Without understanding or empathy, conflict and breakdown are inevitable, says Nelisha Wickremasinghe. And, for that reason, relationships cannot be sustained through power alone
Our family is our first experience of group life, and it is here that we embed lasting memories and habits of how to live amongst others. Later, we play out these learned strategies in adult relationships and in the workplace. Our memories and learnt habits trick us into thinking – unconsciously – that our partners, friends, boss, colleagues and customers are actually the parents, siblings, teachers and extended family members of our childhood. Yet what most of us learn in these early years is how to survive rather than thrive with others.
In our vulnerable and dependent childhood state we focus on securing the attention, approval and love of our caregivers. We want and need to belong, and we will do whatever it takes to ensure we are not rejected from our primary group. Thus, we all start with a deeply rooted fear of conflict.
However, for some of us pleasing others does not bring the security we seek. Some of us learn that fighting back and taking control of situations works better. Others learn that we cannot trust people and so we develop an ‘island mentality’ that enables us to survive in spite of others.
So, there are three patterns of relating to others:
- trying to win love and approval is called moving towards (and connects to an animal’s habit of freezing in the face of danger)
- responding with aggression to take control is called moving against (and connects to an animal’s habit of fighting in the face of danger)
- trying to be independent is called moving away (and connects to an animal’s habit of fleeing in the face of danger)
These three patterns of moving towards, moving against and moving away, when repeatedly enacted in response to perceived danger (my dad might shout at me) or real danger (my dad is shouting at me) can become our habitual threat brain response. In our early ancestors this three-patterned response worked fairly simply as fight, flee or freeze action. But in us it has evolved into a complex sequence of feelings, thoughts and behaviours that can lock us in to unhelpful relational loops because, unlike animals, we can trigger our threat response by imagining danger. Here’s an example:
You have a domineering and sometimes angry father. When you were young, you were rightly afraid of him, and you may have learnt to placate him or to respond to him by shouting back. As an adult, you know perfectly well that not all men are like him. But when you are anxious or under stress, or even if another man’s tone of voice reminds you of him, you can easily respond to others as if they were your father. Sometimes we may even – unconsciously – associate all men in authority with our domineering father. Thus ‘men in authority’ activate our threat brain and in their presence, we default to our pattern of placating (moving towards) or arguing and fighting (moving against) – because this is how we learned to survive the child-parent dynamic. Thus, our relationships with male authority figures are always fraught, even when those men have no intention of harming or controlling us. And our childhood survival strategies play a big role in how we go on to deal with conflict in our lives.
- Tip: Start to become conscious of times when your reactions to others or to certain situations seem too strong or out of proportion. You may find it easiest to notice this first in colleagues – one may be quick to anger while another may be endlessly trying to ‘get it right’ for other people. Then try to observe your own reactions in the same way.
- Tip: Talk about your reactions with others and share feedback to discover how others experience you, and how you experience others.
- Tip: Notice when your threat brain is triggered and practice slow, rhythmic breathing to regulate it. Don’t attempt to contribute in a conversation when you are in threat!
Understanding conflict – the fear of difference
Conflict has its roots in ancient threat brain fear. Our reptilian ancestors with their basic brains reacted to difference in the environment as potential danger.
There are different degrees to which each of us can tolerate difference. Some people thrive on it and the new and unusual is necessary and inspiring. Others spend their entire lives in the same habitual routines, never leaving the town in which they were born, or expanding their social and family network or experimenting. For them difference may be painfully intolerable. Most of us have learned to accept some degree of difference in our lives, and we like to believe we are tolerant, curious, open-minded people. And mostly we are, until, of course, something or someone triggers our threat brain. As we have just seen, when our threat brain is triggered, we can become highly reactive, saying and doing things that cause us problems and that we often regret.
- Tip: Practise valuing difference. Observe someone familiar with ‘fresh eyes’. What fascinates you about them? What do you want to learn/know about them?
One of the most significant differences of which we may be unaware and which causes conflict in our relationships is our preferred mode of communication. The family therapist, David Kantor, identified three core modes: power, affect and meaning. Each mode enables us to achieve different goals. In affect mode, our goals are intimacy, nurturing and trust. In power mode, our goals are making decisions, getting things done and being in control. In meaning mode, our goals are to understand how and why things are the way they are and to define our own identity. Stress occurs in our relationships when these goals are in competition, collide or are misunderstood. Interactions between people become especially difficult and frustrating when one domain dominates.
- Tip: Observe a group or one-to-one conversation that you are part of (friends out for a meal; a work meeting, etc.). What modes of communication are being used? Does one mode dominate?
- Tip: Notice when a conversation is dominated by one mode and see if you can adjust your contribution to introduce a different mode. Actively practise the mode of communication you least prefer.
- Tip: In meetings ensure time is allocated for feelings to be expressed (affect mode) and questions to be asked (meaning mode). Don’t rush to decisions and solutions.
It is in our early families that we learn what matters most. Since most of us grow up in cultures that value producing, achieving, competing and winning, we quickly realise that the language and goal of power has far greater currency than that of affect or meaning. Thus many of us learn to prioritise this mode even though it may not be our preferred style or goal. The consequence is that we learn to value modes of communication that are orientated towards decisions, actions and solutions, and we diminish or silence modes of communication that based on feeling or meaning.
- Tip: Identify your preferred mode of communication and notice if it changes depending on the context. Again, talk about these modes with others and seek feedback to discover how others experience you, and how you experience others.
For healthy communication we need all three modes working well together. Without understanding (meaning) or empathy (affect), conflict and breakdown are inevitable. Relationships cannot be sustained through power alone.
Nelisha Wickremasinghe is a Psychologist, Associate Fellow, Oxford University and author of Being with Others: Curses, spells and scintillation (Triarchy Press), out now fromAmazon.
