How do you have difficult conversations if you don't like conflict?
I recently came across this interesting article in Harvard Business Review on the topic of conflict avoidance behavior "having difficult conversations if you don't like conflict. For me, it underlined once again why we pay so much attention to giving feedback in our trainings. When you discuss small issues constructively, you avoid big conflicts.
Diversity and business etiquette
In an international context, however, you are dealing with a huge diversity of (often unconscious) habits and customs, transformed over the years into business etiquette. There is, for example, the more formal way of addressing each other, the straightforward approach, the livery-especially-no-face-loss approach, and so on. It essential to thoroughly familiarize yourself with the customs and why they are used.
For example, we recently trained an international group in a leadership program how to effectively correct undesirable employee behavior. A participant from the Nordics saw a harsh reprimand as the desired approach, then a Southern European, with a lot of text and twisting, gave the feeling that perhaps something could have been done very slightly differently after all. Third was an Asian participant. He did not discuss the unwanted behavior for a second, only shared his expectations and did so with such emphasis that you sensed, "Something has not gone right here!". So the article rightly refers to cultural differences.
Conflict Avoidance: People want to be liked
The HBR advice in the article reads: be direct! The Dutch are known for being straightforward, even blunt for some. Yet we also see a lot of conflict-avoiding behavior among the Dutch. In the personality structure there is an explanation for the difficulty of effectively conducting the more difficult conversations. Here HBR refers to the likeabilityof people. I would like to take you a step further into this phenomenon. Because why is it that some people have a much greater need for that "wanting to be liked" than others? Because if you ask people whether they would rather be respected or liked, they almost unanimously say: respected!
Personal preferences
A great tool to examine this is the Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). In individual or team sessions, we can use the MBTI to identify personal preferences, with an opposite expression for each preference. A preference says nothing about competence, skill or ability, but is a natural reflex, just as you actually always clap your hands or fold your arms in the same way.
Thinking versus Feeling
Beneath the (in)ease of having some snappy conversations lies the difference between the preference for Thinking (Thinking) or Feeling (Feeling). Do you form your thoughts, opinions/judgments and make decisions based on logical, objective reasoning? That indicates a Thinking preference! Do you form them more based on personal emotions and values? That indicates a Feeling preference!
More rational people understand the world best when it is logically constructed. They discuss the subject and differences of opinion substantively. So the advice, "Be direct," is not an issue for them; it does not affect them personally. Their findings are consistent and logically argued. So the more rational people try to resolve disagreements in such a way that any negative consequences are evenly distributed. But oh dear, how painfully honest these people can be at times!
This is true at least for those with precisely that other preference: the more empathetic person. Who values the impact something has on others and personal feelings more than being substantively correct or a "clarity" that does not take into account the individuals involved. They give feedback cautiously because they do not want to hurt the other person avoid a possible conflict. This is because they themselves would take the message personally. Sympathy, agreeableness and compassion - called likeability in the article - give rise to commitment and loyalty within the relationship. So the advice, "Be direct," is quite a stretch for them. And oh my, how they can get around it!
Monitoring the relationship
In our programs we aim to train the Thinking preference well on carefully guarding the relationship. That you are clear is fine, and how does the other person respond verbally and non-verbally?
And what is he/she saying between the lines? Those with a Feeling preference we challenge to be more to the point, to state their boundary and to dare to say no.
For both preferences this is quite a challenge, but the impact of their behavior on relationships with others is significantly improved this way.