For many people, it is extremely difficult to develop sufficient self-control to remain calm as the conflict escalates in ever increasing emotion and volume .  I learned some valuable lessons when I joined the Colorado Mountain Club and took fly fishing lessons.  I learned that certain flies will work with some fish and not others, and what works may vary depending on the time of  year and what type of bugs are normally in the area.  I learned that flies that don’t work early in the day may work later the same day as the water warms up.  I also learned how to cast my line to get the lure where the fish are likely to be.  Finally, I learned how to set the hook to reel them in.  As I listened to these instructions I couldn’t help but think that fly fishing is very similar to dealing with conflict. Button pushing children and adults know what kind of barb to throw, when, and where to get you to bite.  They know how to set the hook to pull you in and how to land you.  They know that if they toss the hook late in the day when you are tired, they will get a different response than when you are rested. 

We have a tendency to believe that unexpressed feelings will do no harm if they are not expressed, and there may be considerable risk to expressing our feelings about a topic of concern.  We could have our ideas rejected, or ostracized.  Even worse, a person we care about may reject us. Therefore, we hold it in.  There may be times when this is appropriate.  However, important unexpressed feeling rarely lay dormant.  Rather they ferment and turn into something far more potent and intense than the original concern.  Unexpressed feelings may creep into other conversations with that person in unintended ways.  Resentment may creep in through tone of voice, impatience, or tense reactions.  We may lose self-esteem, and chastise ourselves for not standing up for our interests.  Even more important, hidden feeling may block positive emotions.  It is more difficult to love someone when you resent what they do.  I am not suggesting here that we spill our guts and vent all our emotions.  I am suggesting that we carefully express our feelings as they relate to the problem without being judgmental.

I once met at restaurant manager who was quite proud of his “Machiavellian” approach to management.  He felt that his employees needed a touch of fear to operate optimally.  He let them know in no uncertain terms when their work did not meet his standards, and was careful NOT to establish a relationship with his employees.  However, he confided that he was frustrated and perplexed by a waitress who had worked at the restaurant before he had taken the job as manager.  She continually did as little work as possible, and seemed to engage in a work slow-down whenever he was around.  He thought she was unmotivated and angry because she wanted his job and didn’t get it.  It did not occur to him that her behavior might be a reaction to his fear oriented tactics.  Since she could not discuss her concerns with him directly, she retaliated with the guerrilla warfare tactics of a work slow-down.

I’m told that my new book contains enough material for 3 books and I need to focus the work to one topic at a time.  The 3 topics are

Conflict Management in the Home

Conflict Management in the Workplace

Conflict Management at School

Which would you prefer that I make my first priority?

Think about a situation when someone gave you negative feedback, and you did NOT feel attacked, humiliated or defensive.

What was it like?

Why were you able to absorb the potentially threatening feedback so well?

Chances are that you felt safe and respected by the person giving the negative feedback.  You probably felt that they had your best interests at heart, even though you may not have liked what they said.  They were not saying things to hurt you, or to advance their own ajenda.  They were giving constructive feedback in a way which respected your needs and feelings.

Since many of my readers are not from the United States, I should say that  in 2/3 of the world the individualistic notion of assertively expressing our personal needs is not accepted practice.  Most Asian, South American and African cultures value group needs above individual needs, and frown on  direct self-expression.   Direct confrontation is considered rude.  Instead, they tend to use face-saving avoidance and nuance.   The ultimate insult is to attack one’s family or group, not to attack the individual.  In contrast, European and North American cultures tend to be much more direct about their personal desires.    Advocating for individual needs above the needs of the group is accepted practice.  Even within the United States, there is considerable variability, however.   My impression is that New Yorkers tend to be very abrupt, while native sourtherners tend to be less direct in their communication. Even within regions, some will be more assertive than others.

I recently encountered some interesting information on violence.  According to Vivian & Langhinrichen-Rohling, (1994) 85% of couples say physical aggression goes both ways, so there is frequently a counter-attack.   Stets & Henderson (1991) also found that, in intmate male-female relationships, the woman is 14 times more likely than the man to throw something and 15 times more likely to slap.  Of course, women suffer far more injuries when physical aggression does occur.

I recently received permission to use the following table in an upcoming book I am writing and on this blog.  Ken Thomas’ table illustrates the five options we have for responding to conflict.  The options depend on how much we must have our own needs met, and how much the other person must have their needs met. A competitive person will attempt to prevail in an argument even at the other person’s expense.  Winning is everything, but often results in damaged relationships!  However, it may be the best option when time is short, and important decisions must be made. The collaborative person, on the-other-hand, is concerned with meeting both their needs and those of the other person.  This style generally results in the most creative solutions, but it takes time and effort, and a commitment from both parties to work at it.  It is most desirable when a continuing relationship is expected (e.g. marriage, business partners).  Compromise is different from collaboration in that neither party fully gets their needs met.  Both give up something.  Accommodation, where the other person’s need are placed before one’s own, is familiar to many parents who make sacrifices for ther children.  When the issue is not important to you and it is important to the other person, accommodation may be appropriate.  While avoidance frequently leads to fermenting issues which eventually build up pressure and explode,  the avoiding style may be appropriate to use when there is absolutely no chance of settlement, and the issue is not that important.

Dear Dr. Frame,

My boss repeatedly puts me down in front of other people and discounts my ideas.  I need the job, and other jobs are scarce in my area.  What should I do?

Valerie

—————

Hi Valerie,

This is an example of workplace bullying.  If it continues, workplace bullying can adversely affect your health leading to depression, irritability, loss of sleep, etc.  The target frequently feels betrayed not only by the bullying attacks but also by the lack of support from their peers.  Good managers know to discuss concerns one-on-one to reduce defensiveness.  Since this is not happening, we should ask ourselves why he/she would choose to ostracize you in public. Perhaps nobody has taught them appropriate management skills.  More likely, they feel inadequate themselves, and put others down to establish their own relative importance.  There may be many other reasons as well.