Category: Relationships and Emotions

My last two posts looked at what constitutes a relationship and what attributes are associated with a relationship.

In this post, I discuss an example which touches upon relationships (and other) issues in a business scenario. Additional elaboration on these issues will be reserved for later posts.

Have you ever done something at work you wished you hadn’t such as being late to a meeting?

Or, failed to do something you wish you had done such as completing a report that was due?

And, when you attempted to rectify the “undesirable” action by saying “I’m sorry (plus an explanation for the “perceived failure”), your boss, or the person to whom the apology was directed looked at you with disdain, displeasure, or disgust.

Even if this scenario hasn’t happened to you, you might still be able to identify with it.

So, what happened?

Well, let’s assume that your “explanation” was, indeed, an attempt to explain the underlying basis for the action that did occur (being late) or the action that did not take place (the absent report) rather than an attempt to simply justify or, in some way, excuse your actions.

In other words, your intent was not to deny, minimize, or avoid responsibility for your actions. Rather, it was an attempt to provide a context for what you did.

The reaction of your boss, however, suggested that he viewed your “I’m sorry” as an excuse and assumed that you were not taking responsibility for your actions.

So, is saying “I’m sorry.” in a business context appropriate?

Well, let’s explore this question from an emotional mastery (basically an emotional intelligence) perspective in the context of building (or maintaining) a relationship.

Basic Concepts:

• emotional mastery:

The basis of emotional mastery is the idea that emotions are tools which, when mastered like any other tool such as a cell phone, allow you to interact more effectively with your environment and make better inter- and intra-personal decisions.

• mastering your own emotions:

You master your emotions when you accept your initial emotional reaction as informative, understand the meaning of each emotion (the message), assess your surroundings to see if your initial perception was accurate, and use the assessment to choose how you want to respond to what is going on.

• relationship:

A relationship is any interaction with another person that has value, is personally meaningful, or personally significant, and which, if not handled appropriately can result in unwanted consequences.

• mastering the emotions of another person:

You master the emotions of someone else by observing their actions and attempting to understand the emotion they are experiencing. Then, by using this knowledge to address any problematic issues they might have with you, you attempt to facilitate a mutually beneficial change in their behavior by changing their perceptions of their interactions with you.

• Retrospective mastery:

Managing the emotions of another retrospectively involves assessing the emotion that is displayed and working backward to understand and change the emotion.

• Prospective mastery:

Determining how you want to be perceived and acting accordingly.

• Manipulation vs Mastery:

When you opt to facilitate change in another person solely for your own benefit, you are manipulating the other person.  If you are detected, your relationship with that person will deteriorate.

When you opt to master the emotions of another so as to improve the relationship with that person in such a way that the change is mutually beneficial, you are mastering the emotion.

Mastery is productive. Manipulation is counter-productive.

“I‘m sorry”.

By itself, the meaning of this phrase is ambiguous.

For example:

1. “I’m sorry I didn’t attend the meeting. I was held up in traffic.”
2. “I’m sorry for your loss.”
3. “Sorry about that.”

#1 is perceived as an excuse or attempted justification.

#2 is perceived as an expression of condolence and sympathy

3# is perceived as an expression of indifference.

The phrase “I’m sorry.” takes on meaning from:

• the context in which it is said,
• the “modifiers” that follow it (the information provided regarding what one is sorry for or about), and
• the perception of the person receiving the “apology” in terms of the relationship with the “apologizer”, the perceived intent of the “apologizer”, and other factors

The perception of the “receiver” is impacted by many factors including:

• relationship with the “apologizer”
• past experiences with, and opinions about, “I’m sorry”
• how one views any “failure to live up to expectations”
• and so forth.

Think about this for a moment.  While there may be times when you are able to discern the nature of your boss’s reaction toward you (his perceived “threat”), there will also be times when you can’t know for certain what the basis of this perception is.

So, you may need to adjust your own comments to cover a range of possibilities.

“I’m sorry” plus restitution

When you said, “I’m sorry” and gave your explanation, your boss responded with a look that suggested his displeasure, some form of rebuke or censure, or even mild anger.

Emotional mastery would suggest that your boss perceives your communication as both inappropriate and as a “threat”.  This is the message of “anger”.  The threat, here, might involve:

• his (or her) view of you as an “irresponsible” employee who wants to make himself feel better by justifying his “failure” to act appropriately (accountability),
• his view of any “explanation” as a “justification” or “excuse” designed to manipulate him.

When you are attempting to interact with another person and “master” (or validate) their emotions within the context of the relationship you have with that person, you need to insure that you address the (possible) perceived threats that person might be reacting to.

When addressing a perceived threat, think about the concept of restitution.  Restitution is defined as the restoration of something lost or stolen to its proper owner and usually appears in legal settings where a crime has been committed.

While it is, admittedly, a bit of a stretch to include the idea of  restitution with saying “I’m sorry.” as no crime has been committed, here is how I am viewing your apologizing to a skeptical boss.

Your actions are perceived as a violation of how things “should be”.  Your boss expects you to be responsible.  Your actions have violated this expectation and it this expectation  that constitutes the “loss” that you are restoring.

So, your “explanation” now involves your stating how you will make things right or restore equilibrium.

Put another way, your boss isn’t so much concerned about why you did what you did as much as he wants to know what you will do to make everything right now that whatever you did is already done.

Hence…

“I’m sorry.” in a business setting? Yes, with caveats.

It is here that your intentions and how you interact with your boss become important. These are relationship elements.

Caveat #1:  Never just say “I’m sorry.”

The reason here is that, as I noted above, this phrase is like a verbal Rorschach card which, because of its ambiguity, is prone to be misinterpreted based on the biases of the listener. Understanding and accommodating these biases are done in the context of the relationship.

Caveat #2: Be aware of your own intent in saying “I’m sorry.” and clearly communicate that intent.  This is mastering your own emotions.

What are you feeling concerning the “mistake” for which you are apologizing?

Did you unintentionally make the mistake? (feeling guilty and responsible for making it right)

Was the mistake unintended but the result of a situation beyond your control? (feeling content but still responsible for making it right)

And, so forth.

Caveat #3:

Be cognizant of the likely perceptions of your listener.

If you know that your boss expects accountability and responsibility, follow your “I’m sorry.” with a brief delineation of what happened and a clear description about what you will do to make it right.

The “I’m sorry.” communicates your accepting responsibility for any unexpected outcomes.

Your explanation supports the acceptance of responsibility and commits to a plan of action to “make it right”.

Caveat #4: Be cognizant of your relationship with your listener.

How does your listener view you and what expectations does he (or she) have about you.

Tailor your response with these expectations in mind.  For example, how direct can you be with this person.  Do you need to acknowledge  power, gender or seniority differences in your communication?

With these caveats in mind, saying “I’m sorry.” is appropriate because it communicates accepting responsibility and is reinforced by a plan to move forward.

In my next post, I will go into greater detail than this post permitted regarding mastering your own emotions in the context of a relationship (Relationship Tip #1) and mastering the emotions of another person in the context of a relationship (Relationship Tip #2).

And, the post after that will go into greater detail of interacting with another person.  Relationship Tip #3 will address the Basic Relationship Rule and Relationship Tip #4 will look at shooting for a Win-Win but settling for a compromise.

I welcome your comments.

This is part 2 of the Relationship Primer series. In the last post, we defined what a relationship is and discussed three categories of relationships.

In part 2, I discuss the attributes of a relationship.

You can gain a better understanding of a relationship in terms of the function the relationship serves, what sustains it, what accounts for one’s actions within the relationship, or what might account for the relationship becoming unstable or problematic by taking a closer look at the attributes of the relationship.

The attributes of a relationship work across all three categories discussed in the last post.

The attributes of a relationship include:.

• The context (including time frames) in which the relationship exists.
• The rules (explicit or implicit) that apply to the relationship.
• The expectations you and the other person bring to the relationship
• Miscellaneous factors such as gender, power differences, age, and elements unique to each individual such as interpersonal skill sets and self-image.

Context

The context of a relationship is the setting in which that relationship occurs.  Some examples of context include..

official settings:

• your work,
• a business such as a store or an airport counter,
• a governmental office,
• an official phone contact including tech support, making an appointment, or placing an order
• ordering food at a “sit-down” restaurant
• a school,

casual settings:

• starting a conversation with a stranger
• a party
• a “blind” date

Rules:

A rule is an explicit (stated or written) or implicit (implied or understood) regulation, mandate or principle governing conduct within a particular setting. 

Explicit rules include:

• policies
• contracts
• codes including ethics
• laws
• parental “mandates” which apply to kids

Implicit rules include:

• precedents (as in “the way things are done around here”)
• implied guidelines (as in “this is the way you deal with that boss”)

If you don’t know the rules that exist within a given context or setting, you are more likely to “cross the line” and be perceived as acting inappropriately. This can lead to conflict.

If the rules are explicit, as in written policies, laws, mandates or ethics codes, it is reasonable to assume that others within your setting are familiar with, will understand, and will act according to those rules. Or, if their actions violate a given rule, informing them that a rule exists should be sufficient to produce a change in their behavior.

If you know the rules, you expect others to act in accordance with the rules and you “judge” or label the behavior of others as “right” or “wrong” based on whether that behavior conforms to or violates the rules. 

Expectations:

Context and rules often determine the expectations that participants have about how they and the other person in the relationship should act.

An expectation is a future prediction about what we believe will happen and, more importantly, what we believe is required to happen (based on whatever criteria are being applied).

Please note that an expectation involves…

• our prediction regarding what will happen in the future and
• our statement of what is required to take place. 

What makes expectations so critical is the belief, expressed as an expectation, that another person is obligated or required to act in accordance with the expectation.

So, if I expect you to do something and you do not, I perceive you as violating some norm or rule.  It is this perceived violation that elicits my anger, displeasure, criticism, or desire to punish or correct the violation.

One’s expectations are often the basis for misunderstandings and conflict in relationships!

Sometimes, we are aware of our expectations.  For example, we expect our server at the restaurant to be polite and attentive.  If the restaurant is not busy, we expect our coffee to be refilled as frequently as needed.  If the restaurant is busy, our expectations change accordingly.  If our coffee gets cold and is “never” refilled.  Our displeasure is clear, our expectations have not been met and the tip we may leave might reflect this displeasure.

At other times, we may not be explicitly aware of our expectations but someone does something and we are surprised at what we see.  This “surprise” is an indication that an expectation has either not been met or has been exceeded.

Our expectations impact our emotions and our actions whether we are aware of them or not.

Sometimes, there can be a conflict between the expectations of the participants in a relationship. 

When I was working as a Psychologist in a juvenile correctional facility, I wrote a report in which my “recommendation” was in direct conflict with what the Institutional team was recommending.  The Superintendent called me into his office and berated me for “not being a team player”. His expectation was that I, as a team player, would go along with the team’s recommendation.  I agreed with him about, and assured him that, I was a “team player”. In this instance, however, I had a higher standard I had to meet. My psychological data led to a different conclusion and I had an “ethical” responsibility to follow my data. My personal expectation was that, when ethics trumped loyalty, I would be ethical.

Another example is when a boss might expect that he (or she) can “take advantage” of a subordinate who “expects” to be treated with respect.  The “me-to” movement is beginning to address this “injustice”.

Miscellaneous factors:

Finally, there are other (miscellaneous) factors which can impact a relationship. Miscellaneous factors may impact the “expectations” each participant brings to the relationship.

Miscellaneous factors include:

• gender (or gender identification)
• power differences (when one’s position involves the ability to negatively impact a subordinate and this “power” is used to exploit a subordinate)
• each participant’s model of the world (one’s model of the world is a general view of “the way things are in the world”or “the way things should be in the world” regarding right and wrong, interpersonal relationships, honesty, values, appropriate vs inappropriate actions, and so forth)
• skill sets (These are the abilities that each person has including assertive skills, problem solving skills, and communication skills.)
• the self-image of each participant (This is the picture one has of oneself and includes self-confidence, one’s place in the world, how one relates to others, one’s sense of entitlement and so forth.)

In the next post, I will look at an example of an interaction which touches upon the concepts of mastering emotions and relationship issues (reacting with another person).

Relationship Tips #1 and #2 address mastering emotions and will be covered in a later post as will Tips #3 and #4 which look more specifically maximizing your interactions with another person.

If you are registered with this blog, please leave a comment.

 

 

 

This is the first of a series of posts on relationships.

In this series, I will help you…

• understand what relationships are 
• how you can appreciate the relationships you have that are “working” 
• how you can attempt to improve the relationships that are problematic.  

In this post, I look at what actually constitutes a “relationship”.

Enjoy, and, if you are registered, please leave a comment.

What is a “relationship”?

Take a moment and think about the relationships you currently have.

You probably thought about your significant other, your kids, or perhaps someone like a family member that you used to be able to relate to but are now estranged from.

Of course, you thought of the easy, or obvious, relationships.

But, did you think of your boss, your co-workers, the clerk at the store who helped you find the perfect gift, the policeman who pulled you over on the way to work, or the tech guy you called to help you figure out how to make your phone do what it is “supposed” to do but doesn’t do for you?

Or, did you think about the person at work  you have to interact with in order to do your job but who, in reality, is a “jerk” because that individual marginalizes, demeans, or discounts you in some way?

On both counts, probably not.

What is a relationship? A working definition:

A relationship is any interaction with another person that:

• has value, is personally meaningful,or personally significant

or

• which, if not handled ” appropriately”, can result in unwanted consequences.

“Relationship” only indicates that there is a connection between you and another person and that you and another person are participants in the relationship.

The definition of a relationship does not, by itself, tell you anything about you, the other person, the nature of the connection, its valence (positive or negative) or how serious the connection is.

All of these elements are important and help to delineate what the particular relationship entails.

The category which you decide best describes any relationship in which you are a participant can impact the expectations you bring to that relationship.

I discuss expectations and their impact on a relationship in the next post.

Three Categories of Relationships

There are at least three categories of relationships.  The first two are obvious.

The third, while less obvious, is no less significant.

1. Personal – family, marriage, kids, in-laws, friends, significant others
2. Business – your boss, co-workers, or customers with whom you interact
3. Unrecognized – the clerk at the airline ticket counter, the tech person you call about your computer, the cop who pulls you over.

Unrecognized relationships are those interactions with others  that you do not typically recognize as “relationships” but which can impact your life.  They may help you get an upgrade on your airline ticket or hotel room, help you avoid a traffic ticket, or improve your ability to achieve other “outcomes” you desire.

Years ago, I happened to be standing in line at an airport and watched a man aggressively tell the clerk that he had to get on a specific flight.  The clerk had informed him that the flight was full.  He postured, the clerk repeated what she had said, and the man left in a huff.  The next person in line approached the clerk politely, stated his need to be on the flight and, was able to get a seat.  This second customer approached the clerk as if he had a “relationship” with her.

Fluid versus concrete distinctions

The categories I have noted above and the examples I have given for each are in no way meant to be either definitive or rigid.  They can overlap.  For example, your co-worker can be a personal friend.

A suggestion: Avoid “labels” and think of all “connections” as “relationships”

As a general rule of thumb,  I try to communicate to others that I see them as a “person” and not just as a “label” such as “employee”, “cop”, “clerk” and so forth. In other words, while the connection I have with this person may not last very long, if it is “meaningful”, it is still a “relationship”.

Indeed, I am suggesting that going forward you consider all important connections that you have with other people as “relationships”.  When you do this, the importance you use as a lens through which you view that connection will have a significant impact on how you relate to the other person.

Why is this the case?

Well, there at least two reasons:

1. When you define a connection with another person, you are viewing that connection as significant or worthy of attention.
2. If a connection is significant, you will take some time to figure out what is going on with, how to make progress within, and how, possibly, to improve that connection.

That a connection is significant does not imply that it is positive, desirable, or healthy. As an example, that “jerk” at work may be someone whose cooperation you need to complete a project. While you might like to eliminate him (or her) from your life and consider the connection undesirable, negative, or unhealthy, it is still significant.

And, it is, therefore, a relationship.

The Attributes of a Relationship:

It is possible to gain a better understanding of the connection that constitutes the relationship by examining the various attributes which define your relationship.

I’ll discuss the attributes of a relationship in the next post.

 

In a recent LI post, an article is cited in which the author writes about an interaction between a woman and her spouse. She has been thinking about a romantic trip to Paris and, as she goes into the living room to tell her husband about the trip, she is thinking to herself “I hope he agrees.”

When she tells her spouse about the trip, he says, “I disagree.”

The article breaks down the origins of the words “agree” and “disagree”.

The focus of the article is the the word “disagree”. As far as the author of the article is concerned the words “I disagree.” really mean (my interpretation) that the spouse has no intention of going to Paris.

“Disagree” is a ‘stop’ word.

In other words, the spouse has thrown cold water on his wife’s dreams and is prepared to go to battle with her using his logic about all the reasons that a trip to Paris is a non-starter.

By the way, this same scenario could occur if he approaches her with an idea which is of importance to him and she says, “I disagree.”

It is an interesting article and I recommend reading it.

But, I have a different take from an emotions as tools/anger mastery perspective.

While briefly acknowledging that “disagree” might have some other, less draconian, meaning, the author doesn’t spend much time on this possibility. Nor, does he talk about the woman’s feelings.

Let’s explore some options.

She goes into the living room and shares her dreams with her spouse. When he says he disagrees, she may feel (at least one of the following):

1. disappointment
2.  anger
3. anticipation.

All emotions alert us to how we perceive our surroundings and prepare us to deal with the situations we encounter. This is the message of the emotion. How we choose to respond to the message is what mastering the emotion is all about.

Note: This italicized comments are intended to communicate a general idea rather than a specific dialog.

The message of disappointment  is that an anticipated event has not gone the way you would like. It is focusing on the implied reaction to the event rather than on the motives of the person with whom she is interacting. If she is disappointed, she has interpreted the words, “I disagree.” as meaning… Well, perhaps this trip was not a good idea at this time as my husband’s clear head usually prevails in these type of situations.

The message of anger is that she perceives a threat and is prepared to go to war to overcome the threat. Here the focus is on both the actions and the motives of her spouse. If she is angry, she may perceive him as being oblivious to her needs by thinking only of the cost of the trip, his own desire not to go to Paris, or his too quick reaction to find fault with the idea rather than explore options. She has interpreted the words, “I disagree.” as meaning.. I don’t care what you say, the answer is ‘no’ and that’s final!

The message of anticipation is that there is a future event coming which could have significant beneficial outcomes and which one is looking forward to. If she feels anticipation, than she has interpreted his words, “I disagree.” as meaning… I can’t really see Paris as a possibility now but let’s discuss it and see where it goes.

If she has learned to master her emotions as tools, her feelings will give her some guidance about how she wants to interact with her spouse. Once she identifies and validates the feeling, she can assess whether her perceptions are accurate by interacting with her spouse, expressing her perceptions and getting feedback from him. Based on this interaction, she can choose how she wants to respond.

I welcome your comments.

Recent events including the shooting in a High School in Florida led me to wonder about how I would help my own teenager (my own kids are adults now) if I had one who experienced an “active shooter” situation with fatalities. I have years of training so I have a sense of how to intervene and the necessary skills to do so.

Disclaimer:  This post is meant to stimulate a discussion of the issues and to provide some guidelines.  It is not meant as a tutorial or as a complete “how-to” regarding talking to a teen.  If you find yourself in the aftermath of an active shooter incident and feel that you are “in over your head”, seek professional help.

I am making some basic assumptions..

First of all, I am assuming that the teen is old enough and engaged enough to be able to discuss their feelings and their concerns.  This does not mean that there are no emotional reactions such as bad dreams, crying, a sense of vulnerability and so forth.

Secondly, I am assuming that the emotional reaction to the event has not prompted PTSD level symptoms which are so disruptive that a professional intervention is required.

Thirdly, I am assuming that the adult interacting with the teen is not so overwhelmed by their own feelings that they really can’t assure their teen about anything.

That being said, before I made any attempt to help my teen deal with this type of event, I would take whatever time it took to make it clear that whatever he (or she) was feeling, it was okay to feel it and that I would do whatever was necessary to help them get through it.  Along these same lines, I would let my child know that I also was impacted by the event.

I would, at the appropriate time, ask the teen  what they were feeling. I would expect feelings including anger, anxiety, and guilt.

While I would get to the anger eventually, as anger is easily understood in this context,  I would first attempt to address the guilt and the anxiety.

The message of guilt is that the person has done something wrong.

With this in mind, I would ask what it was that the teen felt guilty about.  What do they believe they should have done that they did not.  This is survivor guilt. I would do this before I reassured them that it wasn’t their fault.  They already know this on some level but the guilt suggests that there is some doubt that must be addressed.

After they expressed themselves, I would attempt to address the issues they brought up. I would not argue with them but would, through questions, help them begin to see that there was nothing more they could have done to prevent the shooting. Finally, if appropriate, I would share that it appeared to me that there was nothing they could have done differently.

The message of anxiety is that there may be a future event which might cause severe harm.

Anxiety is understandable under these circumstances as these events occur without warning and with fatal consequences. Adults have difficulty with these types of events as well.

Because the event is unpredictable, the teen can become consumed with worrying that it could happen again. This reality, while highly unlikely, is always  possible.

Thinking about future possible events can lead to bad dreams, a desire to avoid going back to school, feelings of vulnerability and so forth.

Here are two possible interventions I might try.

The first would be to explain what dreams are.

All of our brains are at work 24/7.  At night, when we sleep, the activities of the day stop and the brain continues to “process” whatever issue we might have been struggling with during the day.  These issues can appear in our dreams.

Dreams can be experienced as very real.

I would explain dreams to my teen and go on to say that when these dreams happen, we should acknowledge them, accept that they reflect our very real feelings, and then attempt to move past them by not allowing them to have power over us.  This takes time and must be practiced.  But, we can learn to defang our dreams.

I would then attempt to explain that while we can’t always prepare, or avoid, bad things which happen, we can do a lot to help us cope with an event which might happen in the future.

The example I would use is that of a fatal traffic accident.

Whenever we get behind the wheel of a car, we are aware that a drunk driver, an errant nail in a tire, or some unforeseen situation could result in a fatal accident which could kill us.

While we are aware of this, we still get in the car.

This is possible because we believe we are both prepared for the unforseen and are good drivers (We are prepared, alert, and attentive to other drivers.)

At some point, and I would choose very carefully when, I would explain that even if we do everything right, sometimes bad things happen including fatal accidents.

The analogy of a traffic accident can be used in the case of a school shooting.

I would explain that teachers are being trained to deal with these type of situations.

I would also tell my teen to talk about what they might look for in other students which might indicate that this person is troubled and needs to be helped.  If they see something about which they are concerned, they need to tell a teacher.  Also, if there is an active shooter in a school, then they need to be prepared to remain “calm”, lock the classroom door and shelter in place or do whatever the school has suggested they do in these situations. All of this is preparation.

Lastly, I would address the anger by validating it, explaining that the message of anger is that we perceive a threat we believe we can eliminate.  From this perspective, I would suggest that my teen use the energy of the anger to organize with their friends to impact legislators to change the laws regarding gun ownership, background checks, and so forth.

Two caveats are important here.

The first is that this is not a complete discussion of dealing with the aftermath of an active shooter situation. It is only intended as a guide to help if you find yourself having to help a teen begin to deal with the emotions that follow from a traumatic event.

Secondly, while it may look easy in black and white, this process is not easy, can take a lot of time, patience and multiple attempts.  While not easy, however, it is doable and worth the effort to implement.

As always, in these situations, professional help is always available and should be utilized.

 

 

Announcement:

Before I begin the New Year with an article I think you will find interesting, I want to let you, my readers, know that starting with today’s post, I will be posting new articles every other week rather than every week.

While there are a number of reasons for this which I won’t go into, what I would like you to know is that I am still very interested in providing content which is relevant to you.  With this in mind, I hope you will continue to leave comments (We review all of them.) about both the content I provide and any new content you would like me to address.

Thank you for your understanding and continued support.

-The Emotions Doctor-

Happy 2018!

I want to start the New Year with an article on responsibility and accountability because I am suggesting you begin 2018 with a different approach to how you interact with others.

And, by the way, the principles I discuss below can also be applied to yourself.  This can improve your self-esteem and your self-respect.

Someone with whom you have a “relationship” at some point will either do something “wrong” or fail to do something “right”.

That person could be a child, a spouse, or, maybe, an employee.

Perhaps you are angry because their actions are perceived as a “threat”.

Here are some possible threats:

• to your view of right verses wrong,
• they have negatively impacted your goals or your business,
• or you are convinced that they just “should” not have done what they did.

You want to hold them accountable for their actions in order to:

• make things right,
• get justice,
• or teach them a lesson.

Okay, while each of the above makes sense, I suggest that you avoid being too quick to rush to judgement.

Here is something to think about.

Your anger tells you that you perceive a threat in what this person has done.

Let’s agree that their behavior is a threat (whether or not it actually is).

When you move to the next step about what to do to deal with the threat, the issue becomes a bit more complicated.

If your desire is to “hold them accountable”, then you are assuming that the actions they took (or failed to take) were intentional.

If they chose to do something wrong or chose to avoid doing what was expected, then your assumption is correct and corrective action, or punishment is appropriate.

Notice the words I have italicized above.

But, what if something else is going on?

Let me explain.

When we hold someone accountable for their actions, we assume that they are capable of doing what is expected.

To be accountable is to be held RESPONSIBLE.  

If one is capable of doing what is expected, then they are RESPONSE ABLE.

I am making a distinction between Response Ibility vs Response Ability.

Before you decide how to deal with the behavior of another person, it is important to determine:

1) if they could have done what you expected and either chose not to (or just screwed up) or

2) they could not do what was expected either because they lacked a specific skillset or tool or because they completely misunderstood what was expected.

To hold a person accountable when they lacked the ability to do what was expected will elicit anger because the imposed consequence is viewed as unfair and, therefore, as a threat to their view of right and wrong.

Anger will lead to resistance which will interfere with learning.

If the goal is to change the undesired behavior, then it is important to determine that the individual was indeed response able before we hold them respons(e) sible.

In a business context, it may be your responsibility as an employer to help them secure the training they need.

As a friend (or parent), it is your responsibility to do what is necessary to make your expectations (and the reasons behind them) clear and appropriate and to  facilitate the relationship moving forward.

I welcome your comments.

 

 

This is a question that was posted on a LinkedIn forum.  I believe the answer involves two issues.

The first issue involves the phrase “suffering with anger problems”. The second issue involves explaining emotions to kids. The two issues are related.

Let’s talk about the idea that your kid “suffers” from an  “anger problem”.

To approach your child and his (or her) behavior from this point of view will not, over time, be productive.  And, it is not accurate.

Your child may “suffer” from a cold, a  broken bone, or a rash all of which are physical in nature and each of which will eventually heal and go away.

Anger is an emotion which reflects how your child views his world and prepares him to deal with that world.

Anger is a primitive threat detector. Your child’s anger reflects his perception that a threat exists.  That threat could be to his goals, his expectations, or his immediate needs.  The behavior you see is his attempt to deal with the perceived threat.

Anger is a psychological phenomenon which is experienced physically.  Anger is never the “problem”.  It will not go away over time and there is nothing that needs to be “healed”. Behavior that is elicited in the service of anger may be problematic. The way to deal with anger is to understand the underlying perceived threat and address that.

It is important to note that your “advice” will vary with the age of the child.

I view all emotions, including anger, as tools. This is both a description of an emotion and a metaphor.

Anger as a metaphor lets you explain what emotions (including anger) are.

Using “emotions as tools” as a metaphor enables you to explain the concept of an emotion to both kids and adults. As a metaphor, your kid can understand that his anger, the TV remote, his phone/computer, or mom’s sewing machine are just tools that have a specific function. You can choose a “tool” that your child will relate to given the age of the child.

Anyone can understand that you have to learn how to use the “tool” in order to get the most out of it. This is called a learning curve.

From this perspective, you own  a phone, you do not have a phone problem. You experience anger, you do not have an anger problem.  What you do have, in both cases, is a knowledge or training issue.

Anger as a description lets you teach your kid about anger.

Anger, as a tool (description) is a primitive threat detector. When you get angry, your anger tells you that you perceive a threat that you believe you can eliminate if you throw enough force at it. The anger cycle describes how mastering anger “works”.

You can download a copy of the Anger Mastery Cycle by scrolling up to the Welcome post above.

When angry, your kid is perceiving a “threat” to his goals, his needs, his values, his sense of “fairness” or how he thinks things “should” be.

From this perspective, you can talk to him (or her) about the perceived threat (This validates him.), whether or not there actually is a threat (This is the beginning of anger mastery), and the best action to take in the situation (This empowers him.).

You can also talk about the consequences he currently experiences when he gets angry. These are the reasons you say he has an anger “problem”.

The issue here is not necessarily whether those who are labeling him are right or wrong. In fact, they could be either one.  The issue is that your teen is getting in trouble and needs to learn how to deal with that situation.

It is important to note that everyone, including your kid

To view anger as a tool validates (does not necessarily agree with) the anger and shifts the focus to your child, consequences, actions, and making a plan. This is what you want.

To view anger as a “problem” invalidates an important feeling and disempowers your child.

So, what do you say to a teenager who is being told he (or she) has an “anger problem”?

First, you need to ask your teen if he thinks he has an anger problem and what he thinks might be going on that someone else thinks he has an anger problem.

This should get you some valuable insight into how much your child knows about himself, to what degree can he empathize with others, and to what extent he tends to “blame” others for difficulties he is experiencing.

The information you are looking for is the “threat” your teen perceives which is eliciting the anger.

You can then validate his perception with or without corroborating the validity of the threat and attempt to move him toward an adaptive resolution of the interaction.

If his perception of the threat is accurate…

“I can see what you mean. What might we do to resolve this situation?”

If his perception is inaccurate…

“I understand how you might see the situation as you do.  Is there another way to look at it? What do you think it might take to resolve this situation?”

When you validate your child’s anger, you establish that you and he are on the same “team”, the goal of which is to understand the anger and help resolve the perceived threat. Again, remember that you are not agreeing with the anger (or that there is an actual threat). You are only validating that he is angry and that he perceives a threat.

You can then begin to discuss the nature of the threat and how you can help him (or her) resolve it.

I welcome your comments.

This is Part 2 of my blog on Understanding another person.  If you have not read last week’s blog entry, please take a moment and scroll down to read my earlier comments.

Assumption #1: Here, the focus is on you.  When you assess, or judge, another’s behavior as right/wrong or good/bad, you are acting “as if” you already know all there is to know about the person and their behavior. Suspending judgment enables you to be more objective in your interactions with the other person.

While you may disagree with them and even have an opinion about their behavior, for the moment, it is best if you suspend judgement. At a later point, any disagreement you might have can become a focus of discussion.

Assumption #2 and #3 focus on the other person.

Assumption #2:  To assume a person’s behavior is “valid” only means that you are saying that they believe what they are doing is right for the situation in which they find themselves.

You are not saying their behavior is appropriate, effective, or even beneficial. You also are not saying that you agree with the behavior.

This is a critical key to gaining an understanding of another person.

Assumption #3: The basis for this assumption is the idea that each of us wants to engage in a behavior which will help us achieve whatever outcome we want in our present situation.  To the extent that this is true (as it most often is), we do what we have to further our own agenda.

There is no judgement here about the “agenda”.  The other person may be acting in their own self-interest or altruistically.  The only relevance here is that it is their agenda and they are pursuing it.

To do less than the “best” we can won’t help us achieve our agenda.

I am not saying that their behavior is the “best” possible.  In many cases, what they are doing clearly (initially to you and later to them) is not the best possible.  It is only their best in the moment given their model of the world.

This assumption also leads to the possibility that they might choose to change their behavior if they acquire new knowledge, new skill sets, or a  different model of the the world.

Based on these three assumptions, your task of understanding the other person can now focus on gaining information about, insight into, and a better understanding of their model of the world and their skill sets for dealing with those they come in contact with.

When you focus primarily on the behavior, which is what most of us do, you most likely will get bogged down in judgements (on your part) and rationalizations (on their part) and will find that your discussion does not lead to any useful understanding of what is going on.

Asking “why” is often ineffective.

So, another person does something we disagree with and we ask “Why did you do that?”

In an earlier post (9/28/16) entitled: “What” is a better, and more accurate, word to use than “Why”. Here is why. I discussed the reason you want to use “What” rather than “Why” whenever you are questioning your own actions or the actions of another person.

I noted:

When you ask a person, “Why did you do that?”, what you really want to know is:

• What was the basis for your decision to (do what you did)?
• What did you hope to accomplish (by doing what you did)?
• What other alternatives did you consider (before you did what you did)?
• What motivated you (to do what you did)?”
• In what way might your opinion of me lead you to believe you needed to approach me in the way you did?

When you ask “why”, what you will likely get is an excuse.

While I did not really delineate it my earlier post, the rationale for asking “What” rather than “Why” involves gaining an understanding of the other person’s model of the world.

When you understand how they view their world, their relationship with you, their goals and their view of their ability to accomplish their goals, their view of their strengths and weaknesses and so forth, the behavior which originally prompted your concerns now becomes self-evident.

My California Youth Authority Example

When I worked in the California Youth Authority, many of my clients were young black women who had committed serious crimes including murder. I am a white male, raised in a middle class home, with no criminal past.

We were separated by age, gender, race, a criminal past, a history of physical and sexual abuse, and a variety of cultural issues.

This being said, it was my job as their therapist (There were no black female therapists at the time.) was to help them gain a better understanding of themselves, their self-image, their values and so forth.

I approached these young women by admitting that I could not “know” what they felt (empathy) or what they had experienced. I explained that they were an expert about themselves and I was an expert on dealing with (psychological) issues.  I needed them to help me help them. So, if they helped me understand how they viewed their world (Their model of the world, including me.), I could help them gain a better understanding of themselves and an improved ability to get out of “jail” and stay out.

While their crimes were always unacceptable and they were held accountable for what they did, the specific behavior which got them incarcerated could only be approached once it was clear to them that I had an understanding of what they were experiencing.

Understanding opened up the door to further exploration of important issues.

I was not always successful.  But, sometimes, I was.

This is an example of pursuing understanding not empathy.

I hope the above was helpful.

If you found this information useful, please send a link to anyone you know who might  benefit from it.

And, finally,  please leave a comment.

Situation:

• You are interacting with another person whose behavior you find excessive, inappropriate, or “wrong” and you have no clue as to what is “causing” the behavior.
• Because you have a “relationship”with this person, you want to gain a better understanding of them and their actions.
• You have no clue how to begin the “process of understanding”.

Have you ever found yourself in a similar “situation”?

Most likely, the answer is yes.

Possible “relationships” include:

• a parent with their child
• a boss with his or her subordinates
• a leader with his or her followers (volunteers/team)
• a spouse
• an adult child with aging parents
• a person dealing with clients or customers
• and so forth.

In pursuit of understanding, you may have read , or been advised, that you should “put yourself in their shoes”. This is what empathy is all about.

While empathizing with another person is good, there are at least 3 reasons why you might find it difficult to achieve.

1. You may have tried to do this but “empathy” is not your strong suit.

I know of a very intelligent individual who works in the medical profession.  He views himself as very good at “understanding” the clients he works with but tends to focus on the issues he sees in the client’s reasoning or behavior.  He does not seem able to put himself in their shoes and experience his understanding from their point of view.

2. The gap between you and the other person is too wide and inhibits your “putting yourself in their shoes”.

This gap could be due to a difference in age, gender, race, religion, or culture. Or, some other factor such as your values.

3. You found yourself judging the other person as “wrong”.  When you judge another person, you have made a decision about them and the process of empathizing with (or even understanding) them stops.

While empathy is beneficial, it isn’t crucial.

So, even if you find it difficult to empathize with another person, you can still begin to understand them and their point of view.

Understanding another person facilitates your effectively interacting with them, improving the relationship you have with them and even, where appropriate, disciplining them.

A person’s behavior is based on their perception of the situation in which they find themselves.

Their perception of the situation is based on their “model” of the world.

Their “world” includes you.

In attempting to understand how another person is perceiving what is going on and the behavior they are engaging in based on that perception, you need to make three assumptions.  These assumptions set the stage and create an environment for understanding.

1. Assume that the behavior you are seeing is neither “right” nor “wrong”.  It is just their behavior.
2. Assume that every person’s behavior is “valid” for them because it is consistent with their model of the world.
3. Assume that their behavior is the “best” that they are capable of doing given their current skill set and their model of the world.

I will discuss each assumption in more detail and give an example in Part 2 next week.

I hope the above was helpful.

If you find it useful, please send this link to someone else who might benefit from it.

And, finally, please leave a comment.

 

A recent LinkedIn Post highlighted the following post “Tips for Parenting an Angry Child” .

The Philippi Center website recommends to parents who are attempting to deal with an angry child to 1. Take a break, 2.Model appropriate expressions of anger, 3. Practice empathy and 4. Get help.

While these suggestions are good, the Emotions as Tools Model and Anger Mastery Approach add additional information that can help frustrated parents master their own and their children’s anger.

Take a Break

As I discuss in my book Beyond Anger Management:Master Your Anger as a Strategic Tool, once you become aware of your anger and how you are about to react, your best option is to manage your anger by creating some “space” between you and your angry child.  You do this by taking a step back from your child (create physical space) and taking a deep breath to lower your arousal level (create psychological space).  Physical space prevents from doing something you later regret and psychological space enables you to assess what is actually going on between you and your child.

Practice Anger Mastery

When you “practice anger mastery”, you are “model(ling) appropriate expressions of anger and “practic(ing) empathy”. I am just going into more detail and coming at the topic from a different point of view.

Using the space you created by managing your anger, your next steps in mastering your anger are to assess the nature of the perceived threat and choose a response.

There are two perceived threats in your interaction with your child.

The first is the threat that you perceive in your child directing all this anger at you.

It is important to acknowledge that you may react with your own anger to an angry child.

The threat you might perceive could be to some goal you are trying to accomplish that is being impeded by your angry child, your belief (conscious or unconscious) that your child’s anger is challenging your authority as the parent, your sense of vulnerability because you are not sure how to deal with the child’s anger or calm your child down and so forth.

The second is the threat that the child perceives in the situation that is eliciting (not causing) his (or her) anger.

Remember that the message of anger is that a threat is perceived that the anger person believes they can eliminate by throwing enough force at it.  While this is easier to see in an adult, your child’s crying, yelling, fussing, or throwing a tantrum (or something else) is a show of force.  He may not think about overpowering you but he is upset that something he thinks should be happening is not happening and his anger is his attempt to show his frustration and change the situation.  Whether he is aware of this is not the issue at this point.

The response you choose should match the nature of the threat.

In the case of your own anger, your response should be to validate your own anger by acknowledging your anger and the “threat” that you perceive and then switch your attention from yourself to the child.

This does not mean that you ignore your anger.  It only means that your child needs some adult attention right now and you are the parent. You can attend to your needs later.

This where your “empathy” comes in.

Remember that the anger you see is your child’s best attempt to resolve his discontent, discomfort or disbelief.  It is not the best that can be done in the situation…. Only, his best.

So, talk to him and try to find out what the issue is for him that is eliciting the anger.

Note: Ask him “You look angry.  What are you angry about?” Do not ask him “Why are you angry?” Please click on over to September 2016 archives for my post talking about the difference between “What”and “Why” questions.

Once you have a good idea of the issue, you can choose a response including (when appropriate):

• Resolving the issue by giving in.
• Distracting his attention away from the specific issue
• Helping him to gain an understanding (at his level) of what is going on
• Giving him a hug and comfort him
• Ignoring his anger and maintaining the status quo
• Seeking help from someone with more experience than you have.

When you have mastered your own anger and attempted to help your child with his (or her) anger, you have done the best you can do.  Later, you can reflect back and assess whether the action you took was effective or not and learn from your experience what to do next time.

I can assure you that there will be a “next time”.

I welcome your comments.