Archive for perspective – Page 2

As I listened to the the news on both radio and television this Friday, nearly every mention of the switch to Daylight Saving Time brought on some mention of the “loss of one hour” we would experience on Saturday. It seemed that the entire focus during the time change weekend was on the loss. I don’t recall a single person speaking positively about the hour of daylight we would “gain” at the end of the normal business day.

Then, I thought back to the switch from Daylight Saving Time to Standard Time last fall, and I did not recall any significant mention of  “gaining one hour” during that weekend.

Here in Indiana, we just started observing Daylight Saving Time in 2006. So, it is still fairly well talked about when the time change happens. And, it seems to me, almost all of the talk is towards the negative.

Since I moved to Indiana as an adult, I lived for the better part of my life in states that observed Daylight Saving Time. So, I don’t really give it much thought one way or the other. It’s just “how it is” for me.

The point of this post is not to argue the merits or costs of Daylight Saving Time. I am just noticing a tendency that the time change reveals in human nature, and thinking through how I can learn from the behavioral tendencies surrounding this event. And here’s my observation:

People tend to notice loss more than gain and  to see the negative before they see the positive.

I recognize that this is a broad statement. Some people will argue that they don’t go negative. Well, maybe not. And most people do.

If you are interested in becoming a more persuasive and influential leader, communicator, or parent; the learning point is to realize that the people you are interacting with will likely notice what things cost, what they will lose, or how much your proposal will inconvenience them long before they notice the positive benefits or rewards of cooperating with you.

From a practical standpoint, this means that we must give people room to vent and express their negative reaction while we maintain a focus on the positive. They will likely go negative first. We need to anticipate and plan for this response rather than get caught off-guard and frustrated by it. Really, it’s okay. It’s normal. Almost all of us do it to some degree.

Highly effective leaders and communicators find ways to stay positive in spite of initial negative reactions from others.

This post continues the thought I introduced in my last post – stating opinions as facts.

I have noticed that people often state their ideas in a factual way when they are actually only opinions or perceptions.

Here are some examples of perceptions stated as facts:

  • “It’s cold (or hot) in here.”
  • “The iPod (or some other brand) is the best mp3 player on the market.”
  • “Ford (Chevy,Honda, etc) is the best car maker.”
  • “Avatar (The Hurt Locker, The Blind Side, etc.) is the best movie of the past year.”
  • “The best way to solve this problem is to _____________.”
  • “The best technology for _____________ is __________________.”

Let’s take a closer look at these statements.

It’s cold (or hot) in here.

It may be a fact that you or I feel cold or hot in a particular environment. It is not a fact that it is hot or cold in that environment. The temperature measurement is a fact, and the existence of our feelings about the environment is a fact. At extremes of temperature, most people would probably agree with an “it’s cold” or an “it’s hot” statement. But what happens in the mid-range where a temperature that feels hot to you feels cold to me (or vice-versa)? If we argue as if our perspectives are factual statements, we can never reach resolution.

I say, “it’s cold” because I feel cold. You say “it’s hot” because you feel hot. We will never reach resolution if we stay locked in that cycle of discussion.

The iPod is the best mp3 player on the market. — Ford is the best car maker. — Avatar is the best movie of the year.

If you and I have agreed on some objective and measurable criteria for making these judgments, these statements may be factual. If we have not agreed on objective and measurable criteria, we are merely stating our opinions.

With regard to mp3 players or cars, I’m looking at range of features. You are focused on cost.  When evaluating a movie, I look at special effects. You look at the story line. When we use different criteria and discuss our conclusions before reconciling our criteria, we will never reach a resolution

The best way to solve this problem is to _____________. — The best technology for _____________ is __________________.

Most problems have multiple “good” solutions. Depending on the application, any given technology might be the “best” solution. In most problems and in most technology application decisions, “best” is simply a judgment based on a number of criteria. If we do not first agree on the criteria, we cannot agree on the definition of “best.”

Sadly, these examples of “fighting words” come from situations I have either been party to or observed in my work over the years.

Arguments of perspective rarely end well. They tend to become highly emotional with no good way to resolve the conflict. You have your opinion. I have mine. We discuss, push, prod, cajole, attempt to persuade, and then move to open argument without resolution in sight.

My point is not to dissuade you from having or stating your opinion. My point is that you should clearly know when you are speaking about your opinion or perspective. In those cases, make it clear by your words that you are stating a perspective.

For example,

  • “I’m cold” as opposed to “It’s cold.”
  • “I think the iPod has great features.” as opposed to “The iPod is the best mp3 player.”
  • “The fastest (cheapest, longest lasting, etc.) solution to this problem is ___________.” as opposed to “The best way to solve this problem is ____________.”

In most of the situations I have seen, clearly distinguishing between facts and perspectives has reduced the frustration level and lead to faster conflict resolution. I have also seen that people who are unwilling or unable to admit that they are arguing a perspective rather than a fact tend to escalate and prolong conflict conversations.

6 Categories : Communication Skills

I must confess, this is a bit of a pet-peeve of mine. I am okay with people having an opinion. I am okay with people whose opinion differs from mine. I just get a little frustrated when they state and defend their opinion as if it were a fact.

I can accept it is a fact that they have an opinion. I just struggle with accepting their opinion as a fact when all they have to support it is their assertion that it is true.

As I said in Why You Shouldn’t Take Conflict Resolution Advice From Politicians, this behavior would hit my top five list for mistakes to avoid in conflict resolution discussions.

Since this blog is about getting over yourself and learning to take a critical look at how your own behaviors might contribute to the communication, conflict, and relationship problems you face in life; I have to come clean. I am guilty of this behavior on occasion, and I hate it when I do it as much as I hate to see others do it. With that confession out in the open, let’s take a look at the problem.

Stating opinions as facts can be a subtle and insidious conflict conversation practice. It can sneak into your communication patterns in little ways. For example, you might state your viewpoint and support it with “I think everyone would agree that…” (At least that’s how it sounds when I say it. A more people-oriented person might say “I feel like everyone would agree that…”)

With that one little statement, we rope everyone into our perspective and we attempt to use the weight of majority rule to make our opinion a fact.

At other times, we might state our opinion and then follow it up with a “That being the case….” With one comment, we build a whole argument on our perspective.

I believe that each of us has a perspective and that each person’s perspective needs to be heard. It’s just dangerous to assign factual status to an opinion statement.

In my experience so far, I have never observed a conflict conversation that turned out well when both parties insisted on arguing their respective perspectives as if their opinions were facts.

If you want to win the argument, go ahead and state your opinion as a fact. If you want to resolve the conflict, carefully consider which of your positions are based in fact and which are based in your opinion or perspective.

It’s okay to have an opinion. I just encourage you to recognize that it is your opinion and not necessarily an objective fact.