Sequence of Events
Our responses to others within a relationship context are influenced by a number of factors. In each situation we experience, there are critical moments or choice points at which we can make conscious decisions about how we will respond.
This depends on the level of consciousness from which we operate (e.g., instrumental, socializing, and self-authoring levels), how self- and other-aware we are, and the skills we have to carry forth our intentions. The degree of self- and other-awareness we have developed in the paradox of knowing is significant in determining the outcomes.We can refer back to our case study to use it as an example. When the Field Office found out about the R&D group’s visit, they could have acknowledged their feelings of being excluded among themselves and bracketed those feelings for the time being, so that they wouldn’t cloud the next stages of the communication. They could have invited the R&D group into a conversation inquiring about the purpose of their visit and seeking to identify ways in which they could be of help. The R&D group may not have been cognizant of the ways in which the Field Office could support them, so we cannot assume that they did know and that this was a deliberate omission. Going forward, they could gather information in advance of any visits to determine the potential needs of their colleagues, continue to build interpersonal relationships so they can build their self-worth and informally learn about pending visits, and perhaps have a larger-scale strategic conversation with others in the organization to fully explore the vision and function of the Field Offices. Another point of consideration is that the Field Offices may not have the capacity to support the R&D initiative, so they may need to discriminate between what they can realistically support and what they have to let Headquarters manage directly.
An example of this transaction can be as follows:
Field Office: We heard you are coming to
our location, and we wondered why we were not notified of your impending visit.
R&D Team: Well, we are meeting with our
R&D counterparts, and since you are not a Business Center and probably don’t offer services to support us, we didn’t think it necessary to involve you.
Field Office: (critical moment of how to
respond) Well, perhaps this is an opportunity for us to understand more about what you need and for you to know more about our capabilities. If we can support you, we would like very much to be involved in ways that makes sense to both of us. If not, then perhaps through our contacts, we can point you in the direction of others who can support you.
This can potentially be a difficult conversation for both parties, especially the Field Office, because of their emotional investment in wanting to be acknowledged and valued. By recognizing and bracketing their emotions to be able to lead with an invitation for an exploratory conversation, the R&D team feels welcomed and not defensive about their past actions. Even if there is not a role for the Field Office to play in this particular event, they set the tone of collaboration and receptivity for others in the organization, and this will be a good foundation from which to grow future relationships.
This places relationship as the highest order of context instead of self for the Field Office and episode for Headquarters. The Hierarchy Model for this interaction could be transformed into this instead, as shown in Figure 30.5.
An important note to consider is that before transforming the individual structuring of context into a shared context, there will be need for recognition and respect placed on the context that each party brings. This is a critical step in the process of building relationship, transforming communication, and thereby changing the nature of our relationships.
There may be instances in which a shared context cannot be achieved, and at least knowing and understanding why we name and place the order of context the way we do as well as why our counterparts select their level of context to act into is a first step toward any type of conflict transformation and potential reconciliation.| Relationship | Self and Other |
| Episode Speech act | |
| Figure 30.5 | Transformed Hierarchy of Context for “Living Well” |
Strategies for
Transforming Conversations
The strategies and techniques mentioned throughout the chapter can be aligned within three main areas: context, self, and other, which are shown in Figure 30.1. Using these three areas to frame how we focus our attention provides us with an organizing mechanism to address the many levels of complexity inherent in communication. This more focused view will aid in transforming our understanding because we have shifted our attention. It also serves as a framework from within which to select the tools that will provide us with the most useful insights to use for developing more constructive relationships.