Conflict & Feedback
(Dys)functional Viewpoints
–
–
–
–
–
Harmony is Normal, Conflict abnormal
Conflict is pathological
Conflict should be reduced, avoided
Conflict is due to “personalities
Emotions are not part of genuine conflict
Language choice reveal relational, temporal, gravity, evaluation, etc. which
dictate communicative choices. When you have a disagreement with your
significant other, it is best to have which kind of conflict? Knock-down, dragout, spat, tiff, quarrel, squabble, wrangle, clash, disagreement, fight, brawl,
fray, scrap, tussle, skirmish, exchange of blows, mêlée, encounter,
confrontation, altercation, row, argument, dispute, at odds, spar, joust, battle,
dispute, disagree, scuffle, free-for-all, fracas, disturbance, fall out, uproar,
commotion, tumult, hullabaloo, hubbub, mayhem, turmoil, etc.
Defensive Communication
•
•
•
•
•
•
1. USE STRATEGY
2. CONTROL OTHERS
3. EVALUATE OTHERS
4. BE NEUTRAL
5. ACT SUPERIOR
6. ACT CERTAIN
SUPPORTIVE ROLES
•
•
•
•
1. EXPRESS PROVISIONAL ATTITUDES
2. TAKE A PROBLEM-ORIENTATION
3. BEHAVE OPENLY AND WITH SPONTANEITY
4. BE DESCRIPTIVE AND AVOID JUDGMENTS
• 5. EXPRESS TRUST AND EMPATHY
• 6. WORK FOR INDIVIDUALS AUTONOMY AND MUTUAL
GROWTH -- EQUALITY
JOHARI
Window
Known to
Others
Not Known to
Others
Known to Self
Not Known to
Self
OPEN
BLIND
HIDDEN
UNKNOWN
TIPS FOR EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK
• 1. Focus feedback on behavior rather than the person. It is
important that you refer to what a person does rather than comment on
what you imagine she or he is. To focus on behavior implies that you
use adverbs (which relate to actions) rather than adjectives (which
relate to qualities) when referring to a person. Thus you might say a
person "talked considerably in this meeting," rather than that this
person "is a loudmouth."
• 2. Focus feedback of observations rather than inferences.
Observations refer to what you can see or hear in the behavior of
another person, while inferences refer to interpretations and
conclusions which you make from what you see or hear. In a sense,
inferences or conclusions about a person contaminate your
observations, thus clouding the feedback for another person. When
inferences or conclusions are shared, and it may be valuable to do this,
it is important that they be so identified.
•
3. Focus feedback on description rather than judgment.
The effort to describe represents a process for reporting what
occurred, while judgment refers to an evaluation in terms of
good or bad, right or wrong, nice or not nice. Judgments
arise out of a personal frame of reference or value system,
whereas description represents neutral (as far as possible)
reporting.
THE MOST HELPFUL KINDS OF STATEMENTS ABOUT
YOURSELF AND YOUR REACTIONS INCLUDE:
•
•
•
•
•
1. Behavior descriptions: Reporting the specific acts of the other that affect you.
"You cut in before I had finished by sentence."
2. Describing your own feelings:
"I feel blue." "I like what you just said."
You should try to describe your feelings in such a way that they are seem as temporary and
capable of change rather than as permanent attitudes. For example, "At this point I'm very
annoyed with you. . ." rather than "I dislike you and I always will."
•
3. Timing is important.
Reactions should be shared as
close to the behavior that aroused
them as possible so that the other
will know exactly what behavior
is being discussed. For example,
behavior during the encounter
itself can be commented on (e.g.,
"What you just said is the kind of
remark that makes me feel pushed
away.") Disturbing situations
should be discussed as they occur
rather than saving up massive
accumulations of hurt feelings
and annoyances and dumping
them on top of the other all at one
time.
• 4. Statements are more helpful if they are . . .
– a. Specific rather than general. "You bumped my cup" rather
than"You never watch where you're going."
– b. Tentative rather than absolute. For example, "you seem
unconcerned about Jimmy."
– c. Informing rather than ordering. "I hadn't finished yet,"
rather than "Stop interrupting me."
• 5. Use perception checking responses to insure
that you are not making false assumptions about
the other's feelings. "I thought you were not
interested in trying to understand my idea. Was I
wrong?" "Did my last statement bother you?"
Paraphrase the other's comments about you to
make sure the other understands your comments in
the way you intend them.
• 6. The least helpful kinds of statements are those that
sound as if they are information about the other person
but are really expressions of your own feeling coming out
as . . .
•
a. Judgments about the other, "You never pay
attention."
•
b. Labeling or name-calling. "You're a phony." "
You're too rude."
•
c. Accusations - imputing undesirable motives to the
other. "You enjoy putting people down." "You always
have to be in the center of attention.
•
d. Commands and orders. "Stop laughing." Don't
talk so much."
•
e. Sarcasm. "You always look on the bright side of
things, don't you.
DEALING WITH CONFLICT
• Context : Whenever you can, choose a comfortable, nondistracting
context. Forget the "blaming game."
• Personal perceiving : Remember that disagreements escalate when you
forget that your perceptions are highly subjective, especially in
disagreements. Try to recognize that there's a tendency for each person to
feel he/she is being unfairly persecuted, to apply a double standard to
what's going on, to perceive issues and events in oversimplified,
right/wrong terms.
• Sharing: Take responsibility for your feelings and actions. Use specific
descriptions of your feelings instead of generalizations, accusations, and
inferences. Remember that sharing creates trust and trust encourages
sharing.
• Being aware : resolving conflict interpersonally is much easier when you
listen responsively:confirm, paraphrase, parasupport, and diminish
defensiveness.
Handling Conflict Interpersonally
• Conflict occurs when human differences meet.
• Disagreements are unavoidable, but most of them
can be handled interpersonally.
• Content conflict can include:disagreements about
accuracy of perceptions or statements. differences in
definitions of terms, disagreements about reasoning
processes.
• Definition-of-selves conflict can focus on
historical selves --whether a person is informed or
uninformed, competent or incompetent,who has
what kind of authority,who is more powerful, who
has what duties or obligations;\
• or present selves -- how a person sees himself or
herself at the present moment.
Further Suggestions
• Try to imagine the real of the other
Imagining the real involves knowing and understanding what
the other person is going through during the conflict,
Imagining the real is limited by the realness of the other,
i.e., you recognize the other as a unique person, The
feelings you experience aren't just your feelings projected
on to the other. Imagining the real involves the element of
surprise.
• Deal directly with content disagreements.
Limit your disagreement to one issue at a time; avoid
"gunnysacking.“ Try not to let the conflict influence you to
exaggerate how relevant the issue actually is to you, Clarify
points of disagreements so you don't find yourself attacking
a position that the other person isn't maintaining.
• Handle disagreements over definitions of
selves by
getting in touch with how you define
yourself when you're in a conflict;
identifying the "triggers" of the dispute
so you can pinpoint the definitions of
selves that are operating; remembering
to use your positive feelings about the
other to keep clear the distinctions
between unacceptable ideas and
unacceptable persons; exploring the
use of role reversal.
• If the conflict seems irresolvable,
systemically review the ways you've
tried to deal with it; be sure to leave
people room to change; suggest a quiet
time; remember that sometimes the
best you can do is interpersonally
agree to disagree.
COMMUNICATIVE ACTS IN CONFLICT
• AVOIDANCE ACTS:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1. Simple denial. Unelaborated statements that deny that a conflict
is present.
2. Extended denial. Denial statements that elaborate on the basis of
the denial.
3. Underresponsiveness. Failure to acknowledge or deny the presence of a
conflict following a statement or inquiry about the conflict by the
partner.
4. Topic shifting. Statements that terminate discussions of a conflict
issue before an opinion has been expressed.
5. Topic avoidance. Statements that terminate discussion of a conflict issue before an
opinion has been expressed.
6. Abstractness. Abstract principles, generalizations, and hypothetical statements that
supplant discussion of concrete individuals and events related to conflict.
7. Semantic focus. Statements about the meaning of words or the appropriateness of
labels that supplant discussion of conflict.
8. Process focus. Procedural statements that supplant discussion of conflict.
9. Joking. Non-hostile joking that supplants serious discussion of conflict.
10. Ambivalence. Shifting or contradictory statements about the presence of conflict.
11. Pessimism. Pessimistic statements about conflict which minimize the discussion of
conflict issues.
DISTRIBUTIVE ACTS: Verbally Competitive or
individualistic acts.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
12. Faulting. Statements that directly criticize the personal
characteristics of the partner.
13. Rejection. Statements in response to the partner's previous
statement that indicate personal antagonism toward the partner as
well as disagreements.
14. Hostile questioning. Directive or leading questions that fault
the partner.
15. Hostile joking. Joking or teasing that faults the partner.
16. Presumptive attribution. Statements that attribute thoughts,
feeling, intentions, or motivations to other partner that the partner
does not acknowledge.
17. Avoiding responsibility. Statements that minimize or deny
personal responsibility for conflict.
18. Prescription. Requests, demands, arguments, threats, or other
prescriptive statements that seek a specified change in the partner's
behavior in order to resolve a conflict.
INTEGRATIVE ACTS: Verbally Cooperative
and Disclosure Acts
• 19. Description. Nonevaluative statements about observable events related to
conflict.
• 20. Qualification. Statements that explicitly qualify the nature and extent of
conflict.
• 21. Disclosure. Nonevaluative statements about events related to conflict which
the partner cannot observe, such as thoughts, feelings, intentions, motivations, and
past history.
• 22. Soliciting disclosure. Soliciting information from the partner about events
related to conflict which one cannot observe.
• 23. Negative inquiry. Soliciting complaints about oneself.
• 24. Empathy or support. Statements that express understanding, acceptance, or
positive regard for the partner [despite acknowledgement of a conflict].
• 25. Emphasizing commonalties. Statements which comment on shared interests,
goals, or compatibility's with the partner [despite acknowledgement of a conflict].
• 26. Accepting responsibility. Statements that attribute responsibility for conflicts
to self or to both parties.
• 27. Initiating problem-solving. Statements that initiate mutual consideration of
solutions to conflict.
In the End
• Conflict is cooperative –
takes two.
• A vast majority of our
interactions are
supportive and mutually
reinforcing
• What you say does make
a difference