Erik Kondo – Page 39 – Conflict Manager

Navigating Negotiations: Part II – Lawrence Kane

Conflict:

The challenge with conflict negotiations is that more often than not you’re emotionally involved, which is why many companies and agencies employ professionally-trained facilitators to help navigate the process and resolve disputes. Successfully negotiating resolution to conflict depends on the underlying causes. If it is a clash of personalities that requires a different approach than an intentional ethical violation, for example. Consequently the first thing you’ll need to do if you are the independent party brought in to resolve things is to interview stakeholders and try to ascertain what truly happened. If you find yourself in a situation where you may be the cause or the aggrieved party and have to take care of things yourself you will still want to do as much fact finding as feasible before working toward resolution.

Keep in mind that perception is reality so just because something isn’t true doesn’t mean that it doesn’t matter to the other party. But, misperceptions can be cleared up. For example, I used to start work at 6:00 AM on the West Coast when I’d have several meetings with folks on the East Coast. Two or three hours later, whenever my schedule opened up, I would go out, say good morning to my team, making sure I was visible for a while so that folks could tell me if they had something urgent on their minds or ask for help. They called that “management by walking around” in business school. I saw it as being there for the team (as opposed to hiding in my office which was around the corner from where they sat). One of my employees, however, saw it differently. She thought I was checking to see if everyone was at their desk working, a thought which never even crossed my mind. If I didn’t trust the team I never would have hired (or retained) them. That misperception wasn’t particularly hard to correct, but it did cause morale issues for a short while until I realized what was going on.

Armed with whatever background information you are able uncover, you can formulate a strategy for dealing with the disagreement in a way that will keep it from reoccurring. When you speak to the parties, especially when you have a vested interest in the outcome, it is vital to keep your cool and focus on behaviors rather than making things personal. Folks who feel threatened or insulted stop listening, often becoming defensive or aggressive and poised for (verbal or physical) battle. In fact, when someone is losing an argument they virtually always take things personal. At that point the disagreement is no longer about the action or error, often turning to animus that is not easily resolved.

You can feign anger on the job, but it’s a tactic that should rarely (as in no more than once every couple years) be used and then only for special purposes. If folks think you’re bound to blow up at them it will undermine their trust and your career. If you’re actually angry, walk away and re-approach the subject when you’re in a better mood. Saying something along the lines of “I’m having an emotional reaction to this” can both help you calm down as well as have a good reason for tabling the conversation. The only time that feigned anger is appropriate is when you’re dealing with an ethical breach or similarly serious event. It takes years build up an emotional bank account with those around you, yet in seconds you can withdraw all the credit you have gained if you act out inappropriately.

Conflict negotiation can be tough, but it’s also a time to pull out your bag of “dirty tricks,” so to speak. There are a variety of tactics that are often used by conmen and criminals for nefarious purposes that, when turned to a more positive intent, are appropriate in a professional setting. This includes things like forced teaming, coopting, and loansharking. Forced teaming is tactical use of the word “we.” Instead of “I have a problem,” say “We have a problem.” It shows that you’re in it together, both vested in the problem as well as the outcome. It feels inclusive too. Coopting is designed to get other people on your side before they’ve determined what they really think about you. If you can turn critics into advocates, which takes a bit of social and communication skills, you strengthen your position, gather allies, and get help in resolving the issue. If helps if you focus on the superordinate goal of helping the business so that it doesn’t come across as self-aggrandizing. Loansharking is typically done by offering small favors designed to evoke feelings of indebtedness in others. Yeah, it’s cheesy, but even simple stuff like getting coffee for the other person every so often, can make a difference in their feelings toward you. Those may appear to be shallow tactics, but they are highly effective psychologically, especially when you are well-intentioned.

Some final thoughts:

No matter what you’re negotiating begin by keeping the endgame in mind. Know your goal, know your boundaries (non-negotiables), and stay on track. The better you know the other party, what’s urgent and imperative to them, what they need, and how they are compensated or measured, the better. Know yourself and your objectives so that you can stay on track too. Creativity is good. There’s more than one appropriate way to solve most anything, but guard against an agreement that unduly alters what you were originally aiming at. It’s easy to get caught up in the moment, especially if the other party is a very experienced negotiator and more than a little manipulative. If in doubt, sleep on it before agreeing to any final resolution.

Make sure you’re talking with someone empowered to make a decision before you get started. There’s no point in wasting your time otherwise, so if you discover you’re dealing with the wrong people escalate. Or play them off against each other, though that’s tough if you’re not a professional and not a game that most folks ought to play save in special circumstances.

Negotiation is more about communication than anything else, so you will need to exercise active listening skills throughout the process. Silence can be your friend, as the other party will often feel compelled to fill it, oftentimes giving away more than intended. Ask before you assert, aim for clarity and cooperation, pay attention to non-verbals to see if it’s working, and don’t hesitate to course-correct as needed (so long as you don’t stray from your goals, of course) The best deals are those in which both parties find a win. Be courteous, patient, and respectful, but always stay within the parameters you decided before you got started.

About the author:

Lawrence Kane is a senior leader at a Fortune 50 corporation where he is responsible for IT infrastructure strategy and sourcing management. He saved the company well over $2.1B by hiring, training, and developing a high-performance team that creates sourcing strategies, improves processes, negotiates contracts, and benchmarks internal and external supplier performance. A bestselling author of more than a dozen books, he has also worked as a business technology instructor, martial arts teacher, and security supervisor.

The Warrior Legend – Kathy Jackson

We tell our children myths and fables. These are very powerful stories that carry the messages and core values of our culture. That’s how cultural knowledge passes from one generation to another. Humans are motivated by stories. Those stories, those fables, those myths, those legends – they all hit something at a very visceral level. They hit your gut.

Within the firearms and self-defense training community, we have often benefited from the Warrior Legend. This cultural myth hits something deep within the heart of every good man. It is the story of the strong head of household who defends his family. It is the story of the warrior who protects his people. It is the story of the knight who rescues the princess. The Warrior Legend hits a very powerful node in the best and the strongest among our men. And that’s good!

We have often used that goodness to our advantage within the self-defense training community. When we use the word “tactical,” that’s one of the words that strikes this same chord. We have lots of words and phrases that activate the same feeling: Sheepdog. Fighter. Warrior. Soldier. Protector. The man who runs to the sound of the guns. Or puts his own body between his beloved home and the war’s desolation. The strong man loves his woman and he faces danger for her sake. That’s the story we tell, in short form, when we use those words.

Within the training world, we’ve gotten very good at hitting that button, hitting it from a lot of different angles, over and over. And it’s been very effective in motivating male students to buy classes, to pay attention in class, to practice what they learn, to drive forward and learn more. It’s a very powerful message that draws many students into our schools and motivates them to continue their efforts to learn.

The problem is, this message – as powerful as it is – is not one that resonates with the average woman in western culture. Little girls don’t grow up being told that someday, they can ride up to the castle and rescue the enchanted prince. They aren’t encouraged to dream about slaying dragons. Nobody tells their baby girl, “A real woman stands between her husband and any danger that would threaten him.” That’s just not a message we give our daughters.

So this powerful legend that drives men into classes won’t necessarily hit potential female students in the gut. Nor will it encourage them to take their training as the serious business that it really is, or drive them forward to learn more. Culturally, women just don’t hear that message in the same way that men hear it. We’re more likely to react to it as a legend (a fantasy, a myth, a fairytale, an un-reality) than we are to be motivated by the emotion it’s intended to provoke.

Boring

Here’s the awful truth: effective self-defense training is … boring. For those who want to use firearms for self-defense, we spend a lot of time drilling the basics. That’s sights, trigger, follow through. We spend time working on a consistent grip, on a safe and smooth drawstroke, on being able to access the gun from a variety of positions, on good gunhandling and efficient reloads. Students should learn these fundamentals to the point of automaticity. Simply being able to handle the tool without thinking about the tool itself goes a long way toward establishing good preparedness for everything else that follows.

When talking about the humdrum, practical matters that make up the bulk of reasonable self-defense instruction, firearms trainer John Farnam wryly observes, “Everyone wants to know when they get to jump out of the flaming helicopters.” So, thinking about the Warrior Legend that motivates good men, we write class descriptions in terms that would attract the people who want to jump out of those flaming helicopters. We do this because it works very well to attract adrenalin junkies and strong-hearted men, who make up the bulk of the self-defense community. We appeal to the Warrior Legend.

But then we’re surprised and a bit sad that more women won’t come to our classes or learn the skills that would help them learn to protect themselves. Don’t women care about staying safe? Don’t women want to have fun learning cool new skills?

We don’t write our class descriptions thinking about boring, mundane things like, “This will help you stay safe and keep your family safe.” That might be true, but it isn’t sexy. It doesn’t give the reader an adrenalin jolt and it doesn’t promise that they can be the hero of their own legend. It’s the steak without the sizzle.

Who needs this?

The problem is, strong men and adrenalin junkies don’t derive nearly as much benefit from defensive training as the people who aren’t motivated by the Warrior Legend.

The message that women want to hear and need to hear is that serious self-defense training is practical. This training will help you do the things you want to do, in the ordinary happy life you live right now. These skills and this mindset will fit into your everyday life. We don’t train, and we aren’t inviting you to train with us, just because we want to fulfill some virile fantasy, but because we’re concerned about simple reality. This is where the rubber meets the road. This will make your actual day to day life better. That’s the message that women need to hear, and in some ways, it’s almost the opposite of how self-defense training has traditionally been marketed.

So we need to find more ways and better ways to get this message out to good women as well as to good men: Training is not a fantasy or a game. It provides you with important knowledge and experience on a very practical level that can help you take better care of the people you love. The hard work of learning how to defend yourself will help you enjoy the life you want to live. Learning how to protect yourself will help you stay safe and keep your family safe.

When we get that message to our potential students, they come to class. Better than that, they learn how to protect themselves and the people they love.

Overtly Covert: Stepping Out of the Shadows – Karl Thornton

My World is a juggling act of the Overt and Covert Worlds, and it is not a position I want to be in, more a position I have found myself in.

An overt World of training and advocating the need to deal with the global child trafficking epidemic. And the Covert World of dealing directly with the dangerous undercover world of fighting child trafficking and rescue operations.

I run MDTA (Modern Defensive Tactics Australia), my training services business. Part of my service is to train NGO (Non-Government Organisations) Field Personnel, Covert Special Operations Operatives as well as Law Enforcement personnel.

I provide a specialised training program for personnel deployed into high risk environments. Training for covert surveillance, intelligence gathering and physical response personnel. Also training Law Enforcement in Anti-Human Trafficking.

This obviously puts me in an overt environment where my face and services are known Worldwide.

I train undercover operatives for operations that many times are one-up missions, where our training in the physiology and psychology of the realities of the environments and dangers faced, is based on individual survival skills. We train for the specific environment faced by one-up operatives that have minimal if any help and or support when it hits the fan. Depending on the mission involved, and the organisation they are deployed by.

Then on the other hand, I run an NGO myself. Silent Integrity.

Silent Integrity’s mission is to raise funds for training, deployment and rescue missions globally to help fight child trafficking. Silent Integrity also provides volunteer personnel to complete these services. My team and I are directly involved in rescuing children from child trafficking specialising in rescues from the child sex trade.

Once again I train operatives that will deploy with my team and I in the skill sets required for covert undercover operations that place us in high risk environments, where survival can be a based on WILL and SKILL. Training not only in the physical aspects of unarmed combat and weapons defence, but in optimal situational awareness.

In the Covert world of dealing with undercover operations you need to be trained in intelligence gathering, and a unique set of combative skills. You also need to be trained in rapid acclimatization and being able to think and respond under pressure. You need to be trained in Observation skills, Behavioural Analysis and your survival skills will be based on training in RPD (Rapid Prime Decision) Making.

So what qualifies me in this area? Other than my formal qualifications.

Been there – Done that.

For many years now, I have been working in High Risk CPP. Specialising in mainly 1 up protection in the area of Anti-Human Trafficking. Entering high risk zones, offering CPP to NGO (Non-Government Organisations) personnel and individuals that need to enter high risk areas. Obviously this is mainly what we classify as low profile. Covert.

It takes a different set of specialist skills to undertake this type of role, and one I have had to adapt many existing policies, procedures, and learn skills to deal with this specialist role.

Blitz Martial Arts Magazine.

“A lifelong martial artist and security professional’ Karl Thornton today teaches the Modern Defensive Tactics Australia system to security and law-enforcement personnel. Karl is one of Australia’s most accomplished, security professionals, Karl Thornton used his 30 years of martial arts training to create Modern Defensive Tactics Australia.”

Although my job description has changed over the years where I offer a unique service. A service that grew out of what I do dealing in high risk environments, in a one up situation, taking individuals into high risk areas. I am still always aware of the precarious position I have found myself in.

On the Overt side, I am training specialist personnel, raising awareness about child trafficking, and providing services throughout the anti-human trafficking environment. All you have to do is Google “Karl Thornton and child trafficking“ and there I am.

Then on the Covert side, I am undertaking Intelligence and surveillance operations and rescue operations, saving underage children from the child trafficking epidemic. Placing myself in environments and situations that are basically do or die.

I have been personally and directly responsible for the rescue of 23 children from the child sex trade, and indirectly responsible for hundreds of rescued children.

Unfortunately, as I stated earlier, I am not in a position I want to be in, more a position I have found myself in.

My fight to help eradicate child trafficking has led to the need to be overt in my push to effect change and to offer my services wherever I can to deal with this epidemic. Yet on the other hand, I am still active in operational missions where I am “hands on” in environments that I may not return from.

My team and I, are under no illusion that we are not placing ourselves in harm’s way, we deal with and against individuals and criminal syndicates that will do whatever it takes to stop us from disturbing the cash flow. Taking what they classify as assets, the children they are trafficking.

We know we work in areas where professionals like us disappear and are later found murdered, dismembered, burnt and just simply disappear. But the fight MUST continue.

So why am I writing this article. Well, two reasons really.

One, to give those in the martial arts, defensive tactics, and reality based self-defence world an insight to the diversity of work that can be achieved with their skill set.

Two, and more importantly, in my overt role, push awareness of the realities of child trafficking and that it is a growing epidemic that needs the world’s attention to try and stamp it out. I know we will never stop it, but we can fight to make a difference. Even for one child, and that is our belief. If we can save one child at a time, then we are making changes. I have been involved in operations that have saved one child, as well as operations that have saved more than one child. The point is we need to fight for these children.

For more information on what I do, and what my team do. Visit www.mdta.com.au as well as www.silentintegrity.org.au

The Fear Factor, Part II: Mind-Set and the Martial Arts Spectrum – Paul McRedmond

Goal

COMBAT: Kill High adrenaline, emotional commitment and

SELF-DEFENSE: Escape ‘spiritual’ cost, extreme legal repercussions

DEFENSIVE TACTICS: Control

SPORT: Win

ART: Coordination

FITNESS: Fitness Low adrenaline, emotional commitment and

PHILOSOPHY: Knowledge spiritual cost, no legal repercussions

The purpose of combat is to kill the ‘enemy.’ The issue here is that a modern, ethical martial artist is not trained to kill or to deal with someone trying to kill them while a wolf (one of the three categories of criminals, the other two being coyote and weasel) has no compunction about killing you, nor any concern for legal repercussions. The mind-set here is ONE AND DONE and the ambush the best tactic.

Most martial arts are advertised as self-defense styles but the training is based on staying engaged – multiple strikes, locks and holds, takedowns and pins, etc. This is fighting, not self-defense. The mind-set, and tactic, is “STUN AND RUN.”

Defensive Tactics are the realm of the criminal justice and security specialists. The goal is to control the individual; this means either getting him or her into secure custody or to voluntarily alter their behavior. Training here MUST include Verbal Judo (George Thompson), conflict simulations, grappling and counter-assault techniques, behavioral psychology and stress management and inoculation. The mind-set is “I WIN, YOU LOSE’ and the tactic is the swarm-and-pile.

Sport is a formalized contest between one or more players. It has rules, time limits, special environments (like mats), referees, protective gear, restricted techniques, etc. Sure, you can get hurt and many martial artists ARE capable of hurting someone badly, but the training doesn’t include the one most important factor that divides martial arts from ‘shtreet’ fighting – the fear factor. The mind-set is I DON’T LOSE and the tactics, better fitness and force delivery.

Art is for coordination and expression of mind – perception – structure – movement and is also good for developing reflexes that, if trained correctly, can get you past the first punch or rush of a wolf. Modern Arnis is an art. Forms are art. Bagua is an art. Stylized knife and club counters are art, NOT reality. The mind-set here is harmony and the tactic, rhythm.

Fitness is for increasing the available mental, physical and intentional energy so as to live a longer, happier and healthier life OR to prepare you for a sport. The former is about health and longevity, the latter (‘extreme’ fitness) to prepare you for the intense structural stress demanded by most sports. The mind-set here is ONE MORE PUSHUP and the tactic is finding the time to get, and stay, fit.

The purpose of philosophy, the foundation of the spectrum, is the acquisition and use of knowledge. Knowledge is power, purpose and direction and melds the internal and external world into a greater, more inclusive whole by expanding your consciousness via the avenue of focused perception. Knowledge can help you survive in combat, see and avoid the stalking wolf, gain control of confrontational people without incurring liability, be more successful in your chosen sport, reveal greater vistas in your art, help you train smarter, not harder and, perhaps most importantly – know thyself. The mind-set is mindfulness and the tactic, question everything and keep at it until you find an answer.

You Are What You ATE, Part I – Erik Kondo

Most people are familiar with the expression “You are what you eat.” It makes sense. Eat lots of high fat content greasy foods and you get obese. Eat mainly lean meats, whole grains, fruits, and vegetables and you stay nice and trim.

But you are also defined by your actions and by how you explain your actions to others. How you respond to occurrences and events in your life is a big part of who you are. What’s the difference between an accomplished expert and a bumbling novice? The expert both acts and communicates in an effective manner, whereas the novice does not.

Much of how a person responds to any given stimulus comes down to his or her individual ATE.

Where,

A = Attributes (innate abilities and hardwiring acquired from birth)

T = Training (what has been acquired from formalized training and education)

E = Experience (what has been acquired from life experience)

Think about it for a moment. Take different people, individually expose them to the exact same stimulus, next watch to see what happens. How the subjects respond is not random. They will respond in accordance with their ATE programming. People with a different ATE are likely to respond in correspondingly different manner in accordance with their ATE.

In terms of conflict management, let’s imagine for a moment that Person A is walking down the sidewalk and suddenly violently attacked from the rear. Person A is a 6’ 4” 220 lbs. physical specimen. He is an also a highly trained Navy Seal just back from his 3rd tour of duty in Afghanistan where he was involved in undercover operations.

One block over, Person B is also ambushed from behind. Person B is 5’ 2” and 110 lbs. Person B rarely exercises and works as an accountant for the IRS. Person B has had no training in any type of martial arts or physical self-defense. He has never been in involved in a violent incident in his life.

Person A and Person B are exposed to the same stimulus. But how they respond is determined by how they consciously and unconsciously perceive and assess the situation. While awake, people are in a state of continually assessing input from the environment. Most assessments are done automatically without conscious thought. We just do them as we go about our lives. Driving a car provides an example of a continuous stream of conscious/unconscious assessments, actions, and/or continuations of actions. These assessments come naturally from our awareness of the environment. For example, when driving, if you see a stop sign at an intersection, you decide to stop. If you don’t see a stop sign, you continue on your current course.

Awareness leads to assessments which leads to actions. Many times these actions need to be articulated. “I didn’t stop at the stop sign because I didn’t see it. It was obscured by a tree, Officer.”

But we all don’t have the same paradigm of awareness. Accomplished drivers know what to look for. Unaccomplished drivers will “see” a dangerous event unfold, yet not be aware of what is happening. A skilled driver has a different ATE than an unskilled one. The same goes people when it comes to conflict management. The ATE of skilled conflict managers differ greatly from unskilled ones.

In the earlier example, Person A and Person B will respond in vastly different manners due to their respective ATE. They will explain their actions also in accordance with their ATE. You are what you accomplish, and what you accomplish is linked directly to your ATE.

Someone who is “stuck” in life responds in accordance to a static script. This type of person’s ATE doesn’t change. Their knowledge says at the same level. Their experiences are viewed to be the same. They learn nothing new from them. This type of person has a fixed belief system. People with fixed belief systems and ATEs are living in an endlessly repeating loop. Like a pen circling on paper, the path becomes more and more entrenched into their mind and body. This static belief system is reinforced with stereotypes, bias, and closed-mindedness.

In contrast are those whose ATEs are under a constant state of evolvement. They seek out varied training and diverse experiences. Their belief system is fluid and subject to change. Their responses and scripts evolve with time. Since these people’s actions are constantly evolving, they are more defined by the sum of their accomplishments. Those with a static ATE are more identified by their belief system.

Unless you have somehow maximized your ATE at a very high level of accomplishment, you likely have much room for improvement. There is not so much you can do to change your inherited attributes. But you certainly can evolve your training and experience in order to reach a higher level of accomplishment.

An accomplished person effectively articulates what he or she does. What he does results from his assessment of the situation. His assessment is derived from his awareness of his the environment. His awareness, assessment, action(s), and articulation are all a function of his Attributes, Training, and Experience (ATE).

Part II

Calm Down Please, Part I – Iain Abernethy

In this article we will be looking at verbal de-escalation. What I mean by “verbal de-escalation” is what we can do to calm people down, avoid unnecessary physical conflict, and “talk our way out”.

This is a huge subject and to try to cover all aspects of the topic in one article would be like trying cover everything there is to know about punching in one 30 minute session. Nevertheless, I hope to cover some of the core ideas and hopefully encourage you to seek out more information on this fascinating and important topic.

Martial artists train for a whole host of reasons; enjoyment, physical and mental challenge, sport, personal achievement, self-development, to enjoy a common pursuit with other people, to explore “martial culture”, self-defence, and many other reasons besides.

All of these aspects of the martial arts – using that term in its everyday sense – are worthwhile and are perfectly valid reasons to train. However we can have big problems when people mistake the requirements of one aspect with the requirements of another. Perhaps the most common example of this is people training for art, self-development or sport, and believing that, by default, such training will prepare them for dealing with criminal activity and violence (self-defence).

As well as failing to appreciate the many differences between physical “duelling” in the dojo and the realities of the physical side of self-defence, what those to hold to such a view fail to grasp is that true self-defence requires many skills that fall outside the realms of physical conflict. If the student is not given training in these skills then they are not adequately prepared for true self-defence. We need to know about home and mobile security, we need to know the law, we need to be well versed in the nature and type of crimes we are statistically most likely to face, we need training in threat awareness, assessment and avoidance … and we need the verbal skills to defuse and de-escalate situations should it be possible to do so. Believing that physical technique alone is all that is needed for real self-defence is naive in the extreme.

Training solely in the physical, and totally ignoring the more important non-physical aspects of self-defence, also gives us the massive problem that all we have is a physical solution! We therefore could find ourselves in situations we should never have been in, unable to avoid situations that could have been avoided, and running the risk of physical harm (and legal problems) when there was a way to avoid the situation becoming physical. If we truly wish to adequately address the needs of self-protection then we need to include a lot more in our study and teaching than just physical technique.

In this article, we will be discussing the basics of verbal de-escalation and it is my hope that this discussion encourages those new to the subject to explore it in greater depth. It’s not enough to simply give the topic lip service, as many do, with throw away lines such as “talk your way out if you can”. That’s just like saying “punch hard” and expecting students to be able to punch well despite never having being taught punching! There is much to the subject of verbally de-escalating situations and we’ll now move on to cover some of the key points.

The first thing we need to be clear on is that not all situations can be de-escalated! Sometimes there is no verbal “preamble”. Other times, the person will be in such an emotional state as to be beyond reasoning. Alternatively, they may make the decision that they will not be reasoned with. If someone is fully committed to harming you, robbing you, assaulting you, etc then you are not going to be able to talk them out of it. You are not going to be able to talk the career criminal into having an attack of conscience nor are you going to convince the drug addict that they don’t need your money or possessions to feed their habit. If the person is also under the influence of drink or drugs at the time it will make reasoning with them difficult if not impossible. We therefore can’t talk our way out of all situations. Peter Consterdine expressed it very well when he said, “We cannot reason with the unreasonable”.

A year or so a go there was a feature on the 24 hour BBC news channel where it was showing the training of security personnel. In one clip it showed the trainer asking someone playing the role of attacker to “calm down” while they were throwing a barrage of punches at the trainer. If a person is already throwing punches, I would suggest that we are beyond the point of trying to reason with them and we are firmly in the realms of the unreasonable. We need to know when talking is and is not appropriate.

So what we are mainly talking about is those situations where a person is getting angry, frustrated or agitated and hence physical violence is possible, but not inevitable. Of course, you won’t know ahead of time whether a situation can be de-escalated or not. They key therefore is to always be aware and be ready to get physical as it becomes clear that is where the situation is headed. If the person is getting increasingly hostile while trying to close distance, then we should conclude that de-escalation has failed, they cannot be reasoned with, and the correct action at that point would be to pre-emptively strike and escape. There are other times when talking is not appropriate too and we’ll come to those later.

So there are times were verbal de-escalation is neither possible nor appropriate. However, assuming that it is possible to reason with a person, there are methods we can use to help calm people down should they start to get aggressive, and prevent people from getting overly agitated in the first place.

One simple, but effective way to help defuse potentially violent situations is to employ the LEAPS model. LEAPS is an acronym to remind us of the key points of a communication style that can help stop people getting more aggressive and calm them down (providing they are not so emotional as to have reached the state of being “unreasonable”).

The “L” stands for “Listen”. If a person feels they are being listened to it can help remove any sense of frustration. The fact you are silent and listening also gives the person the chance to verbally vent any frustrations they have. Letting a person “get it all out” can be very effective if done right. Listening also gives you the chance to understand why the person is agitated and hence what would be the best things to say and do to help reduce that agitation. Silently listening can also help (delude) the person talking to feeling in control. This can prevent them feeling the need to physically make it clear who is in control!

The silent listening is of course your way of keeping control of the situation, but there is no harm in making the other person feel they are in charge from both the perspectives of calming the situation down further or “tactically intervening” with a pre-emptive strike should it become necessary. Remember that verbal de-escalation is just as much about listening and staying silent at appropriate times as well as what you actually say.

The “E” stands from “Empathise”. Make it clear to the other person that you understand their position and by doing so you give it validity. Even if you think the person is “wrong” remember that your ego should not lead you into unnecessary conflict. Simply saying something along the lines of, “I understand where you are coming from. In your situation I would feel the same way” can help a person feel there is common ground between you and that there is no need for them to get more and more forceful as they try to get their point across. Saying “I’m so sorry I was not looking where I was walking. I understand: I’d be unhappy too if someone split my drink by being careless. Please let me put that right and buy you another.” will be far more effective than a simple, “sorry mate”.

The “A” stands for “Ask”. By asking the right questions you can better understand what stimulated the aggression. You can encourage the person to “get it all out” verbally, buy time, and make it clear that you wish to understand the other person’s viewpoint. They are less likely to escalate to physical violence if they feel there is no need to do so. Frustration is often a trigger for violence. When asking questions it is generally better to keep the question open ended i.e. ones that cannot be answered with a “yes” or a “no”. This encourages them to keep talking and keeps their mind focused on talking. Better they talk than getting physical. Asking, “Will you explain the problem so can I understand?” is not good because it can be answered with an aggressive, “No!”. It is better to ask, “What is your key concern as I want to be sure I fully understand?” It is also a good idea to avoid loaded or accusatory questions. It should be obvious that asking “What is your problem?!” or “Can you please calm down?” are unlikely to have the effect we want.

The “P” is for “Paraphrase”. If you can state the person’s concerns back to them in an alternative way it shows that you understand. Simply repeating word for word can be seen as mocking a person. If a person was to say, “I’m f-ing angry because you should watch were you’re f-ing driving! You nearly crashed into me!” then stating, “I am sorry and I can understand why you are upset at my carelessness” show that you understand and is more likely to de-escalate than simply stating, “I understand that you are upset because I did not watch where I was f-ing driving”.

The final “S” is for “Summarise”. When the person has “got it all out” it can then be useful to summarise the position and concerns of the other person so that they know they have been understood. The summery also marks the end of the conversion and makes is clear that nothing further is needed.

So to recap; LEAPS: listen, empathise, ask, paraphrase, and when it you feel the time is right summarise.

The Self-Defense Continuum, Part I – Teja Van Wicklen

This Self Defense Continuum is about perspective and context. It is a tool to help you break something big down into bit-sized pieces so it can be examined and followed and understood. The Self-defense Continuum is a combination of the ideas of two self defense analysts who were, at the time, working separately.

Erik Kondo came up with The Five Ds of Self Defense. These are five options you have for avoiding, disrupting or escaping crime in one piece. They are Decide, Deter, Disrupt, Disengage, Debrief. (You can find out more about Erik Kondo at ConflictResearchGroupIntl.com or Not-Me.org)

Marc MacYoung came up with The Five Stages of Violent Crime, which represent the stages a criminal goes through in order to commit a crime. They are Intent, Interview, Positioning, Attack, Reaction. (You can find out more about Marc MacYoung at ConflictResearchGroupIntl.com or NoNonsenseSelfDefense.com)

The fact that both men came up with five things that completed one another and formed a natural connection, was opportune and curious. When I looked closer I found they had come up separately and miraculously each with half of a whole.

Together these concepts form The Self Defense Continuum – the time line along which a crime occurs. Thinking of crime as something with a Before, During and After helps us view crime as a process and not just a sudden occurrence we have no control over. It helps us see how moments come together to form events. It helps us see where we fit in and possibly how and where we can affect the outcome. To be able to see a particular crime as a kind of story, can give us more power to affect how we play into it – in naming and understanding the individual moments of a crime, and seeing how one moment follows the next, we gain a bit more insight and potential control over circumstances.

Unfamiliar stories or processes seem to occur out of the blue or too quickly for our reaction time. When we are blind to a process we are unable to comprehend it, let alone, change it. How much time or notice there is before and even during an event has an enormous amount to do with what we perceive to be important information. We only hear or take in that which makes sense to us, and that expands or contracts the feeling of time. The process of crime or event prediction is very much about seeing more than we thought was there.

Let’s use baseball as an analogy. Imagine, you’re at the batting cage for the first time. That ball is coming at you at 65 or so miles per hour and if you’ve never been in a batting cage before, that can be reasonably hard core. How are you supposed to put a bat on a tiny thing headed directly at your head like that?

So you start with a formula. Where is the ball coming from? And where is it aiming at? Once you begin to understand the trajectory, you start hitting the ball. This is an intuitive process for some, and a calculation for others. Either way, you have to get it embedded into your reflexes somehow because you won’t have time to consciously tell your arms to tense up and swing. It has to just happen.

After you’ve had a bit of practice, you start to get the hang of it and you find you have time to dig in and get comfortable. Now that you know how it works, there seems to magically be plenty of time to process things and you start hitting a lot more balls than you miss. Hitting them well is another phase of learning, but hitting them at least means they’re not hitting you.

The first phase of The Self Defense Continuum is:

DECIDE To Spot Criminal INTENT
This is the Before Stage. Decide is the longest, most important and least explored area of self defense. It is where we live, it is where we work, it is where we have time to fortify our homes, our lives, our families, ourselves.

Once something goes wrong you are in the During phase where you have to act quickly. You no longer have time to prepare, make leisurely decisions or comb your hair. Before a robbery you can choose which locks to buy. You can compare prices. During, you can only make a phone call, fight him off, run, or put out the flames.

Before is where most of the work gets done. Until something goes wrong it is always Before. It is Before, right now. Right now, you are Deciding to read this article.

Decide then, is about Preparation. And preparation is the single most important step you can take before a journey. When you hike up a mountain, what you know and what you take with you are pretty important. When you study for the test, you ace the test. When you don’t, you scramble, second guess and reap the rewards of a job poorly done. But never get cocky, that’s how we become lazy. Hubris is often why seasoned swimmers drown and professional climbers fall.

Specifically, this part of the Continuum is about a Deciding to learn how to read or intuit the Intent of another to harm you.

The concept of Criminal Intent refers to a person’s readiness to commit a crime – a readiness that manifests itself physically in some way, because very few people are able to hide everything they’re feeling when something serious is on the line.

Intent is more than a motive. A motive is a reason to do something. We all have good reasons to do lot’s of things that we don’t do. You could have a good motive to quit your job, but you may not. Intent is imminent. He has moved from motive to plan. The barriers are down.

Why he’s chosen you may or may not be important, you may or may not ever find out. If you get away quickly and he escapes, you may have to live without ever knowing. The longer you engage with a criminal, the more you find out about what he’s planning. Is he tying to take you somewhere? Has he asked for something? Or does he want to hurt someone? Do you really want to know?

How do you thwart criminal Intent? Well, first you have to learn to SEE it. And the earlier you see it the better for obvious reasons. If your training and your senses are working for you, you may not even know if the situation was really going to be dangerous. He’ll be gone and moving on to someone else instead of you. There’s always the chance he was just a lonely guy looking for conversation and that he really is a friend of a friend of yours. But there are cues and clues to what people want and how invested they are in getting it. Everyone has a tell, and unlike the movies most tells are similar.

I won’t go into specific behaviors here, Gavin De Becker already wrote the book ‘The Gift of Fear’. And Desmond Morris wrote a number of books on human behaviour if you want to go deeper, just look him up. Then there is What Everybody is Saying and Lie Spotting. There is a ton of information on this stuff at your fingertips. Go forth and practice people reading. Do not, however, jump on your beginner abilities and start judging people. Just watch and over time see if you’re right about your preliminary thoughts. When it comes to danger it’s simple. If something tickles your spider sense, just opt out.

A guy once walked straight towards my car window. He walked in too direct a line and smiled the whole time. The smile looked too practiced and he came a little too quickly. My son was in the car. It was getting dark. He held his hand out like he had a question but I didn’t see any real question in his eyes. He looked too comfortable standing in the middle of a parking lot. Not like a person with a problem. None of this was thought out, things just seemed off and I responded to the discomfort I felt and the child in the back seat I was responsible for.

I rolled up my window before he got to my car, that’s all the time I had. My keys were in my hand but I couldn’t get them into the ignition before he was at my window. He said something like, “can I talk to you.” I smiled and pretended not to understand. I put the key in the ignition while he motioned for me to roll down the window. I smiled, nodded, and I pulled out.

He didn’t need me to roll my window down to talk to me. He also didn’t need to get so close to my car. If he had a question he could have gestured, pointed, stated his need clearly from a few feet away. Good men who live in this world know that you don’t get that close to a woman, especially one with a young child, especially in dim light or darkness.

I love to help people. If you really need something and I can help, I’m your girl. But those were not the words or the body language of someone in a desperate situation. They were the words and actions of someone with an agenda.

It’s arguable, of course. But my son was in the car and that’s what my instincts told me. I’ll never know, and that’s okay with me.

To Be Continued.

Next: DETER At The INTERVIEW Stage

THE TOP EIGHT MISTAKES PEOPLE MAKE IN DEALING WITH HOSTILE AND POTENTIALLY ASSAULTIVE PEOPLE – Peyton Quinn

In this article I write as a self-defense instructor about the mistakes in communications people make in dealing with a hostile person who are testing them verbally with insults etc. in order to see how they respond and if they are a safe victim to assault.

But what we are dealing with here really is human beings and the ‘Wild Kingdom’ we all really live in. I have lived in more than one world in that I was bouncer/cooler in the mid-seventies in a very large and fight prone bar in New Mexico. At the same time I was a High School Mathematics teacher in that desert community too. Later I left teaching in public schools and started a software company that was reasonably successful.

In that work I interfaced with IBM and Hewlett Packard at many different levels of authority and responsibility. I am not at all exaggerating when I say that working in that bar as bouncer, in terms of learning how to better communicate with hostile and aggressive patrons to avoid violence; well to be frank that skill served me well in the business world too.

I was actually surprised to see the extent to which there was so little shared goals by the people in both big firms. Mostly managers and such were first concerned with distancing themselves from any anticipated future problem or crisis. It was politics and self-interest that first motivated most managers and even some higher level executives.

This was real drag on productivity too. And at its root was failure in communications. Few managers wanted to be the one that fist announced a big problem coming up, as then they feared that they would ‘own the problem’. This was not a universal attitude, but any chain of communications is no better than its weakest link.

Remember that there are truly only three types of communications 1-Aggressive and Demanding 2-Passive and subservient and 3- Assertive and effective. But let’s look closer here. In ‘Aggressive and demanding then the person is ‘talking’ to a subordinate. Just as subordinate is receiving that communication or failure at same from a ‘Superior’.

This is similar to responding with FEAR or ANGER at an aggressive person, and that person could be the one assuming the role of the ‘superior’, as in a ‘bully in the bar’ or a ‘pushy’ middle manager. When we respond with either fear or anger we have not chosen our path, we are allowing our biochemistry that is a million years old do the choosing for us!

The only response that is our choice and our decision is to be assertive in the face of aggression.

Now please understand all of this exists on very long continuum. For example, in a prison environment a convict may kill another convict for being ‘disrespected’ or ‘dissed’. In an office situation a manager my fire an ‘insolent’ or ‘disrespectful employee’.

It is mostly the consequences that are radically different in the two examples here, and not the nature of the communication. Both the manager and the ‘homicidal convict’ acted out of a communication that was received as being ‘disrespectful’.

Effective communications can make guy who intends to pound your face into raspberry jam and has articulated that intention to you into a person who decides he does not have to or want to do that. This is no ‘theory’ with me it is experience. And yes, not all such people can be verbally de-escalated but most in my experience can be.

Likewise middle manager or boss who is ‘chewing your ass out royally’ and maybe even in front of others in the office, well if you handle it very well you can sometimes communicate with him or her in productive manner to. By ‘productive’ I mean in way that ‘solves’ or ‘begins to solve’ the problem the ‘Boss’ is chewing you out for. Neither anger nor fear can ever accomplish this. But measured assertiveness might.

So let’s get down to specifics here. Below is truncated version of my newsletter to subscribers whose main interest is self-defense, but true self-defense exists on very long continuum too, from the barroom to the boardroom as I have been in both places good people. I will also say that self-defense is subset of self-improvement and the most powerful form of same I am aware of too when done authentically.

Even martial arts, which is not really self-defense training at least in any comprehensive way, has some real self-improvement benefits too.

Hence below in italics I will give examples of the mistakes people make in dealing with a potentially assaultive bully, to the mistakes and consequences of dealing with the office and corporate environment. If you live in the same worlds I do then you surely know there are disagreeable people there too you must communicate with and yes, even bullies as well.

1- They fail to recognize the intent of the abusive person’s verbal attack behaviors.

The bully’s intent is to determine if a physical attack on you is safe for them or not. In short, you are being ‘interviewed ‘for safe victim potential. The verbal attack and insults and challenges are an ‘interview” of you

Same deal with overbearing manager, once they see they can abuse you one way or another they are encouraged to do so. EXAMPLE” The Boss tells a subordinate to have the Johnson report ready by Friday at 10 AM. The subordinate knows it can be done in that time and the software is not set up for the format he wants. SUBORDINATES FEAR RESPONSE: They say nothing and are not communicating the problem and thus they are worried and unproductive all the way to Friday and then the Boss discovers the people coming in from out of town he will be much less prepared to meet and sell. This could be the last straw for the boss and subordinate well catch Hell and may be terminated.

2- They are in Denial that the verbal assault is really happening

The most common way this is done is just by ignoring the abuser as if he were not there. This means you pass his interview for ‘safe victim potential’ and it’s now much more likely he will get physical\ and attack you. The bully needs to inflate his self-esteem through abusing others with impunity. This is because of his actual weak self-image.

The Boss has not communicated that the situation properly. The subordinate does not realize the gravity of having the report being ready for the important Friday meeting. The subordinate knows that the Boss is always making near impossible demands and time frames and ‘he will just have to learn what is possible and isn’t possible’ Friday.

3- They get angry and return his insults

To the experienced ‘human predator’ this is very close to #3 above. He knows fear and anger are almost the same thing in such a situation. You are also helping him get his courage up to attack you. It is like throwing gasoline on fire to put it out. Showing anger is escalating the situation and shows him he is ‘getting to you’ which to some extent means he is succeeding in controlling you.

To the Boss this is insubordinate and disrespectful and he or she won’t have it. The Boss may terminate the subordinate and find someone in the department that can perform the job rather than complain.

5- They verbally challenge the aggressor

How stupid is this? Both make themselves tactically open for attack. This is ‘Wild Kingdom’ stuff and neither person is really in control of themselves or they would not do this non-sense

Similar to getting angry, it isn’t a rational choice by the subordinate but an emotional response. The subordinate may seem calm but is saying “Boss we have been through this before. The software does not allow the information to be selected and printed out like that and certainly not by Friday you should be aware of these things by now”. In this communication the subordinate as far as the Boss is concerned is just telling him or her what the subordinate can’t do. This is not of interest as much as what the subordinate CAN DO in the time frame. Further the accusation that “you should be aware of these things by now” is insulting and challenging and may be seen easily as being disrespectful and the subordinate being person that is just too hard to deal with and him or she just does not need that.

6-They display an Ignorance of what is happening. If you show fear, indecision and ignorance of the situation then you might say something like: “Hey leave me alone I haven’t done anything to you”. Of course he knows all that already, you have just told him “I am afraid and I do not understand why your acting this way to me as never have dealt with this before and so you can be sure I do not know how to handle it now if you go physical with me”

Here the subordinate is taken off balance by the Boss’s demand. This is partly both parties fault too at that point. The subordinate then will be asking ‘what ifs’ or “are you saying that we have too” or “look it’s not my responsibility to be able to do something the system isn’t programmed to do”. Again the subordinate is communicating to the Boss that it is ‘His problem’ not theirs and what once again simply what ‘can’t be done’. The boss needs a replacement that accepts responsibility and knows there job, this person is headed for potential unemployment.

7- They care what people around them will think about them and let that fear determine their actions.

Suppose you are with friends or your girlfriend or wife when you are confronted by a bully in restaurant. If you are worried or concerned that IF you don’t meet this hostility with ‘manly action’ you will be seen as a coward then you are not in control of yourself, someone else is! If this passes through your mind then you are afraid that you are ‘not really a man’ in the first place and that is the real problem. You are acting like an adolescent boy not a man. Either you are in control of yourself or someone else is. Of course showing fear and freezing up is no good either, it encourages the bully.

The Boss chooses to ‘chew the subordinate out’ in front of other co-workers. This is very seldom by anything but the Boss’s design and purpose so as to amplify the castigation of the subordinate. It is basically the same dynamic communication wise as the dealing with the Bully in the restaurant. The assertive response is best as it discourages the Boss from doing this as it does not met his result does not meet his expectation. An assertive but not insubordinate response might be “Mr. Boss I realize the importance of this problem and we need to go to your office to discuss some sensitive elements of this problem”. If this continues do you really want to work there anyway? WE spend a great really enormous a lot of our life at work. What kind of life do y6ou want? All endings are always also the start of new beginning.

8-They allow themselves to become triggered by ‘Name Calling’. This one is both the more challenging to explain physiologically and for many the most challenging response to disengage from. Being ‘triggered’ exists on a continuum. The trigger for a Black Person might be being called the “N” word. Yet the trigger for another person might be something as simple as being called “Sport”. When “triggered’ a person can respond automatically and immediately and thus not under their own self-aware will and rational control.

The OODA loop: concept:

Observation, Orientation, Decision, Action. This is a very key concept to understand. Decision-making occurs in a recurring cycle of observe-orient-decide-act. An entity (whether an individual or an organization) that can process this cycle quickly, observing and reacting to unfolding events more rapidly than an opponent, can thereby “get inside” the opponent’s decision cycle and gain the advantage.

AN Example: Again I am just having a beer on a Harley bike trip through Colorado and New Mexico when I am aware that a guy at a table by himself has the ‘hard eyes’ on me. I judge him to be a ‘regular’ there .I am of course just passing through. I had an unusually strong sense of malice about this guy and possible mental problems. I decided to pre-empt. I smiled at him and sat down at his table and said in a friendly manner “Don’t I know you form “D Block in La Tuna?” La tuna was a prison in New Mexico the State I was now in. He was derailed. His OODA loop was broken.

In the example by asking him this questions about ‘was he not someone I saw in prison’, I interrupted his decision loop and derailed it. He was surprised and told me he had been in jail before but never prison.

I replied he had been ‘smart then’ and wished him well and went back to the bar to have lunch. This was one of those rare incidents where pre-preemption was best and so I went with my gut feeling there.

OK, how does this idea of the OODA Loop apply to business? The short answer is “in every possible aspect of business”. This is because business is about people and commutations and sales in particular is about anticipating and being able to preemptively engage objections to the sale. Now do not say to yourself “But I am not in sales”. Yes you are in sales every human being on the planet is in sales one way or another really regardless of what they do for a living.

One way to grasp this is this idea: A Doctor sells medical services a Lawyer legal service a Plumber fixing your leaking pipes and overflowing toilet services, a politician sells himself in nearly every conceivable way imaginable, a would be lover of another is selling him or herself to that significant other, or would be significant other or spouse as a suitable mate. The list is of course endless.

To the management or CEO you are selling him or her the idea that you are valuable asset to the enterprise. Ok we don’t necessarily think of it those terms or idioms, but isn’t this idea about ‘sales’ a reality?

That is where the OODA Lop and mastering its intricacies with people and prospects becomes paramount. Sales of any kind is mainly the business of educating the prospect to the sale the ‘how and why’ he or she needs your service or product. Of course that ‘prospect’ may be your boss, the CEO, the manager that can promote you or even the person you are hoping to sell a piece of real estate too).

So you want to anticipate objections so you can resolve them in the mind of your sales prospect. Yet the objections to any sale are always one of these three

1-NO NEED, I do not have the problem you solve so I do not need you or you or service or

2-NO HELP, I realize I have a problem but you dot really understand what that problem is so your solution does not apply to me, it is no help.

3- NO HURRY: Hum, I have the problem, your solution seems to fit, but we have gotten along this far without it so there is no hurry to make a decision right now.

You should be prepared to get inside the mind of your prospect OODA Loop wise. This means you know the problem the prospect has as well or better than he or she does. It means you know thus exactly what the benefit you or your solution provide. And for objection number three, NO HURRY, you should be able to meaningfully project to the prospect what it is costing them daily or monthly or yearly just what it is costing them not to have you or your service or product right now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2V7JwS8d_X8

Fit Defence – Douglas Graham

Is Fitness training important in Self Defence? I say yes of course it is. So let us discuss the how and why. We all realise that our cardiovascular performance can be handy for ‘taking it to the trenches’ but let’s face it. The trenches, is a place that few of us ever intend to take a fight. Not to mention that fighting is not the essence of self defence anyway. Conflict management is. So having an element of control over our body and mind is essential yes? Of course.

So how does Fitness training facilitate this process? Let me give you an example.

I was training a young client only a few days prior to writing this blog. We were doing a protocol where his strengths flourish. This lad is solid in structure, strong in body, driven. After a fantastic job on his second movement, exceeding my expectations. He broke down. He was shaking, feeling ill and I could see the energy draining from him. He had pushed himself right to his physical limit. But with excellent form the whole time. But, adrenaline struck hard.

Discomfort shows us we are pushing our limits. Pain shows us we are pushing our luck-

He was extremely uncomfortable. He had never experienced adrenal dump. So we took an extended recovery period to deal with it. To do this we exacted control over the body, using the mind. “YOU are in control” The mind can activate mechanisms in the body to regain control. In This case it was posture and breathing. Sound familiar to anyone?

Ideally we want to release the adrenaline gradually, for the best performance. Rather than saturate the blood with it. Now and again though, it is productive to take ourselves there. He simply pushed his limit and was able to recover then continue without any issue.

As with any reality training(and make no mistake that this is reality training. More real and grinding than a lot of ‘reality based’ self defence I see on the market) You have to push your limits. Body, mind, technique, beliefs. The young warrior learned much of this, in the space of five minutes. Adrenaline is your friend, but it can be your enemy. Physical stress with a functional application is an effective way to tap into this and learn to cope with it, especially on the physical level.

I have personally used my fitness training to supplement my SD for a long time. Mainly technique based, improving quick twitch etc. The stamina aspect is obvious enough. But far more significantly I believe, as do we all at the Art of Functional Movement, is that movement is universal. No matter what modality in which you choose to use it. As much as, if not more than any other part of us, our bio-mechanics have existed almost unchanged since our species came about. The applications are many but the core of functional and efficient human movement is the same. Lines, shapes and patterns.

Functional Fitness training will facilitate every aspect of your life once you see the simplicity of it all. Active core engagement during ‘fence’. The way a simple step turns a straight punch, into a curved one. The difference between squat and deadlift motions can be the difference between dodging a punch, and taking a knee to the head. It is all there. Hiding in plain sight. No secrets, no mysteries, just you and your training. If you can open your mind and apply it right, the world is your oyster full of pearls.

You can check out my other writings via our website at http://www.functional-living.co.uk/

So take care folks. Stay functional, stay safe.

“Depth of Game” – Rory Miller

Editor’s note: In last month’s issue, Erik Kondo wrote a wonderful article on the “12 Principles of Conflict Management”. One of the founding principles of CRGI is that we want our readers and students to see that we challenge and disagree with each other all the time. That there can never be “experts” in a field as complex as conflict. We challenge each other because we all know that being sure is complacency, and complacency is the first step on the road to failure. Our discussion can be your discussion too. Read everything critically, do not just swallow and regurgitate the last thing you read, however cool. So in this issue both Rory Miller and Garry Smith respond.

In the April issue of Conflict Manager Erik put out a great article on the 12 Principles of Conflict Management. He listed 12 principles that all successful conflict managers use:

Respect (Tolerance, Empathy, Consideration)
Clear Communication (Minimal misunderstandings, Directness)
Appropriate Enforcement (Just-Right for the situation)
Truth (Actuality, Reality)
Knowledge (Deep understanding)
Dynamic Problem Solving (Critical Thinking, Neo-cortex utilized, Situation specific analysis)
Evolution (Constantly evolving and changing, Double Loop Learning)
Continuum of Responses (Spectrum, Scaling, Progressive/escalating use of force)
Control of Emotions (Limbic system controlled)
Trade-offs (Cost/Benefit analysis, Give/take, Negotiation, Compromise, Cooperation)
Open-minded (Responsive to feedback, Open to differing viewpoints)
Accountability (Responsibility, Agency, Acceptance)

It is easy for a simple list to become a dogma. It is also dangerous and these principles are not just words, they require a depth of understanding in order to utilize them effectively and to know when your own principles are being used against you.

During our discussion via email Garry suggested that we could look at this, literally as though we were having our eyes tested. I have no idea what he means by this, so I’m eager to check out his article. I do, however, know that we all see things differently and it’s a grave mistake to assume that different=wrong.

1: Respect (Tolerance, Empathy, Consideration)

Respect based on understanding is important. Sympathy, not empathy (or is it the other way around? I get those confused). It is fine to understand other’s feelings or point of view but do not get sucked into them. We have, in this culture, been taught, largely as unthinking dogma, that all points of view are equally valid, and that since tolerance is a virtue, unlimited tolerance must be saintly.

That’s not just wrong, it is dangerously naïve. If you support unlimited culturally diversity, you must also support female genital mutilation. You simply can’t have it both ways. So understand that everyone has limits on their tolerance. If they don’t there can never be a negotiation, just a drawn-out surrender on all points. Without boundaries you will stand for, your only possible conflict management strategy is to beg and hope that the other party, for their own reasons, will drop you a scrap. To have any depth of game, you must have firm lines on what you personally will not tolerate. And if you are tolerant on many issues, watch for where others use your tolerance to manipulate you for their own gain

2: Clear Communication (Minimal misunderstandings, Directness)

Because of my personality, I agree with this very much. The world becomes very smooth and simple when “yes” means “yes” and “no” means “no.” That said, I’m mature enough to understand that this is not the norm for many people.

In many cultures, directness is considered rude. In some subcultures, especially many of the criminals that I dealt with, stories are often told in a circular manner, slowly building up to the point (See A Framework for Understanding Poverty: A Cognitive Approach by Ruby K. Payne, Ph.D).

You have to understand cultural nuances before you can define what clear communication even is.

3: Appropriate Enforcement (Just-Right for the situation)

Realistically, enforcement belongs at the very end of the list. But I’m following Erik’s lead here.

Understand this deeply. Negotiation only works, negotiation doesn’t even exist, except for the threat of what will happen if negotiation fails. You never do hostage negotiations without a tactical response on standby and a country without an army may make themselves feel important by mediating a treaty… but negotiation without an alternative is begging.

And understand as well that rules, policy and law have no existence other than to the extent that they are enforced. Without enforcement, they are imaginary. Just sympathetic magical spells cast by modern shamans. Only believers in the cult are bound by them, and only to the extent that they choose to be bound.

4: Truth (Actuality, Reality)

This takes skill. Simply, very few people have practiced distinguishing facts from conclusions. Feeling sure about something is no indicator of accuracy. Because people conflate emotion and fact, very few disputes are about reality, but about interpretation. If you have not practiced, you will do this as well, and be part of the problem.

5: Knowledge (Deep understanding)

This topic can go as deep as you are willing to take it. Being a subject matter expert in the subject under dispute is valuable. Do you want an electrician mediating between two surgeons on the best way to do a knee surgery?

But you can be skilled at the mechanics of resolving disputes themselves and dissect the disagreement even if you don’t understand the underlying problem. But that takes skill, humility (because the solution will not come from you and you have to accept that), and sensitivity (to recognize the change in attitude when the disputants approach agreement.)

And understand the difference between memorized trivia and understanding. The ability to spout facts is often misinterpreted as understanding those facts. Don’t fool yourself or allow yourself to be fooled by others.

6: Dynamic Problem Solving (Critical Thinking, Neo-cortex utilized, Situation specific analysis)

Ideally, this is where the other twelve principles lead. Rational thought solves problems. Emotions applied to problems often end in either a dominance/submission dynamic (that’s what the limbic system likes) or in overt violence.

But critical thinking takes skill. The best exercise (and test of skill) that I know: if you are rational, you can convincingly, logically and sympathetically argue all sides of an issue. If you can’t, you are working from your limbic system.

7: Evolution (Constantly evolving and changing, Double Loop Learning)

Growth and evolution is the hallmark of all effective people, not just conflict managers. For continuous growth, you must be honest about what has worked and failed and why. Many conflict managers use and teach the tactics they like to use, which may not be the tactics that work best.

In the moment, especially in a tense situation, you must constantly assess what you are doing and adapt. A good manager can change tactics as soon as she sees the signs things are going downhill. A poor conflict manager stays on “proven” strategies even when they are clearly not working.

8: Continuum of Responses (Spectrum, Scaling, Progressive/escalating use of force)

Conflict is a big subject. In the civilized world, skill at negotiation is often enough– you have access to lawyers and, if necessary, police to enforce agreements. But understand that if your skills don’t extend from the immediate persona you project without saying a word; to your ability to argue, trick, negotiate, debate, and command; to your ability to use force from pushing to deadly force; then your skills are incomplete. There are entire levels of conflict that you cannot manage.

Do not arrogantly believe that a very high skill at one type of conflict will translate to any skill at all at a different level. And within the verbal skill set (reference deep understanding) do not believe that your skill at dealing with social problems will help dealing with someone working from an asocial perspective. The skills will not only backfire, they will be used against you.

9: Control of Emotions (Limbic system controlled)

For most people, the default wiring is to assume that any conflict with another human being is a social and/or emotional issue. And we have a tendency to deal with emotional issues from an emotional perspective. Are you smarter when you are angry? Afraid? In love? Do we have any evidence whatsoever that any emotion makes you better at solving problems?

10: Trade-offs (Cost/Benefit analysis, Give/take, Negotiation, Compromise, Cooperation)

The Win-Win solution is set up as the ideal solution in any negotiation. A pure win-win, where everyone gets exactly what they want, is rarely possible. Anything you gain comes at a cost to someone else. A pure win-win would never need to be negotiated, just the possibility pointed out.

Which means you must have a clear idea of what you need and what you want. A clear idea of what you can and cannot sacrifice for what you want. And understand everyone else’s motivations just as clearly. Your ability to manage the conflict will lie almost entirely in your ability to navigate between these edges (gains and losses, acceptable and unacceptable) for all parties.

11: Open-minded (Responsive to feedback, Open to differing viewpoints)

Closed minds don’t grow. Learning is a lifetime activity and I would argue the primary purpose of being a human. That said, it’s entirely possible to learn crap. An open mind with no filter is just as useless, and more dangerous, than a completely closed mind.

All of these principles inter-relate. Your understanding of knowledge, actuality and– above all –critical thinking must temper your tendency to open-mindedness. Listen with an open mind but accept only with critical, rational judgment.

Without mechanisms to test, evaluate, and accept or reject new information a naïve open mind is not just a problem, but a tool that can be used and controlled by people who will not have your best interests at heart.

12: Accountability (Responsibility, Agency, Acceptance)

It is not enough to be able to negotiate or debate or even fight. You also need to be able to identify and measure success or failure. You need to have a mechanism to follow up and make sure the problem resolution is holding. You need to be able to do something if the situation is disintegrating

Without these mechanisms, any solution to any conflict is merely a ritual. The words are said and the treaty is signed…and it will forever be a piece of paper and no more.

You must develop follow-through and in most cases you must grow a reputation for follow-through or else people will be happy to resolve conflict with you, fully confident that they will have free reign as long as they pretend to agree.

Remember, each person in a conflict wants certain things and they want those things at minimal personal cost. If they know or learn that you are satisfied with the appearance of agreement, they will be happy to give you that. The cost of pretending to agree or even to acquiesce is minimal. And the gains from just doing what they want after you have accepted the agreement can be immense. Actions always trump words and without the action of follow-through, any agreement is nothing but words.

In conclusion:

Even this only scratches the surface of these principles. To be good at conflict management or to be skilled at any complex skill is a matter of depth and breadth. There are no simple answers, no one-to-one correspondences. If I were to simplify the list, I would say being a successful conflict manager rests on:

Clear goals. You must know what you need, what you want and what you would like.
Clear parameters. You must know what is absolutely unacceptable, what you wouldn’t like and what you could live with.
Awareness. You must be aware of these within yourself and just as aware of the goals and parameters of the other people involved.
Assessment. You must have skill at reading other people and the situation so that you can know what is working and what is failing. Over the long-term, you need a mechanism to apply this to continuously refine your skills.
Adaptability. On many levels.
Follow-through.