I was responding to a request from a prominent person. This was years ago. I called on others in my group to collaborate with me on a carefully worded response message. There were multiple drafts. I sent the final document. And then . . . crickets.
I called the person's office and spoke to their assistant twice. Time one: "Yes. Whitney [name changed] received the letter. I was told to say thank you and Whitney will get back to you soon." Time two: "Sorry, not sure what's happening, I'll let Whitney know you called." After the second call, I wondered for a few months, heard nothing, then finally put it aside.
Last week I was in a meeting and this person's name came up. Whitney was in the middle of a controversial and consequential public situation. I and the others in the conversation wondered, what role was Whitney going to play? Was Whitney at fault or contributing to the controversy? As the conversation unfolded I recalled, in my mind, my interaction with this person from so long ago. What do you think I said or did?
Before I answer that question, let me digress to think with you about what's happening here. It's a commonplace human condition, and there are at least two paths I could take in this conversation about a person with whom I had a set of experiences long ago.
Path A or B
Path A. Left with minimum information about a situation, we construct a narrative. That narrative takes on a life of its own and we begin to believe our self-oriented constructed story. In this case you might imagine I would have created a Whitney who was uncommunicative, ungrateful, irresponsible, and/or disrespectful. When Whitney's name came up, I might have shared my negative conclusions, asserting my assumptions as facts, and then spread the negative conclusive seeds to the others.
Path B. Though left without a full explanation and details, we extend a benefit of the doubt to the other person. We walk away curious, but without a conclusion, and self-manage our imagination so that we stay wide open to all possibilities, without a negative construction. We consider that there might be a perfectly good explanation. So when it comes up, I might have chosen to not share anything negative about my experience with Whitney. Following Path B I might put aside my unresolved experience and treat any mention of Whitney with care and neutrality.
I'm not going to tell you what I did, though I want to make sure you know this: I do not always follow my own advice, and I certainly do things I wish I could have done better. Like everyone else, I'm a work in progress. You'll have to write the end of the story for yourself with Path A or B as the driver of my choice.
Conflict Resolution Connections
Here are a few points to share that will make the link from this scenario to conflict resolution tools and approaches.
Assumptions
We are often looking at other people as if taking a snapshot through a keyhole and drawing conclusions from that snapshot. When we think about ourselves, we credit ourselves with a rich, complex, and unpredictable inner life and know there are reasonable explanations for our actions. Yet––we make negative assumptions and don't extend the same credit to others. Conflict is fueled by these kinds of assumptions. Everyone is complex. Look further beyond the snapshot, expand your viewfinder and imagine the fullness of the other person.
Self-awareness
Self-awareness is key to managing assumptions. As a conflict resolver, imperfect as I am, I'm trying to develop my own version of an assumption detector that I can easily use in my everyday life. In my mind my assumption detector looks like one of those black lights that turns what seems like reality into an alternate scene with brightly outlined shapes. When I find an assumption, I try to slow down, look closely at the detected assumption, and see if I can expand my thinking. I want to self-regulate, keep control of my actions, and not let my assumptions cause toddler-like chaos for myself and those around me.
Benefit of the doubt
When I work with separating couples I often hand out, figuratively, what I call a basket of unlimited benefits of the doubt. I say something like this: "Now you are going to live different lives from the one you lived when you were together. When the other person does something you don't like, I'm offering that you can decide to extend one of these benefits of the doubt. Imagine the other person as their best self, and you might be able to expect the other person will do the same for you."
Neutral mediators, facilitators, coaches, and other conflict resolvers work to hone their ears to identify their own assumptions, as well as those that seem to be operating in the minds of their clients. My practice is to use a four-stage process: 1) Note assumptions as I hear them; 2) find the right time in the process to name and collaboratively define the assumption; 3) allow participants to consider the assumptions; and 4) decide what to do with the assumptions. At the end of any conflict resolution process I'm likely to give out a basket of unlimited benefits of the doubt. Here's your own basket now. Use it freely––there's more where that came from.