I had a discussion with a friend recently about how to heal hurting relationships. An off-the-cuff topic that, it also hit home. A psychology major, he mentioned that to solve problems required empathy.
By taking the other party’s point-of-view, by reflecting on it, and then generating understanding, so goes his former professor, agreement can be met. I agreed – halfway.
I suggested that I can listen attentively, think with care, ponder the possibilities, and develop empathy that leads to deep consideration of a problem, but that the other side must also work on comprehending my stance and offer some give.
With that a chance opens up to negotiate and compromise to end strife and disagreement. He, however, shared that I was off base.
Later I resumed this conversation with his wife, a dear friend of many years. After explaining, she rolled her eyes in a loving way that fifty years of marriage had created, and stated, “Of course he thinks that. He is never wrong!”
I considered this response and realized the wisdom of my 2-way street awareness: Solutions are never discovered or uncovered when those concerned are dug into a one-way/my way state-of-mind.
I’ve been testing my theory as I work to become more assertive and straightforward. As mentioned, a few weeks ago, I try to please and so there are times, many times, that my preferences vanish into thin air.
While I may feel regret that I did not speak up at the time, usually it is too late as others plunge onward and I mimic my best bobble-head behavior and simply go along.
Staying silent affirms that I was wrong and others are right. And they may be right, well, partially right, but with no compromise grudges arise and when ignored, they may fester and grow.
I am wondering your thoughts. We have all won a few, lost a few, and tied the rest. When did you feel the most valued?
Most often it is the last one that is the most productive as most of the angles have been discussed, challenged, and rearranged to bring success. Full on winning may ignite resistance in others; full on losing definitely makes me want to disappear.
However, with compromise, even when it does not go my preferred direction, I can embrace action as I sense I am respected on the whole.
Empathy does not mean feeling sorry for or trying to stand-in as a surrogate for another.
Although sympathy is often shuffled in with empathy, I view the two as far different. With sympathy, I hurt; with empathy I am compassionate. I don’t offer thoughts unless asked recognizing that the situation is unique to the individual or group; I may offer to help, but this comes from a team standpoint or from the sideline. I become a non-judgmental support system. Even when super ideas arise, my job is not to interfere but to interact as needed. This being said, I expect the same in return. If I go all out, so should the other person. That is the sole way to move forward.
I do believe face-to-face dialogue works best. If I anticipate turmoil, I want to have an agenda – my 2 or 3 key points; the other members’ 2 or 3 key points.
Bouncing back and forth and taking turns are essential. Other ground rules include a notepad to jot important items, a place to write off-topic things that might be covered later, and a time limit — no more than one hour.
Griping does not add to the positives nor does blithering about non-agenda subjects. Nastiness is prohibited. After all, how do people settle and come to terms with too much negative input? Never…
Zoom may also be an option with the above caveats included. Calls can be recorded for later reference which can be good for some, intimidating for others, plus the participants can be anywhere when a live meeting is unreasonable.
The worst choices: email or text messages. While these hold the advantage of a written record, words and statements are frequently misinterpreted and only escalate a problem. For example, my niece wrote that I needed to be “the bigger person” and…
Really, what does that mean? Why me? You can predict my next statement: “Where is the empathy for all of those involved?” Non-existent. Instead blaming one person becomes the solution while all others are exonerated. Plus, what does that phrase even mean? Wade in at will…