Category: guilt

A Lesson From The Play, Next to Normal

Post author By Dr. Jeffrey Rubin
Post date May 26, 2025
4 Comments on A Lesson From The Play, Next to Normal

Welcome to From Insults to Respect.

This week I happened to watch on TV the play Next to Normal. It dramatically and musically brought forth a wealth of thoughtful and emotional reactions. I can’t, in a single post, express all of these, so here, I’m going to focus on just one–the issue of blaming those given a mental disorder label and their parents for how they are acting and experiencing.

The Play’s Main Plot

A woman who had a baby that died in infancy continued to grieve after four months. A psychiatrist, therefore, has classified her as having a mental disorder and has been prescribing psychiatric drugs for depression. Because his patient also imagines that the baby is still alive, and on birthdays she sees him growing up, and she regularly has conversations with him, the doctor has been prescribing an additional cocktail of drugs. As we enter the play, we see the drugs have certainly not relieved the woman from her or her family of the anguish that has come about. The imagined baby has grown to be a teenager. Her family, made up of her husband and teenaged daughter, are deeply concerned and support the psychiatrist’s treatment recommendations. Treatment during the play changes from drugs, followed by an hypnosis approach, and finally Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT), none of which lead to satisfactory results.

My Reaction To The Play

In my training as a psychologist, I learned to avoid blaming people who act in ways that lead to a mental disorder classification or their parents. Blame implies thinking someone is guilty of doing something wrong.

If I perceive that someone has done something wrong and I become frustrated and angry at the person and I begin to seek to punish the person, I view that person as guilty.

For example, if I make a wrong turn to go to my friend’s house and when I discover my error if I have a strong emotion of frustration that springs up in me and I cry out, “What an idiot I am for making that mistake,” I am feeling guilty that I made the mistake, and the reason I am calling myself an idiot is because it is my angry effort to punish myself.

I use that specific type of definition for “guilty” to distinguish it from how I define responsibility, which I view as a more mature response. When people act responsibly, they recognize that they did something wrong, experience a strong feeling of frustration, recognize at the same time that as long they are a human being they are going to make mistakes. They recognize that the strong feeling of frustration is a good thing because it leads them to focus on what they did wrong, and the emotionality helps spur a process that increases the possibility of fixing the error in the long term, decreasing the chance that they will make the same mistake. Part of this frustration reaction leads me to focus on what I can specifically do next time to prevent the mistake. This is a wonderful process, and I welcome the experience as I would a helpful friend. When I see guilt springing up in me, I have been getting more and more skillful at transforming it into my helpful friend.

It seems to me beneficial to keep the idea of angrily desiring punishment when someone does something wrong separate from the idea of learning from the experience of making a mistake by experiencing frustration in a friendly, non-punishing manner. If you see that your five-year old son has made a mistake when trying to add 7 plus 3 and he came up with 9, you may see that he has done something wrong, but you might experience this as somewhat different from when you feel someone is “guilty” of doing something wrong. You may think that your son almost got the right answer, and he’s trying, and this is part of a useful learning process. You might not feel angry at him, nor think he deserves to be punished for his efforts. Perhaps you might gently correct him and give him a warm smile.

Although I am pretty good at avoiding the blaming game, from time to time I slip up and become angry at what I’m perceiving is happening with people dealing with mental health concerns. This play, so well done, has helped me to better reconnect with the habit of making the distinction between guilting and taking responsibility as I conceptualize them.

The music, singing, and dialogue blend together to avoid simplistic interpretations of events and filled me with empathy for the complexity of dealing with such challenging circumstances. I was left thinking that people embroiled in the types of situations that the play depict would do well to learn for themselves the difference between blame and responsibility. Moreover, it seems to me that it takes more than just noting the difference; it takes practice to turn this understanding into a useful habit. One useful practice is to identify five times when you found yourself employing guilting, and then see if you can write out a way to turn them into a response that better matches a responsibility response.

My Best,
Jeff

Tags Blaming, guilting, mental disorders, mental health concerns, Next to Normal, responsibility

Albert Einstein blame conflict management conflict resolution desire guilt John F. Kennedy responsibility

Einstein and the Nature of Blame, Guilt, Responsibility, and Respect

Post author By Dr. Jeffrey Rubin
Post date October 8, 2015
6 Comments on Einstein and the Nature of Blame, Guilt, Responsibility, and Respect

In our society, the idea of self-reliance is often viewed positively. And yet, it is our nature to benefit in numerous ways from others. As Albert Einstein beautifully articulated in a book titled, Living Philosophies: A Series of Intimate Credos:

Einstein in his later years

“From the standpoint of daily life…there is one thing we do know: that man is here for the sake of other men–above all for those upon whose smile and well-being our own happiness depends, and also for the countless unknown souls with whose fate we are connected by a bond of sympathy. Many times a day I realize how much my own outer and inner life is built upon the labors of my fellow-men, both living and dead, and how earnestly I must exert myself in order to give in return as much as I have received. My peace of mind is often troubled by the depressing sense that I have borrowed too heavily from the work of other men.” (p. 3)

Despite all that we benefit from the lives of other human beings, there are times when we come into conflict with them. How we handle conflicts can have an enormous effect on how much respect we have for ourselves, and others have for us.

An important step toward learning how to better handle conflicts, is to come to understand more precisely than most people what a conflict is. This will lead to a deeper understanding of how conflicts are connected to blame, guilt, and responsibility, and how this understanding can be used in a practical manner. We’ll then return to the example of Einstein, looking at how he utilized the skills that were discussed today, and how this led to the high degree of respect that millions have long had for him.

What is a Conflict?

According to the DIG CONFLICT MODEL that we have been utilizing on this blog, From Insults to Respect, a conflict occurs when the following three conditions occur:

Party A desires an act will occur.
Party A perceives that another party is likely to act in a manner that interferes with the desire.
Party A perceives that the other party would be guilty of doing something wrong if he or she carries out the interfering act.

Notice that each of the three conditions has a key word italicized—desire for the first condition, interference for the second, and guilt for the third. If we take the first letter of each of these key words and put them together, they spell DIG; hence the DIG Conflict Model’s name.

Party A, in the above definition, indicates the individual who is theoretically engaged in a conflict and from whose perspective the conflict will first be described.

The word “DIG” provides us a way to remember a technique to quickly and succinctly describe a conflict. First, we describe the “desire,” then the “interference,” and then the “guilt” condition.

The DIG model is also helpful because sometimes we can come up with an idea to make a change in just one of the easier to understand parts that then leads to the rest of the conflict becoming easier to manage. In earlier posts we looked at examples that illustrated using these ideas, and in one particular post we focussed particularly on ways to change the guilt condition (see here).

Since I wrote that post, I received some feedback indicating that there is some confusion about the nature of blame, guilt, and responsibility. Thus, today I shall undertake an effort to reduce this confusion, and then relate this understanding to respect.

Blame, Guilt, and Responsibility

Why does Lucy, in this comic, go out of her way to get people she knows to absolve her of all blame regardless of what happens? Here’s my take on this.

The word, blame, has a variety of meanings. So, to avoid confusion, on this blog when we are discussing the DIG Conflict Model we’ll be sticking to one particular meaning, e.g., “When a person blames someone, that person has the belief that someone is guilty of doing something wrong and deserves some type of punishment.”

Punishment is typically not a pleasant experience to undergo. In the above comic, perhaps Lucy wants to avoid punishment by absolving herself from blame.

According to the DIG Conflict Model, when someone has a conflict with you, or you have a conflict with yourself, part of what is going on is that the person who has a conflict with you believes that if you carry out the interfering act you would be guilty of being wrong, and therefore you would deserve to be punished. If you can transform that guilt into something other than guilt, it would eliminate one of the essential conditions of a conflict and thus resolve it.

One way to transform guilt, is to take responsibility for what went wrong. When we do so, we have some of the same very strong feelings that go along with guilt, but rather than believing punishment is the proper response, another is offered; we admit that we played at least a part in what went wrong, and then make it clear that we will take steps to improve our actions in the future. The genuine feeling that comes with taking responsibility, leads us to do a search for improvements.

What are the benefits that come from resolving a conflict in this way? There are many, but on this blog we’re all about how to transform insults into respect, so let’s focus just on this issue.

The Benefits of Transforming Guilt into Responsibility, and then, into Respect

David Coleman is a Senior Research Fellow at the National Security Archive. His most recent book is The Fourteenth Day: JFK and the Aftermath of the Cuban Missile Crisis.

From his research, David found that President John F. Kennedy enjoyed very high public approval ratings compared with most modern presidents. Over the whole of his presidency, Kennedy averaged a 70.1 percent approval rating, comfortably the highest of any post-World War II president. By comparison, the average for all presidents between 1938 and 2012 is 54 percent.

On April 17th, 1961, Kennedy ordered what became known as the “Bay of Pigs Invasion”: 1,500 U.S.-trained Cubans, called “Brigade 2506”, landed on the island in an attempt to overthrow the country’s dictator, Fidel Castro. The plan failed within three days.

By April 19, 1961, the Cuban government had captured or killed the invading exiles, and Kennedy was forced to negotiate for the release of the 1,189 survivors. After twenty months, Cuba released the captured exiles in exchange for $53 million worth of food and medicine.

When the invasion had failed, many felt Kennedy was guilty of doing something terribly wrong, and more than a few insults were being hurled at him. However, when he went before the press, he took responsibility for the failure, and pledged to take several specific steps to make sure that what happened would never happen again. Immediately afterwards his approval rating spiked, going up to 83 percent, the highest level of his presidency.

From my own experience, I have learned that using a similar type of response can be very helpful. When I find that someone has a conflict with me because of something that I have done, I have often been able to turn those angry feelings that come along with a conflict into a respectful resolution by making it clear that I recognize my responsibility in what happened and I plan to take some action to improve.

Back to Einstein

Returning to Einstein, let us ask, what was it about this man who lived many years ago and somehow still captures the respectful imagination of so many of us? Surely, his awe-inspiring achievements in science is a major reason for this. But today, I would like to ask whether it has, as well, something to do with his profound sense of responsibility to his fellow human beings, a sense of responsibility that led him to set aside, for periods of time, his passionate interest in his research so that he might speak out against injustice, and to put forth his vision for a more peaceful world.

———————————
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.

Tags Albert Einstein, blame, conflict management, conflict resolution, DIG Conflict Model, guilt, John F. Kennedy, responsibility

conflict management conflict resolution criticism guilt interpersonal conflicts likability The DIG Conflict Model

Comics, Conflicts and the Desire to be Liked

Post author By Dr. Jeffrey Rubin
Post date July 16, 2015
No Comments on Comics, Conflicts and the Desire to be Liked

Habitual ways of acting often can’t be overcome by a single discussion. Thus, it helps to bring before our conscience some ideas a few times over the course of several months. With that in mind, let’s review some of the ideas we have discussed earlier on this blog about conflict and the desire to be liked. By utilizing a fresh new batch of comics I hope to demonstrate that we can have some fun as we go about this.

Letting Someone You Like Know You Like Them is a Key to Resolving Many a Conflict

As good old Charlie Brown makes clear, it is hugely important for him to be liked. This happens to be true for most of us.

As we discussed in an earlier post, this desire to be liked often becomes threatened when we find that we are embroiled in a conflict. To settle things down to a level at which reasonableness has a chance to prevail, if you happen to like the other party, you might find it helpful to mention this.

I remember one time long ago when I was a mere eighteen years old, I had planned to go to see a movie with a friend. He arrived so late that we missed the show and I became angry.

Did I have a conflict with my friend? On this blog, when we look to see if there is a conflict in a situation, we use the phrase “DIG for the conflict” to help us to answer this question. The word DIG helps us to remember to look for a desire, something that interferes with the desire, and if someone feels someone is guilty of doing something wrong. In the situation I described, I desired to go see this movie and my friend interfered with this desire by arriving late. I felt he was guilty of being inconsiderate. And so I did end up having a conflict with my friend for coming late.

When we use the DIG Conflict Model, we also use the word DIG to remind us to dig a little deeper when thinking about a conflict. A tool that we use to dig deeper is to remember that people typically desire to be liked. With that in mind, can I describe a different type of conflict that occurred within me when my friend came late? Here’s one. I desired to be liked and when my friend came late I felt he interfered with this desire because it seemed to me that if he really liked me, he would have shown up on time. I felt he was guilty of treating me disrespectfully.

Back then when I was eighteen, how did I react to my friend coming late? I started shouting and calling him names. A popular way for people to respond to the way I was acting is to shout louder and to try to return the insults with insults. But rather than throwing insults at me, this friend of mine quietly heard me out, and then he looked sadly down at the ground for a few seconds, then he looked up into my eyes, and said softly, “Jeff, your friendship means a lot to me. I like you a ton and a half. I’m real sorry I was late.”

My anger eased, and within a few minutes we were having our usual good time together.

Responding to Criticism Immaturely Can Leave You All Alone

Here we see that Lucy interprets Charlie Brown’s question as criticism. She responds by shouting and displaying other signs of defensiveness such as wildly waving her fists all around. Charlie Brown soon hurries away.

Using the DIG Conflict Model, we might describe this situation as follows: As we know, Charlie Brown desires to be liked. Lucy’s response to his question perhaps interfered with this desire because he believes that when people like you they don’t speak to you in the tone of voice that Lucy used. He might have also felt she was guilty of treating him disrespectfully. Perhaps Charlie Brown abruptly left in response to this conflict he had with Lucy.

In an earlier post titled “Responding to Criticism: Four Levels Of Maturity” we see that Lucy’s style of responding to criticism tends to decrease one’s likability. It also increases the chance that it will create unnecessary conflicts.

What would be a more mature response? In my earlier post, I described one of the most mature ways to respond to criticism as follows:

4. Level 4 individuals listen to the criticizer in a supportive, warm, friendly style, and then make it clear that they fully understand what was said. Moreover, they put the criticizer at ease by making statements that indicate that the wise learn from criticism. Some time is spent on showing that they are thinking about the criticism. If, after thinking about the criticism the criticism is deemed to be correct, they make a statement frankly indicating, “I can see your ideas have merit and I intend to use them in the future.” If they are not sure if they agree, they make a statement indicating that they are very interested in what was said, plan to think a little more about this over the next few days and then they will be ready to discuss this further. If, after thinking about the criticism, the criticism is deemed to be incorrect, a statement is made designed to disagree without being disagreeable. More specifically, a sense of humor, some listening in a caring way and a few smiles help to traverse rough terrain. As the episode winds down, the criticizer is encouraged to feel comfortable communicating suggestions in the future.

What response could have Lucy made in response to Charlie Brown’s question that would have earned her a level closer to a 4 rating? It might be worth discussing this with a few friends. One answer might be something like this:

Lucy smiles and says, “That’s a reasonable question, Charlie Brown. Let me think about this for a few seconds.” She then pauses and rubs her chin, thus showing that she is taking his question seriously. Then she might have said, “I just thought I’d see if I could make more money in the winter by raising my rates.” If Lucy did this without any defensiveness, I think it probably would have come off as more likable than the way she did act in the comic. And perhaps Charlie Brown’s desire to be liked would have become less threatened.

Even Mature People Find It Difficult to Deal With Too Much Criticism In Too Short A Period Of Time

Here Dagwood and Blondie Bumstead end up having a conflict with their neighbors. That is, the Bumsteads had a desire to have a pleasant evening with their new neighbors, but the neighbors constant negative comments interfered with this desire. In the end, the Bumsteads perhaps felt their new neighbors were guilty of being too negative.

Jefferson Writing Declaration of Independence

A while back I provided a post titled “PROVIDING NEGATIVE CRITICISM: A LESSON FROM THOMAS JEFFERSON.” There I summarized Jefferson’s views about how to respond to people you are just beginning to get to know:

One of the main desires that people have is to be liked. If we criticize people before we establish that we like them, they are much more likely to feel that we will not like them. This dramatically increases the likelihood of heightened levels of defensiveness. If, instead, we seek first to establish that we do esteem our new companions, while holding off any negative criticism until a close, friendly relationship has been established, perhaps this would be a wiser course of action. Even after establishing a close friendly relationship, perhaps it still makes sense to avoid giving too much criticism in too short a period of time.

Well, those are some ideas I wanted to review today. In sum, when you are in the midst of a conflict, if you happen to like the other party, it often makes sense to do something to let him or her know it. Even if you don’t particularly like or dislike the other party in a conflict, it is often better if you avoided acting in ways that might be interpreted as disliking him or her. The more mature levels of responding to criticism are less likely to lead others to feel you don’t like them and increases the chances that they will like you. When you are just beginning a new relationship, it is usually better to keep any negative criticism to a minimum until you establish that you genuinely like the other party, and even then, be careful to avoid too much negative criticism in too short a period of time.

I hope you had some fun while we went about reviewing these ideas. May the rest of your week be filled with delightful human interactions.

——————————-

Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.

Tags conflict management, criticism, DIG Conflict Model, likability, negative criticism

conflict intensity conflict management conflict resolution Dagwood dig for the conflict emotional intelligence free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum guilt

CAN A CONFLICT EVER BE TRULY RESOLVED?

Post author By Dr. Jeffrey Rubin
Post date March 4, 2014
2 Comments on CAN A CONFLICT EVER BE TRULY RESOLVED?

“How’d things work out between Blondie and you?” you ask in a concerned voice upon running into your friend, Dagwood. “Did you manage to resolve your conflict?”

“Yeah, um…well, I’m kinda not sure,” he replies.

When it comes to whether or not a conflict has been resolved, sometimes people feel confused, or they end up engaging in needless arguments about this. Today we spend some time clarifying this issue.

The DIG Conflict Model removes much of the uncertainty about this issue by:

being precise about the definition of a conflict
introducing the concept of conflict intensity
being precise about the point at which a conflict is resolved
introducing the concept of related conflicts

The Definition of a Conflict

A conflict exists whenever the following three conditions exist:

Party A desires an act will occur.
Party A perceives that another party is likely to act in a manner that interferes with the desire.
Party A perceives that the other party would be guilty of doing something wrong if he or she carries out the interfering act.

When using the DIG Conflict Model, we describe a conflict by using the word “DIG” to remind us to identify the three conflict conditions, the desire, the interference, and the guilt. Sometimes a given situation has more than one conflict but people end up getting confused because they think that all of the conflicts are one big conflict. When using the DIG Conflict Model, we clearly describe each of the conflicts separately and systematically. This process dramatically reduces confusion and simplifies finding resolutions to each of the separate conflicts. Sometimes we have to dig to identify all of the conflicts in a situation but the DIG Conflict Model provides us some tools to make this relatively easy (see posts titled DEALING WITH CRITICISM BY DIGGING DEEPER and RESOLVING RECURRING CONFLICTS).

Conflict Intensity

Toward reaching our goal of reducing confusion about whether or not a conflict has been resolved, we have just clarified what it means to have a conflict. We now move on toward this goal by learning about the intensity of a conflict.

The three conditions of a conflict (desire, interference and guilt) are not just present whenever a conflict exists. Each of these three conditions may be present at a very high degree, a medium degree, or a low degree.

As an example, let’s say that in the picture on the right, John desires Mary with all of his might. Asked to rate how much he desires Mary on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the greatest desire he can possibly have, he rates his desire for her a 10.

We asked John a few months later to rate his desire for Mary. Some of Mary’s mannerisms have begun to annoy him, and there are times when he has begun to think of finding a new girlfriend. He still has some desire for her but at a lower degree then when he first met her. This example illustrates how the desire component of a conflict can vary over time.

Now let’s look at an example of how the interference component of a conflict can be present at higher and lower degrees. In the picture on the left, Sue desires to get to a long-eared stuffed animal but Fred is interfering. Sue knows Fred pretty well and she is convinced that once he decides to not let her get something, he usually sticks to it for quite some time. Asked to rate how much Fred is likely to interfere with the achieving of her desire on a 1 to 10 scale, she answers 8.

But let’s say a few months later Fred’s behavior begins to change. He still will interfere with Sue achieving her desire to get something but only for a minute or two. By then he has grown tired of that game. When Sue wants to get her long-eared friend down from the shelf and Fred tries to stop her, she knows that by waiting for a short period of time things will work out fine. Now when asked to rate how much Fred will interfere with her achieving her desire, she answers 2.

Finally, let’s look at an example of how the guilt component of a conflict can be present at higher or lower degrees. In this picture on the right, Mike comes home from work and sees his wife and some guy in each other’s arms passionately kissing. Mike’s first reaction is that his wife and this guy are guilty of doing something terribly wrong. If he was asked to rate just how guilty they were, he might say 10. But let’s say that moments after he first sees this kissing scene he notices that there are four other people in the room all holding a script for a play.

His wife quickly withdraws from the embrace of the male stranger and warmly greets her husband. Then she says, “Honey, I got the part I tried out for. We’re all here rehearsing.”

Now Mike recalls that his wife did have plans to go this morning to a play audition. He doesn’t like the fact that his wife usually gets sexy, passionate parts, but he had agreed to marry her anyway.

Once Mike understands that his wife was rehearsing her part in a play when he had walked into the house, he still feels uncomfortable about what he had seen, but he now recognizes that his wife and the male stranger are not as guilty as he originally thought. If asked to rate how guilty they are, he may say 2, or even a zero.

In the DIG Conflict Model, the higher each of the three components are rated, the higher the intensity of the conflict. Sometimes when a conflict’s intensity had been very high, if it is no longer as high, people think the conflict has been resolved, but not according to the DIG Conflict Model.

The Point that a Conflict is Resolved

According to the DIG Conflict Model:

Whenever Party A perceives that a conflict exists, it will be resolved from Party A’s perspective when Party A lowers his or her rating of any of the three conflict conditions to zero.

An example of a resolved conflict will be provided in the next section. But first, let’s take a look at what a related conflict is. Then we will be familiar with four important aspects of conflicts–its precise definition, its degrees of intensity, the point that it is resolved and that some conflicts are related to other conflicts. Then we will see how this will help us to avoid many misunderstandings that lead to needless confusion and arguments.

Related Conflicts

The best way to understand what is meant by a related conflict is by considering the following parable:

The Parable of Jack in the Restaurant

A dad takes his wife and five-year old son, Jack, to a restaurant. Jack’s meal comes first, a nice big plate of spaghetti and meatballs. After Jack quickly shovels into his mouth a couple of forkfuls of his dinner, the dad says, “That looks pretty good, Jack. Do you mind if I have a little taste of the tomato sauce? If I like it, I might want to get something with it next time we come.”

“NO, DAD! I just have enough for me!”

This is frustrating to the dad and he perceives that he has a conflict with his son because he desires a taste of the sauce and perceives that his son is interfering with his desire. Additionally, he believes his son is guilty of being selfish.

As he thinks about what to do about this conflict, his wife and he receive the meals that they ordered.

About fifteen minutes later, the dad still desires a taste of the sauce, but not quite as intensely as before because his hunger has subsided. He then glances over to Jack and notices that there is about half of his original portion of spaghetti left on his plate and the pace of his eating has slowed up quite a bit. His son’s desire to eat his spaghetti has also become less intense.

“Jack,” the dad says softly, “do you still mind if I have just a little taste of your sauce?”

“Sure, you can have some, Dad. I’m starting to get full.” And with that, Jack slides about a third of the remaining spaghetti on his dad’s plate while making sure that there is an ample amount of sauce along with it.

In the fifteen minutes that the dad first desired a taste of the sauce, the situation transformed from a clear conflict situation to a non-conflict situation because the dad has achieved his desire to taste the sauce. But wait! A minute later, the dad, still a bit bugged about something, suddenly realizes he still does have a conflict with his son. He tries to summarize it by using the DIG Conflict Model. “I desire that Jack not be selfish,” he thinks to himself, “but his actions at dinner suggest that he will continue to interfere with this desire if I don’t do something about it, and he’ll continue to be guilty of being selfish.”

This conflict, although related to the earlier one, is different for it has a different desire. The original conflict’s desire was about getting a taste of the tomato sauce. That conflict was resolved when the dad got a taste of the tomato sauce. If asked to rate how much he wants to taste the sauce right now on a 1 to 10 scale, he would say zero. This new conflict’s desire is about Jack not being selfish. Thus it is different enough to be thought of as a new conflict with perhaps a distinctly different set of approaches required to address it.

Now that the dad has clarified in his mind what the new conflict is all about, he begins to reflect upon possible resolutions. “Perhaps I expect too much from a five-year old boy. There is still plenty of time to teach Jack to care about others, and as he matures, he may just naturally become more altruistic. Perhaps it might help if I tell Jack some stories, from time to time, about heroes who act in unselfish ways even when they are hungry or are struggling to meet other needs. And if I model altruistic behavior for Jack with my own behavior, this too can help. As I think on this some more it occurs to me that maybe in the future if I would like to have a taste of Jack’s food, it would be wise for me to wait until he is at least half done with it. This way, if Jack was in a particularly irritable mood because of his hunger, he will have some time to take care of his own hunger desires and to calm down a bit.”

A conflict is related to another conflict when at least one of the three conflict conditions of the original conflict is similar to at least one of the conflict conditions of the other conflict. In the parable about Jack and his dad, initially the dad had the following conflict with his son— I desire a taste of the sauce and perceive that in attempting to get a taste, Jack will create a loud disturbance in the restaurant. Additionally, I believe Jack is acting selfish. A few minutes later, the dad, recognizing he has resolved his first conflict but now has another conflict, says to himself, I want Jack to not be selfish, but his actions at dinner suggest that he will continue to act selfishly if I don’t do something about it. It’s wrong to be selfish.” Both the initial conflict and its related conflict are connected because both of their guilt conflict conditions are similar (Jack is guilty of being selfish).

Discussion

We have now become familiar with four aspects of a conflict–its precise definition, its degrees of intensity, the point that it is resolved and that some conflicts are related to other conflicts. Familiarity of these four aspects of conflicts help to avoid some unnecessary confusion and arguments.

For example, let’s say a young woman named Sally had a very high intensity conflict with her boyfriend. A week later she now finds that it is much less intense. She may think, perhaps it has been resolved. How can she decide?

She can begin by describing her conflict when it originally surfaced using the DIG Conflict Model. Then she can rate what the degree of each of the three components (desire, interference and guilt) had been on a scale of 1 to 10 . Then she can rate each of these three components as they are currently perceived. If none of the three components are at zero, she would recognize that she still has the same conflict with her boyfriend, but it is just at a lower intensity.

This process clarifies in her mind that she still has some work to do if she really wants to fully resolve the conflict. It also draws her attention to each of the three specific components of the conflict.

If you practice using this process, in time you will discover that this simplifies what remains to be done and opens avenues that may lead to problem solutions. For an excellent illustration of this, see the post titled THE ABCs OF POWER AND THE GUILT CONDITION.

Now, let’s change our Sally example a bit. This time she goes through the process of clearly defining her conflict and rating the degree of each of its three conditions. She discovers that she actually did resolve her original conflict, but it has turned into a related conflict. She now has a clear way to understand what has happened. Moreover, as with the Jack in the Restaurant parable, the process of defining precisely what the new conflict is can point her to some solutions she might not have otherwise considered. Recall that Jack’s dad, once he clarified in his mind what his related conflict’s desire is–reducing his son’s selfishness–found it helpful for coming up with ideas about how to teach his son to become more altruistic.

Well, I hope you find in this week’s post some food for thought. May you all have a week with some peace, some excitement and moments of wonder.

——————————-

Tags arguments, conflict intensity, conflict management, Conflict Model, conflict resolution, confusion, desire, desires, DIG Conflict Model, dispute management, emotional intelligence, guilt, wisdom

anger conflict management conflict resolution dig for the conflict free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum guilt guilting wisdom

CONFLICTS AND GUILT

A conflict exists whenever the following three conditions exist:

Party A desires an act will occur.
Party A perceives that another party is likely to act in a manner that interferes with the desire.
Party A perceives that the other party would be guilty of doing something wrong if he or she carries out the interfering act.

On this blog, when we think about describing a conflict we use the word “DIG” to remind us to look into the situation for a desire, something that interferes with the desire, and the perception of guilt. If there is no guilt, there is no conflict, but there still remains a desire-interference problem. All conflicts contain a desire-interference problem, but when guilt is present we have a conflict.

In the above Blondie comic, it is pretty clear that Dagwood has a desire to take a nap and interfering with this is his promise to fix a doorknob. He seems to me to be struggling with whether or not to feel guilty if he doesn’t keep his promise.

Also in the comic, we see that Blondie appears to have a conflict with Dagwood. That is, she desires that the doorknob gets fixed and interfering with her desire is Dagwood’s nap. She seems to think he is guilty for not keeping his promise. Is she seeking to punish him for his guilt by not preparing his sandwich?

Today’s post focuses on the guilt condition of conflicts.

Guilt and Conflicts

On the right we see Mary and Ron. Ron desires Mary and she desires him. They currently are not experiencing a conflict.

Consider a different scenario, one that we all have faced from time to time. You are going to the dentist and you have a desire to experience no pain, but you perceive that the dentist will probably act in a manner that will interfere with this. Do you perceive that under this set of circumstances you are likely to be having a conflict with the dentist? Why?

The DIG Conflict Model, which uses our above definition of “conflict,” indicates that if you do not perceive that your dentist is guilty of doing something wrong, there is no conflict. If you don’t blame the dentist for the pain but accept it as a necessary part of the dental procedure, the interfering condition is experienced in a very different way than when we experience a conflict.

In the dentist situation that I just described, you would still have a desire-interference problem–how can you get through this situation as best that you can given that you desire not to experience pain, and yet you are likely to experience some pain? All conflicts have a desire-interference problem in it, but not all desire-interference problems are conflicts.

Consider, if you will, a slightly different set of circumstances then our original dentist scenario. This time you have had a dental procedure done almost painlessly by Dr. Beam. Now a new dentist, Dr. Vopee, is performing the same procedure and as he does so, you are experiencing a great deal of pain.

According to the DIG Conflict Model, how you perceive this situation is crucial in determining whether or not you are experiencing a conflict. If you are blaming Dr. Vopee for this pain, believing he is doing something wrong, you are very likely to be experiencing a conflict with him. On the other hand, if you perceive the pain as due to the fact that no two procedures are exactly alike and that the pain must be due to the difference in the procedure rather than any incompetence of Dr. Vopee, then you will NOT experience a conflict with him.

What people who are in any given situation perceive is far more important than any act by itself. It is very possible for Sally to perceive that she has a conflict with Bob when Bob has done nothing to interfere with her and has no intention of doing so in the future. This can happen, for example, if Sally’s neighbor lies to her about Bob’s actions.

Let’s explore a little more what it means when we say someone perceives that someone is guilty of doing something wrong.

Some Definitions of Guilt

According to http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/guilt there are a few definitions for “guilt.”

1: the fact of having committed a breach of conduct especially violating law and involving a penalty; broadly : guilty conduct

2a : the state of one who has committed an offense especially consciously
b : feelings of culpability especially for imagined offenses or from a sense of inadequacy : self-reproach

3: a feeling of culpability for offenses

My Definition of Guilty

As far as I’m concerned, you are free to define “guilt” or “guilty” in any way you choose. I have a very specific reason to use the word guilty in the sense that I choose–because I want to distinguish it from a very different experience and this can get muddled if I use the word too loosely. And so, I define “guilty” as follows:

If I perceive that someone has done something wrong and I become frustrated and angry at the person and I begin to seek to punish the person, I view that person as guilty.

For example, if I make a wrong turn to go to my friend’s house and when I discover my error if I have a strong emotion of frustration that springs up in me and I cry out, “What an idiot I am for making that mistake,” I am feeling guilty that I made the mistake and the reason I am calling myself an idiot is because it is my angry effort to punish myself.

I use that specific type of definition for “guilty” to distinguish it from how I define responsibility, which, as I view as a more mature response. When people act responsibly, they recognize that they did something wrong, experience a strong feeling of frustration, recognize at the same time that as long they are a human being they are going to make mistakes. They recognize that the strong feeling of frustration is a good thing because it leads them to focus on what they did wrong, and the emotionality helps spur a process that increases the possibility of fixing the error in the long term, decreasing the chance that they will make the same mistake. Part of this frustration reaction leads me to focus on what I can do next time to prevent the mistake. This is a wonderful process and I welcome the experience as I would a helpful friend. When I see guilt springing up in me, I have been getting more and more skillful at transforming it into my helpful friend.

Some people think guilt occurs whenever they see that someone has done something wrong. It is not wrong to define it this way except when we are using the DIG Conflict Model. But even when we are not using the DIG Conflict Model, it will still be beneficial to keep the idea of angrily desiring punishment when someone does something wrong separate from the idea of learning from the experience of making a mistake by experiencing frustration in a friendly, non-punishing manner.

If you see that your five-year old son has made a mistake when trying to add 7 plus 3 and he came up with 9, you may see that he has done something wrong, but you might experience this as somewhat different than when you feel someone is “guilty” of doing something wrong. You may think that your son almost got the right answer, and he’s trying, and this is part of the learning process. You might not feel angry at him, nor think he deserves to be punished for his efforts. Perhaps you might gently correct him and give him a warm smile.

Another Example

A husband comes home from work. He doesn’t look like he is responding in a friendly, gentle manner as he perceives that his wife is doing something wrong. His face looks angry about it. We can easily imagine that he is likely to make some punishing statements toward the two people who are kissing, and perhaps he might even go further by making some other punishing acts such as hitting or seeking to divorce his wife.

When thinking about conflicts, it is useful to distinguish between guilt that arouses anger and seeks to punish versus viewing someone doing something wrong without it being accompanied by anger.

Now, some of my students ask me, isn’t there a place in this world for righteous anger? Doesn’t the guy who finds his wife cheating on him have a perfect right to be angry and to seek to punish the cheats?

The DIG Conflict Model does not attempt to decide this philosophical issue for all people for all situations and for now through to the end of time. Instead, it seeks to free people who have learned when they were young a rigid pattern of responding to their perceptions that someone did something wrong. If you have learned to react to a perceived wrong in only one way–with frustration, anger and punishment, perhaps you may welcome the freedom to choose between guilt or a friendlier response.

Well, that’s my post for today. I hope you find that it offers some food for thought. Have a great week!

——————————-

Tags anger, Blondie Comic Strip, conflict, conflict management, Conflict Model, Dagwood and Blondie, dig for the conflict, dispute management, experience, free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum, frustration, guilt, guilty, maturity, responsibility

conflict management conflict resolution emotional intelligence free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum guilt Hope psychological maturity respect Romeo and Juliet social intelligence wisdom

NELSON MANDELA AND THE ART OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION

Post author By Dr. Jeffrey Rubin
Post date December 8, 2013
7 Comments on NELSON MANDELA AND THE ART OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION

“Great anger and violence can never build a nation. We are striving to proceed in a manner and towards a result, which will ensure that all our people, both black and white, emerge as victors.” (From Nelson Mandela’s speech to European Parliament, 1990.)

As I write this post, we are in the middle of South Africa’s 10-day mourning period for Nelson Mandela. Although I myself have never set foot in South Africa, I, along with millions of Americans, and millions more around the world, find our hearts merging with those of his country’s citizens. It is, of course, a period of remembrance of a man who learned to forgive his oppressors; a man who in his later years developed a smile full of wisdom and kindness; a man who could fill up Yankee Stadium with thrilling cheers; a man deeply respected.

For me, Nelson Mandela provided us an enduring inspirational lesson on conflict resolution.

Nelson Mandela and Conflict

When we attempt to come up with a brief description of a conflict, it helps to have a good definition of “conflict” at hand. On this blog, we have been using a definition derived from the DIG Conflict Model.

A conflict exists whenever the following three conditions exist:

Party A desires an act will occur.
Party A perceives that another party is likely to act in a manner that interferes with the desire.
Party A perceives that the other party would be guilty of doing something wrong if he or she carries out the interfering act.

Notice that each of the three conditions has a key word italicized—desire for the first condition, interferes for the second, and guilty for the third. If we take the first letter of each of these key words and put them together, they spell DIG; hence the DIG Conflict Model’s name.

Party A, in the above definition, indicates the individual who is theoretically engaged in a conflict and from whose perspective the conflict will first be described.

For most of Mandela’s life, the major conflict that existed in his country can be briefly described as follows:

The large majority of people living in South Africa desired to have basic civil rights but interfering with this was the government’s apartheid laws and policies. The majority of the people felt that those supporting the laws and policies of apartheid were, and would continue to be, guilty of doing a terrible wrong.

Many of the people who participated in the conflict experienced its guilt condition as so large that their attention was focused mostly on that particular condition, and it became hard to focus their attention on solving the desire-interfering problem. To understand this better, we have to take a couple of minutes to see how each of the three conditions of a conflict can vary in size and how that affects efforts to resolve a conflict.

The Three Conflict Conditions Can Vary in Size

The three conditions of a conflict (desire, interference and guilt) are not just present. Each of these conditions, like the sides of a triangle, can vary in size.

The Variability of Desires. People have different desires, some not as strong as others. We can get a feel for this by considering the following scenarios:

Over the course of a few months, Juliet meets four young suitors at different times. First she meets Tom, spends an hour with him at a nice café, and the next day she has no desire to ever see him again. A few weeks later she meets Dick at a play, and the next day she has a small but not overwhelming desire to see him. The following week, during a stroll through a lush park, she is introduced to Harry. The next day she finds that she wants to see him even more then she wants to see Dick. And then she meets Romeo. Juliet’s passion leads her to follow Romeo through the gates of death.

Let’s say twenty-four hours after each of these four meetings, Juliet is asked to rate on a zero to ten-point scale how much she wants to see each. Zero indicates she has no desire to see the guy, and ten indicates the greatest desire she can imagine. For Tom, she provides a rating of zero; for Dick, a three; for Harry, a six; and for Romeo, a ten.

Once a person desires something a certain amount, over time it can change. We all know cases in which both the bride and groom swear at their wedding that they desire to be together for the rest of their lives, and then after a few years, they have no desire to be with one another for another minute, let alone for the rest of their lives.

The process of asking people to rate from one to ten how much they desire something allows us to measure this kind of variability. A similar process can be used to measure the other two conditions for a conflict—interfering and guilt.

The Variability of Interfering Acts. Recall that in a conflict an interfering act refers to a party doing something that gets in the way of Party A’s desire. With that in mind, consider the following scenarios:

Juliet wants to marry Romeo. Her father gives his blessing and says, “Marry him whenever you want.” Juliet is asked to rate on a zero to ten- point scale the degree she perceives that her father will act in a manner that is interfering with what she wants. Zero indicates “not at all interfering.” Ten indicates “completely interfering.” With a delightful smile, she indicates a zero.

Let’s change the scenario a bit. Juliet wants to marry Romeo. Her father says she can see him as much as she wants six days a week. He goes on to say that on Fridays she can also see Romeo as much as she wants, but only during the day. From suppertime to bedtime on Fridays she will meet some other eligible men in the city. If after three months of this plan, Juliet still wants to marry Romeo, her father tells her he will give his blessing. Although Juliet wants to marry Romeo right away, she indicates that it appears to her that her father’s plan will not be completely interfering with what she wants by giving it a rating of three.

How about this scenario? Juliet wants to marry Romeo. Her father forbids her from ever seeing Romeo and has hired some thugs to kidnap and transport him to Australia, thousands of miles away. Juliet indicates that it appears to her that her father’s interfering act is a ten.

These three scenarios illustrate that, like desires, interfering activities can be perceived as varying on a scale from zero to ten. So too can the guilt condition.

The Variability of Guilt. Like the desires and incompatibility conditions of conflicts, people don’t perceive guilt as just present or absent, but rather they perceive varying degrees of it. For example, let’s say Juliet passionately desires to marry Romeo, but discovers that the prince has ordered that anyone marrying Romeo will be beheaded, along with all of her family. Under this set of circumstances, Juliet may not blame her father at all if he refuses to give her his permission.

What about a different set of circumstances? Juliet passionately wants to marry Romeo. In this case, the prince is not involved. Juliet’s father earns a meager living running a grocery store in town. Many of his customers hate Romeo. If they were to hear that Juliet’s father gave his permission for her to marry Romeo, they would stop shopping at his store.

The whole family depends on the income from the store. Juliet believes her family would somehow survive, but they would lose the house that they love and have to make other major sacrifices. In this case, Juliet may blame her father for refusing to give his permission for her to get married, but perhaps just a little bit.

In our final example, Juliet’s father refuses to give her his permission to marry even though everyone in town likes Romeo and thinks he would make a great husband for her. When Juliet asks her father for an explanation for his refusal, he replies, “Because I said so!”

Under this set of circumstances, Juliet may believe her father is completely to blame for his interfering act. In the case of so large a guilt condition, Juliet may begin to focus on doing something terrible to make him “pay” for his guilt. Her angry emotions can make it difficult to think rationally and creatively.

Back to the Mandela Conflict

In 1980, when Nelson Mandela was still in prison, I spoke for over an hour to a person of color about his views on South Africa’s apartheid policies. The entire time he was very angry and he spoke about all of the awful things that those supporting apartheid were guilty of doing. Each time I tried to get him to discuss what the country can do to move forward in order to achieve his desire to obtain civil rights for all of the people of South Africa, he would begin to answer me, but before he could finish his first sentence, he switched back to talking about another set of actions that supporters of South Africa were guilty of.

I believe this type of discussion was typical of many of those embroiled in this conflict until Mandela was finally released after 27 years in prison. Mandela spoke with authority when he modeled for his people a very different form of discussion, a form of discussion that was less angry, less blaming of who did what, and more on how to achieve the desire for civil rights and how to end the interfering acts of apartheid supporters. He spoke with authority in part because the people knew that if Mandela could forgive after how he suffered in prison for so long, perhaps they could find a way to do so as well.

Oh, there were those who wanted revenge despite hearing Mandela’s approach. Would have more violence bred even more violence?

In the end, the South African people decided overwhelmingly that Mandela’s approach was the wiser of the two paths that laid before them. Yes, there remains many serious problems that remain for the South African people to solve. But the people have spoken, and there are many signs that exist to say they were right. Today, according to a recent Gallup poll:

In closing, I want to leave you with the words of former President Bill Clinton. Upon being interviewed about the death of Mandela, Clinton said:

“His enduring power is that he showed us that there is truth and freedom in forgiveness and in the mental and emotional discipline to live in the present and think of the future.”

Tags anger, apartheid, conflict resolution, dig for the conflict, emotional intelligence, free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum, Nelson Mandela, psychological maturity, respect, South Africa, violence, wisdom

anger Bullied bullying conflict management conflict resolution criticism free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum guilt Name calling social intelligence suicide threats

CONFESSION OF A FORMER BULLY

Post author By Dr. Jeffrey Rubin
Post date October 27, 2013
12 Comments on CONFESSION OF A FORMER BULLY

A while ago, my wife and I went to Ithaca to see the emotionally charged play, “From White Plains.” The title is meant to suggest plain white kids from a suburb. As the lights first brighten the stage, thirty-year old Dennis hears that he has won the Oscar for his film based on the bullying he and his friend faced in childhood. When Dennis reveals in front of a worldwide audience during his acceptance speech the name of the worst of the bullies whose actions led to his friend’s suicide, the drama begins.

Ethan, the former bully, sees the telecast, as does almost everyone in his life, and his smartphone lights up. Although Ethan quickly and publicly issues a heartfelt apology for his actions as a child, the fiercely outspoken Dennis is not in the least ready for forgiveness.

“Why should a two-minute apology be enough to forgive someone that caused the death of my friend and years of my own tormenting anguish?” he cries.

But Dennis’s friend, Gregory, challenges him to think about his campaign for vengeance. Increasingly sympathetic to Ethan’s pain from the unrelenting public humiliation that Dennis is leading against Ethan, at one point Gregory emotionally declares to Dennis, “It is you who have now turned into a bully!”

The plot is further complicated by the dilemma faced by Ethan’s closest buddy, John. With so much anger being directed toward Ethan, John fears that if he continues to be Ethan’s friend, those who now hate Ethan will also turn against him. Viewers of these scenes, as they watch John, an adult, struggle with this dilemma, get a vivid sense of how much more difficult it must be for kids facing the same type of dilemma whenever they see a friend begin to be targeted by others. Should they stick with their friend through thick and thin, or join with the larger, more powerful group?

I won’t reveal the rest of the play other than to say it’s very well done.

As I left the theater, I found myself thinking about my own past. At first, I vividly recalled the times that I was bullied and how I fantasized that I was Superman and used my powers to violently put all of the bullies into the hospital with broken arms and legs. And then, with angst in the pit of my stomach, I suddenly recalled an incident that occurred when I was in junior high in which I participated in bullying a classmate.

A student in my class, let’s call him Ralph, had a head that was a bit bigger than my other classmates. Another student began to pass around a sheet of paper with a drawing of a caricature of Ralph with an enormous head standing at a microphone stand giving a speech. The sheet of paper asked for signatures to nominate Ralph to be “Head of the Class.” Although I knew Ralph was watching me, I found myself laughing when the paper arrived in my hands. Not only did I laugh, I ended up signing the petition and passed it on to the student next to me, who proceeded to crack up at the site of the caricature.

After class, while walking beside Ralph on our way to our next class, I saw from his eyes and forehead that he was feeling pretty miserable. “Ralph,” I said, “we all get crap from the other kids from time to time. It’s just the stuff that goes on at school.”

“Yeah, well it doesn’t feel too good,” he replied in a choked-up voice.

“If it makes you feel any better,” I said, “well, I like you.”

With that, I felt that I had done my good deed for the day and the incident was over. The next morning, however, when Ralph showed up in the schoolyard just before the line-up bell, the kids in my class began to once again put him down. I noticed there was a girl that I knew Ralph liked standing near by. Although this time I didn’t join in on the teasing, I wanted to speak up and ask the kids to cut it out, but I didn’t have the courage. I found myself afraid that if I said anything to defend Ralph, the bullying would be turned on me. And so, feeling like a coward, I kept my mouth shut.

Fifty years have gone by, and I still feel that I hadn’t done quite enough at times for all the Ralphs out there.

As an adult, I now believe that the best hope to deal effectively with the bullying problem is to have programs at school that change the culture so that the actions of bullies signify ineptitude rather than manliness; and that sticking up for a kid who is being bullied is a sign of a real hero (see my post “Bully and Beyond”).

But for those of us who went to schools that had no such programs, how are we to deal with the ruminating memories that continue to plague us years after we graduated? Can we ever forgive ourselves for the actions we committed in our youth? Can we ever forgive the kids who humiliated us? Why do some people, having been bullied as kids, turn into bullies themselves the first chance that they get? And finally, why do some people who had bullying experiences as kids instead of converting them into hate somehow manage to convert them into acts of kindness?

Over the next few weeks, I hope readers will help me to make sense of all of this.

——————————-

Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.

Tags anger, bullied, bullies, bullying, conflict management, disrespectful, free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum, From White Plains, insults, suicide, violence, wisdom

conflict resolution encouraging caring free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum guilt guilting insults interpersonal conflicts Negotiations wisdom

THE ABCs OF POWER: THE LETTER E

Post author By Dr. Jeffrey Rubin
Post date June 2, 2013
3 Comments on THE ABCs OF POWER: THE LETTER E

On this blog we have been discussing personal power. We have noted that the reason why people use insults is to try to achieve their desires. This strategy often backfires. Therefore, we have been learning plans to increase our skill to achieve our desires without launching insults at others.

Learning the sources of power greatly enhances our skills to achieve our desires. And once we become confident that we have a variety of effective ways to achieve our desires, we begin to feel more self assured and less likely to become defensive when others begin to criticize us.

After introducing these basic ideas, I began to build a list of sources of power. This list is in alphabetical order. So far, it looks like this:

THE ABCs OF POWER

A=Advancing Skill (see The ABCs of Power: The letter “A”)

B=Breaking Down a Conflict into its Three Conditions: Desire, Interference and Guilt (see The ABCs of Power: The Letter “B”)

C=Coalitions (see The ABCs of Power: The Letter “C”).

D=Discussions or Debates (see The ABCs of Power: The letter “D”)

When the list is completed, there will be sources of power all the way up to the letter “F.” Today we add to our list a source of power that begins with the letter “E.”

E is For Encouraging Caring

One way to achieve your desire is to make a request. For example, suppose Judy, whenever she criticizes me, does so by shouting and calling me names. I find that I have a desire to maintain a good relationship with Judy but the way she goes about criticizing me is leading me to consider ending it. What can I do about this? Well, one thing I could do is to wait until Judy is in a relatively good mood, and then make the following request.

By making my request in this way to Judy there is a better chance that my desire to continue to have a good relationship with Judy will occur than if I just end my relationship with her without making my request.

There are, of course, several ways to go about making a request–some are more likely to achieve your desires than others. For example, imagine what might happen if I asked Judy to stop shouting and insulting me while she is in the middle of shouting and insulting me. And let’s say that as I made this request, I began to shout at her while calling her a pile of garbage for shouting and insulting me.

Using that style of making a request can actually make it harder for me to achieve my desire. Rather than making me more powerful, it can lead to my becoming a weaker individual. It can increase the chances that Judy will become angry with me and she may end up storming away. She may begin to talk about me behind my back in a way that leads others to lose respect for me. All of this is the very opposite of what I desire.

So, as these two examples demonstrate, your style of making a request can either increase, or decrease your power.

Interestingly, even if I make my request in a way that is respectful to Judy, as in the first of the two above examples, if she learns that whenever she refuses any of my requests I then begin to shout and insult her, she can still end up losing respect for me. For example, consider the following scenario:

Notice that when John first makes his request, he does not shout or insult Pete in any way. It is only when Pete turns down his request that John begins to shout and insult him.

When turned down, John angrily conveys his belief that Pete is selfish and uncaring. This pattern of responding when a request is turned down is often referred to as “guilting.” “Laying a guilt trip on someone” and “seeking to impose guilt on someone” are other expressions that may be used to refer to this pattern. Guilting is a very common way to respond when a request is turned down.

Contrast this guilting approach to the following:

In this comic, Diane expresses sadness about coming to class late and requests that Tom pick her up on time. As she makes the request, it is very similar to how John asks for help in the previous example. Neither John or Dianne insults the person to whom the request is made while they make their request. But when John is turned down, he begins to use guilting. When Dianne sees that Tom has refused her request, she remains supportive. We will be calling Diane’s style of making a request “encouraging caring.”

It’s crucial to point out here that even with all that Diane does in this comic, a slight change in the end could turn it into guilting. For example, suppose that after becoming convinced that Tom will not do as she asks, she gets up to leave and yells at him, red faced, “You’re a selfish creep!” Then she would have used guilting and Tom would consequently begin to develop an expectation that this will be her pattern of reacting whenever he turns down her requests.

When someone makes a request in a manner consistent with encouraging caring, they do the following:

When we ask others to help, it is acceptable to express sadness at the current state of affairs and to seek a mutually satisfying solution. If our request is turned down, it is not acceptable to view the refuser as evil. To seek to humiliate those who turn down our requests is forbidden, while showing empathy and support are essential. Some people make the mistake of thinking that to use encouraging caring effectively, people must learn to resign themselves to doing nothing else but graciously accepting it when a person turns down their requests. In many situations that is the wisest choice. But there are many alternatives that can be considered that are consistent with the supportive encouraging caring source of power.

In two earlier posts, I gave some examples of people using encouraging caring and guilting (see AN INTRODUCTION TO GUILTING and GUILTING VERSUS ENCOURAGING CARING). I also described in those posts the research indicating that those who use encouraging caring instead of guilting are more likely to enhance their reputation and in the long run are more likely to achieve compliance to their requests. Those posts are worth taking a look at. For now, let’s take a look at a fresh example of someone making a request.

Here Charlie Brown asks Lucy to trade her Joe Shlabotnik baseball card for some of his cards. He makes the request in a sincere manner, and when Lucy refuses, he remains respectful, avoids any insults, and offers her some additional choices to entice her to trade. Again she refuses, and although he is clearly disappointed, he walks away without insulting Lucy. Is this a case of encouraging caring?

Encouraging caring requires that the requester remains supportive and respectful throughout the request, even when it becomes quite clear that the other party will not comply.

What appears missing in Charlie Brown’s efforts to acquire the card is showing empathy and support for Lucy’s position. He doesn’t seem to care why Lucy wants to hold onto the card.

Charlie Brown could have provided us a clearer demonstration of encouraging caring if he had taken more time to ask her more about why the card was valuable to her, and then listened carefully to what she had to say. He could have summarized her position in a kind tone of voice that showed he understands and empathizes with her position. In the end, he could have said: “I understand that you think Joe is cute. Well, Lucy, it’s your baseball card. If you don’t want to trade it, that’s your right.” To show Lucy that he is able to put himself in her shoes, he might mention a time when someone wanted to trade with him, but he refused.

When we think about encouraging caring as a source of power, it is important to remember that when someone does turn down your request it doesn’t mean that your only option is to graciously accept it and resign yourself to not having your desire fulfilled. As long as you remain supportive, there are other things that you can do that are consistent with encouraging caring.

In our example of Charlie Brown’s efforts to obtain a baseball card, what are some other things he could have done to persuade Lucy to make a trade with him while remaining supportive?

Well, at one point, Lucy explains why she doesn’t want to make the trade.

If Lucy wants the baseball card because Joe Shlabotnik is cute, perhaps Charlie Brown could find some used sports magazines that have several pictures of Joe’s cute face. Charlie could offer them as part of his trade. Or he could offer to take a picture of the baseball card with his camera, have the picture blown up, and put in a 9 X 12 inch frame. These ideas come from thinking about why Lucy desires to have the card and trying to come up with a way that fulfills her desire in a manner that does not interfere with Charlie’s desire to have the baseball card for his collection.

Lucy may have another motive for not trading with Charlie Brown than her stated reason—“Joe Shlabotnik is cute.” Perhaps it is because she is after power. By refusing to trade with him, Lucy is demonstrating that she has the power to refuse his offer. If Charlie Brown were to ask her what she believes would be a fair trade for the card, it empowers her to make an offer. Notice that Charlie does not do this. Instead, he keeps trying to come up with offers. If Lucy does come up with an idea for a fair trade, Charlie can then either accept her offer, or use it as a basis for coming up with a counter offer.

These are just some of the possible approaches that are open to Charlie as he seeks ways to have his desire fulfilled while remaining consistent with encouraging caring. When used with the other sources of power, people have the capacity to find numerous ways to fulfill their desires.

Well, I hoped you enjoyed today’s lesson. I hope to see you again real soon.

——————————-

Tags ABCs of Power, emotional intelligence, encouraging caring, free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum, name calling, requests, sources of power, wisdom

ABCs of Personal Power anger conflict resolution criticism dig for the conflict free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum guilt insults interpersonal conflicts negative criticism parenting social intelligence wisdom

THE ABCs OF POWER AND THE GUILT CONDITION

Post author By Dr. Jeffrey Rubin
Post date April 13, 2013
2 Comments on THE ABCs OF POWER AND THE GUILT CONDITION

For the past few weeks I have been discussing personal power. Power is the skill to achieve your desires. To help people to come up with plans to achieve their desires, we have been constructing a list, in alphabetical order, of sources of power. We are calling this list the ABCs of Power. So far, the list looks like this:

THE ABCs OF POWER

A=Advancing Skill (see The ABCs of Power: The letter “A”)

B=Breaking Down a Conflict into its Three Conditions: Desire, Interference and Guilt (see The ABCs of Power: The Letter “B”)

C=Coalitions (see The ABCs of Power: The Letter “C”).

Each of these sources of power do not instantly provide us with a plan that is specific enough to achieve our desires. Rather, when we feel stuck in coming up with a specific plan, these sources of power can guide us along a path that leads us to discover a specific plan.

As I have already mentioned, the best way to learn how to use the sources of power is to look at a variety of examples of people using the ABCs of Power. To that end, we have recently looked at an example of someone who had a desire to feel less lonely, and found utilizing the sources of power led to a plan that successfully achieved his desire. We also looked at an example of someone who was being bullied when he went for a drink at a water fountain.

Today we will look at a fresh new example.

Eugene and Doreen (Illustrations by Eric Sailer)

Eugene and Doreen recently divorced after ten years of marriage. They have three children. Doreen takes care of them during weekdays, and then, according to a legal agreement, she is to bring them on Saturday morning at 10 to Eugene’s house. Eugene is supposed to return them by eight PM on Sunday evening. Over the past two months, Eugene was late in returning the children to Doreen’s house on three different occasions. After the first time that Eugene was late, Doreen said nothing. “Better to keep things cool for the sake of the kids,” she thought. After the second time, she still kept quiet, but inside she was fuming. On the third occasion, Doreen blew up at Eugene as he was retuning the kids.

“How dare you bring the kids back an hour late? Can’t you tell time? You’re always late. It’s just like you!”

“You dropped them off late in the first place!” he yells back. “You can’t take my time with the kids and then not expect me to bring them back late. I already see them way less than you!”

“The kind of father you’ve been to the kids you shouldn’t get to see them at all!”

The two end up storming away from each other, leaving the children distressed.

Eugene recognizes that this conflict is not good for the kids, and it’s not doing him a whole lot of good either. But he has been unable to come up with a resolution that he likes. Even by focusing first on the desire component of the conflict and then on the interference component, he has met with absolutely no success. His mind keeps thinking about all of the wrongs that he believes Doreen has done during their relationship, and he ends up obsessing on all of these wrongs. Now he decides to spend some time focusing on the guilt component, which is kind of what he has been doing when he spends time obsessing over these wrongs. However, when he decides to focus on the guilt component, he understands he is to do this in a very specific manner.

To focus on this component, like focusing on any of the other two components, he must first use the DIG pattern to describe the conflict. The letters in the word DIG remind him to describe first the desire, then the interference, and then the guilt. He says to himself, “I desire to have a full weekend with the kids, and interfering with this, Doreen has been regularly bringing them to me on Saturday morning over an hour late. I believe she is guilty of being wrong for being angry when I bring them back on Sunday at a time that makes up for her lateness.”

After describing the conflict from his perspective, Eugene tries to describe it, as best he can, from Doreen’s perspective. “Doreen,” he says to himself, “desires that I always bring the kids back at 8 PM Sunday evening, but interfering with this, she perceives that there are times when I will bring them back late. She believes I am guilty of being wrong for bringing the kids back late even when she has been late dropping them off on Saturday.”

As he comes up with this description, Eugene realizes that Doreen has other unresolved conflicts with him that involve her angry memories about mistakes he has made in the past, and he has additional unresolved conflicts with her. By using the DIG pattern of describing his conflict, he has come to better understand this. He had seen all the other conflicts with her as all one big amorphous conflict. This made it much harder to figure out any reasonable resolution. He now realizes that perhaps it will be much better if he focuses just on one conflict at a time, a conflict that can be clearly stated.

“Now, not only am I going to just focus on this one conflict, but I’m also going to just focus on the guilt component of the conflict. This requires that I ask myself the following question— Can I do something so that the guilt part of the conflict will be reduced or eliminated?”

As Eugene ponders this question, he finds himself saying, “What can I do so that I don’t view Doreen as guilty of being wrong in this situation, and what can I do to convince Doreen that I am not guilty of being wrong?” Suddenly, Eugene remembers that the issue Doreen felt he was most guilty of throughout their marriage was that he didn’t listen to her. “Whatever I do to resolve this conflict, it would be best if Doreen ends up feeling that I really listened to her. Otherwise she will remain so angry that she will refuse to do anything to resolve the conflict.”

As Eugene crafts his plan, he realizes that when he calls her to discuss this issue, she will view it as a situation in which he is providing criticism to her. “I better review the providing criticism level 5 description. And at some point in our conversation, Doreen will be criticizing me. To prepare for our conversation, I better review the level 5 description for responding to criticism.”

After studying those two descriptions, he starts to imagine different ways he can respond to Doreen so that she clearly feels he is listening to her and that he is using skills consistent with the highest levels of maturity. Some of the comments he imagines Doreen will make anger him so much that he has to spend a few days utilizing the anger techniques that we discussed earlier. Finally, he believes he has come up with a plan that’s worth a try.

RING!

“Hello,” says Doreen answering her phone.

“Hello Doreen, it’s me, Eugene.” He had to practice making sure he could say this without bitterness in his voice.

“What do you want, Eugene?”

“First, I want to say I’m sorry about how I spoke to you in front of the children last Sunday. I know that wasn’t helpful at all. I would like to get together with you sometime this week without the kids around so that we can discuss how we can better deal with the lateness problem we’ve been having.”

“Is that Daddy?” their daughter asks Doreen. Eugene can hear this on his end of the phone line.

“Yes,” answers Doreen. “Now be quiet. I’m trying to talk.”

“I hear the kids are in the room,” says Eugene. “Let’s set up a time when we can talk without the kids overhearing us. I don’t think it’s good for them to hear us quarreling.”

“I don’t know what there is to talk about!” says Doreen sharply. “Just bring the kids back when you’re supposed to. I can’t believe you have the nerve to complain about my being a little late on a few occasions when you didn’t even show up half the time for the kids’ big events when we were married. There was Judy’s play, Mark’s little league games, I can go on and on.”

This is extremely hard for Eugene to hear, especially because he knows the kids are in earshot. But he has prepared himself well, and he manages to keep listening to Doreen without interrupting. When he is sure she has finished with all that she wants to say, he summarizes her key points, agrees that there is much merit in what she has to say, and then he adds, “You are right that I was far from an ideal dad in the past. I’m sorry that I disappointed you, myself, and most of all, the kids. I really do want to try to do better. That’s why I’m asking you to meet without the kids to discuss our latest problem. Please tell me a good time for us to do this.”

“I think it’s a waste of time, but how about next Sunday, when you bring the kids back. I’ll have my mom here to watch the kids and we can go for a walk. Is that okay?”

“Thank you, Doreen. I’ll see you then.”

That Sunday, Eugene returns the kids a few minutes early in an effort to make certain he would not be late.

“Thank you for setting this up with your mom,” Eugene says in a pleasant tone as he and Doreen begin their walk. He is making an effort to start their conversation on a positive note. “I know how busy you are.”

“A full time job and raising kids is pretty exhausting,” she replies sounding a bit harried.

“Yes it is, Doreen.”

Doreen then launches into her outrage that Eugene has the nerve to make a big thing about her coming late a few times. “If you bring them home late, it messes up our whole routine and the kids don’t get the sleep they need, and the next day at school they’re wild.”

“I can see your argument is a good one, Doreen. If you bring the kids to me late on Saturday morning it’s just me that loses out. If I bring the kids home late on Sunday, not only are you put out, but the kids get messed up too. What I did without discussing it with you clearly isn’t an acceptable solution to my problem. I should have discussed this with you first. I know I was wrong and I apologize.”

“Well I’m glad you understand,” Doreen replies, her tone beginning to sound a little less angry.

“I do treasure my time with the kids, Doreen. Is there anything you can come up with that you think would be fair when you come late on Saturday morning?”

Doreen again goes into how often he was late in the past. “If I’m late a few times it serves you right for how many times you were late in the past!” she concludes.

As Doreen speaks, Eugene makes sure he does not interrupt her and that he makes it clear he is listening and trying to see the merits and legitimacy in her point of view. He attempts to communicate his understanding of her viewpoint by checking his understanding every few minutes. This involves summarizing what he has heard her say and then pausing to see if she is satisfied with his summary.

As he listens to her list of criticisms, he is tempted to say that she deserves to be punished for all the things she’s done wrong, but he realizes that providing negative criticism to her now would not be a productive approach. Doreen would start to go down her list of all the things he did wrong in the past once again, which he is already well aware of. He could then go down all the things she has done wrong over the years, something he’s already done with her on numerous occasions. In the end, they would end up getting nowhere on the conflict he came to discuss.

“Doreen, I understand why you feel I should be punished for the many mistakes I made over the years. In my mind, I am being punished for them. For example, you got the house, and you know how much I love that place. And I only get to see the children two days a week. Going through the divorce was hard on both of us. Please suggest another way we can work out this lateness problem.”

“Don’t you understand, bringing them back late on Sunday is out of the question.”

“I understand that, Doreen. Can we make up the time some other way?”

“Well, how about this? If you feel I’m dropping them off too late on Saturday morning, tell me and we’ll figure out together when you can make up the time. The kids have some Monday’s off from school every now and then, like Presidents day. Maybe you can make up the time on a Sunday when there’s no school on Monday.”

“I like that idea, Doreen. So, when I feel that I want to make up some lost time I should contact you and arrange a time to make up the time.”

After this issue is agreed upon, Doreen talks a little more about some difficulties she’s having with the kids of late, and Eugene uses his best listening skills. As they return to the house, Eugene again thanks Doreen for agreeing to discuss this problem.

Afterwards, Doreen is much less likely to bring the kids late on Saturday mornings, and when she is late, it’s just a few minutes. Eugene never bothers to ask to make up the time, for it really hasn’t amounted to anything significant. He too, on occasion, has brought the kids back a little late but Doreen understands that this will happen from time to time. Both he and Doreen are pleased with how this conflict had been resolved.

Notice that Eugene, upon focusing on the guilt component of the conflict, came to realize that Doreen not only thought he was wrong for bringing the kids home late on Sunday evening, but also about not listening to her whenever she spoke to him. By improving his listening skills and by apologizing for his mistakes in the past, including bringing the kids home late on a Sunday evening, this helped to reduce the intensity of the conflict. Once this occurred, Doreen became more open to working out a resolution with which both parties felt comfortable.

In sum, the source of power that we have been discussing encourages you to break down the conflict into its three conditions, then to come up with an idea to make a change in just one of them, and then to see if the change might lead to the rest of the conflict becoming easier to manage.

To be an effective source of power, we found that it must be coordinated with the other skills we learned. For example, utilizing the knowledge about the Responding to Criticism Rating System and the Providing Negative Criticism Rating System helped Eugene resolve his conflict with Doreen.

The source of power that has you breaking down a conflict into its three conditions, like all sources of power, cannot immediately provide a specific plan that will resolve a conflict. Nevertheless, when you are having difficulty resolving a conflict, the perspective that occurs when you focus on just one of the three conditions will often help you to create a valuable plan that might have otherwise been overlooked.

——————————-

Tags ABCs of Power, anger, conflict, criticism, dig for the conflict, guilt, insults, maturity levels, negative criticism, parenting, sources of power, wisdom

ABCs of Personal Power coalitions conflict resolution criticism dig for the conflict emotional intelligence free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum guilt insults interpersonal conflicts Name calling teasing wisdom

SOME EXAMPLES OF UTILIZING THE ABCs OF POWER

Post author By Dr. Jeffrey Rubin
Post date April 7, 2013
No Comments on SOME EXAMPLES OF UTILIZING THE ABCs OF POWER

On this blog, for the past three weeks I have been discussing the nature of personal power.

I’ve also been constructing a list, in alphabetical order, of the main sources of power. So far, the list looks like this:

THE ABCs OF POWER

A=Advancing Skill (see The ABCs of Power: The letter “A”)

B=Breaking Down a Conflict into its Three Conditions: Desire, Interference and Guilt (see The ABCs of Power: The Letter “B”)

C=Coalitions (see The ABCs of Power: The Letter “C”).

When the list is completed, there will be sources of power all the way up to the letter “F.” But before we expand the list to include these other three sources of power, let’s take a little time to look at some examples of individuals who use just the first three sources of power. This will allow readers to become more familiar with how this list can become helpful in a variety of situations.

First Example

It’s summer, and Tommy, a thirteen year old Brooklyn boy, loves to play basketball at the nearby school yard. It’s a pretty big school yard, and he and his friends play pick-up games at one end, while the older kids play pick-up games at the other end. Near where the big guys play is the water fountain.

In summer, after a game, Tommy needs a good drink of water. But lately, some of the big kids at school who have bullied him have been playing in the big kids’ game.

The last time Tommy tried to get a drink of water after a game, the bullies really gave him a hard time. That was yesterday. Now Tommy wants to go play basketball, but he doesn’t know what to do about the water fountain problem. All last night he imagined he was Superman and he beat-up the bullies using his super powers.

But that really didn’t solve the problem. ” What should I really do about this?” he asks himself.

He remembers that his counselor at school gave him a list of the sources of power and taught him how to use it. He goes and gets the list.

The first item on the list says A=Advancing Skill. “Hmmm,” he says to himself, “can I learn some skills to take care of these bullies? The only thing I can think of is to learn Karate, but it would take years for me to get good enough to get the bullies to leave me alone. Let me look at the next thing on the list. It says, B=Breaking Down a Conflict into its Three Conditions: Desire, Interference and Guilt.

“To use this source of power,”says Tommy, “I have to first describe my conflict using the word DIG to remind myself to dig for the conflict by first describing my desire, then what is interfering with my desire, and then the guilt. Okay, that’s pretty easy. I desire to get a drink after each basketball game. Interfering with this is some of the big kids by the fountain who like to pick on me. I think those big kids picking on me are guilty of being bullies.

“Now that I broke the conflict into the three parts, let me see if I can change just one part to make things better. The first part is my desire. How can I get my desire for a drink after a game despite those kids at the fountain?”

After thinking about this for a while, he converts this source of power into a plan. “I’ll bring some water from home.”

Tommy goes down to the schoolyard with his school backpack carrying a couple of bottles of water and his basketball. He now has all the water he needs between games.

By staying away from the big kids who like to pick on him, he finds that he has no more trouble with them.

Example Discussion

The list of the “ABCs of Power,” gets you to start thinking about finding some realistic solutions. Once Tommy began to think about what he could do to achieve his desire despite what was interfering with this desire, the problem became simpler to manage.

It’s important to keep in mind that if you can’t come up with a plan by yourself, you can utilize the third source of power on the “ABCs of Power” list–COALITIONS. What I mean by this is when using the ABCs of Power, it is often helpful to get together a coalition of some people whom you respect and together you can go down the list while trying to come up with a plan.

Second Example

Charlie Brown is the Manager of his baseball team.

This year, he is not satisfied with trying to fire-up his team with a spirited speech about spirit. He knows most of his players have not been playing as well as he would like.

Although he tries his best, he gets one criticism after another.

Let’s say that Charlie Brown has been learning to use the “ABCs of Power” list, and he begins to wonder how he can use it to achieve his desire to become a better manager. He takes a look at the list and sees that the first item on the list is–

A=Advancing Skill

“Hmmm,” he says to himself, “how can I learn some skills to be a better manager?”

This question helps him to come up with a plan. First, he goes on the internet, puts into his search engine–“learning to become a better baseball manager.” From this, he tracks down relevant material written by experts on how to run a baseball team.

One of the strategies that is recommended is to watch a local college baseball team practice to see how its coach runs the team.

When Charlie Brown goes to a college baseball team practice, he is struck by how there is so little standing around by the other players when the coach is working with a few of the players. All the other players have some assignment to work on their own skills while they wait for the coach to direct his attention to them.

Hmmm, Charlie Brown thinks to himself, when I hit ground balls to my infielders, I have my outfielders stand in the outfield watching. Then, after I finish hitting some ground balls, I then hit some fly balls to the outfielders, while the infielders just stand in the infield taking some throws back to me so I can hit another fly ball. Too much time is wasted by carrying out a practice like this.

Charlie Brown, after watching this college practice, instructs his outfielders that whenever he’s working with his infielders, they are to play a special game in the outfield that is designed to help them work on their skills. The left fielder is to throw a fly ball to the center fielder, who then throws a fly ball to the right fielder. The right fielder, after catching the fly ball, tries to fire the ball back to the center fielder as if he is trying to throw out a runner on second, and then the center fielder is to fire the ball back to the left fielder as if he is trying to throw out a runner heading home.

Charlie Brown also gives other players who are not out on the field, different games to play that are designed to practice one skill or another. He urges everyone to use all of the time they are at practice to work on a skill and to never just stand around. In this way, his team begins to get three times as much practice advancing their skills in the same practice period then before Charlie Brown went to watch the college coach. His players begin to say that they are enjoying practice far more under the new set of practice rules, and soon this pays off in the amount of games that they begin to win.

Example Discussion

We see here an example of how the “ABCs of Power” list can help someone to better achieve a desire. Charlie Brown could have become all caught up in a net of excuses for why his team always complains about him and why they never win a game. But the sources of power list helps to redirect him to focus on some ways to come up with a practical plan.

In addition to focusing on the item on the list called, “Advancing skills,” Charlie Brown could have joined that source of power with the source of power known as “Coalitions.” This might have helped him to come up with a different type of plan. For example, he might have thought about organizing a fundraiser with each of his players offering to do some special chores around their family’s house, like washing the car. The goal would be that each player earns five dollars. By pooling the money, which might amount to $50.00, Charlie might persuade the college coach to help him identify someone he knows who is in training to become a baseball coach. With a little financial incentive, an aspiring coach might come to one of Charlie Brown’s baseball practices. The team could then learn how a person who is a grown-up with specialized skills in running a baseball team runs a practice session.

Learning to use the “ABCs of Power” list for a wide range of conflicts requires that people see quite a few examples of others using the list. Today’s lesson was designed to begin providing those necessary examples. Have a great week!

——————————-

Tags ABCs of Power, anger, brooklyn boy, bullies, conflict, criticism, dig for the conflict, emotional intelligence, insults, psychological maturity, sources of power, wisdom