When the goal is positivity

[Zues126]

There is no way he'd be having this conversation if the idea of R wasn't in the picture. Did it sound like he enjoys this? He is in limbo too. The only reason he's dealing with it is because he hopes it improves. But if it doesn't I'm sure at some point he'll file, just like at some point he separated.

In your last posts I hear you talking about how he yelled. I haven't seen you write anything that shows that you really appreciate what he's saying. When someone says the same things, multiple times, in escalating tones...that's a sign they don't feel they're being heard. And it doesn't look like he is, because you continue to type your side of it and why you don't feel he's being reasonable or fair.

Then you go back to the giving up thing. Giving up won't lessen the pain from the loss of your marriage and it comes from the same place that he did when he walked, one of the things you are most upset with him for doing.

I know you have tried to understand his point of view. If you do intend to stand by your M I think you need to step up your validation game. It's not about psycho canned responses. It's about being able to articulate 'his side' as well as he can.

I remember I had an argument with XW once when we were recently separated. It was my ONLY argument post BD. Funny, this was during my high alert faze where I tape recorded a few of our interactions so I had it on my cell phone. I was mad at myself for failing to validate, so later I listened to it again. I wrote out her point of view and underlying concerns. Funny thing- once I wasn't in the heat of the moment I recognized great validity in everything she was saying, even if some of the details differed. It was eye opening. I later emailed her back saying "Finances, legal system, children...could it get any more intimidating? We weren't the best at communication during our R, now's a heck of a time to try to improve. Anyway, it couldn't have felt I heard anything you had to say, so let me tell you what I think your main points were." Then I bulleted them ALL out. I concluded by saying "While we may need to compromise here and there, I find that I agree with you 100% in all of your underlying concerns, and we'll keep them in the center of any decisions we make for our family."

I'm quoting something I posted earlier. Keep working JH. You will get there if you stay the course.

I think you need to do both. Validate and boundary set/truth dart. They don't have to conflict.

The thing is, validation is all about acknowledging the other person's point of view. That is it. The challenge for LBS's is we really don't. But we expect them to understand and agree with ours. Seek not to be understood, but to understand. Someone has to step up and lead the way. And what I've learned is that when people feel understood and acknowledged, they feel so grateful and appreciative of that they want to reciprocate.

Take an exchange I had last week between me and my manager. Now, he is a great manager, and I am a great employee.


The background needed: I am a star employee that hit my goals in 2015 in year 1 on the team
The topic: Me being given a verbal warning for missing January goals

My manager and I had a scheduled 1:1. He spent most of the time working with me on my game plan, helping where he could, probing me and challenging my plans in certain areas, getting involved in a few spots to assist, and giving me feedback on what my plan was. This was all done in a respectful way. Then at the end he brought up the verbal warning.

He did it almost apologetically. He started by telling me he understood how things had played out. He acknowledged that I had gone through a lot in Nov/Dec with custody battles and divorce, and that he knew that impacted me. He also understood that the entire market was challenged during seasonality, and that being in a longer sales cycle that operates on pipeline, these factors created a storm in which poor results were hard to avoid.

Before he could even get to the part where he held me accountable for my actions, I objected. I told him that we all have personal lives, but that I was a professional, and I make no excuses for my management of my assignment. I told him that while business slowed down, I didn't do my part to anticipate the decrease in business and take enough proactive measures to offset the dip. I said I appreciated his consideration, but that I have a responsibility to my customers, my team, my company, and our shareholders, and I hold myself fully responsible for an unacceptable performance.

Funny, when you have a healthy debate both people end up saying what they think the other person should have said.

Suppose my boss had led by telling me that I had a responsibility to my team and company, that I should've been more proactive, that I am fully responsible for my performance...how do you think that would've flown? Most employees would've responded defensively (even though he's right) and even though I would've agreed, I would've left thinking he was a dick. Instead I am more appreciative of his leadership than ever and don't want to let him down.

So, flight...there's an example of how to validate and set boundaries. My boss has to deliver the verbal warning, he can't keep me on the team indefinitely if I don't perform, he can't allow me to spew excuses and keep missing targets...but the best way to get that is to validate all of the things that contributed to me being in that spot.

Same way, when a WAS is talking about why they left, or why they cheated...while that isn't appropriate behavior, if we go right to attacking and condemning the behavior and trying to show them why they're wrong and we're right, nothing good comes out of it. Their defenses flare up, and we only help them dig in their heels. But if we can validate all of the reasons WHY they felt they had to leave, while still maintaining our boundaries and beliefs...THAT is the balance we should look for.

As to when to do which, when to truth dart, when to validate, etc...that is more complicated. But I'll tell you this- truth darting should be done sparingly...and I don't think it should be done at all until there has been a foundation of serious validating. You have to establish in their minds that you know their mind, you know their feelings, and you care...then maybe they'll give some respect to what you say, even if they don't like it initially.

So truth darting has to follow validation. And in order to validate you have to see past your side of the debate. That's very, very hard for us LBS's when we're in so much pain. But it is critical and why I harp so hard on this topic.