Miles Davis once said, “If you understood everything I said, you’d be me.” That quote stuck with me and I have repeated this phrase and variations of it when talking about interpersonal conflict, and how we often react to misunderstandings because we missed what the other person meant or where they were coming from. You, like I, have undoubtedly encountered many situations when that occurs. In fact, it is easy to misinterpret what others say, if we don’t have a context, a relationship built on trust, cultural similarities or understandings, openness, or the same senses of humours or appreciation for the other’s. Further, disparate values and beliefs, biases, mindsets, life experiences, and many other variables have an impact on our understanding of one another- what they say, what they do, how they interact, and so on. Essentially, we are not them and they are not us- so how can we understand everything they say or do?

It is often the case that we assume we know what people are saying and why – and react accordingly. We use our lens, our values, our expectations, our hopes, and other frames to interpret what we are hearing or seeing. If we know the other person well many of our perceptions are validated by the history we have with them, though we may not be absolutely clear on everything. That said, our assumptions are often within the realm of possibility if we have a close relationship. In these cases, when we disagree or adversely experience what they are saying or doing, we are more apt to engage the other person in a conversation – to gain a better understanding of their words or actions. When we don’t know people well or the relationship is breaking down, lack of connection and incorrect attributions preclude building trust and developing a relationship in which it feels safe to raise questions and discuss what is going on. In either case, the continuing unknown can result in growing tension and ongoing dissension, in developing more and more adverse assumptions, in questioning our judgement, in faltering trust in the other person- and even ourselves.

This week’s Conflict Mastery Quest(ions) blog suggests you consider a conflict situation – an argument that evolved because it was clear you and the other person did not understand one another – or, at least, one of you didn’t get what the other was meaning.

• What misunderstanding happened that resulted in an argument?
• As far as you can tell, what did you specifically misunderstand about the other person? The situation? The interaction between you?
• For what reasons might the other person have said or done that which has caused you upset?
• What words might you use besides upset?
• What would you prefer the other person had said or did instead, in this circumstance?
• What did the other person seem to misunderstand about you? The situation, The interaction between you?
• What seemed to be causing that person upset – such as, how might they have interpreted what you said or did?
• What other words might the other person use to describe their experience in that conflict with you – from what you can tell?
• What do you need from the other person to be able to move on? What might the other want or need from you to move on?
• What are you most curious about right now?
• What else occurs to you as you consider these questions?
• What insights do you have?

(From the archives)

It seems to me- based on my work as a conflict management coach and, well, just as myself – that one of the things that leads to interpersonal conflict is when we have expectations of another. It might have to do with how we interact on a day-to-day basis, how we treat one another privately and publicly, how we communicate when in conflict, how we support each other, or whether our values and needs are compatible. Further, we might expect someone to support us in a matter, to acknowledge something we did for them, to care for us when we are not well or unhappy, to meet our needs, to recognize our good deeds, to trust us, to respect our decisions and reasons we acted in certain ways, and so on. The list is endless!

It is worth considering this variable when we find ourselves reacting to these and other sorts of circumstances. Exploring our affirmative answer to the question, “Am I reacting because of unmet expectations?”, will make it easier to understand what we needed and ultimately, easier to articulate that to the other person. Taking a look, too, at our related reactions helps us do so. Indicators may be if we are feeling disappointment, betrayal, dismissed, ignored, not trusted, that we and our needs are not taken seriously, and many other emotions that reflect that we are let down by what the other person said or did or didn’t say or do.

How we manage situations and the range of feelings we experience will differ depending on variables such as the length and nature of our relationship, our needs and values and beliefs, influences from our upbringing, how we are feeling at the time, the amount of stress in our lives, our general state of health and well-being, and so on.

This week’s Conflict Mastery Quest(ions) blog is about this topic and you are invited to consider an interpersonal dispute in which you experienced unmet expectations in the situation and emotions that reflect that as you answer the following:

• What is the situation?
• What did the other person say or do, or not say or do, that had an adverse impact on you? How might you describe the impact on you?
• What, more specifically, did you expect of that person that they didn’t deliver on?
• What makes the aforementioned expectation especially important to you?
• What reasons are you attributing to the other person for what they said or did or didn’t say or do?
• What excuses have you made for the other person- such that you are inclined to let the situation go without voicing your expectations, if that is what you are doing?
• What do you know for sure about the other person’s motivation for not meeting your expectations? What don’t you know about their motivation?
• What is your fear, worry, concern about letting the other person know, if you are reticent to tell the other person?
• What advantages are there to raising the matter? What are the disadvantages?
• What are your expectations of yourself in this matter?
• What else occurs to you as you consider these questions?
• What insights do you have?

(From the archives)

The crux of this three-step test is that it provides a simple way to filter our words before speaking – when we are upset especially –  to ensure what we are sharing is helpful and not hurtful. In fact, a colleague adds to the list: Is it helpful?  making it a four-step test! In either case, the idea is that if a statement we are about to make – one that might hurt, offend, insult, or upset another person – does not meet all three (or four) criteria, it is likely best left unsaid.

I read somewhere along the way that this way of filtering ourselves before we speak has been attributed to the practice of “right speech” in Buddhism, and questions such as these – that invite us to screen what’s on our mind when in anger – provide a guideline for more successful communications. It is a simple and straightforward guideline that requires us to stop and think before reacting and saying things we cannot take back, as often happens when we are in our interpersonal conflict.

Keeping future focussed in this week’s Conflict Mastery Quest(ions) blog please consider a conversation for which you want to be prepared to get your possible contentious point(s) across while not offending the other person (if that’s the intention). This will provide the opportunity to process your messages using the lens discussed here.

• What is the situation about?
• What is it that specifically upsets you most about what they said or did – or didn’t say or do?
• Without screening your thoughts here, what’s really on your mind that you would really like to say – though you know it would not be productive?
• Stepping back now,  about that statement (the previous question) was true? What wasn’t true?
• What was kind ? What wasn’t kind?
• What about the statement you made was necessary for you to convey? What part or parts were unnecessary?
• What about that statement would be considered helpful by the other person?
• What wouldn’t have been helpful?
• If you were to reword what you want to convey- what might that sound like in a way that passes the three step test?
• What might you add that would meet the fourth step?
• What else occurs to you as you consider these questions?
• What insights do you have now that you didn’t have before you answered these questions?

Just a few things I wish for: that world peace and climate control are truly possible (and that leaders around the world work together to make it happen), that people are kinder to one another, that leftover fries taste just as good warmed up, that pets live longer – and, well, I could go on. Sounds fanciful, right? One of my other wishes – more pertinent to this Conflict Mastery Quest(ions) blog – is that we learn, beginning as toddlers, how to interact in healthy ways when there is conflict between us and other people and that we accept that interpersonal disputes are a normal and inevitable part of our lives.

My conflict management coaching practice is full of clients wanting to do conflict better and I know many friends and family members who also report this desire. I, like you I expect, am a life-long learner – trying to be better at many things including how to engage effectively in conflict- with competence and confidence! I acknowledge it’s hard and that being better at conflict – doing it well – requires us to know how and when to stand up, when and how to stand down, how to respond from a place that shows self-awareness, compassion, self-respect, kindness, honesty, dignity,  and a willingness to hear and connect about our differences.

This week’s Conflict Mastery Quest(ions) blog challenges you to consider how you would like to do better when it comes to engaging in conflict. To do so, I suggest you bring to mind an interpersonal dispute you know you didn’t do very well.

• What is/was the dispute about?
• What did you say or do in that conflict that you realize was not very effective, kind, smart, compassionate, etc.?
• What impact did you observe or hear regarding the other person’s experience of what you said or did?
• Thinking about it now, what specifically would you have said or done differently if you had it to do over again?
• If a close and caring friend observed you in that conflict about what might they be surprised (disappointed) considering how you interacted?
• What makes being more effective in conflict most difficult for you?
• What are 5 things you would like the people with whom you are in conflict say about how you engage in it i.e., what characteristics would you like them to attribute to you?  What would you like to be able to say about yourself and how you engage in conflict that reflects the better version of you?
• In what ways are your answers different in the two previous questions if they are?
• What would it take for you to think more highly of yourself when it comes to how you engage in conflict?
• Looking back on the same dispute you started with here (first question) what are the three learnings you have gained from answering the questions here so far?
• What else occurs to you as you consider these questions?
• What insights do you have now that you didn’t have before you answered these questions?

(From the archives)

This phrase is one I’ve heard or said as long as I can remember! And the words and its meaning reflect the crux and cause of many interpersonal disputes.

There are various ways of processing the meaning of this phrase when you think about it. ‘Say what you mean’, for instance, typically arises in a dispute or can lead to one when we (or the other person) are perceived as being indirect, not clear, holding back, passive-aggressive and other ways of interacting that triggers the other person. And ‘mean what you say’ often comes up when someone is perceived as insincere, phony, dishonest, and other such characteristics.

The phrases said together, as they often are, are doubly loaded with the above perceptions and can initiate or exacerbate a dispute. Being honest seems to be the underlying message and honesty is often difficult at times we are fearful, upset and confused. Also, when we don’t feel safe to tell the truth, we won’t. Fear will keep us from saying what we mean or what we are thinking and that clearly creates a dynamic that is difficult to resolve

Considering this phrase then (‘say what you mean and mean what you say’), and its possible relevance to a situation you are in, the following questions may help to facilitate a deeper dive to uncover the impact of the conflict dynamic and the resolution of this matter:

• If you said this phrase (bolded above) or something similar – or even if what you were thinking – reflected the essence of this statement, what did the other person say or do that led you to say or think this phase?
• What was your perception of what was transpiring between you two at that time?
• What specifically do you think the other person may have wanted to say that they meant?
• What might have kept them from being straightforward?
• How might the other person describe what went on between you?
• If there might have been a time when they used this phrase or something similar about you how might that have come about?
• What were you not being straightforward about – if that was the case?
• What do you suppose the other person’s perception was of you at that time?
• What do you think can be done to make it safe for the other person to be honest with you?
• What do you think you may say or do at these times to help make the conversation more open and honest, if possible (and desired)?
• What else occurs to you as you consider these questions?
• What insights do you have now that you didn’t have before you answered these questions?