| Using Your Emotional
Intelligence in Difficult Conversations
by Susan Dunn
There you are with your boss, let’s say, and you find
yourself to be under attack. Do you use your EQ and announce
that you feel attacked, or intimated, afraid or belittled?
Let’s divide that question into two parts.
Do you use your EQ? Definitely. Do you announce how you’re
feeling? No. Not necessarily. EQ is about emotions, but it’s
also about rational thinking.
The crux of emotional intelligence is understanding your emotions
and then using the information they give you. You need to
hold on to that first part and be able to wait. There will
be times when you want to reveal what you’re feeling
(verbally or nonverbally) and times when you do not.
Whatever you decide to do, it must be intentional. That is,
if you want to escalate, do so consciously. If you want to
de-intensify, do so consciously. If you need to buy time to
think, you must be able to throw something out that resembles
participation and interest, but means nothing, the sole purpose
of which is to give you time to think carefully so as not
to self-sabotage.
A gut-level reaction of discomfort on your part will signal
you that things are not going well, and this is what you need
to pay attention to.
It’s important not to confuse yourself by judging your
emotional response. Being sensitive and reacting strongly
may be temperamental, but they’re on a spectrum we all
have, and if you get strong signals, they should also be clear,
which is fine, and maybe even beneficial. One reason people
are “clueless,” is because they aren’t able
to read and interpret their own emotional reactions or those
of others. In the last analysis, it’s what you DO about
emotional information that matters.
When you don‘t have enough information, and you sense
the person isn’t leveling with you, or has some hidden
agenda, or is couching insults in loaded innuendos, stop and
think. It’s imprudent to reveal how you’re feeling,
because, for instance, if you’re dealing with what might
as well be termed a “bully,” they are going for
the fear reaction, and you don’t want to reinforce that.
In any adversarial position, revealing your feelings tips
your hand, and the opponent (which is what this person has
revealed himself or herself to be) then has more information
that you do. They are often “groping,” and you
want to leave them with empty hands, figuratively speaking.
The second part of EQ is to take the message from the emotion
without acting and move on to think rationally about what
you’re going to do. This includes both words and actions.
You need to be monitoring your nonverbal behaviors as well,
as they are often more revealing than one’s words.
If your hands are shaking, put them under your desk or in
your pockets or behind your back. If your knees are knocking
together, sit down and cross your legs, or sit forward and
put your hands on your knees. Keep your eye contact and expressions
neutral. You don’t want to escalate, and most importantly,
you want to avoid taking the bait and becoming emotional and
irrational.
What’s the bait? Something in what’s being said
that’s designed to insult or provoke you, and it can
be sandwiched amidst many things, including pseudo-compliments.
For instance, “I know you’re doing the best you
can, and considering what you’re going through, it’s
admirable but…”
The bait is … just what is it that you’re “going
through”? If you open your mouth with what’s on
your mind you hand your head over on a platter. Let’s
face it, most of us would have something in mind if that were
said, and it wouldn’t be something good. That’s
just human nature. The speaker implies there’s something
wrong with us, and few among us couldn’t come up with
a name for that amorphous something. It might be The Divorce,
or being fat, or being on anti-depressants, or being gay,
or having cancer, or being pregnant. [The general theory of
“baiting” and this particular sequence are outlined
in “The Gentle Art of Verbal Self-Defense,” by
Suzette Haden Elgin]
The person may or may not be driving at something in particular,
but the point is that you ignore the dig, and get to the facts
of the matter – something you can deal with in a rational
manner.
If you can become rational and remain there, you can ask questions
that direct the conversation toward something specific, i.e.,
a late report, a poor presentation, or something concrete
and behavioral. If you are at fault, you can address that.
If the boss is out-of-line, you can, with tact, pursue this
further.
Conversations that feel like sparring matches are just that,
and if you don’t get it, you’re going to mark
yourself as a future ready-target. You can count on the fact
that more will follow.
An honest and authentic discussion feels good, and you can
show some vulnerability. At attack situation feels bad, and
you must defend yourself.
In “The Gentle Art of Verbal Self-Defense,” Elgin
gives many good examples of sentences which indicate you’re
shadow-boxing and I refer you to her excellent book for examples
and sample responses that work.
Some of them are:
If you really …
Even you should …
Everyone understands why you …
Reading these – removed from the heat
of the moment –you can quickly see that they are fishing,
vague, and full of hidden implications. For instance, if someone
says to you: “It would seem to me that if you cared…”
this implies, but does not directly state, that you do not
care. That’s what you address, says Elgin, not whatever
follows.
You’re likely to react emotionally in one of two ways.
Either you will become angry at the insinuation, or you will
realize the person is either incompetent or plain out mean,
or both, and be disgusted (and perhaps afraid).
As Ms. Elgin so eloquently puts it, “As in any other
martial art, unnecessary force is dishonorable and merely
indicates that you are either an amateur or a sadist.”
We do not like to see someone go after a gnat with a machine
gun, whether it’s ourselves or someone else, and so
we react to this emotionally.
In either case, if you remain in the emotional state, you’re
likely not to handle yourself well. It is annoying to be insulted.
In your anger, you may spill, babbling things that don’t
advance your cause. It is infuriating when the person won’t
come out and fight in the open. You may then lash out, or
withdraw and appear arrogant, and hang yourself in your silence.
Most of the battles you’ll engage in nowadays are verbal
battles, and you need to be prepared. In some circles, and
with some individuals, it’s a traditional mode of communication.
How you handle these interchanges is all predicated on your
emotional intelligence, i.e., your ability to hold your emotions
at bay when under attack, think rationally, and proceed without
self-sabotaging. And generally speaking, the more confidence
you have in your ability to handle yourself in adversarial
verbal situations, the less likely they are to occur.
Get some coaching and get some practice. It will pay off.
Keywords: relationships, love, work, communication,
anger, stress, self-defense
About the Author
Susan Dunn, San Antonio, TX, USA
sdunn@susandunn.cc
http://www.susandunn.cc
Susan Dunn, MA, Psychology, Emotional Intelligence Coach,
http://www.susandunn.cc . Coaching, Internet courses and ebooks
around emotional intelligence for career, relationships, transitions,
resilience, personal and professional development. Mailto:sdunn@susandunn.cc
for free ezine.
|
