People Skills_How to Assert Yourself, Listen to Others, and Resolve Conflicts

by Robert Bolton PhD

  How does one go about defining a problem in terms of needs?

  Sometimes it is obvious that there is a conflict of interests. For the two women in the religious order, the broad outlines of the problem were clear. Their task was to redefine the problem in terms of needs. Had a third party not been present, they would have had to listen empathically and speak assertively to understand each other’s needs. One way of doing this is to distinguish between means and ends. What is the ultimate goal that Sister Veronica has for the means she has selected (using the community’s car)? A friend of mine uses the following formula in defining needs: “I need to…. [statement of the goal, not a solution].” He finds this helpful in asserting. In listening he searches for the same kind of information: “You need to…. [after careful listening—a statement of the other’s goal—not the solution she may have proposed].

  The stress of conflict or even of anticipated conflict makes it likely that people will often unwittingly disguise their needs in language that is more heavily coded than usual. Then, too, under stress, people’s ability to listen usually decreases significantly. Therefore, it can take a surprisingly long time to define a problem in terms of needs—even when important aspects of the conflict are obvious at the outset.

  Often, however, the conflict of needs is camouflaged. One or both parties may be unaware of the other person’s need at the outset of a conversation. The person who is aware of her needs may assert and find herself up “against a brick wall” because the other has equally strong counterneeds. When this happens the asserter moves to conflict resolution skills (when the other is in the grip of great emotion) and then to collaborative problem solving. Because it is important to know the precise nature of the other’s need, and because the other may not state it clearly, quite a bit of time may be required to understand and to be able to accurately state the problem in terms of needs.

  Sometimes a person may be listening to another unfold her dreams when all of a sudden the listener is given data that, unknown to the other, conflicts with the listener’s needs. The listener then has to reflect the other’s needs clearly, state her own needs assertively, and then, once the problem is stated to the satisfaction of both parties, the remainder of the problem-solving process can be followed. It is a difficult thing, however, to listen accurately and empathically, assert respectfully and forthrightly, and state both sets of needs objectively—especially when one is experiencing the stress of conflict.

  For example, a mother was listening to her 17-year-old daughter, Joan, tell about how excited she was about graduating from high school in January (a half year earlier than the rest of her class). Joan felt relieved that all her high school requirements were behind her and proud that she had obtained a job for the period before she began college.

  Joan’s mother, who teaches communication skills, was able to listen empathically to Joan’s description of her achievements and her hopes for the future.

  Joan then stated her plans to visit Arizona (from her home in New York State) to visit two young men and then travel to San Diego to visit a third. This plan conflicted with her mother’s value system and the mother was triggered out of her empathic listening and began sending roadblocks.

  Later, when the mother realized what had happened, she reopened the conversation and disciplined herself to listen empathically. Then she asserted her concerns and the mother and daughter proceeded to find a mutually agreeable solution.

  Participants in our courses tell us that one of the most difficult things about collaborative problem solving is the fact that they are often unaware they need this skill at the start of an interaction because they are unaware of the other person’s strong need. Discerning that need and then switching methods (i.e., from assertion) is difficult and time-consuming when first learning communication skills. With practice, however, it becomes much easier and somewhat quicker.

  Defining the problem in terms of needs, which is the first step of the problem-solving method, often takes about half of the time required for the whole process. To repeat, it requires asserting one’s own needs, listening reflectively until you understand the other person’s needs, and then stating both sets of needs in a one-sentence-long summary of the problem. Except for very simple or very difficult problems I figure on five to twenty minutes for this step. It’s well worth the time involved. As the old saying has it, “A problem well defined is half-solved.”

  Step 2: Brainstorm Possible

  Solutions

  Once the problem is adequately defined, the search for possible solutions begins. I usually use the brainstorming method. Brainstorming is defined as the rapid generation and listing of solution ideas without clarification and without evaluation of their merits. Many a seemingly insoluble problem has been constructively resolved through the use of this method.

  In brainstorming you try for quantity, not quality. Seasoned brainstormers realize that most of the ideas generated will be excluded in later stages of the process. But they could care less. They are after high volume now.

  There are basic guidelines for brainstorming which, when followed, lead to more productive sessions. These guidelines are designed to secure a climate in which a powerful flow of creative thinking energy is directed at conceiving possible solutions in a short time period (usually less than five minutes). Deviation from any of the guidelines will probably slow the flow of ideas and decrease the group’s creativity. These, then, are the all-important guidelines:

  1. Don’t evaluate. Evaluation thwarts creativity. It tends to make people defensive and they are likely to keep their ideas to themselves. This is a time to suspend critical judgment:

  Brainstorm.....Nobody says, “No.”

  Brainstorm.....Nobody says, “That will never work.”

  Brainstorm.....Nobody says, “That is a dumb idea.”

  Brainstorm.....Nobody says, “That will cost too much.”

  Brainstorm.....Nobody says, “That has already been tried.”

  Brainstorm.....Nobody says, “That’s a terrific idea.”

  Later on there will be a time to state what solutions look best to you. But for now hold rigorously to the “Don’t evaluate” rule—even when “positive” evaluations seem called for.

  2. Don’t clarify or seek clarification. Explanatory remarks interfere with the rapid and creative generation of possible solutions. When people begin to explain what they mean in the middle of the brainstorming process (“The reason I want to post notices on doors is …”) or are asked what they mean by others, the ideas often slow down to a trickle.

  3. Go for zany ideas. A far-out idea may seem nonsensical but it may provide, in seed form, the solution that is finally adopted. I am told that the managers of a major airport were brainstorming ways of removing snow from the runways. One of the participants suggested putting a giant frog on the control tower which could push the snow aside with its enormous tongue. In time that idea was reshaped to the solution they ultimately selected—a revolving cannon that shoots a jet airstream.

  Beyond their occasional usefulness, zany ideas often serve as relaxants to a pair or group, and may thereby foster greater creativity.

  4. Expand on each other’s ideas. Brainstorming generates a lot of incomplete ideas. Some of the best solutions come from adding to or combining or going beyond ideas that have already been contributed. One young couple was brainstorming ways of sheltering themselves from the elements on their vacation. He said, “Buy a van.” Piggybacking on that idea, she said, “Rent a recreation vehicle for two weeks each year.”

  5. List every idea (or ask the other person if she would like to list them). Be sure each idea is recorded in a few of the speaker’s key words when possible. The person holding the pen should not become a self-appointed editor, censor, or judge—just a recorder. When brainstorming in a group it is often helpful to have two or more recorders working at newsprint pads on easels.

  6. Avoid attaching peoples names to the ideas they suggest or listing each perso
n’s contribution separately. School teachers will often list their ideas in one column and students’ ideas in another column. Many parents make the same mistake unthinkingly. The goal is for the two people or group to come up with the best ideas they can. All parties contribute to the climate which nurtures creativity, each puts forth ideas which triggers the thinking of others—so in fact, even if one person makes a contribution which is adopted, it is a group effort. Focusing on who gave words to the idea is dysfunctional.

  Research findings demonstrate that it is important not to come into a problem-solving session with the attitude that there is only one adequate solution to this conflict.17 Solution rigidity is responsible for the failure of many problem-solving efforts. Once you begin utilizing this process regularly, you will probably be amazed at the number of “elegant” solutions there are for very difficult problems.

  Step 3: Select the Solution

  (or Combination of Solutions)

  That Will Best Meet Both

  Parties’ Needs

  If clarification is necessary on some of the solutions that emerged in the brainstorming, this is the time to do it. The clarification should be as succinct as possible. The “no ” evaluation guideline applies to the clarification period as well as to the generation of the ideas. If no clarification is needed, begin the selection process.

  The following guidelines have proven helpful in evaluating what proposed solution or combination of solutions will be selected:

  Ask the other what proposed alternatives she would favor in the solution of the problem. Do not eliminate solutions one by one. This consumes needless time and can decrease people’s problem-solving attentiveness and effectiveness.

  State which alternatives look best to you. Make sure your needs get met.

  See which choices coincide.

  Jointly decide on one or more of the alternatives. Usually, if the needs were well defined at the start, several of the same alternatives will be selected by both people.

  Be sure the other person is satisfied with the solution arrived at. It is to your advantage as well as hers that both of you accept the choice. If it meets her needs, she will be far more motivated to see that the solution is implemented. As someone wisely said, “People do things for their reasons, not for ours.”

  Consensus is the decision-making method most appropriate in the collaborative problem-solving process. Consensus means finding “a sense of the meeting,” a willingness to accept the group’s decision. Rensis and Jane Likert write:

  The process of arriving at a consensus is a free and open exchange of ideas which continues until agreement has been reached. The process assures that each individual’s concerns are heard and understood and that a sincere attempt has been made to take them into consideration in the search for and the formulation of a conclusion. This conclusion may not reflect the exact wishes of each member, but since it does not violate the deep concerns of anyone, it can be agreed upon by all.*18

  When two people are working the collaborative problem-solving method, it may seem too formal to say that decisions are arrived at by consensus. However, the spirit of consensus pervades the collaborative process whenever it is used. Majority votes, parliamentary procedures, adherence to Robert’s Rules of Order—these are not used in collaborative problem solving. (Straw votes may help to determine the sense of a sizable group—but these are not binding and often are not necessary.)

  Once both parties have selected a solution which seems mutually desirable, it is important to try to foresee the possible consequences of that solution or combination of solutions. Seemingly desirable solutions are often ambushed by unforeseen consequences. While it is impossible to accurately predict all outcomes, people who are skilled in problem solving do not overlook this important activity.

  Step 4: Plan Who Will Do What,

  Where, and by When

  Sometimes people are so elated at arriving at a decision that meets everyone’s diverse needs that they celebrate prematurely rather than work out the nitty-gritty of how the solution will be implemented. However, a solution is no better than its implementation. The parties involved need to decide who will do what, where, and by when. Sometimes determining the how—the methods to be utilized—is also important. It is helpful, too, to specify times when the people involved will get together to check how the implementation of the solution is going.

  Many people are forgetful. Others have memories which are inexact. It is usually desirable to write out the agreement that was reached, including the details of who will do what by when. The written agreement is not meant to be anything more than a reminder. Some people like to keep a statement of the problem, the ideas brainstormed, the solution, and the implementation decisions on one page. In one family I know, people date and sign the papers and keep all the agreements in a folder in a particular drawer. They enjoy reading agreements from years ago in much the same way that other families enjoy looking at photographs of various events in the family’s history.

  Step 5: Implement the Plan

  Until this point in the process we have been thinking and talking. Now we are at the point of action. There has been mutual agreement about who will do what by when. Now is the time to do it.

  The first four steps usually are part of a discussion that takes place at one period of time. When the discussion is completed the parties usually separate and do their part of the agreed-upon action steps. As a gesture of good faith, it is important to complete your action steps on schedule. If the other was a full participant in the problem-solving process, and if her needs were met by the solution, there is a high likelihood that she, too, will carry out her part of the agreement.

  Still, people are human and sometimes they do not live up to agreements which were made with great sincerity. In these situations an assertion message, followed by reflective listening, may be appropriate.

  As you do collaborative problem solving with another person, skip Step 5 (implementing) and move directly to Step 6. Implementation of the plan is of crucial importance, but it doesn’t begin until you and the other person have completed this discussion.

  Step 6: Evaluate the

  Problem-Solving Process

  and, at a Later Date,

  How Well the Solution Turned Out

  After a problem-solving session I like to take a few minutes to discuss how the process went. The kinds of things we discuss include some of the following topics:

  How each of us feels in general about the process we just went through.

  What each liked most about the process.

  What each liked least about the process.

  Something that bothered me.

  Something that bothered the other.

  Something I wish I hadn’t done or said.

  Something the other wishes she hadn’t said or done.

  What each of us can do better next time.

  Toward the end of the problem-solving session I always make sure we set a time to see how well the solution is working for us. Some action plans do not stand the test of time—either in total or in part. If an action plan is not working, it should be corrected, or a new one should be instituted. If it is working well, why not celebrate having worked through a difficult issue with success?

  WHAT THIS PROBLEM-SOLVING

  METHOD COMMUNICATES

  A consultant-friend, Peter Lawson, points out that each step of the collaborative problem-solving method has an important mutually affirming message that may be communicated at a conscious or subconscious level. Through the years I have added some of my ideas to his. This is the message I find in each step of the problem-solving process:

  Step Message

  I. Define the problem in terms of needs.

  Your needs are important to me; you are important to me. I am important enough to have my needs expressed and heard. We really can understand one another.

  II. Brainstorm possible solutions.

  I value your creative thinking and mine, and believe that
together we can be even more creative in dealing with our common problem.

  III. Select the solutions(s) that will meet both (all) parties’ needs—and check possible consequences.

  I want you to have your needs satisfied, I want my needs satisfied, and I won’t accept either one of us denying our uniqueness.

  IV. Plan who will do what, where, and by When.

  You and I are willing to make joint decisions and coordinated plans to assist each other in getting our needs met.

  V. Implement the plan.

  You and I have the power to change our behaviors in ways that can enhance our lives and improve our relationship. Our commitment to each other is expressed in action as well as in words.

  VI. Evaluate the process …

  You and I want to continually improve the way we solve problems that arise between us. In honesty and caring we will discuss our feelings about this interaction.

  and the solution.

  We are not locked into any solution, policy, or program. If our decision is not as good for us as we had hoped, we have the power to remake it—better.19

  COLLABORATIVE PROBLEM

  SOLVING IN ACTION Before and After

  Sonje and her husband, Woody, have had frequent conflicts about one issue in their life. Sonje is a violinist in a symphony orchestra and has to practice at least an hour each day. During this time, Woody often turns the stereo on at high volume. The stereo spoils Sonje’s concentration and grates on her nerves. Sonje gave this description of her behavior before—and then after—learning collaborative problem-solving skills.

  My usual response to his action was to say, “Will you turn that damned thing down!” or “You’re being very inconsiderate!”

  One day I decided to answer his blaring of the stereo with an assertion message. I said, “Woody, when you turn the volume up on the stereo when I am practicing, I get very frustrated because my concentration suffers.”