Here’s a strategy to improve dynamics in a difficult conversation: In an argument or tense discussion, replace "but" with “and”.
Lawyer/mediator Susan Ingram describes this in her recent blog. “Typically", she writes, “When you’re having a discussion with another person, both of you are going back and forth with each of your own proposals, and not really listening to what the other person has just said.”
When we begin our comments in a conversation with “but”, Ingram says, "we are essentially negating and dismissing what the other person has just said. We are not valuing that person’s experiences and ideas and are just focusing on the point we want to make.”
Instead, she suggests, start with the word "and". By doing this, say writes, "we are acknowledging that we have heard what the other person has said and allowing that there may be value in his or her words. Thus, we are effectively keeping the channels of communication open, encouraging problem solving, and moving the conversation along to a more likely resolution.”
Replacing “but” with “and” sounds easy, but it's not a simple cut and replace. You have to listen carefully and craft your “and” response in a way that conveys your concerns. You have to think it through and adjust a sentence or more in order for your "and" response to make sense.
The Thomas Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument or TKI has been around since the 1970s and bills itself as the world's most widely used conflict style inventory. I started out as a Thomas Kilmann trainer in the 80s and found it very useful. I got frustrated eventually and developed an alternative, for reasons I'll explain. But for at least one purpose, you should still use the Thomas Kilmann.
A concern of Ken Thomas and Ralph Kilmann in developing the TKI was "social desirability bias", a phenomenon in testing in which test takers answer questions dishonestly. Rather than truly describe their own behavior, they answer in ways they think are socially desirable. Kilmann writes in his explanation of the development of the TKI that he and Thomas were inspired by their study of the Mouton Blake inventory, a predecessor to and paradigm for their own instrument. But the Mouton Blake had a glaring social desirability bias problem.
Kilmann observed a situation in which the Mouton Blake inventory had been administered to managers. From the way statements in the inventory were worded, he writes, "it was obvious that 'collaborating' was the ideal mode, while 'avoiding' was the least desirable one." "Sure enough," he continues, "that’s exactly how managers rated themselves, with over 90% ranking themselves highest on collaborating and lowest on avoiding. Their subordinates, of course, experienced those same managers very differently."
Thomas and Kilmann set out to create a similar conflict style test that would be free of the influence of social desirability bias. They adopted the underlying framework of the Mouton Blake, but designed their conflict mode instrument with 30 questions containing paired statements, each worded to be equally desirable. Takers are asked to choose the statement in each pair that more accurately describes them.Since 1974 when it was first published, good publisher support, ongoing engagement by the authors in how to use the TKI, and use of the Thomas Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument in various research projects have propelled the TKI to a leading role.
So why look any farther? The following experiences with the Thomas Kilmann drove me to seek alternatives and eventually create my own:1) The Thomas Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument frustrates many users. As a trainer I discovered that the forced choice question format of the Thomas Kilmann greatly annoys a significant number of test takers. Users are presented with two descriptions of responses to conflict and required to choose one of them.
In conflict styles training, you have an option to use either a paper or online version. I used to be ambivalent on this, but no more.
I'm an old-school trainer. I love the simplicity of paper and face-to-face training. But after Style Matters had been out in paper for several years, demand for an online tool drove us to also develop a digital version. That was an eye-opener for me.
After dozens of hours honing our scoring algorithm, I couldn't deny that the score report our server spits out for each user mines the user data in ways I can't match in a workshop from a hand-tallied score summary. It would take quick thinking and 10-15 minutes dedicated to each participant for a trainer to come even close to the detailed insights contained in the 10 page score report generated by our server. That's just not realistic with 10-20 people in a workshop.
So I'm a reluctant convert to the digital version of Style Matters. We still sell the print version, but in my opinion the ideal approach in training is to have users take the online version before the workshop, print out the score report at home, and bring it to a live workshop. (Already, you've saved 20 minutes of group time that would otherwise be spent passing around paper forms, giving instructions, and waiting for everyone to finish!)
Then in a face to face setting take users through a learning experience (supported by this Powerpoint or your own sketch of it) that provides some input on conflict styles, reinforced by review and discussion of digital score reports in small and large group settings.
Do you use an angry voice to communicate or give instructions when a firm, even voice would do the job just as well? I witness this most commonly in sports settings, where it seems to be accepted that coaches and trainers shout angrily at those they are training. I'm not talking about raising the voice to be heard. I mean shouting with angry inflections and body language, to convey authority and motivate.
Sports isn't the only place this happens. Every parent and teacher - and I speak as a veteran of both roles - gets ticked off at the youngsters in our charge sometimes. So do team leaders, managers, and supervisors of all sorts, working with all ages. Frustration comes with the territory of leadership.
Anger is a powerful tool for many good purposes, when used sparingly. The volume and intensity of anger say "Listen up...!" and often people do. When it's exceptional, anger gets attention and underscores a message.
But used frequently, the positive effects of anger diminish. Anger stresses people. Eventually they tune out and turn inwards for relief from the bombardment. Then you have to shout louder for the same effect.
Worse, your emotional outbursts trigger similar responses in others. Drama and disrespect creep into many discussions and become normal. All communication suffers, frustration spirals, and morale goes down.
Trainers considering Style Matters as a conflict style inventory should be aware of two other options as well, the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument and the Hammer Intercultural Conflict Style Inventory. Style Matters has been optimized for the majority of conflict resolution trainers. But a percentage of trainers might benefit from a specialized tool.
Optimized for psychometrics. The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument, also known as the TKI, was developed in the 1970s with a priority on psychometric validation.
The Thomas-Kilmann is noted for its commitment to psychometrics, reflected in its commitment to the use of a question format that forces users to choose between only two possible options in responding. Although some users find this format annoying, authors Thomas and Kilmann retain it because it results, they say, in more accurate data. For a description of my own experience with the TKI, see my blog post on it.
If psychometrics is your over-riding concern, and issues such as user friendliness, cultural flexibility, and cost have little bearing for you, the Thomas-Kilmann is probably the right choice.
Cost is $19.50 per user. A trainer's guide is available for $250.
Life spares no one from conflict. But unfortunately the word has not yet reached the schools that train professionals.
Name the profession - engineering, teaching, business, social work, lawyer, religion, medicine, whatever. Few professional schools in these professions offer students training in how to navigate the conflicts that come with practice of that profession.
* * * * * * * *
I would love to hear your ideas for effective learning experiences outside of the classroom! Please send them to me at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. With your permission, I'll publish the best ones here.
Here's what you need to design and implement an effective learning experience with Style Matters Online:
Download Trainers Big Guide to Successful Conflict Styles Training. This free 45 page guide to conflict styles training explains the five styles of conflict, the concepts of Calm and Storm, how to work with the cross-cultural aspects of Style Matters, and provides step-by-step guidance through a workshop. In addition you need...
Download Trainers Small Guide to Style Matters Online. This free 10 page supplement builds on concepts in the big guide above and applies them to training with the online version. If you’re just facilitating a conversation, you can get by with just this supplement to design your discussion. If you’re feeling ambitious and expecting to give inputs as an active trainer role, you should have both.
View Intro to Conflict Styles slide show, available in either traditional Powerpoint format or dynamic Prezi format. This short slide show, free for online viewing and available for purchase offline, introduces core concepts of the five styles of conflict and serves as a great prelude to discussion of score reports.
Videos. There are several short videos to help users interpret their scores on our site. You might want to encourage your users to review one or several of them before a workshop. You'll find them useful to you as a trainer as well, for their present key concepts concisely.
Sometimes when there's a conflict, the best thing to do is say nothing and just drift away. Or say firmly, "Let's not take that on right now. " If you're good at selective conflict avoidance, you will have a greater sense of order and control in your life, and you will have more time and patience for the issues most important to you.
This post is the first in a series to help you expand your skill with the five styles of conflict interpersonally or in leadership. In each post I'll show you several transition phrases for one particular style - in this post for Avoiding. Each of the five styles of conflict in Style Matters - which are similar to those found in the venerable if now out-dated Thomas Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument - will feature in posts that follow.
Not everyone needs this post! It's especially for people who find conflict Avoiding difficult or scored low in Avoiding in their score report. If you scored high, other posts in the series will be more useful to you.
We manage conflict better if we choose our responses in moments of storm, rather than blindly react.
Does your behavior in conflict change sharply when you get upset? Do you turn suddenly aggressive when surprised or angered? Or, when conflict heats up, does your assertiveness quickly fade, replaced by avoidance or accommodation?
Such patterns may reflect a strong Storm Shift in conflict, a marked change in behavior as stress rises. Stress, anger, or fear trigger a shift in brain functioning, away from rational "upper brain" management, towards control by the instinct-guided "lower brain". This can bring drastic changes in response to conflict.
A Storm Shift is not necessarily bad; it can in fact be good if your automatic responses are skillful and appropriate for the situation triggering them. You want the surgeon who operates on you to react instantly, for example, if your blood pressure drops. You want a quick shift to a different modality, an instant command of the situation, with clear orders to the medical team. No negotiating, no pussyfooting around!
But a big Storm Shift handicaps effective leadership and conflict management if:
An easy way to expand your conflict resolution ability is to begin using the two step discussion process. This is so simple that you might say, "Isn't it obvious?" Well, no. It certainly wasn't to me for many years. So here's a personal story that shows its power.
In a large institution where I worked, people rolled their eyes about the facilities manager. Kathy had been there for ages and people said she was an inflexible nitpicker. Everyone had a story - we all had to go through her to arrange space and technical support for our meetings and workshops.
Soon after I arrived, I too had my moment with Kathy. I needed access to meeting rooms at unusual hours. This required a special key - which she tightly controlled. I also needed her permission to bring in special equipment.
The two step approach looks like this: Step One: Take steps to establish or affirm the relationship. Step Two: Engage in problem-solving or task activity.
The Cooperating Style of conflict management is about actively seeking ways for both sides to win everything they want. I assert myself clearly and confidently. You do the same. We work together to find solutions that allow us to both get what we want. I win and so do you - how wonderful!
Or maybe, how ridiculous. A magical conflict style that makes everyone happy? Ha, haa, haaa. We could be forgiven for starting a review of Cooperating with a big laugh. Real life isn't that easy and we all have stories to prove it.
[video width="224" height="224" mp4="components/com_wordpress/wp/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Cooperating-Emojis-cynic.mp4" loop="true" autoplay="true" preload="auto"][/video]
The passing this week of Archbishop Desmond Tutu brings a flood of memories of an amazing man and a remarkable chapter in history. I was in South Africa from 1989 to 1995 and witnessed him in action on many occasions.
For anyone committed to leading peaceful change in organizations, communities, or nations, there's much to learn from Tutu's life about how to be effective in human transformation.
If you're interested in leading conflict styles training, download my 2019 trainers' guides with a single click below. To get notice future updates and my blog posts for conflict styles trainers, sign up on the lower right to the trainers list. I post only a few times per year and I won't share your email address!
Comprehensive Guide. My comprehensive Trainers Guide to Successful Conflict Styles Workshops is now in its 4th edition. The 2019 update is the same as previous editions, now newly edited for clarity and ease of use. The 40 page guide provides detailed guidance for training with Style Matters (or the Thomas Kilmann or other inventories based on a similar five styles framework) and many suggestions for presenting information and leading discussion. Download the Trainers Guide in PDF free here.
Guide to Online Version. We've also just released a 10 page companion piece, Trainers Guide to Style Matters Online. Whereas the above guide provides detailed guidance on all aspects of conflict styles training, this short guide focuses narrowly on work with the online version of Style Matters. If refers often to the full guide, so you should have both. Download the online training guide here.
What’s your experience of meetings?
"They're boring. They're useless. Everyone hates them. So why can't we stop meetings?" laments a recent article in the New York Times, "Meet is Murder."
Research by Fuze, a telecommunications company, finds organizations spend 15% of their staff time in meetings. For upper level managers, it's 50%! Yet meeting facilitation methods in most organizations are clumsy and out-of-date.
That needs to change. As online meetings become more common and participants separated by miles increasingly gather electronically, inept facilitation becomes intolerable. The digital age raises the priority of skilled meeting facilitation for organizations.
Why? To get things done in remote meetings, with people connected only through the thin linkages of screens and speakers, facilitators have to provide extraordinarily high levels of guidance and control. Being proactive and assertiveness is paramount. Facilitators must keep participants who are in multiple locations on the same page, prevent awkward silences and verbal collisions, and guide the group through appropriate and efficient problem-solving and decisionmaking approaches.
