CONTACT
Issue 07 - April 2005
The Big Picture
Cluster/School Stories
Professional Matters
-
The World of Mathematics
-
The “What Happened?” Conversations
Teachers Write
Your Say
Photo Gallery
Archive
Glossary
Sitemap
CONTACT Us
Back to Home
-
Professional Matters
Printer-friendly page
The “What Happened?” Conversation

By Organisation Development Division
-
In our article, “Difficult Conversations“ in the last issue, we explained that in every difficult conversation, there were actually three conversations going on at the same time: the “What Happened?” Conversation, the Feelings Conversation, and the Identity Conversation.
Let’s look at the “What Happened” Conversation in depth.

Food for Thought:
Recall a recent disagreement you had with someone.
Can you identify ‘the other story’?
How did what the person say impact you? What did you assume were his intentions? What were your own intentions?
Try to identify and understand what each of you contributed to the disagreement.
People typically disagree on one or more of the following:
What happened (Story)
Who meant what (Intentions)
Who should answer for what happened (Responsibility)

On each of these fronts – truth, intentions and blame – we make common but often crippling assumptions. Dealing with these assumptions is essential to improving our ability to handle difficult conversations well.

The Truth Assumption: I am right and you are wrong!
This assumption causes endless grief. For example, “I am right that I have done my share of the test setting”; “I am right in saying that the contractor overcharged me”.

The problem is that difficult conversations are almost never about getting the facts right. They are about conflicting perceptions, interpretations and values. They are not about what a contract states, they are about what a contract means. They are not about what is true, but about what is important.

What should we do then? Moving away from the truth assumption frees us to shift our focus from proving we are right to understanding the perceptions, interpretations and values of both sides. We can try to understand the other person’s story and adopt the “And” stance, i.e., my story makes sense, and so does yours.


The Intention Invention: I know your intentions!
Did you shout at me to hurt my feelings or merely to emphasise your point? We often assume we know other people’s intentions when we don’t. The point is: intentions are invisible. We assume them from other people’s behaviour, i.e. we subconsciously make them up!

Because our view of others’ intentions and their view of ours are so important, jumping to unfounded assumptions can be a disaster.

Don’t assume they meant to hurt. Just because you were hurt by my words does not mean that I intended to hurt you. But knowing my good intentions cannot negate the hurt I caused you, so I need to move beyond just self-defence and address your feelings as well.

The Blame Frame: It’s all your fault!
It is really difficult to see how we’ve contributed to the problems in which we ourselves are involved. And it is almost always true that what happened is the result of what both parties did –- or failed to do!

Talking about blame distracts us from exploring why things went wrong and how we might correct them to go forward. Instead of assigning blame to others, ask yourself how you have contributed to the current situation.

The Goal
Whether you’re talking about your contrasting points of view, intentions or contributions, the goal isn’t to get an admission from the other party. The goal is to understand better what’s happening between both of you, so that you can start talking constructively about where to go next.

In the next article, we will explore the Feelings Conversation.


Reference

Stone, D., Patton, B. and S. Heen. (1999) Difficult Conversations: How to Discuss What Matters Most. Penguin Books


 
 
     

 


Page Last Updated : 19-Apr-2005
This site is best viewed with IE ver 5.x and Netscape ver 7.x
Copyright 2004 Ministry of Education. All rights reserved.
Privacy Statement | Terms of Use