Conflict Resolution: To Deal With Highly Opinionated People, Give Up Being Highly Opinionated

One of the most frequent questions I’m asked is, “How can I deal with highly opinionated people?” and I always answer in the same way: To be effective with these people, give up being one of them. After all, everyone is “highly opinionated” including, of course, me (I wouldn’t be writing this if I weren’t). Some don’t express their opinions openly, but their opinions are in their minds just waiting to be expressed to a friend (“You can’t believe what John said to me. He’s so opinionated.”).

Now when presented with my answer for dealing with highly opinionated people, your tendency may be to argue which is, of course, an example of just how opinionated you are.

That’s why the best way to deal with opinionated people is to listen to what they are saying and really “get” them. Listen for what they are actually saying without all your judgments, beliefs and opinions (which, by the way, are more examples of how “highly opinionated” you actually are). Never give your opinion without first paraphrasing, to the other person’s satisfaction, what he or she has just said to you.

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Aggression encourages aggression. Listening encourages listening. Go into the interaction with these highly opinionated people not with the intent to get them to agree with you but with the intent that you are going to agree with them. “Agree” in this case means understand where they are coming from and with the possibility that you will not only change your view but that you will change your behavior.

What have you got to lose? That which you resist persists. Your current way of dealing with these people hasn’t made any difference. Why not try something new?

After all, from the perspective of the other person, you’re the one who is “highly opinionated.”  

We’re Worried About The Wrong Things

“Don't listen to "experts" predicting what might happen. They have no idea what's going to happen.”

Jeffrey Gittomar

Author, “The Little Red Book of Sales” among others

If you are a parent, what do you worry most about? According to a Mayo clinic survey that was mentioned in a story in the New York Times on September 18^th, 2010, parents are most worried about, kidnapping, school snipers, terrorists, dangerous strangers and drugs.

The story was titled, “Keeping Kids Safe From the Wrong Dangers” and, as you can infer from the title, parent’s worries bear little relationship to reality. According to the Centers for Disease Control, the five things most likely to cause injury to children up to age 18 are car accidents, homicide, child abuse, suicide and drowning.

In fact, "The least safe thing you can do for your child it to drive them somewhere" according to Lenore Skenazy, author of "Free Range Kids."

British writer Warwick Cairns, author of "How To Live Dangerously" calculates that "If you wanted to guarantee that your child would be snatched off the street, he or she would have to stand outside alone for 750,000 hours."

In reality, homicide is down, kidnapping is down, traffic deaths are down. So why do we so often worry about the wrong things?

The answer lies in our brains and in what’s called our “reticulating activating system” (RAS) which basically determines what we will focus on. When we experience emotion (hearing of a terrorist attack, reading about home foreclosures or the state of the economy), our RAS goes into high alert and has us watching out for potential dangers. So when we read a newspaper or watch the news on television, we become convinced that we need to be fearful for our safety. Colloquially, we understand this when we say, “What you see is what you’ll get.”

So how fearful do we need to be? Not very. Our perception of fear doesn’t match reality. What we see on television or read in our newspapers is very unlikely to happen to us. Yet we think it will and it keeps us in a state of high arousal. Politicians, advertisers and the media know this and use it to influence our behavior.

So relax. What you see is not likely to be what you get. 

What Difference Will You Make Today?

“Few will have the greatness to bend history itself; but each of us can work to change a small portion of events, and in the total of all those acts will be written the history of this generation

.”

Robert Kennedy

Here’s a “small portion of events” that represents the fulfillment of Kennedy’s aphorism:

I was putting gas in my car the other day and I noticed a man standing near the entrance to the gas station store. He was unshaven, his clothes were dirty and he was extremely thin. I thought he was going to ask me for money. He didn’t.

At that moment, an older couple approached me and somewhat frantically asked if I was familiar with the neighborhood. They were lost and asked for directions to their destination which I patiently gave them. But the more I explained, the more confused they got, asking me over and over to repeat the directions.

Suddenly, I heard a voice behind me speaking to the couple. It was the man I had seen by the entrance to the gas station store. He was correcting something about my directions. I realized that he was right and I had been wrong.

I left the couple in the very capable hands of this man. As I drove away, I waved to this man who waved back and smiled.

Cynics among us may assume that this man was simply looking for a handout but I don’t think so. He had truly made a difference for that couple and, I maintain, that was the “handout” he had been seeking. If he also got some money for making a difference, so much the better.

In fact, the “handout” we are all seeking is to know that our lives matter and that we made a difference. The reason any of us get paid for the work we do is because we made a difference.

The question I encourage you to wake up asking yourself every morning (to replace any negative thoughts that may be there as you awake) is, “What difference can I make today and who can I make it for?” The difference we will make will always be a “bending of history” no matter how large or how small the difference.

If we will just search for opportunities to make a difference for others, we will find them.  

Are Pink Elephants Keeping You Stuck?

“We are what we think, we become what we think and what we think becomes our reality.”

Source unknown

I heard a great demonstration the other day of how to deal with fear. As I recreate this demonstration, I suggest you consider a fear you have: Asking for what you want. Speaking in front of groups. Pursuing a dream. As you read, ask yourself, “What am I really afraid of?”

I was in a seminar and a saleswoman talked about her fear of calling a prospective customer because she was afraid she’d be considered “pushy.”

In response, the leader of the seminar asked her to think of a pink elephant. He asked if she had a clear image in her mind of a pink elephant. She said she did (are you seeing one?).

The leader than asked her to think of the words, “I’m pushy.” He asked if she was hearing herself saying those words. She said she did (imagine hearing yourself saying those words).

The seminar leader then asked what was the difference between the two thoughts.

Now pause for a moment and ask yourself the same question. Is there really any difference between a fictitious pink elephant and a fictitious thought?

The obvious answer is that there is no difference. Both are made up.
The thoughts we have in our heads are no more real than that pink elephant. But we behave as though those thoughts are real. Notice, for example, the thought that stops you from saying or doing something that you’d like to say or do.

Not only will we stop ourselves, we will argue with anyone who points out the unreality of our thoughts. For example, the woman didn’t immediately thank the seminar leader for pointing out that she was living in a fantasy world of thoughts that were no more real than pink elephants. She argued for her limitations and listed her evidence for believing that she will be perceived as “pushy” even though she had never been told she was “pushy” or told to never call again.

My point is we make up stories and then live as if those stories are real. We act as though our thoughts are like physical objects that are barriers we can’t get around. We made up our thoughts. We just forgot we made them up.

So the next time you’re stopped from doing what you want to do by some thought, consider that the thought is just your “pink elephant”  keeping you stuck in a fantasy world. Create your reality not by banishing these pink elephants (you really can’t control the random thoughts you have) but by recognizing that it’s just a fantasy you’ve created and it’s the fantasy, not the reality that is keeping you stuck.

Conflict Resolution: Relationship Advice From Keith Richards

“If I’m in conflict with somebody, it means somebody is in conflict with me.”

       Keith Richards quoted in Rolling Stone magazine, October 28^th, 2010

Leave it to the poster child of sex, drugs and rock and roll to give us an access to improving our relationships. As Richards suggests, consider the possibility that we are in conflict because we never quite get our responsibility for the conflict. In fact, we may not even see that we have any responsibility. Literally not see it.

Consider this tragic story that I heard on National Public Radio the other day: A man drove over some railroad tracks and was killed when he collided with a train he didn’t see. Turns out the man paid no attention to the sound of the screaming train whistle, drove around the gates that had been lowered to block access to the tracks and ignored the flashing warning lights indicating the approaching train.

How did the man miss all these signals? He was texting.

We can feel superior to this man and blame him for his irresponsibility or we can ask: When our relationships turn into “train wrecks,” what are we not seeing and being responsible for?

A friend of mine, a very intelligent and capable woman, continually complains that her boyfriend of three years never makes her feel loved. I point out the obvious (cue train whistle, guard gates and flashing warning signs): She has been complaining about this boyfriend for three years, that I doubt he will ever make her feel loved and that she should find another boyfriend. Rather than agreeing when I say this, my friend makes excuses for her boyfriend’s lack of affection.

We can bemoan this woman’s apparent blindness to the obvious or we can ask what we are not seeing and being responsible for. “What you see is what you get” is more than just a clever saying.

Keith Richards reminds us not to feel superior to anyone because they don’t see what’s obvious to us (isn’t it obvious that texting while driving is a bad idea? Isn’t it obvious that someone who has never made you feel loved isn’t likely to ever do so?). There’s plenty we’re blind to that, I’m sure, is obvious to others.

Perhaps, as Richards notes, we literally don’t see that if we’re in a conflict, the person we’re in the conflict with is also in a conflict. That maybe we are keeping that conflict going and not the other person. That our inability to see the other person’s reality is the reason we’re in conflict and not because of some “irrationality” on their part.

This is why I recommend listening without argument to every piece of feedback you receive about yourself. You may be blind to something that is obvious to others and their feedback may keep you from being hurt in a relationship that can turn into a “train wreck.”

Having Fun Yet? Lessons from “Good Will Hunting”

Have you seen the 1997 movie, “Good Will Hunting?”

Matt Damon plays a troubled, self-educated genius (Will Hunting). He falls in love with a Harvard student played by Minnie Driver (Skylar).

In one scene, Will and Skylar are having coffee at an outdoor café. Will stares lovingly at Skylar who is absorbed in her organic chemistry book. She really needs to study, she tells him, because she wants to get into medical school.

Will asks if he can help and Skylar asks if he has ever read about organic chemistry. “A little,” Will replies. Skylar thinks he’s joking. “No one reads organic chemistry for fun,” she says. Will doesn’t reply.

It occurs to me that Will might be thinking, ”Of course some people read organic chemistry for fun. I do.”

Indeed, some people study calculus for fun. Others have fun reading English or French literature. What one person finds boring another finds to be a blast. I had the insight that fun, as well as every other emotion we experience, is created, not discovered. Reading organic chemistry is fun if one chooses to see it that way. There is nothing inherently boring or exciting about anything. Anything.

Consider the possibility that this is true of all our experiences. We think that one experience is inherently more fun or enjoyable or exciting than another. Just the opposite is correct. We create the feeling and then attach it, incorrectly, to the experience.

That night, I had a conversation with a woman who was worried about money because she had less money than she would like and she was suffering because of it. She dramatized her worries by saying she was “in survival.” Her circumstance of having less money than she would like describes the condition of every human being on the planet no matter how much money they have. She chose to call this condition being “in survival.”

I’m not saying poverty is preferable to riches (or that riches are preferable to poverty). But consider what becomes available if we accept that our happiness is independent of our circumstances and that we can be happy no matter our circumstances. Not because those circumstances are inherently happy or unhappy but because we choose how we will be in the face of our circumstances.

We think our circumstances have to be great for us to be happy. This is a trick we play on ourselves to keep us trying to fix our circumstances and then wondering, with each fix, why we aren’t yet happy (certainly a new car, new house, new relationship, new job will change everything. Right?).

Until we recognize that our happiness is independent of our circumstances, we are doomed to live the saying,”The more things change, the more they remain the same.”

Change Management: We Aren’t Creating A Future…We’re Recreating A Past

Have you noticed that history repeats itself? Have you noticed that today’s news is exactly the same as the news from 100 years ago? The settings for the stories have changed, but the stories are the same: What’s happening in the latest war? What scandal is grabbing our attention? How’s the economy doing?

On a personal basis, are you in a relationship where you are in conflicts that never gets resolved? Are you in a job that has grown boring because nothing ever changes? Or are you in a job where change is constant but you’re unhappy because you look into the future and can’t see how things will ever change? Have you noticed that life isn’t quite as exciting today as it was when you were 7 and hated to go to bed and couldn’t wait to wake up?

Why does our human history and our personal history keep repeating itself? It’s because we don’t really create a new future. We simply repeat the past and call that the future. Instead of creating a new future, we recreate a past that has already happened and call that the future.

Consider these decisions from the past that create our behavior in the future: We didn’t like spinach in the past, so we decide to never eat spinach again in the future. We didn’t like a ballet we went to, so we decide we’ll never go to another one in the future. We’ve been on diets, lost weight and put it on again, so we decide we’re never going to go through that frustration again in the future.  We trusted someone in the past and got burned, so we decide we’ll never trust again in the future. We resisted change in the past so we resist change in the future as well.

Change, by definition, occurs in the future. But what evidence do we tend to use to decide what to do in the future?  Don’t we, in fact, tend to look for evidence from the past

and then make decisions about how we’ll behave in the future?

We look to our past experience, project that experience out into the future and imagine that the future will be just like the past. And, guess what? It usually is. In fact, the future can’t be anything other than some variation of the past. We’ve created that future by predicting it from our past. Case closed!

Now you know why history keeps repeating itself. Organizations often create futures (called “strategies”) based on the past and then live into that past...not the future. Individuals create futures (called “visions” or “dreams”) based on the past and then live into that past…not the future.

It’s a self fulfilling prophecy: We create a future based on our past and then wonder why the past is just like the future.

But to create a truly new future we have to let go of the past. It no longer exists. But we also have to recognize that the future doesn’t yet exist either. We can look back and see that we’ve created our past. What’s not as obvious to us is that we’ve already created our future by filling it up with so much of our past.

You know why the saying, “Today is the first day of the rest of your life” is a cliché? Because it’s so obviously accurate. But today won’t be the first day of the rest of your life is it’s already filled up with what you did yesterday.

Today, when you create your to do list, really create it. Not from your past, but from what you choose for your future. 

Conflict Resolution Training: Lessons From “The Soloist”

Have you seen the movie, “The Soloist?” It’s based on a true story about Steve Lopez, an LA Times reporter and Nathaniel Ayers, a homeless man whom Lopez encounters on the street.

Ayers was a brilliant musician with a great future ahead of him until he started hearing voices in his head that told him the world was an unsafe place. These voices led him to a life on the streets where the reporter encountered him.

We may think we’re very different from Nathaniel but are we really? Don’t we also believe some (certainly not all) of the voices in our heads? Like us, Nathaniel didn’t believe every voice he heard. But he did believe some of them.

Consider the possibility that it’s the voices we do believe, the one’s we’re sure are “true” that keep us stuck.

For example, consider the statement, “Change takes a long time.” Let that one rattle in your mind for a moment. This is a statement commonly held. Almost everyone I encounter believes it.

But is it true or are we, like Nathaniel, believing voices that aren’t real?

Consider instead this voice: Change happens in an instant which, of course, it does. We experience this almost daily when we go from a dreaming state to a waking one.

It’s actually not the change that takes a long time. It’s getting ready to change that takes a long time. How long do smokers wait before they decide to quit? How long do dieters obsess before choosing to stick to a diet? How long do people who “hate exercise” delay before going for a daily walk?

The change happens in an instant. It can take a lifetime to get ready for that change. Some people never do.

Now consider being in a relationship where there’s conflict. How long do we wait before making the instantaneous decision to give up being right? How long do we wait before making the instantaneous decision to forgive? How long do we wait before making the instantaneous decision to listen to what people tell us they need to resolve the conflict?

We define the waiting as “hard” and confuse that with the actual change which is easy.

So watch “The Soloist” and, as you do, imagine that a little bit of Nathaniel is in each one of us and it’s that “Nathaniel within” that keeps us stuck doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome.

Conflict Resolution Training: It’s Time To Change Our “Human Nature”

Folks, it’s about time for “human nature” to change. Whose “human nature?” Yours and mine.

Have you noticed that the news today is basically the same as it was yesterday, a year ago, a decade ago and a hundred years ago?

Perhaps the “news” of your life is the same as it has been for decades. I spoke with a woman the other day who hadn’t talked to an uncle for 16 years because she thought he had criticized her hairstyle at a family gathering when she was 12.

It seems that we are stuck in a time warp of conflict and recrimination.

I was listening to a radio show and the host facetiously said, “Let’s kill all the judgmental people.” While you may laugh at this, it accurately reflects the reason the world is as it is. In fact, it accurately reflects why all our personal “worlds” are as they are.

Consider that we will stop the fights in our life if we will stop fighting. We will feel less judged if we will stop judging. We will resolve our conflicts if we give up having to be right.

We act as though our conflicts are “out there” with the other people in our lives and, if they would only change, our world would be just fine.

The transformation in our thinking about “human nature” will occur when we stop putting “human nature” out there with other people and realize that it is our human nature we are speaking of and our human nature is endlessly malleable.

“You can’t change human nature” is exactly accurate if we think of human nature as only what other people possess. We can always choose to change our own human nature.

I’m sure you’ve heard the old joke about the man who goes to his doctor because he has a terrible pain in his head. The doctor asks him when the pain started and the man answers, “When I began hitting myself in the head with a hammer.” The doctor asks the patient, “Why are you hitting yourself in the head with a hammer?” The patient replies, “Because it feels so good when I stop.”

We laugh at this joke because we recognize how close it hits home. We “know” we can change our behavior any time we choose, yet we keep hitting ourselves in the head with our version of a hammer. But the joke is on us. We act as though it’s the other person who is wielding the hammer.

Unlike in the joke, however, it may not immediately feel good when we stop hitting ourselves in the head. Anything we’ve been doing for a long time will be missed. We’ve become comfortable feeling a particular way and we don’t feel good when we stop. In fact, we miss that feeling because we no longer feel like ourselves. Or, put another way, we miss what we’ve come to identify as our “human nature.”

But if there is ever to be any hope for changing our lives and changing what we read in our newspapers, we‘ll have to be willing to accept discomfort in exchange for peace.

Put another way, we can stop hitting ourselves in the head with a hammer anytime we choose.

Conflict Resolution Training: It’s Better To Receive Than To Give

If you want to resolve a conflict, it’s much better to receive than to give. 

Stop giving people your opinion of them and start receiving their opinion of you. Simply believe everything they tell you about yourself. It’s not “the truth,” it’s only their perception. But their perception is your access to resolving the conflict.

Think of a conflict you’re in now (or have been in the past) and recall what the other person said about you. For example:

·     

You don’t listen.

·      You’re judgmental.

·      You always have to be right.

·      You’re stubborn.

Now consider that all of this is “true”…from the other person’s perspective which is all that matters in resolving a conflict. What you think about yourself makes no difference in conflict resolution.

The feedback you receive is not about you. It’s about the perception of the feedback giver. But it is perhaps the most useful information you will receive about how to resolve a conflict.

So believe it when people tell you, “You should” or “You are” or “You must,” etc. “ Whatever words come after these words are exactly what the other person needs you to do to resolve the conflict.

You may, of course, choose not to give the other person what he/she needs, but then you must (do you have a reaction to that word “must?”) give up your right to blame the other person for the conflict.

You don’t have to agree with their perception, but you must accept that it’s true from their perspective.

Conflict resolution is easy. Listen to what you receive from other people and choose to change…or not. That choice will determine whether the conflict gets resolved…or not.

If you choose not to change, then you are the one keeping the conflict going...not the other person.

Conflict Resolution Training: Use Body Language To Build Rapport With Difficult People

Conflict resolution is easy: Find out what people need and if you can and/or are willing to, give them what they need. How do you find out what people need? You listen, paraphrase and ask the question, “Why is that important to you?”

As you’re listening, there are three nonverbal behaviors that will help you to build rapport and reduce the emotional intensity of any conflict:

1.    Mirror the other person’s body posture and position.

To build rapport with another person, it’s important to let her (him) know that you understand her position from her perspective. You can do this by verbally paraphrasing what she is saying and nonverbally assuming her physical position.

For example, if the other person is standing, stand. If the other person is s sitting, sit. If he (she) is resting his hands on top of the table, do so as well. If he is crossing his right leg over his left leg, cross yours in the same way. When he shifts to a different position, gradually shift to assume that same position.

The key is to move gradually and subtly. Don’t shift to mirror another’s body posture and position immediately after she (he) moves. Wait a few seconds and then gradually adjust your body posture and position to mirror hers. Your intent is not to manipulate but to build rapport so that the conversation flows smoothly. Mirroring sends an unconscious message that you are not a threat to the other person.

If you doubt the validity of mirroring, watch a drama or comedy on television with the sound off. You will be able to tell when the characters are in rapport and when they are not just by observing their body language. When they are in rapport, you will notice that their body postures and positions mirror one another.

2.   Be physically close to the other person

Physical closeness encourages psychological closeness.

If you want to nonverbally communicate, “I’m on your side,” sit or stand beside that person. If you’re in your office, come out from behind your desk and sit or stand near the other person. If you’re in a restaurant, sit at right angles to the other person, not across the table.

The way to determine how close you should get to the other person is to notice what she (he) does when she shakes your hand. Some people extend their entire arm stiffly as though they want you to keep your distance. Others bend their elbow, as they shake as though to draw you closer. Never get closer than the length of a handshake.

3.    If the disagreement gets heated, don’t mirror but align your body with the other person.

Sit or stand facing in the same direction without making eye contact. During heated discussions, direct eye contact can be perceived as a threat (watch two dogs that are about to fight. They are glowering at each other.). You’ll be surprised to find the disagreement cooling down. This is because at a nonverbal level, you’re indicating your desire to remain in contact even though the other person’s verbal behavior suggests a desire to break away.

Alignment can be uncomfortable for you because, if the other person is angry, the tendency is to want to back away. But try alignment and watch the intensity of the confrontation diminish.

Be subtle as you use these techniques. If you are obvious, the other person is likely to feel manipulated. The intention of these three techniques is not to manipulate the other person but to create a relationship in which a win-win resolution to the conflict is possible.

Conflict Resolution Training: The Most Important Question To Ask

Discovering what people need is critical to resolving a conflict because conflict resolution is easy: Find out what people need and give it to them. You can discover what people need by asking one simple and vitally important question: “Why is that important to you?”

Whenever someone says to you, “I want…” ask “Why is that important to you?” Their answer will be their need.

At that point, if you choose to not give others what they need (assuming you are in a position to do so), you are the one who is keeping the conflict going, not the other person.

I was reminded of this lesson when reading a recent story about the Titanic, the ship that sank in 1912.

In the August 22^nd, 2010 New York Times, there was a story called, “In New Approach to Titanic, An Exhibitor Aids Scientists.” The story was about the conflict between archaeologists who want the site left untouched as a memorial and the company, R.M.S. Titanic, that has removed over 4,000 artifacts from the site and wants to continue doing so.

This dispute has been going on in the courts for 17 years. R.M.S. Titanic has been arguing that they should either be granted ownership of the artifacts or be compensated for salvaging them. Archaeologists have fought to stop further salvaging until the entire site can be studied.

What ended the 17-year-old quarrel? The leaders of R.M.S. Titanic asked the archaeologists “Why is stopping our salvaging operation important to you?” and discovered that mapping the wreckage site was the scientific community’s number one priority, not depriving the company of profits from their salvaging operations.

Reading this you may think, “Duh. How obvious.” But wait a minute. How many of your conflicts have been going on for a while with friends, loved ones and business associates. Are their family members you don’t talk to? Business associates you’ve given up on? People from the opposite political party whose opinions cause your blood to boil? How many years have you been engaged in these conflicts without resolution?

All of these conflicts exist because of a failure to ask the most obvious question: “Why is that important to you?” Conflicts continue because instead of asking this simple question, people assume that the other side is just being unreasonable while “our” side is the very definition of reason.

When R.M.S. Titianic asked that question of the scientific community (after 17 years of litigation!) they were able to move forward.

Who knows what you’ll discover when you ask that question. But if you don’t ask it, consider the possibility that you are more committed to being in conflict than to resolving it. 

Conflict Resolution Training: Any Conflict Can Be Resolved

Do you doubt the validity of the title? Think your conflicts are so difficult that there is no hope of resolution? If so, you need to hear the story of Clairborne Paul Ellis, known as C. P. Ellis. His story is told in the book “Being Wrong: Adventures in the Margin of Error’ by Kathryn Schulz.

C. P. Ellis operated a gas station in Durham, North Carolina and was the head of the Durham branch of the Ku Klux Klan.

He threw a party on April 4^th, 1968, the day Martin Luther King was killed.

In 1970, the Federal government gave North Carolina 75 million dollars to desegregate the state’s schools of which $80,000 was given to Durham for a series of workshops to persuade Durham’s citizens to cooperate.

Joe Becton, head of Durham’s Human Relations Commission, wanted the most important city leaders to participate in the workshops. Because he knew that many of the city’s anti integration citizens would resist unless they felt their views were represented in the workshops, he approached Ellis to participate. Ellis was appalled and resisted Becton’s entreaties. But persistence paid off and Ellis, who knew that desegregation was inevitable, decided to participate in order to do what he could to slow the process down.

Becton also approached Ann Atwater, a poor African American women who he thought could represent poor and disenfranchised Black citizens. Atwater had organized housing protests against dishonest landlords and worked with welfare recipients to educate them on their rights.

The man heading the workshops, Bill Riddick, saw that he had to bring these two antagonists together if the workshops were to be successful so he asked them to co-chair the workshops. Blacks were outraged as were whites. Why would a Black person even be in the same room as the head of the KKK? Why would a white person even consider sitting at the same table as a Black person?

As you can imagine, the first meeting was a disaster. Ellis refused to sit down, paced the room and wouldn’t even look at Atwater who sat glaring at Ellis.

One day, at the conclusion of one of these workshops, Ellis and Atwater found themselves alone in the auditorium where the meeting had taken place. They started talking and discovered that their differences were, literally, only skin deep.

Both Ellis and Atwater had grown up poor and uneducated in North Carolina. Ellis’s father was an abusive alcoholic. Ellis dropped out of school in the 8^th grade, married at 17 and had 3 children, one of whom was blind and developmentally disabled. He was barely able to support his children. One of the main reasons he had even considered participating in the workshops was for the sake of his children.

Atwater had dropped out of school in the 10^th grade, had her first child when she was 16 and married the father of her child who left her shortly afterwards. She worked as a nanny and housekeeper but was never able to earn enough money to bring herself and her child out or poverty. Like Ellis, she joined the workshops in the hope that it would make a difference for her child.

Listening to Atwater, to his astonishment, Ellis began to cry. Years later, he told the interviewer Studs Terkel that for the first time, “I looked at her and saw another human being. I began to love the girl, really.”

From 1970 when he left the Klan until 1994, Ellis worked as an organizer for the International Union of Operating Engineers. When asked about his greatest accomplishment, he said it was helping forty African American women secure the right to take MLK day off as a paid holiday, the first contract in the city of Durham to honor King’s memory.

Ellis died in 2005. Atwater is still alive.

So consider the possibility that any conflict can be resolved if you choose to. The lesson offered by Ellis and Atwater is that doing so is a choice and not doing so is also a choice. Believing anything else is a pretense.

Conflict Resolution Training: “Infinite Patience Produces Immediate Results”

The quote in the title is from Wayne Dyer. I never fully understood this counter intuitive comment until I read a remarkable book called Three Cups of Tea: One Man's Mission to Promote Peace... One School at a Time by Greg Mortenson. If you want to produce “immediate results,” read this book immediately.

The book tells the inspiring story of how Mortenson created a non profit agency that has built over 130 schools educating both boys and girls in areas of Pakistan and Afghanistan near where we are currently fighting the Taliban. The book’s title refers to a story Mortenson was told about how patience produces results especially when working with people whose beliefs, attitudes and opinions are different from our own.

Mortenson met a man in Baltistan, a remote region on the border between Pakistan and India who told him that building schools in that region requires focusing as much on relationships as on results.

”The first time you share tea with a Balti, you are a stranger,” the man said. “The second time you take tea, you are an honored guest. The third time you share a cup of tea, you become family, and for our family, we are prepared to do anything, even die.”

There are some obvious lessons in this for anyone interested in producing results especially with those with whom we may have a conflict:  

1.   Take the time to “share three cups of tea” with the people with whom we want to produce results. As Mortenson recommends, “Make building projects as important as building relationships.” Disagreements are more easily resolved when people have a solid relationship based on understanding.

2.   Take the time to listen to fully understand the values, beliefs and opinions of those with whom we disagree. As the man in Balltistan told Mortenson, “Respect our ways.” What goes around comes around. When we respect the ways of others, they tend to return the favor.

3.   Take the time to build rapport and trust with the people with whom we may disagree. All things are possible when people trust one another. Rome wasn’t built in a day, nor a school and certainly not anything that leaves a legacy of accomplishment. When people trust us, they may not die for us but they are certainly more willing to work with us. 

Threats, bribes and demands may produce short-term results. But if we’re interested in something that lasts for the long term and leaves a legacy for others, we must be infinitely patient and take the time to share “three cups of tea.” 

Resolving Conflicts: Lessons From A Black Belt In Akido

Imagine you are an astronaut who lands on a far away planet and encounters a being from that planet. What would you do? Pull out your ray gun and shoot? Fall flat on your face and beg for your life? Or would you try to find a way to communicate and build a relationship?

The analogy is not far fetched. When we are in a relationship at work or at home and the relationship is not going well, it’s almost as though the other person was a being from another planet with whom we just can’t communicate.

In that case, we have the same choices as that imagined astronaut: We may try to overpower the other person with our anger. We may grow passive and pout. Or we may try to find a way to communicate that will restore the relationship.

 This analogy came to mind while reading something from Judy Ringer who brings a unique perspective to the world of conflict and communication. Judy is the author of Unlikely Teachers: Finding the Hidden Gifts in Daily Conflict. She teaches conflict and communication workshops throughout the United States and Canada based on mind/body principles from the martial art aikido, in which she holds a second degree black belt.

Judy suggests that, if you want a great relationship, “Pretend you’re entertaining a visitor from another planet, and find out how things look on that planet, how certain events affect the other person, and what the values and priorities are there. If your partner really was from another planet, you’d be watching his body language and listening for unspoken energy as well. What does he really want? What is he not saying?”

What a brilliant mind set to use to improve our relationships! At heart, conflicts remain unresolved because people have different perceptions of the world and one person wants to convince the other that his perception is the right one. It’s as though both people were on different planets. However, a person’s perception is only “right” on his planet. John Gray captured some of this in his book “Men Are from Mars, Women Are From Venus.”

So how do we reconcile these seemingly irreconcilable differences? Here are 6 steps to do so:

1.   To be blunt, shut up, listen and observe. As Kathryn Schulz notes in her book, Being Wrong, “The only way to engage with the possibility that we could be wrong is to stop obsessively defending ourselves.”

Consider the possibility that if people are defensive around you, you’re giving them reason to think there’s something they need to defend.

If you do nothing else, listen to understand. This one act alone will improve the relationship.

2.   If you must speak, limit your words to paraphrases of what you’re hearing to be sure you understand this person from another planet.

3.   Once you have communicated that you fully understand the other person, you have gained permission to explain your position. If the other person resists your explanation, don’t push it. The harder you push, the more resistance you’ll encounter. I’m sure the black belt in aikido Judy Ringer would agree.

Additionally, resistance is a sign that you haven’t fully listened to all the other person has to say.

4.   Ask the other person how he/she would suggest resolving the differences between you.

5.   Make your own suggestions, not from the perspective of being right but from the perspective of wanting to live peacefully on the same planet with the other person. Brainstorm, don’t dictate.

6.   Whatever agreement you come to, live it with integrity which means stick to the agreement even if you wake up the next morning thinking and feeling that you don’t want to. Change the agreement only with the consent of the other person.

Follow these steps and you and the people you’re in relationship with will find yourselves amicably inhabiting the same planet.

Find out more about the sensational Judy Ringer by clicking here.

Conflict Resolution Training: When Is ‘Take It Or Leave It’ The Right Strategy?

I received a question the other day from someone who asked when it was appropriate to tell someone “take it or leave it” versus utilizing a “win-win” conflict resolution strategy. “Shouldn’t all conflicts be negotiated to the benefit of all who are involved?” this person asked.

It is always my desire to resolve conflicts so that everyone wins. But sometimes, it is completely appropriate to just tell someone they must do something or stop doing something and the decision to do so is fairly simple: When adults act like children, take it or leave it is the right choice.

I came to this insight from an unlikely source, US Magazine.

In the September 21^st, 2009 issue, there’s a story about Arcadian Broad, a 13-year old contestant on the television show, America’s Got Talent.

In case you don’t know, contestants on the show demonstrate their talent and are critiqued by a panel of judges. One of the judges, Piers Morgan, criticized Adrian’s dance performance. Adrian complained to the magazine reporters that he didn’t do well because the dance routine he performed was not of his choosing and that the show’s producers had forced him to perform the routine.

Mr. Morgan disagreed saying that the producers work with the performers to help them do well but never force a performer to do anything he/she doesn’t want to do.

Sharon Osbourne, another judge, supported Mr.Morgan saying, "It was typical young person stuff. When you get upset, you say, "You made me."

It occurred to me that “take it or leave it” is appropriate when you’re dealing with “young person’s stuff” and it’s found among adults acting like children.

For example, I heard the other day of medical technicians in dialysis centers who complained about their nursing supervisors to the patients being dialyzed saying, “I got written up” and “They just don’t like me” and “It’s not my fault.”

Complaining to patients is totally inappropriate, but it’s what a 13-year old would do instead of talking directly to the supervisor and working out the conflict. These technicians need to be told to stop it, “take it or leave it.”

I heard of sales representatives who complained to other sales reps that the reason their sales are poor is because their sales managers gave them “lousy sales territories” or “play favorites” or “don’t listen to me.”

Complaining to other sales representatives rather than talking directly to one’s sales manager and working out the conflict is what a 13-year old would do. These sales representatives need to be told to stop it, “take it or leave it.”

Sometimes, of course, it’s true that the supervisors and sales managers “don’t like me” or “play favorites.” But even then, an adult would have a conversation. A 13-year old would sulk.

So take it or leave it is appropriate when adults are acting like children. You wouldn’t expect a 13 year old to take responsibility for his or her behavior. An adult has to step in and reinforce the rules. 

Please go to http://www.conflictresolutiontraining.net to see all the resources and articles that are available. Thanks.