do together. I like to ask couples to list what they both enjoy, that is, what they enjoy doing together. A couple once told me that there wasn't a single activity they liked to do together. For example, he liked sailing, but his wife couldn't stand it. She liked operas, and he didn't. Note that one needed to take up something that interested the other or they both needed to take the time and effort to find something they both could enjoy. The activities we both enjoy and like to do together are the building blocks of a relationship.

Suppose you goofed and said something you wish you hadn't -- like you put the other person down in some way or criticized something they value resulting in hard feelings. There are steps you can take to mend the relationship. Let's say you said you had no interest in taking social dancing lessons with your romantic partner, and she made it clear to you that she is upset over your lack of interest. After giving the matter some thought, you approach her and offer an explanation as to why there is a problem with her idea -- maybe it is too expensive, time consuming, bad timing, far away, or not the type of dancing you would enjoy. You can also apologize, saying you are sorry that you have upset her. Finally, you can offer some kind of concession or restitution (which explains why so many men buy their women flowers) by suggesting another activity or different location or cheaper option. Your efforts to restore her face may not be successful and the relationship becomes more difficult to restore. Sometimes other people are too stubborn and nothing works for them. However, it you have a good explanation, apologize, and find a mutually acceptable substitution, a reasonable person should see the merits of your alternative and a positive outcome may result. Such cases point to the importance of the "20 Statement Test" as an indicator of those aspects of self and face that require acceptance and support. The failure to identify areas that both parties can enjoy, accept, or support spells trouble.(Photo by RKOpunk)

Managing Stress

We have all experienced someone blowing up on us, often over the smallest issue. While there are a number of reasons for people losing their cool, erupting, and sometimes turning violent, the one I want to talk about today has to do with stress. I often find that when others explode over something small, it is because they have a lot of stress in their lives. Here stress refers to either (1) situations where we think we can't do all that we have to do in the time we have or (2) people who take themselves too seriously.

In the first instance, we have taken on too much. The combination of tasks we are supposed to tackle overwhelm us. Now someone comes along and makes a demand or says something upsetting, and we explode! In this case, we need to reduce the stress in our lives. Every so often, we should ask ourselves, am I happy now? If not, why not? What would we like to change in our environment to make it more enjoyable? What can I do to help cope with all the demands?

A lot of advice is available for managing stress. Learning to say "no," getting better organized, changing our work habits, living a more balanced life so there is time for exercise, rest/sleep, and relation. Taking time out or time off, throwing a party for friends, or doing something you know you can succeed at helps you feel better. Most books on stress list a variety of ways you can "lighten the load" on yourself, reduce the stress in your life, and live a less harried existence.

In the second case, people ask too much of themselves, turn play or vacations into work. You find them irritable, depressed, easily upset, or difficult to get along with. They need to cut themselves more slack. They need to separate work from play and strive to make time for both. They need to make their time at work more enjoyable. Finally, they need to appreciate the fact that bad times help us to better appreciate the good times.

Sayings I have found useful/true: "Never say Never..." "Don't look a gift horse in the mouth"..."Easy come, easy go"...'What will be will be..." "There's many other fish in the sea"..."If the shoe fits, wear it." Remembering sayings like these may help you become a person who is more fun to be around.

How do you explain the fact that an event can produce stress in one person and not in another? Of course we are brought up differently, so we look at the world differently from others. However, that means there are different ways to see the world if we would just try. I may think positively about certain events, while you think negatively about them. I invite you to change your view, if that helps reduce the stress in your life. (Photo by MissMaisy)

How do I confront the other person?

When I first started teaching conflict management classes, college students often asked me how to deal with conflicts in their lives, how to approach their romantic partners, roommates/housemates, teachers, and bosses and what to say, exactly. They wanted specific advice, step by step. In response, I developed the following 6 step sequence, which pulls together the advice I gave in earlier blogs.

Step 1: Prepare for confronting the other person about the problem. You need to decide whether or not to confront the other person. Try to identify the specific problem, including your concerns, interests, and unmet needs. Will the problem get worse if not addressed? How will it affect your relationship with the other person? If you believe that the problem has reached a point where it is really bothering you or negatively impacting on the two of you, you probably should have said something sooner. Don't wait any longer. Try to think optimistically and give the other person a chance to offer an explanation or change some bad habit (see my September 17, 2009 blog below for suggestions on thinking about problems). This is also a good time to write out an "I-statement" (See my blog below for September 18, 2009 on the subject). You may not need to read it word for word exactly as written to the other person, but you want to be sure to cover your feelings, the problem, how you are affected, and what you want specifically.

Step 2: Make an appointment to talk to the other person. This is when you say, "we need to talk." Even if you are living together, you need to set aside a time to give each other your undivided attention. Usually you want to address issues within 24 hours, but you need to pick a time and place that is convenient, affords some privacy, and is free of distractions. Times to avoid are when a person comes home hungry and tired from a day at work or is in the midst of watching a television program. It is difficult to discuss serious problems over the telephone and even worse to try to do it via email, so try to arrange to meet in person. Parents often wait until after the kids are tucked in for the night, busy college students sometimes have to wait for the weekend to sit down and talk.

Step 3: Confront the other person at the prearranged time and place. Here is where you put into practice your I-statements (see my September 18, 2009 blog below). If the discussion starts getting heated, you should practice the S-TLC steps (see my September 17, 2009 blog below) and if both sides appear to be digging in, you should practice the techniques for increasing your options (see my September 24, 2009 blog below). Hopefully you will attempt more cooperative negotiation techniques and try to avoid turning the conflict into a competitive negotiation (see my September 21, 2009 blog below).

Step 4: Hear the person out. Just as you want the other person to not interrupt you, listen to what you have to say, and respect your position, so should you. In addition to not interrupting the other and paying attention by looking at the person, you should also ask a question or two. "So, you tell me what you are thinking. How does all this set with you?" You should be prepared to hear some criticism, requests to change your behavior in someway, or complaints you may or may not have heard before. Problematic situations are often not one sided (with only one person at fault). Behaviors are often interrelated such that the other person is behaving in a certain way because of something you are doing. We both contribute in some way to the problem at hand. However, it is important not to become defensive or angry. Don't try to think of ways to refute what the other says, but rather consider the issue from the other person's point of view. How would you feel if you were the other person experiencing your behavior? > (see my September 17, 2009 blog below for suggestions on listening to the other).

Step 5: Come to agreement. Try to collaborate (work together) in resolving the issue or problem (see my September 9, 2009 blog below on collaboration). As I mentioned before, agreements should be specific. Rather than agree to "help more around the house," spell it out: You vacuum, while I do the kitchen floors. You do the laundry, and I'll dust the rooms. Note that an agreement should have something for everyone. You get this, and I get that.

Step 6: Follow up. People don't usually think of this step, but it is as important as the others. After a period of time, perhaps a week or a month, depending on the issue/agreement, you should both sit down and revisit the problem and solution to ensure that both parties are complying and comfortable with the outcome. In some cases, the improvements are noticeable right away, but in other cases, it may take a while before you are in situations where you can see if they are now handled differently. However, in time it may become apparent that one party has "forgotten" to follow through and needs reminding. Other times, one party is unhappy with the way the conflict was resolved, so it is important to address these misgivings. When following up, it may be necessary to revise the agreement or even scrap it in favor of trying something new. However, if both parties are complying and satisfied with the outcome, this would be a good time to celebrate! Perhaps go out to dinner or a movie or throw a party for friends. Doing something for fun to celebrate successfully resolving a conflict that results in mutual satisfaction is reinforcing. This way you reward good behavior and are more likely to use the 6 steps to successful confrontation in the future.

Following these steps to successful confrontation is more likely to lead to a mutually satisfying resolution to the problem or issue and gives the other person a chance to work with you to improve the situation. All too often we don't give the other person a chance by avoiding the issue until we can't stand it and then explode in a way that divides us rather than work together toward a mutually satisfying outcome. (These 6 steps to confrontation are discussed in more detail in Chapter 6 of Managing Conflict Through Communication, which I co-authored with Ruth Anna Abigrail, if you wish to cite them elsewhere.) (Photo by kendradee33)

Increasing our options

In my last blog, I looked at more difficult situations, involving scarce resources -- which look like a win-lose situation (I get the resource and you don't). Today's blog focuses on ways to generate more options to convert the situation from a competitive one to a cooperative negotiation because we can then resolve the conflict in a way that satisfies us both.

Generating more options often requires thinking outside of the box, maybe even getting creative. How do we do this?

1. Brainstorming: This term is often misunderstood. It is not something we do by ourselves. It is also not the same as discussing ideas. We brainstorm with the other person or each of us brainstorms with our family or friends or colleagues at work, and we simply list all the suggestions without discussing them or evaluating any of the ideas. Why not? Calling something a good idea or a bad idea discourages others from making contributions. Even a bad idea can trigger people to think of other better ideas. Also, later on, several of the ideas (which were less effective by themselves) may be combined to solve a problem. So brainstorming often produces a way to solve a problem that had not occurred to the conflicting parties initially.

2. Cost-cutting: One way to resolve a conflict may cost you in time, money, and effort. Part of the solution to the problem might involve the other party contributing time, money, or effort to make life easier or more affordable for you.

3. Compensating: This occurs after an incident because it involves reimbursement. Whereas cost-cutting pertains to the future, compensation involves the past. If you suffered in some way, the other person may offer to compensate you for your loss of time, money, effort, or pain.

4. Changing positions to interests: We learned in making I-statements (see Sept. 18 blog), that the last part should be a statement of your goal in the conflict, what you want specifically. You want to use our only car tonight, but I want to go somewhere else. Notice the word "want" here. What we want, specifically, is our position, which may involve a scarce resource -- only one car that we both want to take in opposite directions. Our interests however occur on a higher level because they are our needs. In this situation, our interest or need is for transportation. The shift from "I want this car" to "I need transportation tonight" is a shift in thinking. Suddenly, we realize that there may be other ways to get from point A to point B. A friend in going to the same event, and I might be able to go with him, while you take the car. So we both go where we want to and who gets the car becomes irrelevant. Shifting from positions or wants to interests or needs often results in resolution.

5. Granting priority: We can invite the conflicting parties to each draw up a list of items to be negotiated and rank them. We might then agree to grant each other the top one (or two), but negotiate the rest on the list. Note: both mush grant the other the top item. This can be viewed like a trade off. I give you X but in return I get Y. Often granting the highest items frees up the negotiation so that the remaining issues can be resolved much more easily.

6. Tossing a coin. In our society we have many ways to assist people in making decisions. We know that two people are going to arrive at a doorway at the same time, so we say "women before men" or "age before beauty, etc." I am amazed that even in life threatening situations, these methods work. On a sinking ship, we are reminded, "women and children go first. " "Who risks her or his life?" let's flip a coin or draw straws. Rock/scissors/paper and drawing numbers to wait at the deli are techniques people often use to settle potential disputes. Of course, you have to get agreement before hand on the technique if there isn't one already in place (like doorways and sinking ships). Once that is agreed upon (like let's see who is the fastest, so let's race for it), the conflict is often easily resolved.

Entering into a difficult and complex negotiation, we might begin by granting each other the top item on our priority list, we might then engage in brainstorming, cost-cutting or compensation, and focus on interests rather than positions to resolve many of the other issues. Finally, we might agree to tossing a coin or some other common method for resolving what remains. In any case, we will have tried to be creative, and employed negotiation techniques for generating more options to resolve the irresolvable. (Photo by fezinator1)

Negotiating over scarce resources

Many conflicts clear up as soon as we make our wants, interests, and needs know to others. Sometimes, they just need to know and they will quickly grant your wishes. Other times, with the communication skills described so far, they will accept a solution if they see benefit to themselves. In either case, you asserted yourself and worked with them collaboratively to resolve the issue.

In this blog, I look at a more difficult situation, involving scarce resources -- not enough to go around. What if you both want to use the same car tonight, don't have enough money to buy what you want and the other person wants, want to be with the same man or woman that someone else wants, want to be with your family over the holidays but the other wants to be with his or her family at the same time, or both of you want to watch two different TV programs at the same time? In these cases, making your needs or desires known to the other is not enough. You also need additional tools to increase the options for reaching an agreement. Today's blog focuses on how you can do that.

My ideas for today's blog come from the subject of negotiation. There negotiators exchange proposals and counter proposals as a means of reaching a satisfactory settlement. Negotiators are governed by the minimax principle, where they strive to minimize loses and maximize gains.

The rub is that there are two entirely different ways to negotiate, either cooperative or competitive, each with its own purpose. First, there is competitive negotiation, which is useful for dealing with people with whom you do not have or desire an interpersonal relationship. Such cases may include buying/selling a car, house, etc. In such cases, one should start high, concede slowly, emphasize the value of one’s offers, conceal some information (like home much you earn or have saved in the bank), argue forcefully, and try to outwait the other. In these situations, it is OK to view the situation as win-lose. You want to sell at the highest possible price, while the other is trying to get the lowest.

Secondly, cooperative negotiation can be a win-win. It is an integrative form that combines formal bargaining techniques with many basic interpersonal skills such as effective listening, assertiveness, supportive communication, and collaboration. This works best when both parties trust one another and the outcomes could be mutually satisfactory. In these situations, competitive negotiation would leave at least one party dissatisfied and could lead to the destruction of an interpersonal relationship. Rather, the parties need to view the situation as win-win. They want both parties to feel good about the outcome of the negotiation.

So you want to save competitive negotiation for selling/buying houses, cars, etc., but use cooperative negotiation for friends, family, and romantic partners, etc. How we actually engage in cooperative negotiation is the subject of my next blog. (Photo by Rebeloneil).

What should I say in a conflict? (I-statements)

In my last blog, I introduced the idea of communicating our wants, interests, and needs to others, but in a way that involves working together rather than forcing our wants on others. One useful technique for accomplishing this is through the use of I-statements. Generally you-statements ("you this...you that..." ) arouse defensiveness in others. I-statements do not.

I-statements consists of 4 parts:

1. Feelings: You need to state how you feel (emotionally). I feel angry..upset..frustrated..sad..afraid...anxious...uncomfortable... is much less likely to arouse defensiveness. How can anyone deny how you feel? Besides an expression of your feelings is of interest to others, if they care about you.

2. Problem: You need to identify the behavior that caused you to feel the way you do. I feel angry because you didn't return any of my calls...were late...forgot our special day...took the car without telling me...left dishes in the sink...didn't vacuum like you were supposed to. The problem is the issue or the event that triggered the conflict.

3. Consequences: You need to also explain why the other's actions affect you the way they do. I thought maybe something happened to you (because you didn't show or call).. maybe you don't care enough about me or think enough about me...left me stranded because I needed the car...it is unfair for me to have to work and do the housework too... We cannot expect others to be mind readers. They do not always realize how their behavior impacts on you.

4. Goal: What do you want? If the other were to agree to do something, what would you want him or her to do? You need to be specific about what you want. Don't say, you want the person to be on time after this because that may not always be possible. Say you want the person to try to be on time, but if they can't, then to call you and let you know when they can be there. Or, you want them to start marking special days on a calendar as a reminder. Or, you want the person to ask before taking the car. Don't say that you want more help with the housework. Instead, say that you want the other to wash the dishes and not leave them in the sink over night or you want the other to vacuum once every week. I am suggesting ways you can clearly express the goal you have in mind.

I-statements can consist of a single sentence like "I am anxious and afraid when you don't show because I think that something may have happened to you, so I want you to try to be on time, but if you can't, then call me." I have found it useful to even write out this sentence ahead of time. However, you can also cover each of the 4 parts in the course of a discussion in which you spend some time talking about your feelings, then mentioning the problem, eventually explaining how it affects you, and then finally telling the other person what you want (goal).

I-statements help us take responsibility for our feelings and wants, and enable us to stand up for what we think is important. If we don't tell others what we are thinking, can we blame them for being confused, uncertain, or blame them for acting the way they do? At least we owe them the chance to cooperate, change, or make amends.

However, if we use I-statements, but the other continues to ignore our feelings and wants, then this may be a clear sign that the other person doesn't care about you. Then you need to say something like, "I am frustrated and upset when you ignore my requests because I don't think you care about me. I want you to try to be more considerate of me by taking my requests seriously." If that fails, then you truly have a very serious problem in your relationship. (Picture by by rosco_sandy).

S-TLC steps to dealing with conflict

I have written a lot about conflict, but the one topic that people seem to remember most and comment on using the most often is my 4 step S-TLC model. Many admit not thinking along these lines until I introduced the 4 essential steps to take when engaging in a conflict. I copyrighted these 4 steps in Chapter 3 of a textbook: Managing Conflict Through Communication (2007), which I co-authored with Ruth Anna Abigail. To help people remember these steps, I use S-TLC, for stop, think, listen, communicate

STOP: Take a time out! Before you say or do anything, stop and get a hold of yourself. Too many of us react to a situation, and then we later regret what we said or did in the heat of the battle. Many people have trouble with this step of the model. How do you pause long enough to get control of yourself? You should come up with what works for you, but reading what others do may help you think of something your could use in the future. Here are some suggestions:

1. Leave for a few minutes or however long it takes to get control of yourself. You could walk around the block, go get a cup of coffee, or smoke a cigarette (if you must).
2. If you can't leave, try counting to 100 (or count backwards), ask to change the topic of conversation for a while, agree to sit and say nothing for a few minutes.

THINK: While taking a time out and before saying anything you might later regret, reflect on what you want, what you think the other person wants, imagine how your interaction might go if you say something one way or another.

1. Ask yourself, what it is you want from the other person. If everything went your way, what is the best you could hope for? Then, on a more realistic level, under the circumstances, what might you expect to gain?
2. If you make your needs, concerns, interests known, what impact will your assertiveness have on your relationship with the other person?
3. Behaving one way or another, how will you affect the other person's view of you as a person? Will you be seen as thoughtful, conscientious, reasonable? Or a hot head, lose cannon, a person unable to control her/himself?

LISTEN: After you make your request, offer your view, and explain why all this is important to you, then hear the other people out. Give them a chance to make requests, offer their views, and explain why they feel as they do.

1. Pay attention to the other by looking at them, nodding your head, and saying, uh-huh, OK, I see, etc.
2. Don't interrupt the other person. Don't make negative facial expressions or show lack of interest.
3. Try to put yourself in the other's place to see the conflict from the other's point of view. Ask the person questions.
4. At some point, summarize to the other what you think the person is saying. This forces you to pay attention, and makes the other person realize that you get the message. You could ask them to do the same for you.

COMMUNICATE: I view communication as a process (involving a series of steps) by which people interact in a way that involves coordination (working together), so that the outcome is a mutual understanding. One should not try to be controlling and dominating. I cringe whenever I hear someone say, "I have to be right," "I always win the argument," "I am never wrong," "I know what's best for you," "I don't care what you think," "I have the best idea, " What you think doesn't matter," "You have to do this or else..." All theses phrases are one-sided. However, we have all heard the phrase, 2 heads are better than 1. So as you communicate with the other person,

1. hear each other out, try to cooperate, work together.
2. Discuss the problem, not what you think of each other at that moment.
3. Keep trying to see the problem or issue from the other's point of view, which is what he or she is trying to tell you if you listen to the person.
4. Try to keep an open mind, withhold judgment, don't jump to conclusions, welcome feedback.

With which of the S-TLC steps do you have the biggest problem? When talking to groups of 20-30 people, I find some who say that one step or another is their biggest problem, but some admit that 2, 3 or all 4 steps are a big problem for them. I suggest that everyone carry a card with the words stop, think, listen, communicate written on it. Also, make a note or two for each word to help you make the right choices. I might write: Stop--walk around the block, Think--What do I want?, Listen--ask questions & give feedback, Communicate--Don't dominate. You need to adapt your card more to your style and available options. What works for you is what you need to do.
(Picture by LA_signals)