In my last posting I wrote about the pitfalls of group cohesion, including the risks of groupthink. This post is looking at what happens in our intimate or personal relationships when we attempt to keep agreement there, at all costs.
The key point I would like to make is about the merits of arguments and disagreements. I can think of plenty of occasions where I have heard the words "we get on so well, we never argue!", usually in fairly new relationships. Of course, when I hear this I begin to wonder whether there will be a gradual erosion of one of the party's identity if that continues or even whether there is an underlying aversion to conflict. For relationships to thrive as well as survive, conflict must be permissible, coupled with the skills to then sort out an acceptable solution of course. The healthiest relationships are those who think "we get on so well, it's ok to disagree".
A reluctance to permit disagreement can stem from a number of problems, some of the ones which perpetuate conflict-avoidance being:
1. One or both parties holding an aversion to arguing, perhaps being guided by the underlying unhelpful belief "it's better to keep quiet and keep the peace". Perhaps this was learned from parents who themselves reacted to every little problem with difficulty, either by avoidance or aggression. Mirroring parents' own problematic behaviour or over-compensating by doing the converse are opposite sides of the same coin.
2. Where disagreement occurs it is coupled with anxiety, anger, shouting, stress, tears, and so on, making it virtually impossible to find acceptable solutions.
3. If disagreement is incurred, one party feels threatened, must be right at all costs, incurring learned helplessness in the other or "tit-for-tat" battling.
4. A lack of self-confidence that one has the skills to find mutually acceptable solutions. I have frequently heard one party say things like "it's no use, he/she talks rings around me and afterwards I just feel worse".
5. A fear of abandonment, typical thoughts being "if I assert my wishes, then he/she will leave me; stop loving me; think less of me; our relationship will be over; we will no longer be soulmates; etc."
6. Disengagement and apathy. The thinking here might be along the lines of "it doesn't matter what I want, nothing ever changes; I don't know what I want anymore; what I want doesn't matter; it is more important that everyone else is happy". The most usual emotional reaction here is depression.
Of course the reality is in fact, if you cannot permit disagreement then your relationship cannot grow and be a mutually fulfilling and happy one. More destructive, "secondary" problems usually emerge.
At the opposite end of the spectrum there are of course major problems where relationships are based upon constant disagreements, usually due to unequal power sharing or continual power-struggles. In these relationships there is often one party who has "final say", creating an unhealthy and extremely volatile equilibrium point. The power might be attributed to whomever is earning the most money, or to the one who shouts the loudest, cries the hardest, etc. One of my guilty pleasures on television has been watching the Katie Price (a.k.a glamour model Jordan) and Peter Andre reality show (from time to time). It makes interesting viewing from a relationship therapist's perspective, because if ever there was a couple who have an impoverished ability to consider the impact of their words and actions on each other's feelings, it appears to be them. The power-sharing battles seemed to peak just prior to their announced split, evidenced by the words calmly uttered by Katie Price, along the lines of "I earn most of the money, why can't I have it how I want it?". At this point, Peter Andre lost control of his composure, resorted to name calling his wife and being hustled away from her by all the people they surround themselves with. The intimacy between them is grossly threatened already with cameras and staff ever-present, the extremely blurred lines between what is surely for entertainment and what is real, and now the seeming very real power-struggle regarding whomever earns the most money gets to have final say. Extremely poor intimacy-building, emotional control and problem-solving skills coupled with sacrificing emotional privacy have all eroded the love that must have been there between them at one time. What is being demonstrated very clearly is negative tit-for-tat interactions, pushing them into a pretty irreversible, downward spiral of negative exchanges. Without the skills to take a deep breath and calm down, to find solutions and press pause upon one's own overwhelming need to take charge, relationships like these do not recover. It helps if one party is able to guide the other, however in this (extreme) example, neither party have particularly good skills nor, it seems, the realisation that there is a different way to behave.
I currently run relationship-building group work, both in France and London (Harley St and Chiswick). Together, as part of a supportive and confidential group, and guided by me, individuals have the opportunity to learn these powerful life skills as well as uncover some of the unconscious patterns that threaten healthy, happy relationships. More intensive weekend workshops in France will continue later on in the year.
Saturday, 30 May 2009
Thursday, 14 May 2009
Accepting Differences
Being different is all part of being human and makes life the rich tapestry that it is rather than a pretty dull monochromatic print. In our relationships, be they at work or at home, it is fundamentally important that we learn how to accept differences, as just that. Different is how it is, not good, not bad, just different. From here we can find better solutions, rather than shoe-horning each other or events into any one agenda. This week's blog is looking more at the organisational effects of not accepting differences however.So what if you work with someone who finds it hard to accept differences or even in an organisation where conformity is a strongly held value? This is a fairly typical symptom of teams which are stuck and in organisations not performing particularly well. One important dimension of a healthy team and organisation is its ability to invite and incorporate differences of opinion, different perspectives and disagreement even, in order to achieve balanced decision-making. Not any one person can possibly anticipate all eventualities, however where challenge or objection is not permitted, then the decision-making becomes stunted and the group extremely vulnerable to being left behind in the marketplace, to losing good staff members or even to catastrophic events. There are many good examples of how this lack of open challenge has contributed to some unfortunate events, including disasters. The Space Shuttle Challenger disaster, for example, occurred on January 28, 1986, when the US Space Shuttle Challenger broke apart 73 seconds into its flight, leading to the deaths of its seven crew members, including the civilian female teacher, Christa McAuliffe. The disaster resulted in a 32-month hiatus in the shuttle program and the formation of the Rogers Commission, a special commission appointed by US President Ronald Reagan to investigate the accident. The Rogers Commission found that NASA's organisational culture and decision-making processes had been a key contributing factor to the accident.
To cut a long story short, NASA managers had known since 1977 that engineering contractor Morton Thiokol's design of the SRBs contained a potentially catastrophic flaw in the O-rings, but failed to address it adequately. They also disregarded warnings from engineers about the dangers of launching on such a cold day and had failed to adequately report these technical concerns to their superiors. This could be explained as a certain arrogance attached to holding more influential positions in the hierarchy and eliminating voices from down below (and external to NASA) or it could even be attributed to flawed decision-making processes. The report mentioned here made a much more general observation, that it was the culture of the organisation to make these "top-down" and closed decisions, irrespective of plenty of evidence being supplied to the contrary.
An entire area of psychology has been devoted to studying this phenomena of "filtering out" by the group the inconvenient truths or differences of opinion and has been called "Groupthink". Groupthink is a type of thought exhibited by group members who try to minimise conflict and reach consensus by shutting down or simply not inviting critical testing, analysing, and evaluating of all ideas. Individual creativity, uniqueness, and independent thinking are lost in the pursuit of group cohesiveness, as are the advantages of reasonable balance in choice and thought that might normally be obtained by making decisions as a group. Irving Janis, the researcher who coined the term, provides seven pointers on how organisations can overcome the natural but potentially limiting or fatal tendencies for groups to seek agreement:
1. Leaders should assign each member the role of “critical evaluator”. This allows each member to freely air objections and doubts.
2. Higher-ups should not express an opinion when assigning a task to a group.
3. The organisation should set up several independent groups, working on the same problem.
4. All effective alternatives should be examined.
5. Each member should discuss the group's ideas with trusted people outside of the group.
6. The group should invite outside experts into meetings. Group members should be allowed to discuss with and question the outside experts.
7. At least one group member should be assigned the role of Devil's advocate. This should be a different person for each meeting.
By following these guidelines, the risk of groupthink can be minimised. After the Bay of Pigs invasion fiasco, John F. Kennedy sought to avoid groupthink during the Cuban Missile Crisis. During meetings, he invited outside experts to share their viewpoints, and allowed group members to question them carefully. He also encouraged group members to discuss possible solutions with trusted members within their separate departments, and he even divided the group up into various sub-groups, to partially break the group cohesion. JFK was deliberately absent from the meetings, so as to avoid pressing his own opinion. Ultimately, the Cuban missile crisis was resolved peacefully, thanks in part to these measures. (this example has been extracted from Wikipedia).
Clearly in organisational settings, we are all vulnerable to groupthink, a point that continues to be demonstrated to this day in groups and organisations across the world, including some of those I have worked with.
I haven't discussed how seeking cohesion at all costs affects intimate relationships but clearly there is a downside here, where cohesion is more important than solving real problems. I will try to write more about this in next week's blog.
Here are a few references on the effects of groupthink on organisational decision-making, including what sorts of environments make groups particularly vulnerable:
McCauley, Clark. "The Nature of Social Influence in Groupthink: Compliance and Internalization." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 57-2 (1989). 250-260.
Schafer, M. and Crichlow, S. (1996). Antecedents of groupthink: a quantitative study. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 40, No. 3 (Sep., 1996), pp. 415-435.
Vaughan, Diane. The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture, and Deviance at NASA. Chicago. University of and Chicago Press, 1996.
Monday, 11 May 2009
Living the Good Life
I am reading the Martin Seligman (PhD) book, "Authentic Happiness" and as I am struggling to find time for blogging right now, I'll pick up on his point for this week's blog, on how we can all live the good life, where we know what that means to us.
Seligman observes that living the "good life" is not necessarily drinking Champagne and driving a Porsche .. (although I might like to discover that for myself!). However, living the good life, according to Seligman, involves finding out what your strengths are in the key areas of your life, those areas that matter most, such as raising children, holding on to love and enjoying work for example, and living a life that draws much more upon these strengths in those areas. He says "the good life is using your signature strengths every day to produce authentic happiness and abundant gratification. This is something you can learn to do in each of the main realms of your life.." (p.13)
Seligman points out that his strength is in teaching and so he gets immense satisfaction from teaching a complex subject to his students or even his eight year old on the rules of playing Bridge. He notices how he feels invigorated when doing this. He also notices how he feels when doing things that are not particular strengths of his, when organising people for example. This is something that he has been mentored in and now considers himself to be adequate at however afterwards he will usually feel drained, not invigorated. I must agree that when I write something well or design and deliver a training workshop that I feel energised, happy, and I literally glow when I see or hear of others enjoying it or benefitting from it. This act of creativity is one of my signature strengths and is important both in how I spend my leisure time as well as in my working life. However, if I were asked to design spreadsheets, work with numbers and not with people, simply disseminating information and reports for example, then I know that I would feel drained and disenchanted extremely quickly! I am much more of a people person and I like interacting with others much more than when dealing with numbers or simple facts and so it's interesting to notice how differently I feel when working in either domain. It's also useful knowledge if I wish to create more opportunities for me to live my own "good life".
Here is a practical exercise to uncover what some of your "signature strengths" are:
- think of a time at both work and at home where you felt particularly energised or just didn't want to stop what you were doing until you'd finished it to your satisfaction. If it makes it simpler write them down as two separate examples, one for work and one for home. Now write down under this how you felt at the time - fulfilled, energised, excited, happy, satisfied, etc. In doing this for both examples, what do you notice are similar to both examples? The feelings? The level of interaction, or lack thereof, with others? The impact this had on you or others? Achieving a goal or getting recognition? For Seligman, it is his love of lifelong learning and sharing this with others. For me too it is in sharing this learning, especially in passing on positive feelings and experiences to others (spreading a good virus if you like!).
Knowing how you feel can help you channel your efforts into more activities that are likely to give you more of these desirable feelings and this becomes a positively self-reinforcing activity. As a secondary exercise, you can also consider times when you felt exhausted, drained, unhappy, bitter or cynical and consider what it was that contributed to that. There will be common themes there too, useful in noticing what they are in order to direct you from aiming for jobs and environments that do not play to your strengths. This helps you to recognise and so avoid where you are creating negatively self-reinforcing activities. For those who find themselves repeating undesirable patterns, try to think about what is the "secondary gain" to you within these undesirable experiences. What is the positively reinforcing element within the negative cycle e.g. people pleasing at your own expense, an unwillingness to say no, a need to be needed, a reluctance to break out of old perceptions about what it is to be a man or woman, etc.?
As Seligman rightly puts it "Authentic happiness derives from raising the bar for yourself, not rating yourself against others". As any professional athlete or sportsman knows, measuring performance for raising the bar of one's own performance is only useful where one's own personal best is used as the measure or bar. If your son is an amateur-level football player, it is far more useful to measure his progress against his own personal best rather than David Beckham's!
If you wish to see how you rate against others in relation to happniness however you can take the Fordyce Emotion's Questionnaire, at Seligman's site:
http://www.authentichappiness.org/
Seligman observes that living the "good life" is not necessarily drinking Champagne and driving a Porsche .. (although I might like to discover that for myself!). However, living the good life, according to Seligman, involves finding out what your strengths are in the key areas of your life, those areas that matter most, such as raising children, holding on to love and enjoying work for example, and living a life that draws much more upon these strengths in those areas. He says "the good life is using your signature strengths every day to produce authentic happiness and abundant gratification. This is something you can learn to do in each of the main realms of your life.." (p.13)
Seligman points out that his strength is in teaching and so he gets immense satisfaction from teaching a complex subject to his students or even his eight year old on the rules of playing Bridge. He notices how he feels invigorated when doing this. He also notices how he feels when doing things that are not particular strengths of his, when organising people for example. This is something that he has been mentored in and now considers himself to be adequate at however afterwards he will usually feel drained, not invigorated. I must agree that when I write something well or design and deliver a training workshop that I feel energised, happy, and I literally glow when I see or hear of others enjoying it or benefitting from it. This act of creativity is one of my signature strengths and is important both in how I spend my leisure time as well as in my working life. However, if I were asked to design spreadsheets, work with numbers and not with people, simply disseminating information and reports for example, then I know that I would feel drained and disenchanted extremely quickly! I am much more of a people person and I like interacting with others much more than when dealing with numbers or simple facts and so it's interesting to notice how differently I feel when working in either domain. It's also useful knowledge if I wish to create more opportunities for me to live my own "good life".
Here is a practical exercise to uncover what some of your "signature strengths" are:
- think of a time at both work and at home where you felt particularly energised or just didn't want to stop what you were doing until you'd finished it to your satisfaction. If it makes it simpler write them down as two separate examples, one for work and one for home. Now write down under this how you felt at the time - fulfilled, energised, excited, happy, satisfied, etc. In doing this for both examples, what do you notice are similar to both examples? The feelings? The level of interaction, or lack thereof, with others? The impact this had on you or others? Achieving a goal or getting recognition? For Seligman, it is his love of lifelong learning and sharing this with others. For me too it is in sharing this learning, especially in passing on positive feelings and experiences to others (spreading a good virus if you like!).
Knowing how you feel can help you channel your efforts into more activities that are likely to give you more of these desirable feelings and this becomes a positively self-reinforcing activity. As a secondary exercise, you can also consider times when you felt exhausted, drained, unhappy, bitter or cynical and consider what it was that contributed to that. There will be common themes there too, useful in noticing what they are in order to direct you from aiming for jobs and environments that do not play to your strengths. This helps you to recognise and so avoid where you are creating negatively self-reinforcing activities. For those who find themselves repeating undesirable patterns, try to think about what is the "secondary gain" to you within these undesirable experiences. What is the positively reinforcing element within the negative cycle e.g. people pleasing at your own expense, an unwillingness to say no, a need to be needed, a reluctance to break out of old perceptions about what it is to be a man or woman, etc.?
As Seligman rightly puts it "Authentic happiness derives from raising the bar for yourself, not rating yourself against others". As any professional athlete or sportsman knows, measuring performance for raising the bar of one's own performance is only useful where one's own personal best is used as the measure or bar. If your son is an amateur-level football player, it is far more useful to measure his progress against his own personal best rather than David Beckham's!
If you wish to see how you rate against others in relation to happniness however you can take the Fordyce Emotion's Questionnaire, at Seligman's site:
http://www.authentichappiness.org/
Friday, 24 April 2009
Reciprocity
When we find ourselves in very similar situations but with different people, this is a good indication that we are being reciprocal in (and somehow contributing to) whatever is happening. In some way, this situation is being maintained by us. Since the early groundbreaking work on reciprocity (Gouldner, 1960; Homans, 1958; Levi-Strauss, 1957; Malinowski, 1922; Simmel, 1950) many studies have examined reciprocity, demonstrating reciprocity in relationship development and maintenance. Its importance to all human interactions is a “vital principle of society” (Thurnwald, 1932: 106).
This can be difficult to accept when relationships are not going so well however in examining this we gain back more control, we reduce our stress and so we are able to better problem-solve rather than remaining in limbo. Often when someone is in an unsatisfactory relationship, friends and family can be heard wondering aloud about why doesn't he just leave or sort out the problems? This person is likely engaged in collusive reciprocity, whereby the buy-in is simply through staying put, through putting up and shutting up. Collusive reciprocity such as this usually comes from being unassertive. The collusion is in avoiding or submerging a problem in the relationship, with an overwhelming desire to keep the peace, for example. Equally, not acknowledging the extent of your anxieties relating to a relationship problem could be considered as being reciprocally colluding. This is not however the same as accepting rationally that important differences exist, nor in ignoring minor negative events or behaviour.
How does one recognise colluding reciprocity? It is usually down to the individual being aware of feeling persistent flashes of anxiety about a recurring problem, but there never seeming to be "the right time" to address it or being closed down by their partner. Equally, making statements such as "I do it to keep the peace"; "there's no point in saying anything because he/she won't listen anyway"; and a general attitude of helplessness or powerlessness are key signs. There are however opportunities to improve one's situation through facing up to where one is caught in colluding reciprocally. Not a guaranteed change in your partner's behaviour however, but ways to improve how you feel about the situation, reducing the anxiety and helplessness and an exploration of problem-solving strategies. This certainly minimises the problem in the longer-term and increases the chances one hundred-fold of changing the outcomes in the longer term. With someone highly unassertive, this usually requires short-term professional counselling for improved self-esteem, assertiveness and communication, with support, understanding and guidance from family and friends. A common problem for a person suffering in this sort of unhappy situation however can be isolation due to a general withdrawal of friends and family over time, sharing in the helpless attitude of the long-suffering party, and therefore disengagement i.e. "there's nothing we can do either if she/he chooses to just stay, put up with it, etc." Again this reduces the problem-solving capability and the self-esteem of the person even further.
There is of course healthy reciprocity in relationships and I call this cooperative reciprocity. This is assertive with respect between the individuals permitting compromise, give and take and negotiation. The reciprocity brings mutually satisfying solutions to the real problems. The healthiest reciprocity is whereby your partner's happiness and well-being is as important as your own, if not more so.
In reality, for most couples, there is a mix of some colluding and more cooperation. Skilled partners recognise the importance of maintaining goodwill and strive to create more opportunities for it to exist, and allow minor differences or problems to exist without this threatening the relationship. There are few things more satisfying for me than guiding individuals to creating more opportunities to create further goodwill and happiness in their relationships. Where our relationships go well, all is well in the world!
This can be difficult to accept when relationships are not going so well however in examining this we gain back more control, we reduce our stress and so we are able to better problem-solve rather than remaining in limbo. Often when someone is in an unsatisfactory relationship, friends and family can be heard wondering aloud about why doesn't he just leave or sort out the problems? This person is likely engaged in collusive reciprocity, whereby the buy-in is simply through staying put, through putting up and shutting up. Collusive reciprocity such as this usually comes from being unassertive. The collusion is in avoiding or submerging a problem in the relationship, with an overwhelming desire to keep the peace, for example. Equally, not acknowledging the extent of your anxieties relating to a relationship problem could be considered as being reciprocally colluding. This is not however the same as accepting rationally that important differences exist, nor in ignoring minor negative events or behaviour.
How does one recognise colluding reciprocity? It is usually down to the individual being aware of feeling persistent flashes of anxiety about a recurring problem, but there never seeming to be "the right time" to address it or being closed down by their partner. Equally, making statements such as "I do it to keep the peace"; "there's no point in saying anything because he/she won't listen anyway"; and a general attitude of helplessness or powerlessness are key signs. There are however opportunities to improve one's situation through facing up to where one is caught in colluding reciprocally. Not a guaranteed change in your partner's behaviour however, but ways to improve how you feel about the situation, reducing the anxiety and helplessness and an exploration of problem-solving strategies. This certainly minimises the problem in the longer-term and increases the chances one hundred-fold of changing the outcomes in the longer term. With someone highly unassertive, this usually requires short-term professional counselling for improved self-esteem, assertiveness and communication, with support, understanding and guidance from family and friends. A common problem for a person suffering in this sort of unhappy situation however can be isolation due to a general withdrawal of friends and family over time, sharing in the helpless attitude of the long-suffering party, and therefore disengagement i.e. "there's nothing we can do either if she/he chooses to just stay, put up with it, etc." Again this reduces the problem-solving capability and the self-esteem of the person even further.
There is of course healthy reciprocity in relationships and I call this cooperative reciprocity. This is assertive with respect between the individuals permitting compromise, give and take and negotiation. The reciprocity brings mutually satisfying solutions to the real problems. The healthiest reciprocity is whereby your partner's happiness and well-being is as important as your own, if not more so.
In reality, for most couples, there is a mix of some colluding and more cooperation. Skilled partners recognise the importance of maintaining goodwill and strive to create more opportunities for it to exist, and allow minor differences or problems to exist without this threatening the relationship. There are few things more satisfying for me than guiding individuals to creating more opportunities to create further goodwill and happiness in their relationships. Where our relationships go well, all is well in the world!
Sunday, 19 April 2009
Creating realistic expectations
In a study of a range of people, some of whom suffered from depression (mild to severe) even mildly depressed undergraduates showed a stronger expectation in the likelihood of future negative events than non-depressed undergraduates (MacLeod & Cropley, 1995). In other words they had a stronger tendency to make negative future predictions. As a therapist, uncovering my client's expectations can provide valuable insight into what their negative expectations are and how these are contributing to or even maintaining their problem.
A very good friend of mine is also an extremely nervous driver. In fact, I had never realised this until fairly recently when we travelled together for a couple of hours, with her driving. I listened to how she spoke and responded each time a car approached from the rear and then overtook her. Her hands were fists, wrapped tightly around the steering wheel, her shoulders and neck were tense and and she made comments such as "oh god, he's far too close .. I wish they wouldn't come up so fast .. I always think they're going to run into the back of me .. etc.". These thoughts all revolved around predicting very negative outcomes. Over dinner afterwards she told me that she hadn't always had this reaction when driving however this problem had been growing, as other problems grew in her personal life. Her self-esteem had taken a knock, and one of the side-effects of this for her was an erosion in her confidence in her own ability to be safe whilst driving. We tested out balancing her negative predictions and on the way back the next day, she agreed to test out more balanced (and realistic) predictions! Although not magically cured it was enough for her to notice improvement and she felt that she was able to drive more competently the next time and practice some more.
During the study I mention above, the future negative events being predicted also included feeling rejected, feeling inferior, finding oneself rather irritated, people getting annoyed with you, people acting hostiley toward you, not handling problems effectively, being a disappointment, not measuring up, making an important mistake, and so on. In another study, depressed subjects were more likely to minimise the gains to be had of taking the risk of approaching new social situations and more likely to magnify the risks and the downside (Pietromonaco & Rook, 1987).
An effective means of countering this, as well as improving someone's mood, can be as simple as engaging them in the following exercise:
Find out what this person's expectations are relating to the thing that they dislike, fear or avoid doing (preferably something that were they to improve at it, it would surely have a positive impact on their life). To illustrate this, here's another example: one of my clients avoided social situations due to their self-proclaimed chronic and "natural shyness" resulting in a dislike of meeting new people, yet he desperately wanted to meet his ideal mate (an unfortunate catch 22 situation). We agreed that in order to increase his chances, he would need to begin tackling new social situatons with renewed vigour. I discovered that his expectations of doing this were expressed in very negative terms, such as "I don't like most people", "most people don't like me", "I will feel like a spare part", "I just feel too awkward", "I will make a fool of myself", "I can't seem to find anything to talk about", "most people are boring", and "I'll end up feeling worse than I do now". We agreed that not only are these expectations negative, but that they are faulty too. We worked together on each one, listing first the faulty expectation and then writing down a possible more realistic (and optimistic) one. Here's some to get you started:
Faulty expectation for not being more outgoing: "I am simply an introvert"
More realistic expectation: "Though like many people I am more introverted than extraverted, I've managed to meet people before in new situations and have made some good friends through this".
Faulty expectation for not being more outgoing: It's all my fault if someone new doesn't like me.
More realistic expectation: Ican't please everyone - no-one can - but it's true that when I feel good about myself, I am more relaxed and this comes across.
A very good friend of mine is also an extremely nervous driver. In fact, I had never realised this until fairly recently when we travelled together for a couple of hours, with her driving. I listened to how she spoke and responded each time a car approached from the rear and then overtook her. Her hands were fists, wrapped tightly around the steering wheel, her shoulders and neck were tense and and she made comments such as "oh god, he's far too close .. I wish they wouldn't come up so fast .. I always think they're going to run into the back of me .. etc.". These thoughts all revolved around predicting very negative outcomes. Over dinner afterwards she told me that she hadn't always had this reaction when driving however this problem had been growing, as other problems grew in her personal life. Her self-esteem had taken a knock, and one of the side-effects of this for her was an erosion in her confidence in her own ability to be safe whilst driving. We tested out balancing her negative predictions and on the way back the next day, she agreed to test out more balanced (and realistic) predictions! Although not magically cured it was enough for her to notice improvement and she felt that she was able to drive more competently the next time and practice some more.
During the study I mention above, the future negative events being predicted also included feeling rejected, feeling inferior, finding oneself rather irritated, people getting annoyed with you, people acting hostiley toward you, not handling problems effectively, being a disappointment, not measuring up, making an important mistake, and so on. In another study, depressed subjects were more likely to minimise the gains to be had of taking the risk of approaching new social situations and more likely to magnify the risks and the downside (Pietromonaco & Rook, 1987).
An effective means of countering this, as well as improving someone's mood, can be as simple as engaging them in the following exercise:
Find out what this person's expectations are relating to the thing that they dislike, fear or avoid doing (preferably something that were they to improve at it, it would surely have a positive impact on their life). To illustrate this, here's another example: one of my clients avoided social situations due to their self-proclaimed chronic and "natural shyness" resulting in a dislike of meeting new people, yet he desperately wanted to meet his ideal mate (an unfortunate catch 22 situation). We agreed that in order to increase his chances, he would need to begin tackling new social situatons with renewed vigour. I discovered that his expectations of doing this were expressed in very negative terms, such as "I don't like most people", "most people don't like me", "I will feel like a spare part", "I just feel too awkward", "I will make a fool of myself", "I can't seem to find anything to talk about", "most people are boring", and "I'll end up feeling worse than I do now". We agreed that not only are these expectations negative, but that they are faulty too. We worked together on each one, listing first the faulty expectation and then writing down a possible more realistic (and optimistic) one. Here's some to get you started:
Faulty expectation for not being more outgoing: "I am simply an introvert"
More realistic expectation: "Though like many people I am more introverted than extraverted, I've managed to meet people before in new situations and have made some good friends through this".
Faulty expectation for not being more outgoing: It's all my fault if someone new doesn't like me.
More realistic expectation: Ican't please everyone - no-one can - but it's true that when I feel good about myself, I am more relaxed and this comes across.
Faulty expectation for not being more outgoing: I've tried this before and it didn't work.
More realistic expectation: the past is not necessarily a guide for the future. My shyness is not a problem in all situations, in all areas of my life, and need not last forever (it can be viewed as a phase). I have learned many new skills and through trial and error I can improve at this too.
Being able to reality-test these in a fairly small and safe way is the next step. Breaking down the task of meeting new people into the small steps to be taken, rehearsing this in advance, as well as increasing one's vigilance to this negative self-talk and being prepared with some realistic ones to counter them with, is the next part of the process. Martin Seligman Ph.D. has written extensively about this subject from the perspective of positive psychology (I am reading his book on "Authentic Happiness" right now and I recommend it to anyone keen to develop themselves and overcome any self-limiting patterns). Together with my client above, we summarised his new thinking into a mantra that he could memorise until able to repeat it back to himself automatically, as follows:
"Though I have tried to improve before, my circumstances are different now, I understand better how I have been maintaining my isolation and shyness. I am already developing new and better skills at becoming more outgoing".
With support, care and love if this is affecting a loved one, chronic shyness can be overcome. This method is effective with a wide range of faulty expectations and can assist in many other areas of building relationships. During conflict resolution for example, one can always try to uncover and balance one's own faulty, negative predictions, in order to begin the process of establishing harmony once more!
Wednesday, 1 April 2009
Spring has sprung!
"Nature often holds up a mirror so we can see more clearly the ongoing processes of growth, renewal and transformation in our lives" - Mary Ann Brussat
Well it is now officially spring-time! My birthday has just come and gone and I usually find myself reflecting moodily on the year just passed and the new one now beginning. The past year has been a good one though, bringing good people into my life, and new experiences building on old ones. I still commute back and forth to my spiritual home in France, where I am lucky enough to be surrounded by nature as well as the company of my 3 cats, 1 hedgehog, twenty frogs and some cheeky (and brave) birds.
Thinking about what it is I love about nature so much makes me think about how we are all connected to this side of living. A more intuitive and season-led way of living. While I am in London it is easy to forget this and at weekends I usually make sure I get into the great outdoors. Take my cats' adaptability, intuition as well as their patience for instance. They spend day after day, finding enjoyment and entertainment in the minutiae of changes (unfortunately killing some of it, although as Persians their killer instinct is barely there). They are patient about time passing and have no concept of achievement, status (other than the occasional squabble for the spot on the sofa), passing judgement nor their widening girths and greying hairs. Their company is so easy, with their friendly faces and their comfortable presence in the house. "Patience is the companion of wisdom" (Saint Augustine).
I live quite quietly, wandering around my garden and the vineyard beyond. Spring is the time to really appreciate the changes as new greenery begins to poke through and the dead wood from the year before quickly disappears (it birds don't carry it away for their nests then the locals make quick work of it in their wood-fired ovens). As my house and garden age, as well as needing a lick of varnish and a spot of weeding, they resonate with all the memories that I have collected in this place.
This is all quite apt at a time of year when I am so conscious of how quickly my years are speeding by!
"...Generally, by the time you are Real, most of your hair has been loved off, and your eyes drop out and you get loose in the joints and very shabby. But these things don't matter at all, because once you are Real you can't be ugly, except to people who don't understand..." (Anne of Greengable’s much loved stuffed toy sums it up!)
Well it is now officially spring-time! My birthday has just come and gone and I usually find myself reflecting moodily on the year just passed and the new one now beginning. The past year has been a good one though, bringing good people into my life, and new experiences building on old ones. I still commute back and forth to my spiritual home in France, where I am lucky enough to be surrounded by nature as well as the company of my 3 cats, 1 hedgehog, twenty frogs and some cheeky (and brave) birds.
Thinking about what it is I love about nature so much makes me think about how we are all connected to this side of living. A more intuitive and season-led way of living. While I am in London it is easy to forget this and at weekends I usually make sure I get into the great outdoors. Take my cats' adaptability, intuition as well as their patience for instance. They spend day after day, finding enjoyment and entertainment in the minutiae of changes (unfortunately killing some of it, although as Persians their killer instinct is barely there). They are patient about time passing and have no concept of achievement, status (other than the occasional squabble for the spot on the sofa), passing judgement nor their widening girths and greying hairs. Their company is so easy, with their friendly faces and their comfortable presence in the house. "Patience is the companion of wisdom" (Saint Augustine).
I live quite quietly, wandering around my garden and the vineyard beyond. Spring is the time to really appreciate the changes as new greenery begins to poke through and the dead wood from the year before quickly disappears (it birds don't carry it away for their nests then the locals make quick work of it in their wood-fired ovens). As my house and garden age, as well as needing a lick of varnish and a spot of weeding, they resonate with all the memories that I have collected in this place.
This is all quite apt at a time of year when I am so conscious of how quickly my years are speeding by!
"...Generally, by the time you are Real, most of your hair has been loved off, and your eyes drop out and you get loose in the joints and very shabby. But these things don't matter at all, because once you are Real you can't be ugly, except to people who don't understand..." (Anne of Greengable’s much loved stuffed toy sums it up!)
Monday, 30 March 2009
To avoid repeating mistakes we must reinforce wisdom!
"Money … can symbolize work, power, love won, or love denied. It can take the form of expensive homes, expensive clothes, expensive presents. Luxuries become necessities. Debt compensates for all shortcomings. "For people to admit they can't afford things they want means placing themselves in a position of weakness," says Dr. Edward J.Khantzian, associate professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. "They have to say no to themselves, and nobody likes that." - Time (October 1982)
Following on from my blog last week about our over-reliance on financial power, I'd like to redress the balance this week and give some examples of wisdom which have occurred during my lifetime. Last week I was feeling a little dark and didn't really give too optimistic a picture of human nature and its possibilities. However, believing in our capacity to act not just knowledgeably but wisely is a necessary step to behaving wisely in the future. So, in the spirit of visioning a better future, here are ten examples of true wisdom that I can think of that have occured in my lifetime:
1. Destroying the apartheid system (1991)
2. Breaking down the Berlin wall and the East:West German divide (1989)
3. Abolishing fox hunting as a blood sport in the UK (2004).
4. Closing down Guantanamo Bay & the US denouncing torture (2009).
5. N.Ireland and the UK agreeing to live side-by-side in peace (1998).
6. Cuba, an incredibly poor country, training some of the best doctors and donating a large number of them to caring for others in other third world countries.
7. Japan publicly apologising for many of their past war crimes (NB: the power of an apology can never be under-estimated. Research shows that receiving an apology has a noticeable, positive physical effect on the body. An apology affects the bodily functions of the person receiving it - blood pressure decreases, heart rate slows and breathing becomes steadier).
8. Women and other minorities are given the right to earn equal pay for equal work under EU legislation.
9. The Dalai Lama's 'middle way' policy demonstrates the power of inaction and peaceful protest. Is there another equivalent public figure today who represents so much with so little material resource?
10. Britain's defense of the right of all human beings to legal representation and protection against draconian policing with the active blocking of both a 90-day detention and the 42-day detention proposal by our Government (to allow terrorist suspects to be detained by police for up to 90 or 42 days before being charged ie formally told what law they are accused of breaking). Finally this measure was removed (blocked primarily by the extremely non-democratic House of Lords - furthering the argument to considering alternatives to our democracy as we know it today?).
"The truth is that Wall Street gamblers are one of the causes of our frequent business depressions." - Floyd W. Parsons, The Saturday Evening Post (October 1923). Since this episode we have witnessed 13 further recessions, not including our current one. What wise thoughts or deeds can come of this?
Following on from my blog last week about our over-reliance on financial power, I'd like to redress the balance this week and give some examples of wisdom which have occurred during my lifetime. Last week I was feeling a little dark and didn't really give too optimistic a picture of human nature and its possibilities. However, believing in our capacity to act not just knowledgeably but wisely is a necessary step to behaving wisely in the future. So, in the spirit of visioning a better future, here are ten examples of true wisdom that I can think of that have occured in my lifetime:
1. Destroying the apartheid system (1991)
2. Breaking down the Berlin wall and the East:West German divide (1989)
3. Abolishing fox hunting as a blood sport in the UK (2004).
4. Closing down Guantanamo Bay & the US denouncing torture (2009).
5. N.Ireland and the UK agreeing to live side-by-side in peace (1998).
6. Cuba, an incredibly poor country, training some of the best doctors and donating a large number of them to caring for others in other third world countries.
7. Japan publicly apologising for many of their past war crimes (NB: the power of an apology can never be under-estimated. Research shows that receiving an apology has a noticeable, positive physical effect on the body. An apology affects the bodily functions of the person receiving it - blood pressure decreases, heart rate slows and breathing becomes steadier).
8. Women and other minorities are given the right to earn equal pay for equal work under EU legislation.
9. The Dalai Lama's 'middle way' policy demonstrates the power of inaction and peaceful protest. Is there another equivalent public figure today who represents so much with so little material resource?
10. Britain's defense of the right of all human beings to legal representation and protection against draconian policing with the active blocking of both a 90-day detention and the 42-day detention proposal by our Government (to allow terrorist suspects to be detained by police for up to 90 or 42 days before being charged ie formally told what law they are accused of breaking). Finally this measure was removed (blocked primarily by the extremely non-democratic House of Lords - furthering the argument to considering alternatives to our democracy as we know it today?).
"The truth is that Wall Street gamblers are one of the causes of our frequent business depressions." - Floyd W. Parsons, The Saturday Evening Post (October 1923). Since this episode we have witnessed 13 further recessions, not including our current one. What wise thoughts or deeds can come of this?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)