Yesterday, my daughter, Alexandra, showed one of our cats, Merlin, in our county 4-H fair.

Generally, Merlin is the cat you see in the picture above. He lounges on our deck. He sleeps on the steps. He stays with us in the yard. He insists that we pet him when we are in the garage. He is a really friendly cat.

At the fair, he was in a cage in a hot building surrounded by other cats, people he did not know, and smells he did not recognize. And, he had to wear a harness.

During the judging, a person he had never met before held him and inspected him in front of about 30 onlookers.

He hissed at the judge.

When I took him from the cage to put him in the carrier for the trip back home, he hissed and growled at me.

When I got him into the garage and opened the carrier, he growled at me and ran away.

After I got him back to the garage, he growled and hissed at me as I removed his harness.

As he was lying on the steps from the garage to the kitchen, I petted him, and he growled and hissed at me.

Merlin was not a happy kitty.

In case you haven’t been around cats very much, they can have what is called redirected aggression. Basically, this means that when they cannot directly address something that is irritating them, they just might express their aggression in a different direction against another animal or a person who had nothing to do with their initial frustration.

And, people often respond the same way. They feel stress, frustration, or irritation in one area of their life or in one relationship, and they vent it in a different area of their life or in a different relationship. I’m not saying this is a good thing. I’m just observing that it happens.

In Merlin’s case, I didn’t take him to the fair, and I wasn’t there during the judging. I didn’t do any of the things that stressed him. I just took him home.

Can you believe the nerve? He was mad at me — his rescuer!

When he growled and hissed at me, I didn’t get angry with him. I could see that he was hot, scared, and stressed. He was losing large quantities of hair (that’s a sign of stress in cats). I could tell that he was not angry with me directly. He was simply displaying redirected aggression.

So, I was nice to him. The cat that was growling at me got kind words and petting in return.

It worked like a charm. Within a few minutes of getting home, hearing kind words, and getting his head scratched, he was back to his normal, loving self.

I recognize that people are far more complex than cats. And, can’t we learn a lesson from Merlin?

When people are stressed, tired, frustrated, irritated, scared, or hungry; they just might display some redirected aggression. As long as no one is getting physically hurt, why not try to understand rather than criticize or confront?

Calming words and an understanding attitude just might be what it takes to help them, like Merlin, return to normal.

Related posts:

1. Resolving Conflict Lesson: Watch Your Step
2. Conflict Resolution Techniques: Question Your Assumptions
3. Conflict Resolution Tips: Task Oriented People with People Oriented Individuals

In one way or another, I have commented on this common difference between people in this blog and in other articles. It seems that I have, in many cases, made the point in an indirect way. Today, I thought I would make a more explicit observation about one of the common differences between task-oriented people and people-oriented people (from the DISC model):

• Task-oriented people generally “think” about things (including relationships).
• People-oriented people generally “feel” about things (including tasks).

In a previous post, I shared the story about calling home while I was traveling. That story illustrated my task nature and how I made a relational effort (calling home) into a task. That story also illustrated how the way that I defined the task led me to ignore the relational aspect of calling home. I called home and I was done. No conversation. No real listening. I checked out when my task (calling home) was checked off my list.

A similar mental barrier can creep into the approach that people-oriented people take with regard to tasks.

For example, I once worked with an extremely people-oriented person on evaluating a potential business investment. As we talked through his options, we came to a logical conclusion about what he should do next. After we came to our conclusion, he paused and said that he had some reservations about being able to invest the money needed to move forward.

I said: “How much money do you have?”

He said: “I don’t know for sure. I just don’t feel like I have enough.”

I wanted to say (but, thankfully, I didn’t): “How much money you feel like you have was not the question. I asked, how much do you have?”

At that moment, we could have had a major communication breakdown. He felt rather than thought about a factual, data-driven issue.

My colleague in this story is a very intelligent person. We did not get into a conflict over this situation because we were both able to adjust our communication styles (word choice, tone, etc) to better connect with each other.

What if, instead of holding back my initial thought, I had said what was in my mind: “…how much do you have?” (With the accompanying sarcastic tone.)

How would our relationship have progressed from that point?

I think it would not have gone well.

The misinterpretation of intent that often comes from this simple difference in perspective and approach can create some pretty intense conflicts.

Task-oriented people can think that people-oriented people are not rational.

People-oriented people can feel that task-oriented people don’t care.

And both assumptions are often wrong.

Related posts:

1. Conflict Resolution Tips: Task Oriented People with People Oriented Individuals
2. Conflict Resolution Tips: People Oriented Individuals with Task Oriented People
3. Better Relationship Tips For Task Oriented People: Redefine Your Task

In many cases, the path from conflict to resolution is like traveling down a dirt road in the country.

It’s a little rough. Dirt might get in your eyes so that you don’t see clearly what lies ahead. You have to go more slowly than you do in other situations. Once you are on the road, you have to keep going. It is too narrow to turn around and go back the other way.

At some point, you come to a fork in the road and you have to make a choice.

In the first few moments of a conflict situation, many of us (close to all of us) are prone to say and/or do things that make the conflict worse. When we perceive a threat, we go into “fight or flight” response and adrenaline takes over our brains. We do not act as calmly and rationally as we do at other times. This response often leads to an “I don’t know why I said that” experience.

When you have an “I don’t know why I said that” moment, you are on the dirt road.

You are on the dirt road before you even know what happened. You were in a conversation with someone, and, suddenly, the conversation turned and it got a little rough. You’re not really sure what’s going on.

Eventually, you regain your bearings. You start to realize that you’re now on a dirt road (under the influence of adrenaline). The adrenaline rush makes it hard to see and think clearly, but you are now aware of where you are.

Then, you come to a “fork in the road.” You reach a point in the conversation where you have to make a choice to stay on the road or to take the right fork that leads you back to the main highway of resolution and positive interaction.

The moment of choice might not happen immediately. It might, in some cases, take a day or so to calm down enough to realize that you can choose a different path in this relationship.

Even if it takes awhile, the adrenaline will wear off. When it does, you cannot continue to claim: “I don’t know why I said that.” You are no longer in the automatic and reactive mode.

After the heat of the moment passes, you can exercise your power of choice to act in better and more constructive ways. You can:

• apologize
• forgive
• explore alternative solutions
• listen
• engage in conversation, etc.

Human nature can make us prone to rationalize and justify our bad behaviors by blaming others and claiming that we had no other choice. The truth is that we almost always have a better and more positive option we can choose.

Remember to exercise your power of choice in conflict resolution.

Related posts:

1. Conflict Resolution Techniques: Question Your Assumptions
2. Snow Drifts, Driving Lessons, and Conflict Resolution
3. The 7 Deadly Sins of Conflict Resolution

As I read about, study, and work to apply effective conflict resolution techniques, I see one common and overwhelming problem develop in workplaces, families, and social organizations. I see the same problem develop just about everywhere I see people interact.

What is this huge problem?

People make assumptions about other people’s intentions.

Sadly, they often make wrong assumptions about the other person’s intentions.

This behavior is so common and so prevalent, I have written about it on at least two other occasions.

In one post, I told the story of how I started down the path of wrong assumptions in an interaction with my daughter.

In another post, I shared an observation I made about an interchange where one person based their entire interaction with another person on their assumptions about the other person’s intentions without ever asking for clarification.

Recently, I had the opportunity to observe another interchange between two people who got seriously engaged in a heated conversation because one of the parties took offense to what he believed to be the other person’s intentions. For the purposes of this post, let’s say their names are John and Joe.

In a small meeting setting, Joe raised a question about something John had proposed in a previous meeting. I heard Joe question the proposed approach to solving a problem. Apparently, John heard Joe question the necessity of solving the problem.

John’s body went almost immediately rigid as he turned to face and lean toward Joe. His voice tone grew sharp, and his volume went up. In all fairness to John, I don’t really know what he was thinking. I did perceive his tone and body language to become aggressive.

The conversation got progressively more heated as Joe and John spoke.

As they continued, John made direct, negative comments about his view of Joe’s intentions. He used words like:

• “You just said that because you want to…”
• “You didn’t have the courage to speak earlier about…”
• “I knew you would do this to me…”

In rapid succession, John manged to:

• Negatively label Joe’s intentions,
• Attack Joe’s character, and
• Express his view that Joe was doing something “to” him.

It only got worse from there, and it all began with John’s assumption about Joe’s intention.

John immediately assumed that Joe had a negative intention. His response followed the classic conflict escalation cycle almost perfectly. From this negative interpretation, he went to anger (my interpretation of his emotional state), and both parties found themselves locked in a negative conversational spiral.

Had John been willing to question his assumptions about Joe’s intention and then to engage in conversation and dialogue rather than in attack and recrimination, the situation would likely have gone in a totally different direction.

The next time you find your assumptions about another person’s intention leaning towards the negative, stop yourself for just a moment and question your assumptions.

• Did they mean that as an attack or simply as a statement of their opinion?
• Are they attacking my character or are they just trying to understand my approach?
• Did they mean what I think they mean?

I’m sure you get the point. Take just a moment to slow down and question your assumptions before you dive into the conversation.

Related posts:

1. Why Your Natural Response to Conflict is Probably Wrong & What You Can Do About It
2. Exercise Your Power of Choice in Conflict Resolution
3. Conflict Resolution Insights: Why Conflicts Escalate

As I watch and participate in conflict conversations and conflict resolution efforts, I notice patterns of behavior that consistently produce bad results. In a recent conversation with one of my coaching clients, we started to discuss these patterns of behavior. We jokingly began to call them “The 7 Deadly Sins of Conflict Resolution.”

The conversation stimulated my thinking about what NOT to do in conflict resolution.

Sometimes, knowing what NOT to do can be as helpful as knowing what TO do. So, I thought I would share the results of my conversation with you today.

Here you go…

The 7 Deadly Sins of Conflict Resolution:

1.  Continuing to talk about the past.

Other than looking at past behaviors to understand how you got into the current situation, forget about it. Talking about what has already happened just stirs up negative emotions and drives conflict escalation rather than resolution.

2.  Trying to “fix” emotions.

Emotions are simply the result of how we interpret and respond to the world around us.

We can control our behaviors.

We generally cannot control our emotions. We certainly cannot control other people’s emotions.

When we try to fix emotions, we sink ourselves in a conversation about things we cannot control. So, we get stuck in a negative conversation spiral that tends to make conflicts worse rather than better.

3.  Rushing the conflict conversation.

If a workplace conflict has grown to the point that it calls for a focused and intentional resolution conversation, it has become a business problem. And, this business problem is probably costing you more than you first realize when you consider the salaries of the involved employees, the value of work that is not being done, the cost of poor decision quality, the impact of poor information flow, etc.

Unresolved conflict gets expensive very quickly.

Since most people are conflict averse, they want to have a quick conversation to get the conflict resolved. They do not want to be involved in an emotionally charged discussion for very long. So they schedule 30 minutes to an hour for the discussion, and they send all parties back to work after the discussion in an elevated emotional state that makes them less able to do their jobs and make good decisions.

This is a bad plan.

While the specific time line for a conflict resolution conversation depends on many factors, most conflict conversations reach their peak of emotional energy at about 45 minutes to an hour. Most resolutions come after the peak emotional involvement. They rarely happen before or during the height of emotion.

If you want to resolve a conflict, make sure that you set aside enough time to get through the emotion and on to the plan.

4.  Continuing to blame others.

We all have our moments when we want to blame others for our behaviors. Sadly, focusing on blame only serves to make the conflict worse.

Blame shifts the responsibility for our behaviors from ourselves to other people. For example, “I yelled at you because you yelled at me.”  While it feels a bit like self-defense, it actually triggers conflict escalation.

Very seldom will anyone respond positively to you if you blame them. (It could happen. It’s just not very likely.)

5.  Trying to justify our behaviors.

Justification is blame’s evil twin. They often go hand in hand.

Blame is a form of justification and justification often leads to blame.

Justifying our behaviors might seem like “explaining our behaviors” to us, but it sounds like “making excuses” to others.

6.  Refusing to apologize or giving a conditional apology.

I often hear people say something like: “I would apologize if…

• “They would apologize”
• “They would stop doing _____.”
• “They would do _____.”

Since I rarely see any conflict where one party is totally at fault and the other party is totally right, I find it hard to believe that we cannot find something to apologize for in the interest of resolving the conflict.

Why make the apology conditional? Why wait for them to do something so that you can apologize for your contribution?

Don’t take ownership of what they did, and don’t apologize for anything that was out of your control.

Do apologize for anything that you did to contribute to the conflict.

7.  Refusing to forgive past behaviors.

Like apology, forgiveness is often offered in a way that is contingent on the other party’s behaviors. For example…

• “I’ll forgive them when they apologize.”
• “I’ll forgive them when they stop doing _____.”
• “I’ll forgive them if they will do _____.”

Forgiveness might be the offer that helps to deescalate the conflict. It certainly is the catalyst for helping you get your emotions back in line. And, it doesn’t work to resolve conflict when it is offered conditionally.

Neither you nor the other person can go back and “undo” a past behavior. When you forgive it, you move out of the past and into resolution for both of you.

Forgiveness is more about changing your own anger and letting go of the negative thoughts in your head than it is about bestowing a gift upon the other person. So, just forgive. Don’t wait for them to ask.

Some additional thoughts on forgiving:

• Be careful how you offer forgiveness. If you come across as patronizing, it will probably back-fire on you.
• Notice that I did not say forget. You can forgive someone for their past behaviors and have little faith or trust that they will behave honorably in the future. Forgiving and forgetting are not the same thing.

Watch your behaviors for signs of these “7 deadly sins.” If you see them creeping into your conflict conversations, take actions to get them out of your conflict repertoire and find a more suitable behavior.

Photo by debaird.

Related posts:

1. Exercise Your Power of Choice in Conflict Resolution
2. Conflict Resolution Techniques: Question Your Assumptions
3. Conflict Resolution Mistakes: Stating Opinions As Facts

Over the last few months, I’ve given some thought to what I consider to be the Top 7 Secrets for Resolving Personal Workplace Conflict, and I have recorded an audio program that is available now.

While the program is targeted at personal workplace conflict resolution, you can use the insights from it to minimize and resolve family conflicts as well. (After all, people are people. Only the context changes. The principles remain the same.)

Here’s what you’ll find on this audio program:

• Ways of looking at conflict that you may have never considered.
• How to apply powerful psychological principles in a practical way to help you control your response and develop influence with others.
• Two secrets that may initially seem contrary to what seems like the right thing to do. In fact you might do just the opposite of what these two secrets will tell you to do if you don’t know better.
• A secret that may seem obvious when you hear it, and you will be surprised how often people get it wrong in practice.
• Three secrets that are technique based. I’ll show you specific things you can do to reduce conflicts.
• Three secrets that are insights to how you should think about and prepare for your conflict resolution efforts.
• Powerful tips, techniques, and insights you can use immediately to resolve all types of conflicts in your life – specifically those conflicts that occur in the workplace

I am also working on a website to deliver content like this via download and/or streaming audio and video. That site should be ready soon. I’ll announce it here when I’ve finished developing the content to make it a useful relationship building and conflict resolution training resource. In the meantime, the Top 7 Secrests CD is ready now on this page.

Related posts:

1. Conflict Resolution Tips: Task Oriented People with People Oriented Individuals
2. Conflict Resolution Techniques: Question Your Assumptions
3. Conflict Resolution Tips: People Oriented Individuals with Task Oriented People

As a result of this perception of threat, we often get angry. Then, we behave in ways that they perceive as a threat, and the conflict escalation cycle begins.

Our natural responses to conflict often begin with this perception of threat. This perception triggers our “fight-or-flight” response, and our adrenal glands kick into high gear. At this point, our bodies get flooded with adrenaline and logical, rational thought pretty much stops (at least for a moment).

When we perceive others to be a threat, we generally act in two ways that can be incredibly effective at protecting us from physical harm and terribly detrimental when it comes to resolving most workplace and family conflicts.

How the “fight” response contributes to conflict escalation is pretty straightforward. With this approach, we usually come on too strongly and too aggressively for the vast majority of normal relational situations. As a result, the other person feels a direct threat from our response.

How the “flight” response contributes to conflict escalation is a little more subtle, and still just as powerful in its affect on the conflict escalation cycle.

The flight response often leads us to disengage, remain quiet, and withdraw from the person we perceive as a “threat.”

Depending on the other person’s perspective, withdrawing from the situation can signal a number of things that actually contribute to escalating rather than de-escalating the situation (if not immediately, then over time).

For example, they might view us as being unmotivated, unconcerned, or unwilling to engage. In any of these cases, they can feel compelled to pursue interaction in an effort to settle the issue. They pursue, we withdraw, they pursue some more, we withdraw further, etc.

Our withdrawal, rather than helping the situation, has escalated the conflict.

To avoid either of these negative responses, I suggest an approach that starts this way:

Question the story you are telling yourself about the other person.

For example, you can question whether or not they actually intend to be a threat to you by re-framing your internal dialogue this way:

• “Do they mean to harm me in some way, or did I just misunderstand?”
• “Are they really on the attack, or are they just tired and having a bad moment?”
• “Are they an evil person, or did I say something that offended them?”

Alternative stories can stop our perception of threat and lead us to a more positive, rational, and engaged response than either a heated attack or an icy withdrawal. We can act to resolve the communication breakdown rather than act to escalate the conflict.

Please share your thoughts on the steps you can take to move conflicts towards resolution and away from escalation.

Related posts:

1. Conflict Resolution Insights: Why Conflicts Escalate
2. Conflict Resolution Techniques: Question Your Assumptions
3. Exercise Your Power of Choice in Conflict Resolution

These situations caused me to reflect on what happens in conflict:

• How it gets started,
• How it escalates, and
• What you can do to de-escalate it.

I was also wondering if these situations happen in your life. Here’s what I mean, you know what you should do in a given situation, the situation occurs, and then you do exactly the opposite of what you knew to do.

Since I’m guessing that I’m not alone in this struggle, I thought I would interrupt my series of posts on Frequently Asked Questions About the DISC Model by mixing in a few posts on understanding the dynamics of conflict escalation.

Using this post as a starting point, we can then look at how to avoid or minimize this problem in our lives.

In this post, I will quickly show a model of what often happens during conflict escalation. By understanding the model, we can plan positive steps to back conflicts down after they start. I’m drawing some of this post content from a video course I am developing on resolving personal workplace conflicts. I’ll share more on that later.

The escalation cycle generally starts with one person (I’ll call them Person A) doing or saying something that the other person (Person B) perceives as a threat. Notice the key word: perceives. It doesn’t really matter if Person A meant their words or actions as a threat. It only matters if Person B sees the words or actions as a threat.

This perception of threat can take many forms, and it is likely linked to the anger process I wrote about previously.

Once Person B perceives a threat, they will probably move to anger and then behave in a self-protective way out of that anger.

Person A now perceives Person B’s behavior as a threat.

Person A follows the same perception-anger-behavior pattern and further contributes to the conflict escalation as shown in the video above and the image below. (Click on the image for a larger view.)
I plan to revisit the specific things we can do to reverse this cycle in future posts. For now, I’ll leave you with this observation: either person can take steps to de-escalate the conflict.

They can either:

Recognize the problem and change their behavior so that the other person no longer perceives a threat.

— or —

Question their perception in order to get their own anger under control.

In practice, the person taking responsibility would likely do both.

In an ideal world, both parties would take responsibility, stop blaming, and move to resolution. Even in our less than perfect world, either party can take the right actions and move to resolve the conflict with or without the other person’s cooperation.

Related posts:

1. Why Your Natural Response to Conflict is Probably Wrong & What You Can Do About It
2. Conflict Resolution Techniques: Question Your Assumptions
3. The 7 Deadly Sins of Conflict Resolution

Guy Shares Two Questions to Help
You Control Your Anger

A question that often comes up in my conversations and training sessions regarding conflict resolution is this:

How do I control my anger?

Great question. Sadly, it’s often the wrong question.

Anger is not really a primary emotion. It does not come first. It may come quickly. It just doesn’t come first. Anger is generally the result of something else.

If you imagine at your emotional container like a bottle filled with a carbonated beverage and sealed with a stopper, you can develop a simple model for understanding what happens when you get angry so that you can attack the anger at it’s source rather than trying to control it after it happens.

So, we have our emotional container represented by a bottle filled with a carbonated beverage. Now, we shake it up, and we get an explosion of foam. The foam represents anger.

Have you ever had a sink full of foam when you were trying to wash your dishes? If you have, you realize just how difficult it is to get rid of the foam. Well, anger is the same way. Once it blows out of us, it is really difficult to reign in and clean-up.  It would be better to stop the foam (anger) before the explosion.

One tactic for controlling anger at its source is to recognize that by removing what came before the foam, we never have to deal with it at all. Since anger is a secondary emotion, we can dig past it to the primary emotion behind it and deal with that rather than trying to deal with the anger.

In many cases, the primary emotion triggered by an event in our lives will be one of two things:

1. Fear, or
2. Hurt/Pain (either physical or emotional)

If we can learn to identify which of these is at work in us when we start to feel “angry,” we can deal with the primary emotion in a way that can remove or reduce it. When we do that effectively, we get our anger under control by never letting it get ramped-up in the first place.

Several months ago, I read the results of a study that said a key predictor of domestic violence was the inability to clearly articulate emotions. The strategy I am proposing here aims at improving your skills in the area of expressing what is really inside rather than letting it build to the point of explosion. When we back-up the chain of emotional responses to the key, underlying, primary emotion, we can often express our fear or hurt more clearly so that it never escalates to full-blown anger.

How do you apply this approach?

When you feel anger welling up inside you, stop and ask yourself these questions:

1. What do I fear?, and
2. What is causing my pain?

If you can find an answer to these questions and then express the emotion in a healthy way, you just might avoid the need to clean-up the foam of your anger.

(I don’t mean to suggest that getting angry is always a bad thing. It’s just often a bad thing, if you want to preserve relationships. I’m also not suggesting that this is the only way to get your anger under control. It’s just one way to do it. If you have other suggestions, please leave them in the comments section below.)

Related posts:

1. Effective Communication Skills: You Don’t Know Until You Ask
2. Conflict Resolution Insights: Why Conflicts Escalate
3. Resolving Conflict Lesson: Watch Your Step

Just yesterday, I had an interchange with someone close to me (not in my family, but still close) that didn’t go very well. This person asked me a question that I perceived negatively, and I got angry.

His wording was a little off, and he got mildly put-off with me as well. However, he didn’t mean to irritate me. He had no intention of asking the question that got me going in a way that I would perceive as an attack. Still, I perceived it as an attack, and I got mad.

Yes, I was a bit tired from working some late nights. It is true that I have been sick for the last two days, and I wasn’t feeling well. It is also true that his request came to me when I was working under some deadlines to get projects done that were rather pressing. All of these pressures probably made me a little more on edge than usual. And still, I overreacted.

Fortunately, we met face to face shortly after our text/phone interchange, and we quickly resolved the issue. That was good.

Here are the key learning points for all of us (me included):

• Pick the right time and place to confront a miscommunication – on a cell phone while both of you are driving is probably not a good idea.
• Be on guard at all times for misperception – yours and theirs. (In this case, I should have been doubly on-guard given my physical state at the time.)
• When things go astray, be ready to meet personally with the person to work it out.
• Be willing to apologize for whatever you did to contribute to the conflict.

The reality of life is that you will have conflicts and that knowing intellectually how to resolve them will not make you immune to them. They will often happen when you let your guard down and allow your emotional “buttons” to get “pushed.”  That is certainly what I experienced in this event.

As I get farther away from the event, I begin to wonder: “How did I let myself get so angry so quickly?” The answer, I think, is that I was reacting to a question rather than thinking about the person asking the question and the whole situation. I was judgmental rather than curious. In short, I let my buttons get pushed by someone who had no intention to do so.

So, as I work to get over myself, I encourage you to do the same. Know your emotional triggers, be aware of how they could get unintentionally triggered, and watch your step in communications with others. I don’t propose that you or I will ever be perfect at doing this. We can work at it and attempt to get better.

Related posts:

1. Conflict Resolution Techniques: Question Your Assumptions
2. Conflict Resolution Insights: Why Conflicts Escalate
3. Effective Communication Skills: You Don’t Know Until You Ask