In the middle of a negotiation, when the stakes are high enough no one can walk away. You make your offer.
And you’ve worked hard, honed your argument with the latest and cleanest data.
And they shake their head “No,” like they’ve heard it a million times before.
Or worse.
While you’re talking, they aren’t even listening, they’re thinking of their counter argument.
You’ve lost.
And now you see them as beyond reason, like a solid stone. And none of this is your fault.
Your argument was by the book. You stated your position, responded to their objections and were prepared to synthesize a new idea from the conflict.
That’s the standard theory.
Except, none of the books will that say it rarely works unless you have the power to impose a decision or a judge who can render judgment.
Two sides reaching an agreement, on their own, impossible.
But Is Agreement Even The Prize We Seek?
Or is the prize to be right?
We all say it, “It’s the principle of the thing.” Translated, this really means, “Admit it. I’m right.”
Because anyone can create an argument that is reasonable in their own eyes.
And all of us have seen a load of information and social authority dumped on someone. It is clear they’re wrong and don’t have a leg to stand on. No question about it.
And do they say? “Yup. You’re right, I am wrong. Thank you so much for helping me.”
Not often.
At best, they’ll mutter “Sure.”
Which is an escape from an uncomfortable social situation and not an agreement. Nothing has been resolved and maybe even gotten worse.
This quest to be right makes us rigid and drives others away.
Our Perspective Conceals Everything.
It’s simple to believe that everyone sees the world in the same way. That we all want the same thing.
You want it. I want it. We both can’t have it, so there is conflict.
Sometimes that is true.
What I’ve Noticed About Conflict.
When I began mediating parenting agreements for families in Juvenile Court I felt that there was never enough time to understand the parents and their conflicts well enough to help. Superior Court closes at 4:30. The deputies clear the building. Good bye. No exceptions.
In mediation I developed a shortcut. I’d ask each parent, “What do you think they want?”
Here’s the surprise.
Most parents didn’t know what the other parent wanted. In fairness, parents in Juvenile Court might connected through their children but they are often separated by restraining orders, previous addictions and memories of violence.
And in divorce, communication is broken. Soon to be ex-spouses operate under old assumptions. For them, asking, “What do you really want?” can be the first step in a battle that neither wants.
However, some parents do know what the other parent wants.
I’d follow up with, “Why do you think that is?”
Bad question.
It doesn’t reveal an insight into the other person. Rather, it reveals an insight into the person voicing the opinion. Or if they blame themselves, a door to an ocean of guilt has been opened.
Can We Truly Gain Perspective?
When we think of others how do we know that we aren’t really thinking about ourselves?
When we imagine other’s intentions how can we be certain that we aren’t applying our worst intentions to them?
Our minds organize information into patterns. As we perceive, the mind either creates a pattern or places the information into an existing pattern. This allows us to ignore the static and proceed with confidence in our very complex world.
And what happens when our thought pattern doesn’t mesh with someone else’s thought pattern? We don’t see the same things. It feel like we are at odds. They don’t understand or just don’t “get it.”
Everyone has different point of view, and some reason why their world is that way.
So how do we change a thought pattern that no longer works or at least understand someone else’s? After all, the mind believes its pattern is objective reality.
Anyone can change their the thought patterns that form their reality after they realize that it’s possible and they have a tool.
One tool to see and then change thought patterns was developed by Edward de Bono. He called it Thinking Hats.
The Thinking Hat tool is based on the premise that people use different ways of thinking to understand life. These different ways of thinking produce different ideas and reactions to the world.
When you have new ways of thinking you’ll gain new perspectives and ideas.
Thinking Hats has been used to train nurses and vocational students.
But I am suggesting a different use of this tool. I believe we can use this tool to generate ideas on how another person might be thinking.
Using The 6 Thinking Hats To Understand Others.
There are six basic ways of seeing and processing information to form a thought pattern. And each way is assigned a different colored hat.
The Neutral White Hat.
Views itself as an unemotional information gatherer.
The most important things are. “Do we have enough information to make a decision?” and “Is this information valid?”
The Emotional Red Hat.
Pure emotions like fear, love, security without the need to justify itself with facts.
They are not thinking deeply rather they are living the feeling.
The Critical Black Hat
Negative critical thinking, doubt and criticism.
Their first line of thinking tends toward the negative looking for errors.
“We’ve never done this before?” And “ What are the drawbacks to this?”
The Positive Yellow Hat
Focuses on benefits and looks for the upside. It doesn’t want to close the door on an opportunity. “This could really work.”
Concerned about positive assessments.
Seeking forward momentum, wants to make a decision and move on.
The Creative Green Hat
Seeks and explores new ideas and alternatives.
They are provocative and are comfortable with “crazy” ideas.
They won’t settle on a single idea rather they prefer a set of solutions.
The Managerial Blue Hat
The manager wants to be in control of thought and the people.
Makes sure that a process is followed.
If you could assign the other person a Thinking Hat, which color would it be? Are they usually critical? Then maybe they’re a Black Hat. Are their feelings and emotions in the driver’s seat? Possibly they are a Red Hat.
What is your hat color? Is it the same as theirs? If not, can you see how you don’t see eye to eye. Are your words often misinterpreted?
This isn’t a psychological assessment. The intent isn’t to provide a diagnosis. So your assessment can be “wrong,” and the outcome of your mediation or negotiation will still improve.
You Can Be Completely Wrong And Still See An Improvement?
Because, time spent systematically trying to understand someone else’s point of view is never wasted. The breadcrumbs discovered on the trail to what they want is valuable.
And it gets even better.
Try on at least two different colored hats and write down how things would look the same or look different from each perspective. This process tends to surface new thought patterns and help you see the boundaries of your existing thought patterns.
Initially, these patterns may seem slightly crazy. That’s fine, new ideas usually appear off kilter. And as new patterns emerge you may see things that had been breezed over and maybe important points begin to fade.
When we can separate a person from their point of view we are on the path to designing a solution that works for everybody.
What impact other impacts can this have on your offer or mediation?
If you are making an offer to a White Hat, it would be helpful to list the logical reasons that your offer benefits them. An offer made to a Blue Hat could be presented in terms of structure and process.
Things look different when you think differently. And changing Thinking Hats is the first in changing minds.
Ted Andrews is a mediator living in Southern California. He practices throughout California using online tools.
Disclaimer - The information provided in this post is for general information purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. You should not act or rely upon this information without seeking formal professional counsel. The information provided in this post is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship.