Recently we learned what is happening to our brain on disagreement. Today we learn how to make healthy changes
I am still reflecting a lot on what Jonathan Haidt and Caroline Webb imparted about how our brains are reacting when they are stuck on disagreement. Just the awareness of what is actually going on in our heads is a real wake up call. We can’t fix what we don’t know needs fixing.
We do know, however, that many of our disagreements rarely get resolved for good. We just keep looping back, having the same conversation over and over. We aren’t making forward progress and we feel exhausted from all the effort.
This common occurrence was so familiar to me years ago that I called it my lifetime pass on the merry-go-round. My partner and I would have the same exhausting disagreement over and over, never resolving a blended family conflict. Today as I reflect on the 5 steps to common ground, I am wishing that I had these tools then. All I longed for back then was to stop getting on that merry-go-round and to stand firmly on solid ground, feeling level-headed and warm-hearted, not dizzy.
Although Jonathan and Caroline share that there are 5 helpful steps to finding common ground, there are actually 6. They start with ground zero.
In Step 0, each party in a disagreement describes their point of view. No interruptions, no listening to respond, no judgment. After all, we have to know where everyone stands.
Jonathan points out that if it is a familiar disagreement, you might believe that you already know where someone is coming from. You might even think it is too repetitive and unnecessary to begin at ground zero. Yet, the truth is that the psychological payoff from being able to clearly articulate where you stand, where you are coming from and what matters most is profound.
I am also reminded that Dr. Ellen Langer tells us that variability is a key component of mindfulness these days. We know this to be true. One day our hot button might be one aspect and another day, we feel a little stronger about another facet of our story. Even an old familiar disagreement will have some variability baked in.
Ground zero helps us work with what is most salient in the present moment.
It is foundational, not repetitive nor unnecessary. Start from the beginning. Tell your story and your perspective.
Then, we can move on to the 5 steps that will help us find common ground – and help our brains step out of gridlock that happens rather unconsciously when we are in the grips of disagreement.
- Step 1: Describe their point of view as positively as possible.
- Step 2: Identify all areas of agreement
- Step 3: Isolate and understand the true disagreement
- Step 4: Explore how both could be correct
- Step 5: Decide what you can do now, based on your common ground
In Step 1, we get to practice being the super communicators and deep listeners that Charles Duhigg teaches. We can actively demonstrate that we have listened to learn. This is where we loop for understanding. Your goal is to repeat back what someone has shared with you — and to do so in such a way that they might remark: “I couldn’t have said it better myself.”
For the record, you can do this skillfully — even and most especially when you don’t agree with someone. To prove this point, just imagine that the disagreement is with your 5 year old who has a very strong opinion about ice cream as the main course for dinner. You can state their perspective clearly (and possibly with good humor) all while completely disagreeing with their strong case.
Step 1 is foundational and transformational. Just as Jonathan pointed out, we have a basic need to be heard and understood. Most of our resistance and natural defenses comes from us fighting so hard for just that — to be heard and understood.
When you can loop for understanding by repeating back someone’s story, you have made that connection and met those basic needs.
Step 2 requires both parties to work together to find some matches. Where is there common ground? If you imagine that you are drawing a map in an attempt to traverse some rocky terrain, it helps a great deal with this process. Instead of just focusing on obstacles, you find a work-around. One of the best magnifying glasses you can use for Step 2, is to get closer and see what matters most to both of you. Chances are there is a lot of common ground right there.
Jonathan points out that when we look together for common ground, we reset our attentional filters. That is how you help your brain get off the one-track frame of mind.
Step 3: Jonathan points out that in this critical step, it is now and only now that you aim everyone’s attention at the source of the conflict, which he says should feel more bounded (manageable) and obvious. He emphasizes that this exploration is about curiosity and understanding, not persuasion or manipulation.
What I can see with more clarity now is that when my former partner and I hopped on the merry-go-round of disagreement, we were also having a tug of war. Most of our conflict came from having to strike a balance when it came to events or activities that involved our grown children in our blended family. To my partner everything that involved his kids was a 10 on a scale of one to ten. Without some level setting and real perspective taking, it was impossible to find common ground and make important choices about attending a summer BBQ or a baby shower.
Step 4 is where we find the paradox that Brene Brown has been show casing. Rarely is anything a zero-sum game – yet this is precisely where we get stuck. We have a winner take all mindset. Two things that appear to be in opposition can both be true. Brene wants us to get comfortable with straddling this tension — it is the rock solid fulcrum that helps us strike a balance. Brene always says “the center will hold”. This is a great image to keep in mind when holding paradox and honoring that two opposing perspectives can both be true.
Jonathan offers another image that is so powerful. He offers that when we reach this step in a conversation (notice it is no longer a disagreement, it is a beneficial conversation), both parties turn and face the same direction.
Just sit with that.
It is a huge reminder that we are on the same team and we are working together to find common ground and reasonable solution.
We are turning to face the same direction, albeit it subtly different orientations.
Step 5 is making that joint decision about what you can do together, based on common ground, shared understanding of each other’s needs and perspectives, and a strong desire for a positive outcome for everyone.
Jonathan shares that we can look each other in the eye and ask “What can we do based on where we agree?”
He also adds that there is no need to hold everything up because of one sticking point. Yet how often do we actually do just that? One party refuses to go to the event or cooperate unless he or she gets their way.
This is where the real flex happens in conflict resolution. Remind yourself that solving disagreements is not a zero-sum game. Compromise is a win-win.
Sometimes when we do this value calculation, as Dr. Caroline Fleck would teach us to do – we are pausing to consider the long term benefits of being cooperative, agreeable and flexible. It’s like money in the bank when we find common ground and invest in being amenable to being agreeable.
The reality is that you can give a little more today knowing that you can bank on that generosity and understanding for the future.
Jonathan leaves us with this noteworthy insight:
“Each time you successfully navigate a disagreement, you are not just solving the immediate problem; you’re building your capacity to handle all future conflicts with greater wisdom, more trust and less stress.”
Noteworthy Resources:
