For this week’s blog I am bringing back one that was popular a couple of years ago. So, this one is from the archives (originally posted January 26, 2016):

It sometimes happens when conflict is evident – that we avoid facing it and so, we manage the dynamic indirectly. This may be by dropping hints, making veiled comments, being sarcastic and other ways. Such responses to conflict may well have an underlying intention and hope to bring the situation to the surface – not necessarily to avoid it. In any case, this approach may be referred to as “beating around the bush”, which has an interesting (and frightening) derivation.

According to http://www.brownielocks.com/wordorigins.html, this expression “comes from boar hunting in which the noblemen hired workers to walk through the woods beating the branches and making noises to get the animals to run towards the hunters.  Boars were dangerous animals with razor-sharp teeth (you really did not want to meet one-to-one, esp. with no weapon).  So the unarmed workers avoided the dense undergrowth where the boar might be and beat around it, rather than going into it.  Thus, this evasive technique was termed ‘beating around the bush’”.

If this expression reflects your way of managing a current conflict, the following questions might be helpful in unpacking the tendency. Feel free to use the past tense about a previous dispute, if preferred. In either case, I suggest you start by bringing to mind a situation in which you realize you are or were inclined to use evading techniques.

• What is the situation about?
• What evading technique(s) are you using?
• What is happening as a result of using that technique (your answer to the previous question)?
• What do you want to have happen that may not because you are evading the conflict that way?
• When you consider the metaphor more closely, what does the “bush” represent in your conflict?
• Taking the metaphor further, in what ways are you being a “nobleman” or “unarmed worker”?
• What other technique(s) might be more effective?
• What do you suppose keeps you from being direct rather than evasive?
• If you haven’t said so yet, what are the fears you are experiencing about the conflict? About the other person?
• What are the possible opportunities you are missing by “beating around the bush”?
• What else occurs to you as you consider these questions?
• What insights do you have?

For this week’s blog I thought I would bring back a blog that was very popular a few years ago. So, this one is from the archives (originally posted January 12, 2016):

Some of us have a pattern known as people-pleasing. When it comes to conflict this may refer to a tendency to avoid expressing ideas, thoughts and feelings when they differ from another’s for fear of offending them. Afraid to say no, or to defend ourselves, or having a tendency to comply rather than assert a different idea or suggestion, are other examples of behaviours that reflect people-pleasing.

This way of being often means living our lives according to other’s values and beliefs and, as a consequence, acting in ways that are continually out of alignment with ourselves. Having low self-esteem and trouble envisioning ways to manage dissension that will serve us better are commonly prevalent. This makes engaging in conflict a huge challenge.

Not all people are fully aware of how our people-pleasing patterns adversely affect conflict engagement. Others of us are fully aware, but prefer to accommodate others or give in so as not to be part of a conflict. In any case, we may experience self-anger, feelings of inauthenticity and dishonesty about the conflict and its impact.

It’s not a straightforward and easy process to change people-pleasing patterns. However, the following questions may help to open up an internal conversation to be able to gain some sense of who you prefer to be if you tend to be a people-pleaser in some or all conflicts – and don’t want to be.

• Consider a conflict in which you know you behaved as a people-pleaser. What was that situation?
• In what ways did you interact as a people-pleaser?
• How did being a people-pleaser help you? How did it not help you?
• What need (or needs) remains unmet for you due to being a people-pleaser in that situation?
• If you were good to yourself rather than the other person, what would you have said or done differently in that situation?
• How would it feel if you said or did that (your answer to the previous question)?
• What different outcome might have resulted if you said or did what would have pleased you rather than the other person?
• If you are a people-pleaser and, for instance, have trouble disagreeing, expressing the impact of the conflict, asserting your views or saying no, what messages might that convey?
• What messages do you prefer to convey (if you don’t like the ones you referred to in the previous question for you)? How are those messages more aligned with your values and beliefs?
• What will it take to interact in ways that are more aligned with your values and beliefs?
• What else occurs to you as you consider these questions?
• What insights do you have?

Interpersonal conflict is often deflating. Our egos, self-esteem, confidence, mood and other parts of us can all be negatively influenced when we are in dispute. Who the other person is, the subject matter, what she or he said or didn’t say (or did or didn’t do), and the attitude and facial or body language we observed – any number of these and other things could provoke us. I think I can safely say though, most of us experience moments like this when we are feeling deflated after a conflict.

What I notice from many of my conflict management coaching clients when conflicts negatively effect and linger for them is the tendency to be hard on themselves and go to places that reflect old habits. These include engaging in self-blame or blaming the other person, withdrawing, using silences, and reacting in other ways that demonstrate their default system.

If you have a tendency to go to a default (an old conflict habit that isn’t good for you) – even when you try not to – you might find this week’s Conflict Mastery Quest(ions) blog of relevance.

When you are not being good to yourself, after or during a conflict, and go instead to a negative place, what do you tend to think about yourself at these times?

What feelings usually accompany the thoughts you refer to in the previous question?

In what other ways is the place you go to hard on you?

When you think about it, what makes this a place you gravitate to during or after a dispute?

When do you not go to that negative place during or after conflict?

What makes the difference?

What thoughts may you draw on to replace your negative ones, rather than go to your default place?

If you were to be good to yourself during a conflict, what would you do differently? What different feeling would accompany that shift?

If you were to be good to yourself after a conflict, what would you do differently? What different feeling would accompany that shift?

What will it take for you to orchestrate the shifts so that you will be better to yourself during a conflict? What will it take for you to orchestrate the shifts so that you will be better to yourself after a conflict?

What else occurs to you as you consider these questions?

What insights do you have?