Throughout our lives, we will all face adversity and confrontation, often simply because others disagree with our wishes, desires or opinions. These challenges can be as simple as what to watch on television or as complex as custody plans after a family undergoes a separation. No matter the issue, it is often helpful to a mutually beneficial resolution to understand why others are saying No, and how to turn that No into a Yes!
Many people feel that the only successful outcome of a negotiation is to get the other person to agree with everything that they are proposing to settle the matter. While this will certain leave one party happy, it will almost certainly cause resentment, frustration and dissatisfaction for the other party and may result in a repeat visit to the issue in the (near) future.
It is almost a given that some people will say No to a proposal as we are all somewhat conditioned to hearing No throughout our lives. No – you cannot have another cookie! No – you can’t stay out late on a school night! No – you can’t do your homework later! So, when we hear a No, it doesn’t always mean that the person who said No is convinced that is the correct response. It may be a conditioned response, especially in a new and confusing situation. The role of the mediator is to discover the true reason behind the response so that the core issue can be discussed. Sometimes, a No is simply automatic and may not have any conviction behind it. This is when everyone has to remain calm and not let emotions interfere. Instead of getting frustrated or upset, the path to agreement is to see the response of No as a step and not as the final decision. It is important to continue the discussion and to focus on the desired outcome, which is to find the best way to satisfy everyone’s objective. This is best accomplished by dispassionate discussions as to why each party feels that they are correct in their position, why they feel this way. One of the best methods of discovering this reason is to inquire as to the worst possible outcome of each decision, and then digging deeper as to why those fears exist. For example, if one parent feels reluctant to have the children stay with their ex-partner without supervision, it is important to determine what they fear will happen. Do they fear that the other parent will neglect the child’s needs or not care for the children according to their standard? And if so, what do they fear will be the outcome of this neglect? Will the children suffer any real physical or emotional harm, or will they be left to watch too much television? If real harm is feared, then the reluctance is justified and must be addressed, especially in regard to what has occurred in the past to introduce these fears. If the fear is that the children won’t be engaged and kept busy, then perhaps the resolution would be a schedule of expectations that each parent will respect and follow. Homework, hygiene and proper sleep and nutrition for children are usually a shared concern and one that may be easily resolved. If there are other underlying concerns, such as substance abuse or emotional manipulation, then the outcome may be complicated by these concerns. However, no resolution is possible without open and honest communication. Problems are usually easy to recognize – what makes the mediation process powerful is when both parents work together to both identify and offer possible solutions to turn those NO’s into YES’s!
– Jon Himelfarb, Father and Friend