A classic situation of conflict within work teams occurs when one person does not act according to the expectations of another, and this generates friction and claims. We find ourselves with a lack of understanding and empathy, which alters the work environment and complicates the achievement of objectives.
Claims such as “put yourself in my place” or sterile suggestions such as “if I were in your place, what I would do is…” are often heard, without really achieving a rapprochement between the parties or remedying the conflict.
Why does it happen that “putting oneself in the other’s place” is not effective in understanding each other or in finding solutions?
We generally use the phrase “I put myself in your place” as a metaphor that represents the act of imagining ourselves in the other person’s situation. It allows us to recognize how you may be feeling, what your fears and concerns are, your enjoyment or satisfaction.
The problem is that when we do it, we start to ourselves in the place of the other, but the one who is in that place is he and not us. And as obvious as it may seem, we forget that we have different fears and resources, different origins, another story, and also that our objectives may be different.
Therefore, this resource is usually insufficient to understand the actions of another person, since it does so from its own singularity.
It can even make conflicts worse, by generating anger or impotence because they do not do “what I would do”, or simply “I can’t understand it”, complicating the search for solutions.
For this, Neuro Linguistic Programming proposes a model that allows us to go through conflicts and bond harmoniously.
The first step is to become aware of what we ourselves are feeling in this situation, to recognize our emotions, resources and limitations, taking into account what we want to happen.
Once we become aware of our own position, putting ourselves in the place of the other as if we were that person, imagine ourselves with their history, their convictions, resources and limitations, considering what is negotiable and what is not, from their point of view. We are going to try to get as close as possible to his particular way of seeing and feeling.
After having gone through these two positions, we are going to leave both places to identify new alternatives, seeing the situation from the outside, without being involved on one side or the other. From there, think about what advice we could give to these “strangers” so that the relationship flows and they can achieve their own objectives in harmony.
Finally, we put ourselves back in the first place, identifying with ourselves, to “receive” these new points of view and evaluate which ones we feel comfortable with and are applicable to us.
The next time you cannot understand why the other does what he does, instead of resisting and getting angry, I invite you to go through these three positions until you broaden your understanding of the situation and of the people, and from there, find new alternatives.
Cristina Saleno
NLP Trainer – Professional Ontological Coach
Coordinator of the NLP career at ELAC Foundation.
by CEDOC