Sometimes during an interpersonal conflict we sound like we are in a court of law. We make our points in dogmatic ways, act as though no other position could possibly be considered, and convey an expectation that the other person has no choice but to capitulate.
Considering the viewpoints of you and the other person, how might an actual judge determine an outcome regarding the differences between you?
It sometimes happens in a conflict that we back down from our viewpoint. We may yield to the other person and resent that she or he is getting their way. Or, we may reckon that backing down is the optimum retreat from unnecessary agony. Or, we may determine there are other reasons to not insist on our perspective, desires and hopes. Backing down, whatever our reasons, carries its own set of challenges and doesn’t usually help us to move forward.
What is backing down in a conflict achieving that walking forward with a mutually agree on goal will not?
It may seem a good thing to take a conflict off the rails that it is moving along. However, derailing it may make it worse. We may lose control of the journey it is meant to be on and take its essence to a place it doesn’t belong. Whereas letting a conflict travel the rail it started on might help us better understand the route and buy the ticket that safely gets us to a destination we both want.
What about this metaphor resonates for you and a conflict you are in?
Yes, interpersonal conflict can take a lot out of us and even threaten the relationship. Once our energy and good faith gets depleted at these times, the way back seems plodding and often hopeless. We lose the notion that there’s something positive to be gained from the conflict and one another, or that we have the ability to make it happen.
What potentially good thing is there that you will make happen from a conflict you are in?
Many of us have “best” practices we use when in conflict – at least, they seem to be the best at the time. However, we realize that using approaches that are “tried and true” does not mean they will always be the best practice for each situation and person. Adapting is, in the end, the core competency.
What adaptations to your usual proven practices may be more suitable for a current conflict you are in?
