The Web address of this article is
http://sfhelp.org/02/win-win.htm
This is one of 150+ Web articles exploring factors that promote
relationship and family health and satisfactions. This briefintroductiondescribes the site's purpose, author, and the best ways to use this
information. Eacharticle 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, 2002) integrates the key
Project-2
Web articles and resources in this nonprofit Web site, and provides many
practical resources.
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, reflect: why are you reading this - what do you
need?
+++
Loyalty conflicts
and relationship
triangles
are common relationship stressors. This article illustrates how the
communication
skills from
family Project 2 can help resolve these
and other stressors via mutually-respectful compromising.
Win-win compromising happens when each person feels they got enough
of their current
needs met
in an acceptable way.
Perspective
All human relationships
encounter problems - conflicting needs, priorities, perceptions, and
values. All adults and kids have social problems and
internal conflicts among the
talented
subselves that make up their
personality. In either domain,
problem-solving (vs. fighting, avoiding,
debating, lecturing, hinting,
explaining, monologing, venting, blaming, explaining, justifying, preaching, postponing, and
arguing)
is a
conscious decision and a learned skill.
assert these needs clearly
and respectfully; then ...
listen nonjudgmentally to
each other's needs, and affirm them verbally; and then...
co-operatively brainstorm for solutions that
fill each person's needs well enough.
Have you ever seen these requisites identified together? Could you omit any
and resolve major conflicts well enough?
How likely is it that two or more
conflicted adults and/or kids would have all these requisites?
Reality check: the last time you
negotiated an effective compromise, were most or all of these factors present?
Now recall the last time you couldn't resolve a significant
conflict - which factors were missing?
The more you use
communication basics and skills to do win-win problem solving, the more automatic
and effective it becomes.
High-nurturance
family adults learn, model, and teach these basics and skills to their kids
- a priceless life-long gift! Did your early caregivers give you this gift?
Are the young people you care about acquiring it? If not - why?
The good news - most internal and social conflicts don't require you
to be aware and competent at all these factors to get good-enough results.
The bad news - you do need to become aware of and
competent with all of them to resolve major conflicts in your most important
relationships - starting with those among your busy subselves!
Our warp-speed society doesn't teach kids and adults what you
just read yet, partly because our ancestors weren't aware of
these requisites and how to use them well. That's why personal
and social conflicts are epidemic. You probably can't change our
societal ignorance - and
you can raise your family members' (a) awareness
and (b) motivation to learn effective win-win compromising.
If you don't promote this - who will?
Let's make these abstract ideas more real by seeing them in action...
Example
Here's
how this process sounds in a typical stepfamily
loyalty conflict, where all
three members feel that they're OK, and
co-equals in worth. Here's the scene: Bill,
14, finishes dinner before his mom Sarah and new stepdad Sam do. As the boy starts to leave the
table, Sam asks him to stay until the adults finish. Bill looks at his mother and
says...
Bill: "Do I have to Mom?" (stay per Sam's request);
Sarah takes charge, and calmly names the problem: "Bill, sit down a
minute and help us, please. We've got another loyalty conflict here. You want to leave
right now (affirms him: an =/= attitude). How come?"
Bill defines his needs: "I want to call Carl about the game
tomorrow, and I have a ton of homework. Besides - excuse me, but listening to you guys is
not always the most exciting thing, you know? And you eat so slow!"
Here
many adults - speciallyshame-based survivors of
low-nurturance
childhoods - would semi-consciously feel attacked and
disrespected, rather than decoding
Bill's message as information about legitimate needs.
Without Self control and awareness, feeling attacked
by someone (and/or by your
Inner Critic)
causes hurt, irritation, defensiveness, blaming, blocked listening, and
escalating
power struggles ("fights") about (a) who's right and (b) who's going to get their way
(win/lose).
Sarah (grinning): "So you want to check in with Carl, get at your
work, and not get bored, eh? OK, fair enough (affirms his needs with empathic
listening without agreeing, judging, arguing, or commenting).
Hang in here a few minutes and help us, please. Sam, why do you want Bill to stay?"
Sam: "Well, dinner's one of the few times we're all together. It
just feels good to me that no one leaves until we're all done. That includes me! I always
had to stay at the table when I was a kid - I guess it just doesn't feel right that people
scatter. I feel it's, uh, disrespectful."
Bill: "But Mom, I've never had to stay before (Sam
came)...";
Sarah: "I know, Hon. This is new for all of us!
(Her
Self listens
without taking sides, and stays focused on the process). So Sam, you need us to
feel like a family, and sticking together at dinner is an important way of doing that, for
you" (uses empathic-listening skill to affirm his
needs, without agreeing, judging, or commenting);
Sam (feeling heard and respected): "Yeah. I feel
like we're all always racing around, and this is one of the few times we can all be
together and catch up." He isn't aware of his underlying primary
need to feel like an ideal "normal" (bio)family.
Sarah (smiling, without sarcasm or blame): "Guess what, guys.
I'm feeling caught
in the middle again.
I guess we need to find some kind of new rule
for mealtimes, huh?" She pauses to reflect, and then says
"I
need each of us to feel clearly heard now, and to find some way to make
this work for each of us so I can get out of the middle. What choices do you see here?" (Mutually-respectful
assertion).
As Sam and Sarah finish eating, all three
come up with several options for lower-stress dinner times.The
adults' share an attitude of"our respective dignities and needs are of
equal importance, now" They settle on Bill agreeing to usually stay for about
10 minutes, maximum, if he finishes dinner first.
The adults agree to intentionally
include the boy more (i.e. to listen to him with real interest) in their table
talk, and save most "boring" adult topics for their own time. This
is a double compromise acceptable to each of them
Note: if
Sam and Sarah have made too little couple-time, this
resolution probably wouldn't work. They
also
all agree that there will be exceptions when Bill can leave quickly, and when the
adults need to talk "boring stuff" with him present. This avoids
stresses from rigid black/white rule-enforcement.
+ + +
This simplified example shows a co-parent
respectfully negotiating
conflicting needs nonjudgmentally, and three family members forming a
tentative new household
rule together. Sam could have initiated and led this process too.
Bill's "job" here is to...
identify and assert his current needs,
accept the adults' needs
as equally legitimate;
participate patiently in this win-win process, and...
learn how to lead it himself.
All three people felt heard and respected enough,
and no one felt blamed, guilty, or defensive. This discussion took about 10 minutes,
which Bill could tolerate. It strengthened everyone's experience and faith in their
problem-solving ability, and increased their feeling like a win-win team. They had done
this process before, together, so all had some trust it could work for each of them.
Other co-parents who didn’t have
awareness or a shared mutual-respect attitudes might
have had either adult "pull rank" and their needs without
mutual discussion: "Bill, sit down and stay here 'til we're done. Period.";
or Sarah saying "Go ahead and leave, Bill. I'll straighten Sam out."
Both
responses promote stressful lose-lose-lose
relationship triangles.
When all family adults see loyalty
and other conflicts as shared family problems rather than battles or power struggles one
member must fix or win, working together patiently to
meet
everyone’sprimary needs enoughgrows strong
couple and family bonds over time.
Do
you agree? If so, do you do mutually-respectful win/win compromising like this now?
This example is ideal. What if the boy had pressed his needs? For instance:
Bill: "But Mom, Carl's leaving tonight for the weekend, and I
have to call right now!"
Either co-parent could flex,
respect Bill's
immediate needs, and say ...
"Well, OK, Bill. We'll work on ideas for a new
dinner guideline for us while you do that. We'll pick this up tomorrow night at
dinner." (a win/win compromise). Or ...
"OK, call Carl, and then please come back and join us for a few minutes while we
work on this together."
An
impatient, distracted, or
inflexible (i.e.
over-anxious, insecure, self-doubting) adult might use lose/lose power
tactics,
and say "No! 10 minutes won't kill you. Now stick around 'til we finish."
Implication: "My
needs are more important than yours now - I'm 1-up here!")
Bill would probably feel disrespected (a
victim), hurt, and resentful
- specially if this was a regular pattern. He'd hardly feel
like cooperative problem-solving or a co-equal family
team
member.
In real life, all people
can't
always get their key needs met well enough. Notice which members of your family
or organization usually seem to get their key needs met most often over time. When
people
consistently feel genuine respect for themselves and each other ("your
dignity and needs and mine are equally
legitimate and important now"), win-win compromising is most likely.
If members of a family
or other group are significantly
wounded
and
unaware, consistent
win-win
problem solving will be elusive until (a) their true Selves lead their
personalities and (b) their self and mutual respects improve.
Useful
Questions
When you have trouble achieving win-win problem-solving, research questions
like these to help raise your success:
"Who among us has been getting their needs met most often, recently?
The least? Is that OK with everyone?";
"If
we can't find a win-win way together, what choice is best for our relationship?
Loyalty clashes are a kind of
values conflict. Values conflicts are inevitable, and occur when two people hold different beliefs,
perceptions, and/or priorities. One co-parent is firm with kids, while the other is
permissive. A child likes
rock music, while a co-parent likes symphonies.
No one is right - we just have
different
tastes, opinions, and preferences.
Relationship
stress blooms when one adult or child
feels another is imposing their values, preferences, and/or local needs in a way that
disrespects, hurts, or deprives them and/or another important other person
of equal consideration and respect.
When
two co-parents feel and assert "I’m right
(1-up), and you’re wrong (1-down)," kids get
trapped in the middle, creating a loyalty conflict and probably one or
several
relationship triangles. When
an adult tries to
manipulate, shame, reason, or force their partner into adopting their parenting values,
problem-solving vanishes, and toxic loyalty conflicts
and triangles flare.
Notice
that it’s easy for you to get into values conflicts all by yourself! One
personality subself can say "C’mon - fight to convert Bill to our way of
doing household chores. Don’t give in!"; while another
inner
voice (subself) says "Hey - if you compromise and give in some, the long-range payoff is
a happier marriage and family. That’s worth a lot more - so cool it!"
Who
usually wins your internal values conflicts -
your "immediate gratification" subself, or your wise "long-range-payoff"
subself? Do you like the results?
If you find yourselves in an abstract
values conflict, vs. disagreeing over something tangible like a car, phone, or pet,
stay aware that "agreeing to disagree" and "=/="
(mutually respectful) compromising strengthens
relationships and Self respect.
Trying to sell or convert someone else to your
values is like a Catholic and a Baptist trying futily to convince each other that their
way is better and "the truth." Parenting
values are a kind of religion (a set of beliefs), based on early experience, faith, and ideals; and
motivated powerfully by love for one or more kids, and adult self-respect.
Part of a stepfamily's challenge is that
there are usually
three or more
co-parents who usually have very different
parenting "religions." Some far-seeing co-parenting teamscan learn to live
together in respectful disagreement, or even harmony (!).
For
five reasons, millions of
U.S. (and other?) co-parents ultimately seem to be
happier living psychologically or physically apart. Numberless others silently endure
depleting, disappointing family relationships because they
see no viable options. They don't know of these
12 powerful safeguards.
See
thisworksheet to learn how your family
members handle loyalty conflicts
now.
Can you describe how you do? Also see this summary of
common communication blocks to see if you're
doing any of them. If so, review these tips and
helpful phrases.
For more perspective,
experience this longer
comparison of lose-lose and win-win
conversations, and these options for resolving
values conflicts, impasses, and relationship cutoffs..
The Web address of this article is
http://sfhelp.org/02/win-win.htm
Perspective
See
this