Miscommunication | Guy Harris: The Recovering Engineer

Archive for miscommunication – Page 2

Jul
21

Intentions – A Poem That Came to Me While Cleaning

by Guy Harris

I don’t know why this came to mind, but it did.

I was helping my wife clean our living room, and I was, as I often am, thinking about what I could write here. I was not thinking about my wife, my kids, or my professional colleagues.

I was just thinking. (Remember, I am a recovering engineer. I am almost always “thinking.”)

I started thinking about how we often misinterpret other people’s meaning, and this little rhyme popped (almost) fully formed into my mind.

So, I share it here with you today:

I’ll never know your real intent,
Until I ask you what you meant.
And, if you choose, in your reply,
To then, tell me the reason why.

3 Categories : Communication Skills, Resolving Conflict

Jun
12

Conflict Resolution Techniques: Question Your Assumptions

by Guy Harris

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.

Photo by striatic.

1 Categories : Resolving Conflict

Apr
19

Conflict Resolution Insights: Why Conflicts Escalate

by Guy Harris

On two recent occasions, I have been involved in interactions that started with a minor miscommunication and quickly elevated to full-blown conflict. In both situations, the other person and I pretty quickly recognized what was happening, and we managed to get our communications back under control.

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.

2 Categories : Resolving Conflict

Apr
2

Resolving Conflict Lesson: Watch Your Step

by Guy Harris

When it comes to conflict, none of us is immune to our emotional triggers.

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.

Photo credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bludgeoner86/ / CC BY 2.0

2 Categories : Communication Skills, Resolving Conflict

Sep
25

How Would You Define The Problem?

by Guy Harris

As I watch political campaigns, national debates, business meetings, and family discussions where the rhetoric and emotion increases while the civility and connection decreases, I see a common thread: failure to stop the discussion of solutions long enough to come to an agreement on how to define the problem.

I’m guilty myself. I see a problem. I assume other people see the problem and that they will define it the same way that I define it. I assume that we all understand what the criteria for a “good” solution will be. And I dive head-first into a conversation where I try to “sell” my solution to the problem as I see it.

Here’s a thought: stop discussing the solution until we agree on the definition of the problem.

In the process, you might ask questions like:

Do we both agree that there is a problem?
What is the problem?
What is the scope of the problem?
What is causing the problem?
What would a good solution look like?

Until we reach agreement on these starting questions, we can never agree on the solution to the problem.

How many conflicts could we resolve, reduce, or even eliminate if we all stopped talking about the solution long enough to understand our different ways of defining the problem?

Photo courtesy of www.sxc.hu.