The Default Language of Conflict

A couple of days ago, I had an interaction with a client and upcoming leader in the network marketing industry, which caused me to reflect quite a bit about something which is at the root cause of all conflict, and suffering in this world.

In this interaction, in what this person probably thought was a “nice way” of saying what he thought of the way I did a few things in my business, he rubbed me the wrong way. Let me first say that I’ve always liked this guy (I still do), he’s a super hard worker and always has the best interest of those around him at heart.

So his comments were not said in malice in anyway, shape or form.

But for whatever reason, on this particular occasion, this person lacking a few skills of diplomacy and an understanding of how language, no matter how subtle will do one of 2 things – create conflict or promote peace and solutions.

The gist of his message to me was that he didn’t particularly like an aspect of how I did business. What was interesting is that he tried soooo hard not to offend me. But no matter how much he padded it, it really didn’t matter.

The reason is because in a conversation, when you tell someone “I’m not fond of it”, “not the way I would do it”, “That concerns me…”, etc.

… what you are really telling the person is “I dont’ like it”, “You’re wrong”, and “I don’t trust you”.

Regardless of the tone you use, our human instinct is to immediately defend, fight or at least prove to the other person that you are “right” and he/she is wrong. That is human nature.

Unfortunately, using this language of “right and wrong” is the mode most of us operate under “by default” – it’s a primal default. Especially in our society where traditional religious values teach us from the very beginning about good and evil, what we should do and not do, (i.e. right and wrong).

Is it a coincidence that most wars throughout history involved the use of religion to label the other side as “evil”, thus justifying the war?

But more generally, all conflict arises from one side making the other side wrong in some way, and believing they are right. The belief that you are right also implies that you believe that you have all the information you need (enough of the entire story) to cast your judgment on the other party, and do so without doubt.

And the belief that you are right can certainly be a noble one, as was the case during WWII as the Allies fought the Nazis. When you have this belief you MUST be willing to fight for what you believe to be right and go all the way — as it should be. If you’re not willing to do this, then what is your belief worth?

I, for the most part, am aware of when I choose to tell someone they are wrong and I am always ready to back that up, (with my fists if I have to). I loathe the perpetual intellectual masturbators of our society who are more than happy to point out your flaws, how/why you are at the wrong, kick you when you are down, but never choose to participate in the real world and hide in the utopia of academia.

Believing you are right, should also come with the acceptance that you could be proven wrong, thus being willing to accept the consequences of being wrong. (Accepting humiliation, embarrassment or even death in the extreme case.)

And it is at this humbling thought, that I introduce the other alternative to the realm of “right and wrong” few in the world even know exists…

The Realm of What Works!

The sickening thing about politics is that representatives are constantly ‘marketing’ or ’selling’ to their constituents in everything they do. A very successful marketing tactic is to demonize the otherside – thus accusing them of being wrong and convincing voters that that is the case.

Therefore, solutions towards what will work for the American people are rarely arrived upon.

When you speak to someone with a mindset and language of peace & solutions, you are saying to them “My goal is to find what is going to work for both you and me”. Don’t mistake this with compromise, because that still implies that there are things in the agreement you think are wrong.

When seeking what works, you are not looking to demonize, or make anyone wrong. In fact, the concepts of “wrong or right” doesn’t even exist.

Like I said above, when you tell someone they are wrong or mistaken, it causes their guard to go up and on the most primal level feel threatened. When you seek what works, you are telling them “the solution we arrive at is going to benefit you”, which will obviously invoke them to lean in closer to listen.

For example:

“I read your report the other day. I wanted to ask you about [blank] on page 4. Given that our goal is [blank], how did you arrive on that and how do you think it will help us achieve our goals?”

vs.

“I read your report the other day. I don’t think your recommendation on page of about [blank] really contributes to achieving [blank] and will probably waste our time and money. What I think we should do is this…”

The first is inviting the person to share more about what they are thinking, not making them wrong and reminding them about what the ultimate goal is – perhaps even leading them to finding a better solution (maybe one you agree with) by forcing them to think deeper about the situation.

The second is rejecting their recommendation, minimizing their ideas and thrusting your ideas on to them without collaboration.

Another situation could be, if the person you are dealing with is a jerk, hard to work with and has a huge ego (provided they are not hostile or violent). It is still possible to work with that person and find solutions that work, provided you’re willing to do the work to maneuver around the other person’s traits.

You might want to find out what motivates this person, learn about their fears and desires and use that knowledge to craft your approach.

Of course, if the other person is hostile and is not willing to work with you, then politely asking the individual to kindly step outside for “further discussion” might be appropriate. (Thus stepping into the language of conflict and maybe some colorful language…)

Being Self-Aware

My point with all this, is in most situations, it is possible to arrive at solutions that work for everyone if you are willing to take responsibility for the current situation and your life by setting ego aside and work with what you have.

But most importantly, you MUST always be aware of the mode and language you are using. You must ask yourself whether you are defaulting to your primal language of right/wrong or if you are truly seeking solutions. Being self-aware and being really honest with yourself is the key and knowing was “mode” is appropriate to use in a particular situation.

And when choosing the route of conflict, you must be willing to go all the way and have conviction in your position.

Out of all my years in business and the parallel pursuit of person development, this concept of “what works” has been one of the most powerful in my life. It’s been the difference maker in my relationships and has led to valuable partnerships, joint ventures and friendships with leaders such as Mike Dillard, Jay Kubassek, Charles Heflin, Jon Keel, Russell Wright, Tim Erway and countless others.

It’s been instrumental in the successful partnership with my best friend and business partner, Raymond Fong, whom also understands this very well.

So to the rising star in this industry who was the catalyst for this reflection, I thank you for inspiring me to write this piece and I thank you for being receptive to my response.

In my response to him, I simply shared some of these concepts and I offered an explanation with regards to some of his concerns. Things are cool now.