Relishing Conflict

My last post was about the commitment I've made to getting something positive from every interaction.  The commitment was inspired by the training I received from Verus Global corporation (Verusglobal.com) that was founded by the authors of "Stomp the Elephant in the Workplace" and other books about creating a positive culture at work or at home.  Of all the interactions I've had since this training, there is one kind that appears over and over again that starts off as stressful but ends up as constructive if I handle it correctly.  This is the interaction that occurs when someone objects to one of my proposals.

It happens with my wife, my kids, my volunteer work, and it happens over and over and over again at work.  I have an idea.  I mean well.  I think it's a fine idea.  But someone shoots it down.  Sometimes they aren't very nice about it.  They not only shoot down the idea, but sometimes they seem to be questioning my motives or even my integrity.

I generally find myself welcoming these objections.  I know that almost always the other person means well.  Even if, in some cases, they could have found a nicer way to make their point, almost everyone I know at home or at work who disagrees with me is usually primarily driven by some value, belief, or principle they truly believe.  If I sense sarcasm, it might be my imagination, but even if it isn't, the sarcasm is secondary. What is usually primary is that the other person just doesn't agree.  And if I focus on that core motivation--honest disagreement--then there is a huge opportunity to move ahead.

It's even better if the other person's comments are public.  Because now it's time to react.  If I look past any sarcasm or any words that "hooked" me emotionally, I can re-evaluate my position.  If I still think I'm right, I can explain my position respectfully and persuasively and gain more support from the group that is involved in the discussion.  If, instead, the other person has taught me to see things completely differently and I'm now aligned to their point of view, I gain trust with the group by humbly telling this to the other person and thanking them for their input.  And if, as is usually the case, I find myself with a new proposal that blends both of our points of view, the other person becomes an ally and the group respects the compromise that we've developed.

I've seen this happen dozens of times in the last few weeks.  For example, I'm the President of the community council for my neighborhood in Clifton, and there were over 100 emails going back and forth about my proposal to declare to City Hall what was the "best use" of a vacant property.  This was controversial because an overly aggressive definition of "best use" could scare away so many developers that the property would remain vacant for years.  But every negative email felt to me like an opportunity to bring the group together on a final resolution.  With each objection, the resolution was "tweaked" until finally I felt it was far more effective than it would have been without all the conflict.  I actually found myself looking in my Inbox and feeling glad whenever there was another objection.  I'd often feel a sting if I felt there was some sarcasm or anger in the objection, but the sting was not as strong as the feeling I had that by the time I responded we'd be in a better position than we were before someone said, "NO!!!  I DON'T AGREE!!!"

No Bad Conversations

A few weeks ago, during a training class, I was challenged to get something positive out of every interaction, every day.  Some interactions might not feel good.  There may be anger, disappointment, conflict, and stress.  But the challenge is to always get something positive out of the experience, to grow in some way and help the other person grow.  In the words of the trainers, to somehow use the interaction to "activate potential".

The training was called "Pathways to Leadership".  It was facilitated by trainers from Verus Global.  Here's a link to their website:  verusglobal.com.  Verus Global is led by Craig Ross and Steve Vannoy, co-authors of several books including Stomp the Elephant in the Office.

Verus Global doesn't use the term "no bad conversations".  That's my description because it resonates with me.  Verus Global uses, instead, the term "Best Ever Principle", which they say is to use your "ability to realize and activate potential in every interaction, every day."  As soon as I heard about this concept, I kept thinking about how I could possibly do this in the more difficult interactions in my life.  Making a phone call to someone who I know is angry.  Responding to an email that is needlessly insulting.  Dealing with sarcasm.  Meeting with someone who usually will not listen.  Confronting someone on a team who is not doing their part.  These are the conversations I've routinely avoided, even when they are the conversations I need to have to make progress.

I think the trainers are correct.  It IS possible to find a way to grow in these interactions.  If nothing else, there is the growth that comes from calmly expressing what I feel and what I believe with the best possible intentions and growth that comes from listening intently to the other person's point of view.  Moving past any negativity while seeking to understand the other person and always seeking to make the situation better.  I can't imagine many situations where this approach would fail to lead to SOMETHING positive.

So, for the last few weeks, I've mentally prepared myself to get the best out of ANY meeting or phone call, especially the ones that could be difficult.  I've kept the "Best Ever Principle" in mind when responding to a nasty email or getting ready for a potential conflict.  And it's worked very well so far.