|
AGH! My favorite topic! Conflict, communication, confrontation etc., I'm curious as to why there is (generally speaking) such an avoidance to have a conversation with people or to stop and ask what people mean when they say something. Get more information for exammple. I made that mistake yesterday and it was a nice reminder that it is something I should not lose track of.
Personally? I believe that anything that even begins to sound like conflict, the parties should stop, and then each person should examine their motives, take responsibility for perhaps saying something that may have been misconstrued and further, start over and come to a place where both people can be understood, heard and validated in some way. One good way to avoid conflict and have a rational conversation is to start with the phrase "are you saying...." followed up with what you thought you heard. Lets face it, sometimes we take things wrong and then things just go straight to h377 after that. Even in the best of circumstances. Emotions run high, people's trigger points get hit and then POOF! An argument ensue's. This doesn't have to happen.
When I say, examine your motive, what I am saying is to think about what you'd really like the outcome of the conversation to be. You want a win/win situation. Being right doesn't mean you have to stop listening to the other persons view point, nor does it mean you get to stomp your opponent into the ground and belittle him/her. What win/win means is that both people are heard and come to a resolution that is agreeable to both parties. (or more if that is the case) Start with heart (what are you looking to do?) Start with facts (what facts do you have at the moment that aren't stories you told yourself without any proof that you would like to address) and make it safe for the other person to express themselves. Be open to what you may not want to hear and then ask questions until you fully understand what the other person is saying. At times, you may have to wait your turn, which :) when you have a point of your own can be .. difficult. However, the outcome is usually resolution so it's worth the wait.
As for the moderator stepping in and saying something? Well ... considering the way things began to go, the moderator could play mediator. Ask what both parties are saying or in the alternative, allow the parties to resolve it themselves. I involved myself in a dispute on another group over in Yahoo this morning where things had started flying and nerves were struck. What I did was, looked at both sides of the coin in my response as well as added my own view and how things could be resolved in the process. I asked questions as well based on my knowledge of the situation and the people involved.
I have a suggestion ... when a person feels their heart twisting in their chest or their ears turning red or their hair standing on end? STOP! ask yourself "what is this person really saying and what does it have to do with me? We all have trigger points, the good news is that we can change how we react. OK I'm going over to Yahoo now and see if I've helped LOL. I hope so. For me? The lesson I learned this morning? Is as I said above. Learn to get more facts, don't respond so quickly that you don't have all the information ... and be civil. Simple.
> Eric Sohn wrote:
> When is conflict not a "bad" thing?
>What did people learn from the heated exchanges here? Would you have learned it had the moderator stepped in and stopped discussion?
>Coach Eric Private Reply to Sue T. (new win) |
