Conflict & Feedback

1. 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, drag-out, 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.

2. Defensive Communication • 1. USE STRATEGY • 2. CONTROL OTHERS  • 3. EVALUATE OTHERS  • 4. BE NEUTRAL • 5. ACT SUPERIOR • 6. ACT CERTAIN

3. 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

5. 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.

6.  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.

7. 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 capableof 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."

8.  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.

9.  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.

10.  6. The least helpful kinds of statements are those that sound as if they are informationabout 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'rea 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.

11. 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.

12. 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.

13. 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.

14. 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.

15. 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.

16. DISTRIBUTIVE ACTS: VerballyCompetitive or individualisticacts. • 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 asdisagreements. •  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.

17. 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.

18. 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