"Critical Conflict" – in the name of Corey. A team of five led by Patterson

This book refers to situations where a friend promises to do it, but fails to do so, as a key conflict. The difficulty in dealing with key conflicts is not only how to urge friends to fulfill what they promised, but also how we deal with key conflicts while trying not to damage the relationship. This book breaks down the process of dealing with key conflicts into three stages: First, knowing that the other person has not kept their promises, how should we prepare for the conversation with the other person? Second, in the process of dialogue, what kind of process should we follow to ensure that the conversation is effective? Third, after the conversation, how should we ensure that the consensus of the conversation is implemented into action?

In most cases, when the people we work with make a commitment, they don't. We will have two reactions: one is to choose silence, holding back and not saying, but silently thinking that the other party is not credible; the other is to choose to explode and express their dissatisfaction with the other party's face. Neither of these approaches actually solves the problem, and it hurts the relationship between the two people. This book argues that neither approach is the best option, that we should try to achieve our original goals and maintain our relationship with our collaborators. The way we approach key conflicts is not to punish our partners who break their promises, but to work with each other to help them remove obstacles and deliver on their promises. This is followed by a three-part process for resolving key conflicts.

Part I: How should we prepare to talk to the other person when they break their promises. In this part, we focus on three questions: How to set the focus of the problem? How to prepare communication materials? And how to understand each other's difficulties? Before we officially begin, we should first clarify the basic position, that is, how should we view the defaulting collaborators? Usually we think that the other party did not fulfill the promise, of course, should be punished. Then the direction of our next conversation becomes to let him know his mistakes and correct his mistakes, at which point our collaborators become opponents, and the focus of the conversation is to make the other party admit their mistakes, so that the result will definitely be unhappy. 1) The author proposes another perspective of understanding, that the person who does not fulfill the promise is not our opponent but our partner. What we need is not to punish him, but to help the other party refocus the point, find problems, and solve problems together. To achieve such a goal, we must first re-focus the problem and redefine the problem to be solved. The book provides a tool called the CPR rule to help us focus on problems: content, pattern, and relationship. If we work with someone for the first time and the other person defaults, we focus on the content. That is, to state the facts of this matter, that is, what we agreed on at that time, you did not do it, and I was very angry. If we re-offend again for the second time, we don't have to beat him to death with a stick, thinking that he can't be associated. Because it is not necessarily the other person's character, but his behavior pattern. For example, if someone likes to talk big after drinking, then the things we promise when we drink should be confirmed after drinking. How to repeat the third offense, then you can tell the other person directly, hurting our relationship and trust. We use the CPR law to lengthen the judgment time, let us use our intellect to intervene to make three judgments, and reduce the possibility of misjudgment. 2. In addition to resetting the focus of the problem, the author believes that we also need to prepare communication materials. It's to prevent us from being carried away by emotions in communication. In the process of communication, the most feared thing is to talk to the chicken and the duck, one side accuses you of why you did not do it, and the other party feels that it is not easy. On the one hand, he was angry, and on the other hand, he was very innocent. In the end, the conversation that did not solve the problem turned into a cathartic mood of each. And if the two sides talk about the facts, it will be much better. 3. Finally, we need to understand why our collaborators are not keeping their promises. Because this problem is more complicated, if we think in a different position, we will find that a person does not accomplish things, and the reason is not limited to himself. Two other factors are given in the book: society and structure. Society refers to the social relationships around the person. Sometimes it's not a question of whether you want to or not, but rather pressure from the organization. The structure is a more macroscopic reward and punishment system. Through empathy, we may find that in fact, a person's inability to fulfill the commitment is not necessarily bad character or forgetfulness, but may encounter various difficulties that we did not expect. If there were, the focus should not be on the committers, but on these external factors. With such a three-step process, we can begin to communicate, process and solve problems.

Part II: What kind of process should we follow during the conversation to ensure that the conversation is effective? We focus on three actions, how to start the conversation, if judging each other's difficulties, and how to respond. 1, if the opening, some people like to take care of him left and right, hoping to make the other party realize their problems through euphemisms. The author believes that the first 30 seconds of the whole conversation set the tone, so the key to the matter should be clearly and directly explained to avoid other associations between the other party. Of course, it's not a straight line, we need to make the other person feel safe in the process of the conversation. People subconsciously choose to fight or flee when they feel threatened, but whether it is fighting or fleeing will make our conversation end. Because it's important to create a secure opening. For example, try to communicate one-on-one in a private place; use us as much as possible when communicating, not you, avoid unilateral accusations, etc., so that the other party feels that this is an equal dialogue, and it is convenient for the other party to confide in them. The task of this opening statement is: first, to let the other party understand our intentions and know that we are here to talk about this matter; second, to understand our attitude, to know that we are here to communicate on an equal footing and not to attack; third, to understand that our goal is to discuss a solution together. 2, the next is the judgment, we based on the other party's feedback, make a key judgment, the other party can not complete the commitment, whether it is a lack of motivation or lack of ability. 3. We will respond after the judgment is completed. If the other party is not capable, but has the willingness to fulfill the commitment, then we should take the initiative to help the other party simplify the problem and reduce the difficulty of solving the problem; if it is insufficient will, many people subconsciously want to change this person at this time, and this change may be punishment. We should restrain this impulse, these rewards and punishments can only change the temporary results, can not last, we should create motives for the other party. The other party is also a rational person, with his own judgment, if he has identified a thing, it is difficult for us to twist it, what we can do is to add conditions to his judgment, so that he can naturally get the same result as us with reason. We need to present the consequences of doing so to him, and the other party has the idea that it may change. Of course, not all key conflicts can be resolved in this way, and at this time we should take a step back and set up a stopgap measure to control the loss as much as possible.

Part III: With a solution is not all right, certainly not, and the most critical step is to execute. No matter how beautiful a solution is, no matter how much the two sides reach an agreement, no implementation is empty talk. This part is how to turn the solution into a plan and how to check it. A sound plan requires four key elements: who, when, what happens, and follow-up inspections. The key to who is not who participates in the program, but who is clear about responsibility. It is to clarify who is responsible for who supervises. When to provide a precise time, it is best to be accurate to the time of the year, month, day and minute. What is the purpose of quantitatively describing things precisely enough to be performed. Finally, there is inspection, which is the control point that we set throughout the process, which is responsible for the best results.