We’re talking about conflict.

Last time we looked at the origin of the word itself. Conflict is literally about bashing things together.

The word carries a connotation of forcefulness or violence. It feels threatening, and that feeling offers an important clue as to why we don’t like it, and why we often respond to conflict badly.

Like it or not, we also learned that conflict is inevitable, and even necessary for groups (like teams or companies) to achieve the best possible outcomes.

Assuming your workplace has not devolved into armed combat, a word that shares a strikingly similar etymology (pun intended), the conflict we’re talking about here is simply a difference of opinion involving strong negative emotions.

Unfortunately, the parts of our brains that respond to threats don’t know that.

Finally, we discussed how it’s usually not the underlying disagreement that elicits those strong negative emotions, but rather our destructive responses that cause so much heartache.

The destructive response is what we do. This week, as promised, is about why we do it.

Working Backwards

Our destructive responses to conflict are the optimal starting point because they are an easily observable behavior (though as with many negative behaviors, they are easier to observe in others than in ourselves).

But these destructive responses—sarcasm, gossip, defensiveness, and so many more—are really just the last step in a cycle:

1. A Conflict Situation arises (we disagree over something that matters to us).
2. Automatic Thoughts emerge in our cortisol and adrenaline-soaked brains.
3. We react with a Destructive Response.

We have already established that conflict, the first link in the chain, is inevitable. We also identified many varieties of destructive response.

It’s the Automatic Thoughts in the middle that remain.

These automatic thoughts are the “why” behind our destructive responses, but they are also the opportunity for improvement, because we have the ability to...

1. Notice these thoughts and make them less automatic, and
2. Choose better ones.

Cause and Effect

Why did you blurt out that destructive response? Because of the automatic thought that preceded it.

And why did that particular automatic thought pop into your head just then?

The simple, yet not-terribly-satisfying, answer is, because of everything that came before it, and I mean everything.

That destructive snark you just launched back at your coworker came from...

• The automatic thought that arose in your prefrontal cortex in the last second leading up to you launching it, which...
• Resulted from the lack of sleep two nights ago that compromised your executive function, which happened because...
• [Insert years or decades of experiences depending on age]...
• Middle school.
• [Insert several eons of other stuff]...
• All the way back to the evolutionary pressures that shaped the behavior of your non-human ancestors millions of years ago and beyond.

So, ultimately that destructive response to conflict lies at the end of an endless chain of cause and effect reaching back into the furthest extremes of our biological origins. Thus the complexity of our behavior.

It’s a lot. More than anyone can reasonably understand, but we don’t need to understand all of it to handle modern-day conflict better, because in between the unfortunate comment and the dinosaur-dodging, Jurassic era shrew from which we all evolved came all the things that shaped your personality, and when it comes to understanding personality, we have lots of tools that can help.

Our personality styles predispose us to (but do not dictate) certain varieties of automatic thoughts. Thus, understanding our personalities in conflict situations helps us see patterns and anticipate trouble spots.

If the Shoe Fits…

I’d like to tell you that I’m a completely unique and un-categorizable human.

At some level, I am. We all are.

But in reality, many aspects of my personality are pretty accurately captured by the DiSC® model. In that framework, I have a strongly inclined C-style (Conscientiousness). And yes, I am at least partially predictable.

How does this influence my automatic thoughts in response to conflict?

To Err Is Human (But I Still Hate It)

People with the C style tend to feel really, really awful about making mistakes. It can feel like a moral transgression, like a sin. (I didn’t say it was rational).

To know that I was rightly to blame for something bad happening is devastating. Thus, to feel wrongly blamed can make me instantly and forcefully defensive if I’m not careful, and I'm always on the lookout.

Here’s how it plays out:

1. Conflict Situation: Someone disagrees with, or is unhappy about something I’ve said or done (or I perceive that they are).
2. Automatic Thought: They are unfairly blaming me.
3. Destructive Response: Defensiveness, an onslaught of bulletproof facts, logic, and data refuting their position—my weapons of choice.

Similarly, because of their conscientious focus on facts, logic, reason, and accuracy, when confronted with an emotional argument (vs. a rational one), people like me with a C style might automatically think, “They are being intentionally unreasonable” or “They have no idea what they’re talking about.”

Those different, but just as automatic, thoughts might lead to destructive responses of exasperation or belittling—equally unhelpful.

Different Style, Different Thoughts

Martha, on the other hand, has an Si style, a blend of the Steadiness (S) and Influence (i) styles. Whereas I feel threatened at the thought of being blamed, she will tend to feel more threatened by loss of connection and harmony, or damage to relationships.

In conflict, her automatic thought might be something like “This fighting is too risky. It’s better to just give in” or “you don’t care about me.”

Though we might not be conscious of them, we all have these reactive, automatic thoughts when we feel threatened. But our different personalities cause them to take different forms.

Thus, understanding our own personalities can help us respond to conflict more effectively by helping us notice those thoughts and making them less automatic.

Find the Gap

Remember that all important quote, inspired by Viktor Frankl, but actually penned by Steven Covey. We've shared it before:

Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.

(Check out The Loom for more quotes like this and many other valuable resources. It’s free!)

The space we’re looking for exists between the automatic thoughts and our destructive responses.

Let's Start Putting It Together

1. Conflict arises. There is a difference of opinion involving strong negative emotions. Learn to recognize it.
2. Develop awareness of your reactions. First we have to notice the automatic responses and put them in “manual” mode. Understanding our personality style can offer clues where to look.
3. Once we have noticed the thoughts, we must leverage the emotional intelligence skill of Impulse Control to open up that crucial space. Pry the stimulus apart from the response and jam a wedge in there. Your power is in that space.

And once we have space, we have to use it to choose a better response. How we can do that is our topic for next week!

In the meantime, the Productive Conflict Profile can help you understand how your DiSC style influences your automatic thoughts in conflict situations, and how others with different styles might react to that same situation very differently.

Until next time,
Greg