• home > site overview > site map or directory > Q&A, Project-2 links, Solutions article, or other page > here

The Web address of this three-page article is http://sfhelp.org/02/lose-lose.htm

        This is one of 150+ Web articles exploring factors that promote relationship and family health and satisfactions. This brief introduction describes the site's purpose, author, and the best ways to use this information. Each article is part of a mosaic of related ideas, so the more you read, the more sense they'll all make.

       This article is one of a series describing effective thinking, communicating, and problem-solving. The series summarizes seven learnable communication (relationship) skills  that are essential for building high-nurturance relationships and resolving social conflicts effectively.

        The unique guidebook Satisfactions (Xlibris.com, 2001) integrates the key Project-2 Web articles and resources in this nonprofit Web site, and provides many practical resources.       

        These articles augment, vs. replace, other qualified professional help. Clicking a link below will open an informational pop-up or full new browser window, so please turn off your browser's popup blocker or accept popups from this non-profit site - no cookies or ads!

        Before continuing, stop and reflect - why are you reading this - what do you need?

+ + +

        Premises - all communication aims to fill current needs - i.e. to reduce current emotional and physical discomforts. So "win-win" communication between two people occurs when each person feels (a) their current needs were reduced ("filled, met, or satisfied") well enough, (b) in a way that both people felt good-enough about. "Lose-lose" communication occurs when neither communication partner feels one or both these criteria were met well enough. Other possibilities are win-lose, and lose-win.

        Project 2 in this nonprofit, divorce-prevention Web site offers a research-based framework of concepts and skills to promote consistent win-win outcomes. To get the most from this article, first read...

• an introduction to normal personality subselves  (slides or text article);

• an introduction to family Project 2 - develop effective communication skills;

• basic communication concepts (slides or text article); Option - first take this interesting quiz;

• common blocks to effective (win-win) communication; and...

• tips for more effective communication.

The premise above suggests that personal and social problems are unfilled needs (discomforts). Internal and social conflicts are need-clashes. Therefore, problem-solving and conflict resolution in all settings aims to fill all participants current primary needs well enough, in a way that everyone feels good-enough about.

        This article aims to grow your awareness by...

• summarizing 37 (!) common ineffective problem-solving strategies, and...

• illustrating a typical lose-lose communication sequence between two adults; and then...

• illustrating the same scenario in a win-win context. 

       If people (like you) don’t do win-win (effective) problem-solving together, what do they do? See if you recognize any favorites here...

37 Ineffective Problem-solving Strategies

        Each communication partner can choose one or several of the conflict-responses below (a) within themselves (internal conflict), and/or (b) with their communication partner (external conflict). Until you become fluent in the learnable skill of process awareness, your choice of responses will probably stay largely unconscious and habitual. If true, your unconscious mind (false self) controls you and your relationships.

       Thoughtfully scan these common ineffective communication strategies below. Can you think of others? Seen all at once, our buffet of possible responses to internal and interpersonal conflict is pretty creative and amazing, wouldn’t you say? Consider that we never studied any of these, but became “experts” anyway!  Option - check or asterisk strategies below that you or another important person use.

 1)   Denying (to Self or partner) your thoughts, feelings, needs, and/or current reality

 2)   Avoiding (lying, omitting, “forgetting”, and “walking out” fit here)

 3)  Intellectualizing / Rationalizing / Analyzing / Over-explaining / Lecturing

 4)  “Gunnysacking” / “re-living” (bringing up and rehashing old unfinished issues)

 5)  Minimizing the conflict, and/or it’s importance
 

 6)  Deferring / not following up / Procrastinating

 7)  Giving in or up - choosing a victim or martyr attitude and role

 8)  Defending / Explaining (justifying beliefs, opinions, behaviors)

 9)  Never forgetting or forgiving (yourself and/or your partner)

 10)  Deflecting / Distracting / Confusing / Defocusing

 11)  Numbing and/or Spacing out / “Clamming up” / Silence

 12)   Complaining / Whining / Nagging / Hinting (vs. asserting)

 13)  Catastrophizing / exaggerating / over-dramatizing

 14)  Getting sick / hysterical / depressed / enraged

 15)  “Mind reading” / Assuming / Second-guessing / Predicting

More common ineffective problem-solving strategies...

 16) "Time-traveling” - over-focusing on the past or the future;

 17)  Threatening, demanding, intimidating, or bullying  vs. requesting or negotiating;

 18)  Attacking / Blaming / Shaming (“guilt trips”) /  “Getting even”

 19)   Discounting Self and/or partner’s worth, opinions, feelings, and/or needs

 20)  Pretending or disguising - e.g. laughing when anxious or hurting;
 

 21)  Previewing your response while your partner talks

 22)  Interrupting / over-talking vs. genuine listening

 23)  Confusing fighting and/or arguing with problem-solving

 24)   Competing - equating “problem solving” with winning

 25)  Generalizing - “you always…; / you never…”
 

 26)   Preaching or moralizing - “You’re bad / good / wrong / right / when you…

 27)  Rambling - talking on and on with no awareness and/or clear point…

 28)  Rehearsing - reacting now to an event that hasn’t happened yet

 29)  Anxious, distrustful subselves "blending with" (taking over) one’s true Self, or ‘center’

 30)   Addiction/s - numbing inner pain with chemicals, activities, moods, and/or relation-        ships - this is an unconscious avoidance strategy

 31)  Flooding - venting a stream of gripes, and not pausing to let your partner respond

 32)  Dictating, ordering, and commanding (all these imply “I’m 1-UP here!”)

 33)  Name-calling / swearing / yelling / throwing things

 34)  Punishing - e.g. by withholding something of value or intentionally bringing up         something painful

 35)  Dodging responsibility - using “we” or “you” instead of “I …”, or saying "I was only         joking."

 36)  Talking to a third person or “the wall” - avoiding eye contact (another way of dodging)

 37)  Playing “Yes, but…” - an effective covert control game

    Add your favorites:
 

What Do These Sound Like?

        What do some of these common ineffective communication strategies sound like? Here's an example: A custodial biofather (Jim) declares in exasperation to his new wife Rae: 

“You’re all first with me! No one comes in second! Why can’t you get that, Rae!?”

        This response came after the couple had been “talking” (i.e. arguing) in their bedroom for almost 10 minutes. The “talk” began when Jim got home from work, and his wife Rae complain that his pre-teen daughter Georgia had again ignored Rae’s requests to pick up her clothes from the living room floor. The example below omits some repetitions, and nets out their attempt to resolve their shared tensions. 

Ineffective Couple's Dialog (neither partner gets their needs met)	Communication Errors
Rae: “Why won’t you ever get after her about picking up her messes? You never miss a chance to rag Nickie (Rae’s biological son) about not putting his dishes in the sink - but hassle or put reasonable limits on your princess daughter? Never! Clearly, your daughter remains far more important to you than I am. I’m sick of this!”	Generalizing; playing the victim Sarcasm: implies “You’re ‘bad’, 1-down” Attacking (blaming) Jim, not focusing on her needs Complaining; starting to “flood” Jim with three different problems.
Jim: (Grimacing, sighing, not looking at his wife) “Rae, look - I’ve had a really long day. Gimme a break, for once. We’ll talk about this later.”	Avoiding (eye) contact: (Rae decodes this as ‘you think I’m not important now’ - i.e. “I’m 1-down”) Attacking; dictating; avoiding; deferring
Rae: (sarcastically): “Yeah, sure. That’s what you always say, Jim - only later never comes. And why am I always the one who has to bring up these problems - you don’t! For you, everything’s always la-la fine.”	Distrusting; discounting; blaming; shaming Attacking; exaggerating; generalizing; de-focusing (bringing up a new problem)
Jim: “Well how come when I ask you to get Nick to turn his boom-box down after dinner, you always give me ‘the look’, and tell me I’m (falsetto mimicry) ‘just being too picky’? Your son has the sensitivity of a fireplug.”	Not hearing; arguing; Counterattacking (defending); Deflecting the focus to yet another problem;
Rae (shaking her head, snorting): “You seem to have gotten us off the main problem again. OK, I’ll try it one more time.        I want you to act like a father for a change and talk to Georgia. Get her to show a little responsibility in this house by picking up her litter around here.        I am getting really tired of being just the maid here, and coming in last with you, behind your job, your daughter, and Nina (Jim’s ex wife)! This isn’t what I signed on for! I never thought …”	Blaming; not hearing; deflecting back again; Martyring; discounting both Jim (the person) and his needs, via words, voice tone, and body language; (implication ‘you’re 1-down’); attacking Georgia; implied vague threat; generalizing; Exaggerating; adding a new problem: Rae’s true need to feel respected; Dramatizing; flooding;
Ineffective Couple's Dialog	Communication "Mistakes"
Jim: (glaring): “Read my lips, Rae: You - are - all first - with - me! No one comes in second! Why can’t you get that!?”	“Arguing”: [interrupting (i.e. not listening) + not focusing + defending (explaining) + counterattacking]: implication: “I’m 1-up”
Rae: (Shaking her head, sighing loudly) “Oh, I give up! I can never get through to you.” She turns angrily and walks out of the bedroom.	Blaming; generalizing; complaining; Giving up (overwhelmed); Unaware of resolution process
Jim: looks after her, shaking his head in irritation, weariness, and frustration.	Avoiding; giving up (overwhelmed too); silent blaming and denial.

         Notice what you’re thinking and feeling now. Anything “sound” familiar here? This is a classic stepfamily loyalty conflict, where the bioparent feels in caught the middle of a frustrating, impossible lose-lose situation, and the stepparent feels painfully “second best” (i.e. disrespected and unimportant), and usually guilty for “forcing” her mate to choose. Did you identify with Rae and/or Jim here, or neither? Why? Did either of these people get their needs met?

        Though this bit of typical (lose-lose) co-parent dialog is brief, it illustrates a lot:

• Neither mate identified what they really needed, or stuck to it, though Rae tried;

• Neither really tried to hear the other, non-judgmentally, as a co-equal partner;

• Neither Jim nor Rae thought to change their focus to how they were trying to problem-solve. As they each felt increasingly un-heard and frustrated, they got more and more tangled in a growing knot of unmet needs (discomforts or “problems”);

• During the exchange, neither mate felt respected by the other - i.e. they each decoded "1-down"
  R(espect) messages from the other. Thus, their communication process added to their unmet primary needs, vs. reducing them;

• Each mate unconsciously used many ineffective resolution strategies to re-create a predictable communication sequence causing these lose-lose outcomes:

1)  Neither partner filled their communication and other needs;

2)  They diminished their mutual trust that “talking” together (on this loyalty-conflict issue) would “work” (fill their needs). Their expectations of "communicating well about the kids" ratcheted down another notch, so the next time they try, they'll expect it not to work ... That rapidly becomes self-fulfilling, with unaware co-parents...

3)  Jim and Rae both unconsciously added this incident to their respective “gunnysacks” of "unfinished marital business" (old hurts and resentments);

4)  They each repressed their angry frustration, which “leaked out” later in their relations with Nickie and Georgia - adding to their kids’ unspoken stepfamily discomforts and anxieties; and finally …

5)  Rae and Jim’s marital relationship received another injury.

        When enough such injuries accumulate, a long-range result of ineffective resolution sequences like this is emotionally dying or dead relationships, and often separation and legal divorce. Does this seem reasonable to you? Could this happen to you partners, over time?\

From long unconscious habit, this average stepfamily couple each tended to find fault with their partner, rather than agreeing “let’s do some win-win problem-solving together soon, when we’re both up for it.” Unaware, they never got past dig-down problem-level two.

 Are you wondering “What would this have sounded if they did ‘problem-solve effectively”? Let’s take a look...
 

<<  Prior page  /  Add to favorites  /  Print page  /  Email this article's address  /  Project-2 index  >>

 home  /  site overview  /  directory  /  site map  /  Q&A  /  quizzes  /  solutions  /  site search  /  glossary

  research  /  free course  /  guidebooks  /  forum  /  resources  /  feedback  and/or  subscribe  /  * copyright info

Updated  April 13, 2008