Quotes from Douglas Stone

People do sometimes worry that we are about to put someone's "face" at risk, but then visibly relax as they realize that we have put a joint problem on the table (from the third story, of course) with no hint of the blame frame.

Stop Arguing About Who's Right: Explore Each Other's Stories

Of course, neither Doug nor Andrew walked away from the parade thinking, "I enjoyed my particular perspective on the parade based on the information I paid attention to." Each walked away thinking, "I enjoyed the parade." Each assumes that what he paid attention to was what was significant about the experience. Each assumes he has "the facts.

We Think They Are the Problem

And what you experience as an attack might in their mind be meant as a defense against your attack. What, you say, you never attacked them? Ah, there's the rub.

They're selfish.

They're naive.

the normal course of things, we don't notice the ways in which our story of the world is different from

I've described the problem in a way we can each accept. Now I want to propose mutual understanding and problem-solving as purposes, check to see if this makes sense to you, and invite you to join me in a conversation.

They're controlling.

Think of the goal rather as "offering and discussing a possible description and purpose" for your conversation. In other words, the task of describing the problem and of setting purposes is itself a joint task.

If you're not going to answer right away, send a quick note explaining why and when you expect to get back to them. "Let me check with Dan, and I'll get back to you in a few days. If you haven't heard from me by Tuesday, please send a reminder. Thanks!

Can you help me understand . . . ?" you offer the role of advisor. "Let's work on how we might . . . ." invites a partnership. "I wonder whether it's possible to . . . ." throws out a challenge, one which offers the other person the potential role of hero.

They're irrational.

They Think We Are the Problem

Sometimes the most genuine thing you can do is share your internal struggle to cast them in a more positive role. You can say something like, "The story I'm telling in my head about what is going on is that you are being inconsiderate. At some level I know that's unfair to you, and I need you to help me put things in better perspective. I need you to help me understand where you are coming from on this.

In the normal course of things, we don't notice the ways in which our story of the world is different from other people's.

Arguing Blocks Us from Exploring Each Other's Stories

I'd like to explore whether a raise for me might make sense. From the information I have, I think I deserve one. [Here's my reasoning.] I wonder how you see it?

First, paraphrasing gives you a chance to check your understanding. Difficult conversations are made harder when an important misunderstanding exists, and such misunderstandings are more common than we imagine. Paraphrasing gives the other person the chance to say, "No, that's not quite what I meant. What I really meant was . .

Arguing Without Understanding Is Unpersuasive

Second, paraphrasing lets the other person know they've been heard. Usually the reason someone repeats himself or herself in a conversation is because they have no indication that you've actually taken in what they've said. If you notice that the other person is saying the same thing over and over again, take it as a signal that you need to paraphrase more.

Research conducted at Stanford points to two very different ways people tell their identity story and the effect that can have on how we experience criticism, challenge, and failure. One identity story assumes our traits are "fixed": Whether we are capable or bumbling, lovable or difficult, smart or dull, we aren't going to change. Hard work and practice won't help; we are as we are. Feedback reveals "how we are," so there's a lot at stake.

Different Stories: Why We Each See the World Differently