One of the most challenging aspects of resolving interpersonal conflicts is not realizing that the situation in question is much more complex than each of the people involved can see.
Each participant, in opposite positions of the conflict, interprets events differently.
In these situations, our intention when starting a difficult conversation involves:
prove our point;
let others know what we think; or
convince the other person to do what we want (for example, taking the blame and apologizing).
However, this approach leads to defensive positions on both sides and prevents the understanding of different points of view, conditioning understanding and an effective resolution of the conflict.
So, << First Name Test >>, what would be a more appropriate starting point for having effective conversations, in a conflict context?
The answer lies in changing perspective: let’s move from a perspective of conflict (I’m right vs you’re wrong) to one of curiosity and learning.
Let’s look at the differences between the two perspectives:
Conflict perspective:
❌ We think we have all the information we need to understand what happened. Our goal is to convince others that we are right.
❌ We assume that we know what the other person’s intention was. So we want to make her see that what she did or said was wrong.
❌ We attribute blame for the situation to one of the parties (usually others, but it can also be self-directed). The objective is to make them admit that they are guilty and take responsibility for resolving the situation.
Learning perspective:
✅ Each participant clarifies their perceptions and shares the information they have access to. Possibly, there will be pieces of relevant information on both sides that the other was unaware of.
✅ We only know our own intention and the impact that the other’s actions have had on us. We don’t know, and we can’t guess, what was going on in the other person’s head. Our goal in the conversation is to share what we feel and the impact the action had on us; and discover what the other felt and the impact of our action on them.
✅ We assume that we probably both contributed to the situation. Our goal in the conversation is to understand this system of contributions: how the actions of both parties interacted to produce that outcome (conflict).
By adopting a learning perspective on conflict management, we begin to understand that…
…our purpose in conversation is no longer to get our message across or prove ourselves right, but to share information and ask some questions, in a spirit of true curiosity.
Instead of trying to convince someone else of something, we want to understand their point of view and explain ours, share and understand the feelings involved and co-construct the solution to the conflict.
The conversation stops being a battlefield (of words) and becomes an experience of openness and growth!
This model is based on the Harvard University Negotiation Project and is an integral part of the intervention I develop to help organizations improve their communication processes.
But it is equally useful for all other interactions in our lives. After all, we are all human and, as such, we want and need to develop meaningful relationships with other people. And to do that, we need to have better conversations!
Try it out and remember:
You’re Doing Great!