Chapter 1: Identify the Trigger 1 Identify the Trigger Think about a friend or relative of yours suffering from a malady or medical condition. Though we might wish that the list of debilitating conditions was much shorter, or that our loved ones could be immune from illness, sickness is a fact of life. Crohn's disease, epilepsy, diabetes, depression, back pain, anxiety, chronic migraines, and on and on... mental and physical anguish is no joking matter, life-threatening or not. It breaks our hearts to see a loved one in pain. Now, imagine, for a second, your loved one being ridiculed for their ailment. It's bad enough to encounter ignorance... the boss of a loved one with colitis not allowing bathroom breaks during a meeting, your family member with depression being "advised" to snap out of it, a perfectly healthy stranger pulling their car into a handicapped parking space. It's a whole other level of frustration to witness someone intentionally poking fun at your loved one for a struggle of theirs that is no fault of their own. Frustration is much too mild of a descriptor. Cue Will Smith. By now you've probably heard about "The Slap." In 2022, Will Smith won his very first Oscar--best actor in a leading role for King Richard -- thirty-seven years into a legendary career. To say it was an emotional night for him would be an equally legendary understatement. Full of nerves, anticipation, hope, joy, pride, and more, Will sat front row while Chris Rock, albeit innocently enough, sought a few laughs at the expense of Will's wife, Jada, who suffers from alopecia areata. Smith's cauldron of emotion boiled over. He marched up on stage and gave Chris the business. In the language of our business: Will got Triggered. Emotions can get the best of us, the most reserved of us. We can suddenly flip from rational, thoughtful, mild-mannered Bruce Banner into some crazed compilation of Lou Ferrigno and Edward Norton. This is in no way because we're bad people, or even unskilled at emotional regulation. It's because a button gets pushed. Something to which we have a pronounced sensitivity gets called out excessively, or uncomfortably or inappropriately. At such a juncture, we are vulnerable to doing or saying things that we otherwise wouldn't condone. We are vulnerable to being Triggered. Just like Will. "Whatever is emotional is opposed to that true cold reason which I place above all things." --Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (as Sherlock Holmes) Interestingly, not all stressors are created equal. A conversation that Triggers you might not Trigger your spouse. A situation that doesn't bother you in the least bit (one you might not even notice) could regularly upset your neighbor. We each have particular peccadillos. Awareness of others' hyperacuities is paramount to great relationships, teamwork, and fostering positively collegial environments. But how in the world are we to know everyone's particulars in the vast sea of pet peeves? It turns out that disagreements, friction, strife, discord, arguments, clashes, and the like--interpersonal instances when someone loses or feels a lack of control, when they can't pull the puppet strings the way they want--can be grouped into three core categories, called Conflict Types. The good news: successfully navigating interpersonal tension--more productively stated, maintaining harmony--doesn't require the depth of friendship or trust that would be needed to understand all the nuances of someone's disposition. Complete strangers can overcome obstacles to collaborating. Having history is helpful, but, elegantly, half the battle of preventing dustups is being cognizant of which distinct type of conflict is most apt to Trigger you and which type is most apt to Trigger the people in your personal and professional circles. The three Conflict Types are as follows: Task Conflict. Task Conflict centers on getting things done --done by their deadlines and in their required quantities... no matter how. You might hear, "The ends justify the means." Task Conflict flares up when due dates or target goals are unmet. Process Conflict. Process Conflict centers on the way things get done. Someone experiencing Process Conflict is not concerned with specific end goals or their delivery dates; they care, instead, about the methods, systems, or policies being employed. A "my way or the highway" attitude may come into play. Relational Conflict. Relational Conflict centers on the people involved in a disagreement and their individual habits, quirks, preferences, and tastes. In Relational Conflict, the parties will fight over anything... simply because they just don't like one another. When there seems to be no functional, objective rhyme or reason for a dispute, you probably have Relational Conflict on your hands. A word of warning: we tend to have a blind spot for our own Triggers. That's part and parcel of how we get Triggered in the first place. When approaching pressure-packed interactions, people frequently make the mistake of not self-assessing, not taking a thirty-second time-out to ask themselves whether they are, or might become, Triggered by the circumstances. Before entering the ring, ask yourself: Is the subject of the presenting pressure a task, a process, or a relationship? Admittedly, for this pregnant pause to be effective, you must know which of the three Conflict Types is your hamartia--your gateway to potential irrationality. To aid you, let's play a little game. We'll present you with three scenarios. Take your time and, as vividly as you can, envision being in the middle of each one. What does it feel like? What emotions might be bubbling below the surface? In striving to visualize (really, feelize ) each scenario, try to pinpoint which would most make you want to slam your head into the nearest wall. Read through each script, dwelling after each to mentally put yourself into the moment. Then, after enacting them all in your mind, pick the one that would generate, for you personally, the greatest amount of frustration, anger, annoyance, anxiety, or exhaustion. Ready? Go! SCENARIO 1 A decade ago, you took a giant leap of faith, quit your job, took out a small business loan (which, honestly, you couldn't afford), and launched your own business. It was scary but exciting. With failure not an option, you poured in your proverbial blood, sweat, and tears--every available waking hour. Over the ten years that have ensued, you've taken only one vacation, but your commitment to this longshot is beginning to pay off. Your start-up just hit midsize business status, last month reaching the one-hundred-employee mark. To celebrate, you decided to take a ten-day beach-lounging excursion to Hawaii with your significant other, to whom you promised that you wouldn't check e-mail for the entire duration. For the recent company expansion, you brought on a hot-shot prodigy in your profession named Jasmine from Texas A&M University (whoop) to oversee the operations of the business. While you think highly of Jazz, it took everything you had to relinquish day-to-day control. Before departing, you hand Jazz a priority list with seventeen items you deem essential for her to complete before you return. She of course agrees and says she's "on it," but not exactly in a confidence-exuding tone. You board your flight on Monday, switching on your e-mail's vacation settings, and prepare to kick back. Tuesday is wonderfully restful. Wednesday features a nice waterfall hike and drinks seaside in the evening. An unplanned Thursday starts out in a beach hammock, flipping pages of a spy novel you bought at the airport... but your mind begins to wander. You find yourself wondering, How is Jazz doing with the tasks I assigned her? Is she running into any hiccups? Might she need my advice on anything? You sneak a peek at your phone while your significant other is nodding off. Logging into e-mail you see a screen-scrolling litany of unread messages. Clicking over to your company's customer relationship management platform, you find that no progress has been reported on any of the seventeen priorities you tasked to Jasmine. Two of them have yellow blinking caution symbols, which indicate that a customer has reported an error or complaint. SCENARIO 2 Jump back to the beginning of scenario 1 but tweak the narrative. You're still the sole owner of a start-up into which you've devoted ten years of copious time and personal resources, all at the expense of your family, arduously growing the business to one hundred employees and, at long last, profitability. You've accomplished this by singlehandedly developing a systematic process that just won a J. D. Power award in your industry sector for systems efficiency. You are so proud of the accomplishment. It has provided for your recent, confident workforce expansion (of course, taking out a substantially larger line of credit to fund). You relied on the process to guide job descriptions, interviews, and hires. The process has even permitted you to finally step back from day-to-day managerial activities and take the trip to the Aloha State that you and your significant other have always dreamed about. Of course, this wasn't without hiccups. You tried hiring a COO--Steve, who turned out to be a jerk. In addition to ruining numerous previous vacation plans of yours, Steve had to be fired amid much hullabaloo for his complete lack of delivery in performance. That debacle set you back at least two years. So, before nailing down your plans for Hawaii, you made sure to methodically work through the decision to hire Margaret, a Stanford MBA grad with an incredible résumé, impeccable references, and a task-master reputation. With a feeling of relief that Margaret is a 180-degree pivot from Steve, you welcome her to the company, turn over the keys, and smile when she very soothingly and assuredly tells you, "There's nothing to worry about; I'm on top of it." You sense you are in such a good place that you don't even take your phone on vacation with you. Ten days of bliss and a nice, deep tan ensue. When your plane touches down upon returning, you call Margaret to thank her for accommodating your unplugging and to let her know you look forward to seeing her tomorrow morning. Margaret doesn't answer. You get her secretary, who can hardly talk straight: "It's a disaster here! Margaret scrapped the process you built! We've been frantically trying to reach you, but you forgot to leave a copy of your itinerary and we didn't know which resort you booked. We started cold-calling all the hotels on Oahu, Maui, Kauai. The seventeen-point priority list... it's like 170 items long now. I think we're going to go bankrupt!" The line cuts out as your plane stops taxiing. What the #$@&?! The only words of advice you left with Margaret when you departed were follow the process ! SCENARIO 3 Erase the previous two simulations from your mind. Now, conjure up a pressure-packed Fortune 500 environment. You're a midlevel manager at a behemoth, publicly traded company that practices Jack Welch-style "rank and yank" employment policies. You are overworked. Exhausted. You want more than anything to finish out this quarter and escape to a leisurely two-week New Year's holiday with your family. It's December 1. Your production numbers are wavering around the lower threshold that your boss typically uses to trim staff and cut budgetary inefficiencies each January. But at no fault of your own, you feel, given recent market declines in your industry. When you get into the office on Monday, you are greeted by a red exclamation-point-tagged e-mail from your boss titled "URGENT." The body of the message merely says, "See attachment." You click it. Up pops a litany of seventeen things that must be finished before the company shuts down at noon on Christmas Eve. Ugh. How many hours are there between now and then if you work fifteen-hour days and don't take off any weekends? Is it even possible? You crack open the lid of your triple espresso caramel macchiato, close the blinds, lock your door, and prepare to grind. A mere ten minutes into your first report, you hear knock, knock, knock . You ignore it. Knock, knock, knock. Knock, knock, knock . Reluctantly, you open the door. Your colleague, Bob, who might also be on the chopping block come January, barges in, plops down on your couch, and proceeds to elaborate (in no short words) on every detail of office drama, his family drama, his girlfriend drama, and especially every imagined slight from your coworker Clare, who, by the way, you are counting on to close one of your biggest yet most failure-teetering projects. By the time Bob leaves your office, you're almost happy to dive into your boss's task list--cake compared to listening to Bob! SCENARIO 3B Just for fun, let's give scenario 3 an alternate-ending twist. The backstory is the same. But instead of it being Q4 with a month-long grind ahead of you, it's the last week of June. Your Mr. Spacely-esque boss has been breathing fire up and down the halls of your office building, threatening to rescind bonuses, cull the weak from the herd, and do a massive reorg if your team doesn't hit its quarterly numbers. You'd lose outstanding staff, people who'd become dear friends, whose families you care deeply about supporting. Production has been teetering, looking like it might fall into the red. When you click on the URGENT e-mail, you roll your eyes at seeing yet another mismanagement effort. You get those kinds of messages from your boss on a regular basis. "Your precious 'rank and yank' is going to get you one of these days" you mutter under your breath. You know that a laundry list of to-dos would only derail your people, inciting nervousness, shifting concentration away from what's really important. DELETE. You call an impromptu team meeting, give your best "win one for the Gipper" speech, pat everyone on the back, and get down to business. While you make sure your people get home for their family dinners every night, you stay late. You hit it as hard as you've ever worked. Your team is inspired. They step up, you find a new reserve of energy (and buy stock in Rauch Fruchtsäfte GmbH & Co. OG--Red Bull's manufacturer), and, together, crush it. It's now Friday, June 30. What a helluva week! At noon, you stroll into your boss's suite and plop a printout of your Q2 final report on his desk. Thirty percent above target revenue. Ten percent under budget. "Thank you for the motivational push," you say. The figures are so sexy, you doubt he hears your sarcasm. You don't care; it feels great to stick it to him. Grinning ear to ear, you walk out. One by one, you hug each of your employees as you tell them to get out of there and take the whole week of July 4 off. What a sense of satisfaction. You jump in your car and hit the road. It's as hot as... well, it's hot , and you run into early weekend traffic. You don't mind. Cold margaritas and a weekend of just-you indulgence awaits. You've got the windows down and your XM radio cranked up. Your favorite song is playing. Nothing could spoil your mood. Until... Your cell phone buzzes. You answer without looking at the caller ID (you're a conscientious, hands-free driver, of course). It's the one family member you hate getting cornered by--the ultimate drama queen (or king). Extended family politics being as complicated as they are, you can't easily excuse yourself and hang up. Your relative launches into a tirade about a family disagreement that's been brewing. The family member calling you has been making it worse than it should be. Way worse, it turns out. An intervention has been scheduled for tomorrow. You feel your blood begin to boil. Your hard-earned, carefree weekend just got snatched away from you... glorious R&R suddenly supplanted by two days full of dealing with he said, she said BS. So which scenario would be likely to cause you the most discomfort? All three can toggle your switches. But for most people, one is more apt to hit home than the others. If scenario 1 makes your pulse race to the point where the little vein in your forehead starts popping out, you are Task Triggered. If scenario 2 causes your left eye to begin twitching such that your family members duck for cover, you are Process Triggered. If scenario 3 or 3B makes you wish you were instead listening, on repeat, to the sound of someone's nails screeching down a chalkboard, you are Relationship Triggered. If all three situations give you an identically stark "Emotional EKG" spike... stop reading; put this book down and go to your nearest emergency room! All kidding aside, sometimes more than one Conflict Type can Trigger a person. It's not common though. Usually, one of the three scenarios is distinctively more pronounced than the others in the angst elicited. For instance, when contemplating time, you might pose to yourself, "Does it bother me when someone misses a due date?" You might think, Yes, of course . But how would you respond to that someone explaining, as to why they didn't get their work done in a timely fashion, "I wanted to make sure to get the job done right"? Do you admit, "Well, yeah, that is more important in most cases"? If so, while you may prefer it when people adhere to deadlines, you are Process Triggered rather than Task Triggered. Alternatively, your posture may be, "I don't like it when people are late. And I don't like it when people don't pay attention to details. What really bugs me, though, is when my boss does those things!" You look at tasks and processes as valuable commodities. But they don't launch you over a cliff. In this instance, you are Relationship Triggered. Of course, it's possible that the scenarios we presented didn't have much of an effect on you (assuming you gave it the good ole college try in terms of genuinely internalizing the scenes). That's not a reflection on your Triggers; it's a factor of our choice of illustrations. You might, for example, find scenario 1 to be entirely unrealistic; if you were in Hawaii with your partner, you'd have zero desire to check your phone. Or you'd never hand over the reins of a company or project or assignment to someone else, thus making both scenarios 1 and 2 nonstarters. (Granted, an inability to delegate, or having an underlying compulsion to be in control of tasks or processes, suggests that there is a Trigger in there somewhere, but we digress.) Perhaps you dismiss scenarios 3 and 3B because, when you're in the zone (for either work or fun), door-knocks and phone ringtones don't exist. What ringtone? You pop on your Bose high-def, noise-canceling headphones or turn off your phone when it's go-time--or me-time. You're agile at doing do-si-dos when it comes to family members, or, in your family, drama tends to be overblown and fizzles out if you let it. All these situations might be a pain in the buttocks to deal with, but they don't cause, for you, a highly visceral reaction. If so, it's probably the case that we didn't pick examples particularly germane to your life. Try to think of alternate narratives that you know would give you the psychological version of hives or heebie-jeebies. Remember the last time you felt X. What were the factors? Is the crux of the conflict hitting to-do or time targets (a Task Trigger), process or policy adherence (a Process Trigger), or a basic dislike of someone or someone's personality (a Relational Trigger)? By putting your mental imagery talents to work, you can explore what sorts of things truly drive you batty and, thus, discover which Conflict Type will Trigger you. It's also possible that no matter how authentically you try to mentally simulate them, none of the core Conflict Types get a rouse out of you. If this is the case, we're sorry but, no, it doesn't mean you are a superhero. (Well, you could be a superhero; superheroes have Triggers too!) It merely means that your Trigger is likely to, instead, be out on a more extended branch of the Conflict Type tree. There are a few relatives: Emotion. A specific emotion displayed by another person, or a specific emotion elicited in you, causes your brain to go haywire. Maybe you can't stand intolerant people, or jealousy drives you bonkers, for example. This is a cousin of Relational Conflict, but a certain emotion (or emotions) in general rather than the emotional dynamics of a particular relationship or a particular person is your Relational Trigger. Events. You find yourself, from time to time, getting nutty over a specific action taken by another person, or a specific phrase someone might say, or a stance they might take. For instance, you get pissed when you're interrupted, or your skin crawls when someone refers to himself in the third person. This is an interpersonal stepsibling of Process Conflict. Note, however, it's the action, the phrase, or the event that is your Process Trigger since the Triggering can occur regardless of who is involved--that is, it's not about certain individuals. Time. Time pressure, such as feeling like the face of a clock on the wall is staring over your shoulder, or a volume of work with a limited window in which to juggle it all, causes you to short-circuit. This is Task Conflict's fraternal twin. Conditions. You might be thrown off your game by overall environmental conditions. These Triggers can be internal, such as being out of homeostasis (being too hot or too cold, being overtired, being dehydrated, having a headache or low blood sugar, or having to go to the bathroom). Or these Triggers can be external, such as being in a place full of chaotic visual or auditory distractions, or the general malaise of a gray, rainy day. Yes, Conditional Triggers might make you snap, but they aren't really Conflict Types. They are highly transitory; they persist only until the condition dissipates and thus, though equally as powerful as other Triggers, control over them can be restored more easily, regardless of the tasks, processes, or relational variables involved. In contemplating this matter, you might realize that you have a combination of Triggers, or situationally specific ones, or multiple Triggers spanning from your work life to your home life. That's perfectly normal. Just keep in mind, please, that figuring out your (and then your colleagues', friends', and family members') Triggers is not a point-scoring exercise. This is crucial to understand: you are not a better person or a more skilled professional if you have fewer Triggers or more concrete ones. One kind of Trigger is not healthier or superior to another. There is no one "Trigger Profile" that predicts future job performance or things like marital bliss. Nor does having fewer or less frequent Triggers correlate with happiness. And finally, no one is "Trigger free." Acknowledgment is the first step toward growth; how we handle our Triggers is a fundamental determinant of our character. The key to all this is awareness--knowing what Conflict Type Triggers you, needles at you distractingly, brings out a bad habit or two, causes you to lose perspective. When we get Triggered, we tend to skip self-care and bypass conflict prevention steps. But when we maintain awareness of our Triggers, our emotion is less apt to escalate or, if it does start to escalate, we're more apt to remember the tactics we have at our disposal. We stay levelheaded. We're better equipped to solve problems. And we're better able to move through conflict rather than getting mired in it. How about detecting others' Triggers? Do a Trigger Analysis. Pick a relative, friend, or coworker. Reflect on the last time they got sideways with you or were perturbed by something you said or did. Take your time; fully reimagine the situation or circumstance so that you have a vivid, realistic feeling for the moment. Then, ask a round of questions: 1. Was the focus of the disagreement or tension primarily on what was or wasn't done (or a quantity of honey-dos not accomplished), the time it took to complete, or a deadline that was missed or moved? Yes? Your loved one or colleague is likely Task Triggered. No? Move on to question number two. 2. Was the matter of contention about how something was done, a course of action that was taken (or wasn't taken, but your relative, friend, or coworker felt it should have been)? Was there a problem with some kind of policy, procedure, system, or stance? If a blinking neon "yes" sign pops to mind, the person you are imagining is probably Process Triggered. None of these? Go to question number three. 3. Did your family member or work associate make nontopical personal attacks? Was a wide or patternless range of justifications offered for their ruffled feathers rather than something consistently connected to Task Conflict or Process Conflict? Did they harp on your relationship with them? Did they express an emotion seemingly out of context or non sequitur in scale? Did they pick a fight? Just when the friction between you two began to subside, did they make an intentional effort to stoke the fire? Does this person, in general, not get along well with you (especially across a spectrum of issues)? In contemplating these questions, if you are thinking, "Oh yeah, and then some," the person you are doing a Trigger Analysis of is almost certainly, you guessed it, Relationship Triggered. Unsure? If you answer "no" or "I don't know" to all three questions, perhaps there was a Conditional Trigger involved in the episode you envisioned. Did the problem occur when your relative, friend, or coworker was sleep-deprived or hungover? Had they not eaten breakfast or lunch? Were they late for another appointment? When a Conditional Trigger is at play, there may not be an actual conflict or, at least, you can't make a Trigger determination. You'll need to start again. Think of another clash and run through the Trigger Analysis anew. Here's a flowchart to provide you with an assist: Trigger Analysis If you get to the bottom right-hand corner of the tree yet there doesn't appear to be a Conditional or Transitory Trigger you can put your finger on, you may not know the person in question well enough to figure out their Trigger(s) from a single episode. Or they are adept at hiding their Triggers; some folks are self-conscious of their Triggers, actively working to deflect or downplay them. A redo is required. To confidently predict which Conflict Type is apt to Trigger someone, it helps to consider multiple data points. Run a variety of skirmishes, scuffles, and squabbles through the Trigger Analysis, including ones that don't involve you. Try to ascertain the common denominator: Does it tend to be tasks or processes or relationships at the center of things that upset a special someone? The more pain points of the people around you that you can assess via a Trigger Analysis, the more inoculated you'll be against conflict; you'll have the intel to ward off fights and fracases, to turn the tables when others' communication starts heading in an unproductive direction. Knowing people's Triggers gives you armor against two prevalent mistakes--two mistakes opposite of each other but both critical to preventing conflict. One: treating all debates or differences of opinion as cauldrons of conflict. When you jump to a conclusion that someone is going to react poorly, subconsciously you treat them differently. You put up your guard, unnaturally overemphasize or deemphasize subjects, don your kid gloves. Subconsciously they, in turn, pick up on your changed behavior, posture, or language. They change their own behavior, posture, or language as a reflex. The interaction becomes clunky, contrived, uncomfortable. A problem has been created where there wasn't or needn't have been one. The self-fulfilling prophecy is in high gear. The error made here is treating a non-Triggered interaction as more problematic than it is. There are plenty of occasions when disagreements are of a Conflict Type that is not the dominant Trigger for anyone involved. If you know the parties' Triggers, you'll recognize when no one is going to lose their head. Your work is already done. All you must do is stay out of the way and be patient. Issues between people who are not Triggered almost always resolve themselves amicably, on their own, through the normal course of communication and "business as usual." This is because untriggered people do not experience a disruptive emotion spike; their temperature remains moderate enough to allow for rational conversation and problem-solving. They can see the issues fundamentally for what they are and make logical adjustments effortlessly. In fact, we tend to eschew use of the word conflict with these kinds of situations. We recommend you do the same. Two: failing to spot when someone's cheese is about to slide off their cracker. In other words, you are working on a problem that isn't a Trigger for you, but you haven't stopped to realize that it is a Trigger for another person in the equation. You assume everything is hunky-dory. You overlook their budding frustration. You accidently push their buttons. The problem escalates unnecessarily. When confronting a challenge that is "no biggie" for you, don't presume that it won't annoy, worry, or fluster someone else. You'll be way ahead of the game if you query, Will someone be Triggered by this challenge? And when the answer is yes, remember that in the face of significant stressors, people by and large skip over things such as assessment and planning; they can only see the situation as one big mess of conflict or unilaterally become fixated on one small detail. Under pressure, the tendency, for even the most pensive and talented of us, is to try to tackle "conflict" itself rather than the type of conflict. When pushed, pulled, or stretched, resist labeling the problem in general terms such as people not getting along, not seeing eye to eye, not trying to work together. That is a doomed recipe, dismissing the nuances of people's individual sensitivities. Each Conflict Type has a distinct methodology for achieving a positive outcome, each based on a set of variables. The key variables are as follows: Level and type of emotion. Timing of when issues should be addressed. Setting where issues are best addressed. Let's learn the techniques for each of the three Conflict Types. TACKLING TASK CONFLICT People Triggered by Task Conflict like to work quickly; they get in, get the job done, and get out. They are to-do list makers and love to cross things off their lists. Many despise having those dots next to e-mail messages, indicating "unread." Task Conflict Triggerees are appointment keepers. They hate it when meetings get postponed (a Trigger in itself). Having to wait for someone who is tardy drives them up a wall. And they can be clock-watchers who tend to rush later in the day or when a deadline is approaching. They can even seem like they are always in a hurry. As a result, they may be perceived as sloppy, whether they actually are or not. They don't concern themselves with how things are getting done, nor the person or people doing them. They only care that things are getting done. Task Triggered people may be viewed as high strung or impatient. This is not because of any lack of concern for people around them; it's that their focus is on completing work, checking checkboxes. Interestingly, this type of Triggeree is typically a good employee or entrepreneur but struggles with managerial duties, particularly delegating. Folks who are Task Triggered often attempt to avoid Task Conflict altogether by completing all the tasks on their horizon themselves. Group work tends to stress them out, especially when a group member works slowly or meticulously; they'd rather do an entire project solo than worry about someone else not doing a part on time. Those sensitive to Task Conflict may have an aversion to outsourcing or delegating jobs. Upon jobs with soft deadlines, they will generally want to impose firmer delivery dates. It's important to clarify here: deadlines, in and of themselves, are not the problem for people who are Task Triggered. Fundamentally, they like deadlines and the order that comes with them; they are usually quite uncomfortable with projects that don't have any time parameters. What causes feelings of conflict for Task Triggered people is working with others who don't hold the same appreciation for, who don't prioritize, the completion of tasks. Those who are Task Triggered try to take care of everything sans assistance, and it can work... until it doesn't. Keep in mind that Task Triggered people may be in conflict because they're already deep in a hole; maybe they've been juggling a mountainous load and find themselves forced to do a handoff, or they predicted the mountain climb ahead, asked for help, but the help isn't keeping up with them. In either case, they are already on edge when outsourcing the completion of a task so they will get Triggered much faster than those who are impacted by Process Conflict or Relational Conflict. It's important to also keep in mind that every Trigger type has substantial strengths. Someone who is Task Triggered can be counted on under time pressure. They excel at juggling multiple balls without dropping them or burning out. They get the job done. Task Triggerees require little oversight and take constructive criticism well. Since Task Conflicts center around trust and responsibility and are escalated by a worry that to-do items are not going to be completed (or won't be completed on time), the longer it takes to settle the problem (and the less proactive people are in settling the problem), the more anxiety will rise in Task Triggered folks. Task Conflict is best tackled by doing the following: 1. Focus on the type of emotion involved. You might think that frustration or anger would dominate the interpersonal friction in Task Conflict. The emotions displayed often look that way, but those are typically only surface manifestations. Beneath them, the true emotion elicited by Task Conflict is stress, a sense of pressure, and high anxiety. So strive to help Task Triggered people feel as if their issue is being handled quickly and efficiently. Tone is important: lower your voice in both amplitude and tempo. Communicate that the situation is being handled, and affirm that you care about completing the task as much as they do. 2. Attend to timing. Task Conflict is inextricably intertwined with a sense of urgency to get to-do items resolved. Not surprisingly, therefore, Task Conflict resolution hinges on moving expediently. The when outranks the how. Task Conflicts must be addressed now . Not soon, not quickly. Immediately. The acronym ASAP may be tossed around loosely for a range of office assignments, but when Task Conflict arises, "as soon as possible" is vital. The longer the conflict festers, the more upset Task Triggerees will become and the more the trouble will escalate. Not because these folks are bad actors, selfishly stomping their feet. Rather, because of their desire to quash problems. Addressing task-oriented challenges early, before someone gets Triggered, will prevent them from bubbling over with blinding, counterproductive emotions. 3. Realize, and give hearing to, the fact that people Triggered by Task Conflict have a need to feel that action is being taken. The best way to assure them that their concerns are being headed is to engage with them directly, personally. Avoid bogging things down by incorporating lots of people. Definitely steer clear of any kind of e-mailing (or other digital) back-and-forth that inserts a pseudo barrier between the parties. This leads to inefficient communication, adds yet another entry on their "Today's Agenda" calendar (responding to your message), creates another step in arranging meetings, and can seem like you're attempting to stall or minimize the immediacy of the situation. Pick up the phone and get on it! Or better yet, if it's an internal issue, get your fanny over to their office. PROPITIATING PROCESS CONFLICT People Triggered by Process Conflict are "quality over quantity" souls. They care more about the journey than the destination. They are the opposite of Task Conflict Triggerees regarding the pace of their efforts. Process Conflict Triggerees prefer to methodically pursue ideal results or what they deem is "right." But it's more nuanced than just arriving at a correct outcome. They aren't satisfied with a company or team win if inadvisable shortcuts were taken, or if the win was more luck than it was well-crafted performance. Achievements that aren't polished, and sustainably so, aren't acceptable. Take the basketball analogy of "moving the rock." It's a euphemism that refers to the offensive merits of making enough passes--and crisp, accurate passes--to create openings that lead to high percentage shots. A Process Triggered player who believes in moving the rock is likely to rip a teammate a new one (be it on the spot or in the locker room away from cameras), even when that teammate puts up thirty points or hits a game-winner, if that teammate failed to pass the ball per the game plan. Process Conflict Triggerees are often accused of being too rigid, if not downright perfectionistic. Their comfort zone lies within the rubric of rules, guidelines, recipes, and procedures. They like to follow directions to a tee. When someone predisposed to Process Conflict gets a piece of furniture from IKEA, for example, they methodically lay out all the pieces and assemble the product, step by step, with the instruction booklet front and center. If a family member or coworker were to throw out the instruction booklet or just start winging it... yep, major sirens would go off. Watch out! If you are cooking with a Process Conflict Triggeree, don't creatively throw in a dash of this or that! Interesting, these folks also get Triggered when a process or policy is too strictly adhered to--if it's not their process or policy. If they have a strategy they feel is valuable or effective and they are met by opposition from a boss (or vendor or host or other) who says, "Sorry, but that's not the way we do things here," or they are denied a request in the form of "Sorry, that's our policy," they may very well go Richter. Process Conflict can be Triggered by a lack of process as well as by a poorly conceived or disliked process. For illustrative entertainment, put yourself in the mindset of a parent with a toddler. Maybe you are in this stage of life currently, or you can recall a time when your kids were that age. If you don't have children, think back to when your mom or dad (or guardian) told you to do something because "I told you so!" Have you heard that phrase or used it at some point yourself? The blood boiling feeling that wells up inside a parent, resulting in thought hijacking and the blurting out of that statement, is the same feeling someone has when they are Triggered by Process Conflict. At that moment, they fall back to insistence, because they know categorically that what they are asking or proposing is right. Others refusing to understand, or refusing to go along, drives them bananas. In parallel, the sentiment of "why am I being questioned when I know what I'm doing" is incredibly powerful. It can cause a Process Conflict Triggeree to feel slighted and can lead to resentment, fury, and even hatred. At their core, they want people to trust them. Be it a colleague or loved one questioning their approach, giving pushback on a policy of theirs, or deviating from an agreed-upon plan, Process Conflict Triggerees take it as an insult to their abilities. This is key: process conflicts involve respect, or the perceived lack thereof. The emotions experienced in response to this perceived disrespect are often frustration and anger. To propitiate Process Conflict, do the following: 1. Zero in on the frustration or anger expressed. Directly validate those emotions because of the concerns spurring them. Don't dance around the subject. Authentically communicate that you are keenly interested in the opinions and perspectives of a Process Conflict Triggeree. No matter how absurd or overblown an espoused idea may come across, give it a hearing. 2. Be swift. The timing for responding to a disconnect, problem, strife, and so on in Process Conflict--or at least demonstrating a genuine desire to respond--is identical to Task Conflict timing. If you use a "slow burn" strategy--that is, taking your time working through the conflict or waiting to get into it because you want to "do a little extra homework"--Process Conflict Triggerees' frustration and anger will fester. Thus, jump to it! 3. But be significantly deliberate in how you quickly act. Emphasize, as we just did, the word how ; Process Conflict is all about prioritizing the way we are doing things over getting them done as expediently as possible. Process Triggered people want to feel as if they are in control of the situation. Process Conflict Triggerees' angst is about their ideals being adhered to. So use thorough communication and thoughtful planning. Often, a conference or team-style gathering works best--one in which the input of those Triggered is clearly valued and affirmed. Certainly, that can be done one-on-one, but for sticky conflict, a group setting can be an effective way to show that their opinion is valued. REGULATING RELATIONAL CONFLICT Relational Conflict is a beast of entirely different stripes. People Triggered by Relational Conflict go through or manifest a far wider spectrum of emotions, from fury to sadness to apprehension to hysteria. Why? Because there isn't a central issue as there is with Task Conflict and Process Conflict. Relational Conflict "participants" push and pull each other in unpredictable directions for unpredictable reasons, often in highly reactive manners. As we'll harp on throughout this book: when emotion is high, reason is low. In Relational Conflict, emotions tend to broil hotter, and there is less grounding the conflict, making it harder to infuse reason back into the equation. The most effective way to address Relational Conflict, therefore, is substantially divergent from the other Conflict Types. A specific subset of emotions is not the focus. Nor are particular goals surrounding work or project elements. And unlike for Task Conflict and Process Conflict, setting (one-on-one versus group) is relatively immaterial. So what do you do? 1. Put on the brakes. No, that's not to say quit attending to the problem. Rather, lean on the Old Farmer's Almanac advice: "Don't plant your seeds too early; don't pick your flowers too late." Applying this wisdom to conflict means knowing that Task Conflict and Process Conflict are rapidly blooming flowers; they'll wilt in a hurry if you don't tend to them soon enough. Relational Conflict, however, must germinate. If you spring to action, heavy-handedly, attempting to defuse Relational Conflict like a line cook trying to satiate a crowd during a breakfast rush, emotion will be too amplified to help people get where they need to go; you'll end up pouring gasoline on the fire (or in keeping with the simile, too much grease on the griddle). Indeed, when someone is riled, it's incredibly hard to stay patient, to refrain from fast-forwarding to the "fixing" part. With Relational Conflict, patience itself is a central objective. There is far more raw emotion in Relational Conflict, which, since lacking a basis in a task or a process, necessitates a peeling back of the layers. That takes time and thoughtfulness. Participants will likely need a breather. Perspective must be regained. 2. Devote time to reframing, away from all the swirling reactiveness, insulting, and manipulative behavior. The pilot light for the excessive emotion in Relational Conflict is primarily lit by a lack of communication, lack of listening (or, maybe better said, lack of hearing), lack of empathy, and selfishness. With these interpersonal deficiencies comes a strong, reflexive need to vent. Most people in Relational Conflict have unwittingly become bottled-up. A substantial part of your job, therefore, is to be a conduit for healthy, productive venting so a Relational Conflict Triggeree can get a little relief, while allowing you to foster communication, empathy, and unselfishness. The most effective strategies for positive venting and redirecting hinge on furthering your understanding of others. The rest of this book will lay out customized blueprints. Short of using those, let the other person know you hear them; let them know their feelings are not misplaced and they're not alone in a wish to work through them. 3. If the previous two steps initially prove impossible, separate the parties. Putting on the brakes and reframing communication as constructive sharing, listening, and empathizing sometimes requires people in Relational Conflict to discontinue their interaction temporarily. You may have to do double duty here, walking through steps one and two, individually, with each Relational Conflict "side" before working on unification. The goal is to defuse the amplitude of emotion caused by the interaction, itself having become toxic. Then the parties can reset, opening the door to reengaging. "Once you replace negative thoughts with positive ones, you'll start having positive results." --Willie Nelson It is crucial to avoid making the mistake of assuming conflict is "personal"--that is, assuming that because a colleague or relative is angry with you, ignoring you, or flustered with something you did, it's an issue with the relationship. One of the most common errors we encounter--which substantially exacerbates conflict and feelings of ill will, preventing proper solutions from being revealed--is people labeling Task Conflict and Process Conflict as Relational Conflict. This is particularly pervasive in corporate America where people (alas, often women) can get mistagged as "overly emotional." An emotional spike when two people are interacting is not by default either or both having a problem with the other. Be a hawk in determining if the problem is a task or a process before jumping to relationship regulation. KABOOM! Years ago, our firm was hired by a Fortune 100 oil and gas company to "fix" a problem it was struggling with in its Permian Basin operations. In the span of six months, half of the company's drilling crew had left for employment with competitors. A 50 percent turnover rate is off the charts for this industry. What made it remarkably worse was that while the company was forking out an average of $36,000 per trainee to bring in replacements, the exiting employees were taking jobs paying an average of $0.25 less per hour. It was embarrassingly apparent that employees really didn't want to work for the company anymore. The crazy twist: we weren't recruited for the purpose of increasing the retention rate. We were hired, we were told, because a "team had a little quarrel the other day that we hope you can help us keep from recurring." Quarrel... that's one way of putting it, as we'd soon discover. Blind as we were, we began with an investigation into the Conflict Type. The HR department told us, "There are clearly personality problems; the rig guys and the supervisors, they don't get along. We've been trying to weed out the bad apples. Getting people who are a better fit is slow-going, what with all the safety regulations and training requirements." Senior decision-makers were assuming that it was a relationship problem, Relational Conflict. They were making the all-too-common mistake of thinking that interpersonal conflict, because it is interpersonal, must be about the people, must be an issue of the individuals involved disliking one another, not getting along, or being unwilling to collaborate. "What leads you to this conclusion?" we asked. "Stupid little fights. Mid-level managers incessantly poking and prodding. Drillers talking back, not respecting authority. It winds everyone up," the SVP of Personnel offered. "Like the quarrel you mentioned on our pre-engagement call?" we inquired, referencing the original request. "That was just the tipping point for bringing you guys in, but yeah." Sensing there might be valuable information hiding in plain sight, we asked to hear the full story. Corporate headquarters had flown in one of the company's top quality control specialists to do a procedural accounting and ensure that all safety measures were being followed to the letter. He was appalled at the lack of compliance he found. Making rounds, he noticed one of the workers blatantly ignoring a placard above a bright red button reading: DANGER! High Pressure Buildup Risk Wait 5 Minutes Between Pushes "What the #@!! do you think you're doing?" the QC rep yelled, rushing over. "My damn job. Who are you?" retorted the worker. Aghast, the QC rep fired back, emphatically pointing at the sign, "Can't you read?" "Sure can, dumba$$, but can you read this?" the worker said, flipping him the bird... then pressing the button again. "STOP!" the QC manager screamed. "Don't you realize what you are doing could kill us all?" "Just because you have a fancy degree and fly around on the company's fancy helicopter doesn't mean you know how things work around here. We do this all the time." And with that, the worker started repeatedly pressing the button as fast as he could. PRESS, PRESS, PRESS, PRESS... KABOOM!!! A reserve fuel tank in the adjoining room exploded. Thank heavens, there were no casualties, but the worker, quality control specialist, and two floor staffers sustained injuries. Obviously, more than childish spats were going on when the results were this combustible. We ratcheted up our assessment. We posed the questions we've shared with you in this chapter to the managers and their employees (separately, of course, via a neutral "intake" technique). We interviewed the execs at HQ. We reached out to many of the former employees who'd recently quit. The drillers, almost all of them, pointed their fingers at a new safety check procedure the company had implemented in the field without asking for their input. Completing the check each day required interrupting work flow, adding an arduous recalibration, and filling out a lot of paperwork. "We're in the business because we like working with our hands, not filling out forms. We're not desk jockeys," they said. The bosses talked about the vital importance of safety above all else. "Minimizing the possibility of disasters and preventing our drillers from getting hurt is our number one priority. Taking all available precautions, no matter how it may impact oil production or bottom-line revenue, is paramount. We can't compromise on this." Are you seeing the root of the conflict? There was no actual bad blood between the people involved, no real personality clashes. The colorfully worded exchanges on the floor weren't about who was doing the swearing. The problem wasn't relational. Nor was it about driller productivity; it had nothing to do with their drilling or oil barrel volumes or quotas or anything like that. Leadership wasn't concerned about the recent financial losses of the division. The workers were getting paid handsomely; there were no wage docking threats or anything like that. The workers' outsized desire to quit? It was based on a difference of opinion regarding a procedure and based, in part, on principle--the drillers not being consulted in a major decision that changed their work requirements. Process Conflict at its finest! Discovering that the turnover was a result of Process Conflict made the rest of our consultation easy. We had the drillers elect one representative. The midlevel managers did the same. We then brought those individuals together, one-on-one, to hammer out a procedure that would accomplish leadership's safety standard while doing so in a way that recognized the valuable experience and input of the workers on the line--and in a way that wouldn't make them feel like pencil pushers on a day-to-day basis. The new process didn't get rolled out overnight; it took careful development, but what mattered was that workers who were Triggered could see that positive action was in the works. And they felt respected. Conflict resolved. SHE DIDN'T UNCOCK THE TRIGGER When in doubt about Conflict Type, look for clues in the feelings being generated. What is causing an emotional escalation? Is it a task, a process, or a person? Remember, though, the latter is often a smoke screen; a person is being blamed, obscuring a task or process problem. For example, take a divorce mediation we conducted recently. As we do with all marital disputes, we required the husband and wife to each fill out a confidential disclosure form, documenting such things as court jurisdiction (family or civil); whether a suit has been filed and, if so, the status; the reach of the parties implicated; and any evidence of prior or existing abuse in the relationship or with elders or minors. This last entry is critical in determining if the couple can be in the same room during mediation or if precautions should be taken to keep them apart. In the abuse box, the wife and husband both checked "No." So we thought nothing of it and scheduled a face-to-face meeting. The day of the mediation arrived and in strolled the husband... wearing a giant surgical bandage on his neck. We asked him what had happened. With a slight shrug and in the calmest of voices, he replied, "Eh, I made a suggestion about our business and she shot me in the throat." "She shot you? She pulled out a gun and shot you?" "Well, yeah, but it was a .22. That doesn't count," the husband explained. Just when we thought we'd heard it all. Despite having to rush to the ER, the husband didn't think it was a big deal. He had no worries about sitting right back down with his wife to talk through the divorce. That was the first hint that this probably wasn't Relational Conflict. We got the mediation rolling. We had to go through assets, retirement savings, and what to do about their jointly run business. Each item prompted the wife to spin into an arm-waving rant about all the horrible things her husband had done--and how all those horrible things were tied to meth use. Each time, the husband either happily agreed to her accusations or said, "Well I was high at the time; I don't really remember, but I probably deserve what she's saying." The repetitive smorgasbord of emotion present in the wife's complaints were red herring hallmarks of intense Relational Conflict. Clearly, the wife was Triggered (literally too). Amazingly, the husband wasn't. Hint number two that this wasn't Relational Conflict. In true relationship-centered disputes, both sides are fond of tossing insult grenades. As we explored further, a pattern in the wife's yelling became evident. Recurrently, meth smoking resulted in the husband leaving work undone, missing deadlines, and forgetting appointments. They both wanted to keep the business. She was okay with that, if he'd do his job--and on the condition that he agreed to get drug tested every week. He pushed back, offering to submit to blood draws every three months. The gap in their proposals continued to wind her up. She'd fly off the handle; he'd inquire softly, "Do I get any points for taking a bullet?" We bet you have a darn good guess as to the Conflict Type in this proceeding: Task Conflict. As soon as we shifted the goal of the meeting to implementing milestone-based ownership vesting for their business, complete with task completion bonuses, the wife relaxed. Her frustrations were being heard, obvious movement was happening, and concrete measures were being put into place to guard against future noncompliance with task execution. When it came to sorting out the timing of a drug-testing program, the husband pulled us aside. "I lit up yesterday. Can we not have the testing, like, tomorrow? I'm willing to do weekly... if I get into rehab. I'm just gonna need some help getting there. Any chance she'll pay for it?" We presented the solution to the wife. "Oh, honey, yes! I'm so proud of you," she gushed. She was happily willing to compromise on the other matters because those were not her Triggers. Yes, the other matters were still issues, but not the core issue causing her grief: the Task Conflict jumbling her brain. While this is a highly dramatic example, the lesson is to stop spending so much time and energy trying to solve all the problems in front of you. If you instead isolate the Trigger (as emotionally camouflaged as it may be), you stand a marvelous chance of having the remaining, more minor issues, fall away or, essentially, self-resolve. Each Conflict Type has its own handling strategy. Relational Conflict, for instance, requires a significantly longer ramp during the assessment and communication stage. Process Conflict necessitates refocusing from the "what" and "who" onto the "how." Task Conflict demands signs of progress immediately. But armed with the knowledge you've gained in reading this chapter, if you can help people understand and respect one another's Triggers, you can prevent a plethora of divisive confrontations and resolve the rest. Yes, even the incredibly charged "attempted murder" conflict! A frequent misconception is that for conflict to be resolved, for people to work well together, everyone needs to be friends or share the same values. Denzel Washington, courtesy of Coach Boone in Remember the Titans , said it best: "You don't have to like each other, but you WILL respect each other." Overarchingly, the core principles in this chapter are about engendering that respect and about building stronger relationships through recognition and awareness. It's about recognizing that there are distinctly different types of conflict. It's about being aware of others' Triggers. When you are cognizant of the Triggers of those around you, it's like having a crystal ball; you can see a lot of conflict coming and prevent it. And when you encounter someone who has been Triggered, you'll be able to apply the tools in chapter 2 to predict their behavior. Excerpted from How to Get along with Anyone: The Playbook for Predicting and Preventing Conflict at Work and at Home by John Eliot, Jim Guinn All rights reserved by the original copyright owners. Excerpts are provided for display purposes only and may not be reproduced, reprinted or distributed without the written permission of the publisher.
