When approaching conflict, most people aim to get their way, while others try to find common ground. This is a mistake authors Robert Bordone and Joel Salinas say.
In their new book “Conflict Resilience: Negotiating Disagreement Without Giving Up or Giving In” the two argue that trying to solve conflict strips the interaction of its value and that you’ll gain more from having those tough conversations if you’re trying to learn, not trying to win.
“We think of conflict as having the possibility for furthering connection and for actually building a relationship,” Bordone says. He is the founder and former director of the Harvard Negotiation and Mediation Clinical Program.
People who are good at navigating conflict don’t have the mindset that disputes are bad.
There are certain areas of disagreement that it’s just impossible to resolve
Joel Salinas
behavioral neurologist and clinician scientist
“If your orientation about what you’re going into is so negative, it’s just much harder to be adept at it than if you have a different and, I would just say, more accurate frame on it,” Bordone says.
In fact, they see it as an opportunity to validate the other person’s side. Instead of coming in with a list of points, they prioritize listening and asking questions.
“The work of being conflict resilient is entering into a landscape that doesn’t have a script because it’s motivated by a sense of curiosity about something of the other person,” Bordone says.
Salinas, a behavioral neurologist and clinician scientist at New York University, says people who excel at handling skirmishes — whether in their personal life or the workplace — also know that sometimes its unrealistic to expect to see eye-to-eye.
“There are certain areas of disagreement that it’s just impossible to resolve,” he says.
A conversation is not a ‘chance to score points’
To bridge divides over the course of a conversation, you need to actually try to understand the other person’s fears, Kurt Gray, a social psychology professor at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill and author of “Outraged: Why We Fight About Morality and Politics and How to Find Common Ground,” told CNBC Make It earlier this year.
“So often we go into these conversations and it’s not a conversation,” Gray says. “It’s a chance to score points or try to make the other person look stupid. A real conversation is something where you ask questions.”
Gray recommends taking three steps to have better conversations when you’re in a disagreement with someone:
- Try to understand their motivation: Ask questions and express genuine curiosity as to how they came to their conclusion.
- Validate that motivation: Even if you don’t agree with their point, you can affirm that you understand how they got there.
- Emphasize your personal connection: Instead of peppering them with facts, be vulnerable and tell them why you disagree with them on a personal level.
Others are more likely to find some merit in your argument if you share a personal anecdote, as opposed to some statistics, to show why you stand where you do.
“Establishing a connection with someone, seeing them as a fellow human being, I think it goes a long way,” Gray says.
Both of you will leave feeling better and more respected if you at least make an attempt to understand each other.
Want to earn some extra money on the side? Take CNBC’s new online course How to Start a Side Hustle to learn tips to get started and strategies for success from top side hustle experts. Sign up today and use coupon code EARLYBIRD for an introductory discount of 30% off $97 (+taxes and fees) through April 1, 2025.
Plus, sign up for CNBC Make It’s newsletter to get tips and tricks for success at work, with money and in life.
