Too many filters create too many problems

I just finished my call with my coach. I have to recognize that I’m pretty happy about the interview. 

My coach understood really well the situation and my feelings. Obviously, I did not overreact. 

She said that I was more into the second field of conversation: the debate. I wanted to argue my position. I’m now curious to learn more about it in the next classroom. She said I might have a stronger behavior than other people. She means I do not stop under social pressure. I prefer say things. If things are clear, the communication is better quality.

Usually, people have a wrong interpretation of communication because of their own filters. By explaining to people what I feel, or why I am acting this way, the communication is not distorted. She explains me an exercise she did at her home school. Questions were asked to people. The goal was to figure out if the person was more creative, classical ect... Each profile has a specific way to feel situation or to act. It was then easier for the other team member to understand why that person was acting that way. This exercise contributed to erase filters which leaded to wrong interpretation. 

She also asked me what I could have done to fix the situation. Actually, I was thinking about explain to that person how what he said make me feel. How it is interpreted in my culture. But I did not do it. I wasn’t sure about his reaction. He might be part of people who become suddenly deaf and stubborn when they are in a situation of conflict. Again another filter’s problem.

A good communication could have solved the situation

Here is my story about one experience where communication has been distorted by filters. 

The situation happened at school during a team work, which I will consider as a professional environment. Because of the field of study, I had to speak English with the other team members, even if some of them were natives’ French speakers. I consider my English speaking not too bad. At least, I’m able to follow a conversation, professional or not, and despite several mistakes, I speak fluent English. 

This day, I was a little bit confused. I wanted to express my point of view about one specific topic, and because the other team members didn’t get what I really mean, I had to find another way to explain it. It’s usually harder when you want to express a specific idea, even when using your mother tongue. So in English, I was harder for me. But I did success with the other team member, except one. We had two opposite vision of the answer. That’s probably the reason why it was hard to understand the other person. 

The event happened after. I was supposed to write ours answers on a paper sheet, in order to tape it later on a word spreadsheet. But because I had some difficulties to express my idea earlier, a boy concluded I wasn’t good enough to do it. I really felt he assumed I was stupid. I didn’t appreciate the ton he used to say that. He was kind of rude. Moreover, he was the one with who I didn’t agree with about one answer of the question. I felt kind of tension between us. 

I can analyze the conversation with the following statements:

1) Observable data: He said, because I’m not that comfortable with English, I might not write the paper. He could do it.

2) Selected data: I’m not that comfortable with English

3) Added meanings: He has something personal against me

4) Assumptions made on the added meanings: He thinks my English sucks. I’m too stupid to do it.

5) Conclusions: That boy doesn’t like me, that’s why he was kind of rude when he assumed my English wasn’t good enough.

6) Beliefs: I didn’t agree with him earlier about the answer for the team work. Plus he took an example in sport. I’m not at all a sporty fancy person, and he felt it.

7) Actions based on these beliefs: I don’t fell hurt but my self-esteem do. I will be careful next time I’ll be working with him.

I saw this boy only once since that event. But this awkward is feeling still on. The best solution would be to talk to him at that moment. He was probably not assuming such opinion about me. I should explain him that in my culture, when you speak with people this way, it is interpreted as be really rude.

The one who didn’t want to communicate

Nawal has chosen a situation where the communication is key issue for the conclusion of the event. 

It was a really hard topic in the sense of it affected her directly. It is not easy to speak objectively about such kind of situation. But she did well. She explained only facts, without using any personal opinion. So, facts were even stronger. 

The situation took place during her internship. She had to deal with a really rude, impolite and unfair person. She wasn’t excepting a situation like this. She did not find a way to talk to that person in order to solve the problem. She was frustrated of that non healthy communication.

Actually, it was hard for me to stay objective. I have met the same kind of work environment, and I know how hard I can be to face it. I really think that sometimes communication is useless with that kind of people. Obviously they are not ready to listen, and communication starts by listening. It’s seems to be an endless conflict. 

To conclude the interview, I asked her two questions which gave me an overview about her way to deal with problems. It also gave her, for the first time, the opportunity to analyze the situation from outside. The questions were:

• What would you have done to solve the problem if you had the opportunity to defense yourself?

• What would you have done if you were in a higher hierarchical level than that person?