“I’d like to punch him in the face”, Donald Trump, 22 February 2016 about a protester at one of his rallies
Conflict surrounds us: armed struggles abroad, political attacks at home.
We also know conflict in our personal lives – at home, in the schoolyard and at work.
Here is a video about coping with conflict. Maybe even making it a rich learning experience.
What I discovered is that handling conflict well is not about reconciliation. It’s not about getting the other person to agree with you. Nor is it about getting them to apologise. Handling conflict well is about managing yourself under duress. It is about choosing to stay in your power. It is about poise.
I also found out that it can be about learning.
Those of you familiar with my work will know that I produce methodologies which I offer as recipes for certain recurring challenges. When it comes to conflict, I have no less than three methodologies.
Today, let me share with you the highlights. I will be happy to share more if you’d like to have a chat.
Three key points:
1. Conflict is a misunderstanding. They don’t understand you and you don’t get them either. In some cases, discussion can illuminate a shared space but I would counsel against prioritising this outcome. Psychology looks at human rights from a very particular angle. One of my favourite human rights is ‘the right to be misunderstood’. We often exercise that right, don’t we? If you claim misunderstanding as a fundamental human right, so much weight drops off.
Perhaps the only thing to agree on is that we disagree? When you give up trying to get your colleague to appreciate your work, you can focus on making sure that your manager does.
Conflict, misunderstanding – these are empty places. Places of lack. Go instead where the energy is. Keep the diplomatic channels open but focus on advancing your objectives.
2. Here you are exercising your right to be misunderstood. You are not a victim. The possibility of unfairness recedes. You are claiming that right to be misunderstood. This is a place of calm, cool-headedness, poise. And from this comfortable place, you can interrogate reality.
Let’s imagine a colleague criticised a piece of work over which you laboured a lot:
You might enquire: “What is it about my report that you find of poor quality?”. Or: “Did you find any mistakes?” Or: “Which of the figures do you disagree with?”. If they have a point, this line of questioning will surface it and give you a chance to enhance your work. If they don’t, your shrewd questions will soon expose them for the ill-intentioned individual they are.
If their delivery is poor, their words sharp but there is substance, it would be a shame to miss out, wouldn’t it? Being able to ask questions offers you the chance to learn something valuable.
3. In order to ask questions, to be calm enough to do so, it will be important to react without aggression. Critics typically expect their victims to respond in kind. Or to fold. If you meet their aggression with yours, only raised voices will ensue. I would also discourage meekness. Maintaining your composure will most likely surprise the aggressor and your questions possibly make them feel uncomfortable. If so, they will look for a new victim next time around.
One trick to keep your cool: count in your head. This pivots your brain away from a knee-jerk reaction. Keep it busy with something else. Some folks focus on their breath. Counting works for me.
Obviously, there is so much more to handling conflict with poise but these are my own go-to’s: I start with counting in my head to distance myself. I celebrate exercising one of my fundamental human rights: the right to being misunderstood (by the time I get to that step, I usually feel an inner smile blooming). Then I can ask my questions because I am level-headed enough to think about what to ask.
I hope these tips will be useful to you too. I look forward to your thoughts 🙏
