When approaching conflictMost people aim to go, while others try to find common ground. This is a mistake by the authors Robert Bordon and Joel Salinas say.
In his new book, “Conflict Resistance: Negotiating on disagreement without giving up or yielding,” the two claim that attempted conflict is eliminated by the interaction of his value and that you will get more than these difficult conversations if you are trying to study rather than trying to win.
“We mean conflict as a possibility of further connection and actually building a relationship,” Bordene says. He is the founder and former director of the clinical program for negotiating and mediation at Harvard.
People who are good at moving in conflict do not have a way of thinking that the disputes are bad.
There are certain areas of disagreement that is simply impossible to solve
Joel Salinas
a behavioral neurologist and clinic scientist
“If your orientation is about what you go into so much negative, it’s only harder to be skilled at her than if you have different and, I would only say, a more accurate frame on it,” Bordene says.
In fact, they see it as an opportunity to confirm a foreign other person. Instead of entering a list of points, they prioritize listening and asking questions.
“The work of the conflict is resistant to the landscape that has no scenario because it is motivated by a sense of curiosity about something of another person,” Bordene says.
Salinas, a behavioral neurologist and a clinician scientist at New York University, says that people who do well in dealing with skirmishes-a number in their personal life or in the workplace-knows that sometimes it is unrealistic to see that they will see face to face.
“There are certain areas of disagreement that is simply impossible to solve,” he says.
Conversation is not ‘an opportunity to achieve points’
In order to share during the conversation, you have to actually try to understand the fears of another person, Kurt Grey, a professor of social psychology at North Carolina University, Chapel Hill and the author “Outraged: Why do we fight about morality and politics and how to find a common country” said CNBC make that earlier this year.
“So often we’re going to these conversations and that’s not a conversation,” Gray says. “It’s an opportunity to get points or try to make another person look stupid. A real conversation is something where you ask questions.”
Gray recommends that you take three steps for better conversations when you disagree with someone:
- Try to understand their motivation: Ask questions and express true curiosity as they came to their conclusion.
- Confirm this motivation: Even if you disagree with their point, you can confirm that you understand how they got there.
- Emphasize your personal relationship: Instead of packing them with facts, be vulnerable and tell them why you disagree with them on a personal level.
Another is more likely that in your argument they will find some merit if you share a personal anecdote, unlike some statistics, to show why you stand where you work.
“Establishing a relationship with someone, looking at them as a colleague from a human being, I think it’s a long way,” says Gray.
You will both leave the feeling of better and respect if you at least try to understand yourself.
Want to make extra money on the side? Attend a new CNBC Internet Course How to start a side crowd To learn tips for the start and strategies for the success of a specialist with the upper lateral hectic hectic healing. Login today and use CODE Code Earlybird for an introductory discount of 30% off $ 97 (+tax and fees) by April 1, 2025.
Plus, Login for CNBC. To get tips and tricks for success at work, with money and in life.
