Hi, thank you for joining today’s podcast episode. Today’s episode is 243, “How to skillfully engage in a conversation to overcome conflict in a relationship, an interview with Kenneth Cloke”. I’m super-excited to share this interview with you today, as Kenneth is offering such skillful techniques for us to utilize in a relationship, and he’s such a master in having been able to teach at such a level and understand these principles to such a deep degree. So I’m looking forward to sharing that with you.
Before we get started I want to take a moment and just ground with you, with the intention of really setting ourselves up for success in relationship… Knowing the landscape on long-term intimacy can be challenging, but if we approach the challenge with a growth orientation, a growth mindset, there’s so much for us to learn and develop ourselves and grow our relationship, all in the interest of having deeper levels of intimacy, happiness, authenticity, joy, safety, and connection… And that the relationship is a real reflection of the work that we do, right? We’re stronger together when we overcome difficulties in a way that helps us understand each other better, understand our relationship better, and again, just we’re stronger for it, not just patchwork; real deep understanding, and transformation.
The intention of the empowered relationship podcast is to support you in this journey, getting you tips, tools, research to contemplate. And again being more skillful and mindful in navigating the terrain of long-lasting intimacy. You can find today’s show notes on drjessicahiggins.com, click on “Podcast” there in the top navigation bar and you’ll find today’s episode. The most recent episodes are at the top, and today’s episode again is 243, “How to skillfully engage in a conversation to overcome conflict in a relationship, an interview with Kenneth Cloke.”
Also on today’s show notes you’ll find a free guide, “Shifting criticism into connected communication.” And as we’re going to talk about in today’s interview, how we approach our significant other when we have a challenge is significant. And so this guide will give you language to utilize and implement immediately, being able to see perhaps what doesn’t work, to how to shift that into a constructive request or communication that cultivates connection, and cultivates repair, and getting our needs met when we have a concern. Again, you can find this at drjessicahiggins.com, click on “Podcast” and find today’s episode, 243.
Kenneth Cloke is a mediator, arbitrator, coach, consultant, and trainer, specializing in resolving conflicts, multi-party disputes including transnational, marital, divorce, family, grievance and workplace disputes, organizational, public policy and school conflicts, and designing preventative conflict resolution systems. He’s worked in over 25 countries and is the founder and first president of Mediators Beyond Borders. He’s published 15 books on conflict resolution, recently “The Crossroads of Conflict, and Politics, Dialogue, and Evolution of Democracy.” Kenneth, thank you for joining us today.
Kenneth Cloke: Thank you for inviting me.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Yes. I am just grateful that you devoted so much of your career to supporting people in various arenas, large and small. And as you know”, today’s episode and the conversation we’re going to have is really geared towards intimate couplehood, but your career really does support people negotiating conflict, resolving conflict… And for people who maybe are not familiar with you, how did you get interested in this area?
Kenneth Cloke: Well I began, I imagine, initially by living through the 1960s and experiencing a lot of conflicts, and being actually a part of it… And then becoming an attorney; and part of what attorneys do is engage in conflict with each other over various issues. And then I became a law professor and a judge, and realized that what I was doing wasn’t really allowing people to get to a place where they were able to overcome their conflict. In fact, if anything, it was making it worse. And so I began to become interested in how to introduce conversations and design them that would help people actually talk through their problems with each other.
I, of course, went through a difficult divorce, and that also encouraged me to look at how this happened and what the sources of conflict are in relationships. So over the course of the last 40 years, really, I have been full-time immersed in working with people to get to places in which they see their conflicts completely different. It turns out that that’s actually quite possible, and that the language that we use, and the stories that we tell, and the way that we approach our conflicts often has the outcome of making them worse and destroying our relationships, when it’s not necessary for us to do so.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: And where do you feel people get stuck in making this worse? It sounds like you’re saying the stories that people tell, the way they approach… Is there a way you can give us some more examples, especially as it relates to intimacy and couplehood?
Kenneth Cloke: Absolutely. So if you imagine for a moment that you’re about to get into an argument with someone, and you imagine that they’re right there and you’re about to say something because you’re really upset and angry… What is likely to be the first word that you’re going to be using? The very first word out of your mouth?
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Well I know I worked a lot on this myself, but I know my previous tendency would have been “you.”
Kenneth Cloke: Exactly.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Yeah.
Kenneth Cloke: So for most of us the word is “you.” So if you use the word you in connection with something negative, the form of that pronoun is an accusation. And in response to any accusation, what we do is we become defensive and we counter-attack. And so the whole thing turns in a circle. And by turning in a circle, it creates a system that is self-reinforcing. And there is, within that circle, no clear way out. But if we shift the pronoun for example, from “you” to “it”, that is describing the problem as an “it” rather than as a “you”, defensiveness and counter-attack don’t happen so frequently or so automatically. They’re actually not particularly useful in that kind of conversation.
So for example if someone says, “You are lazy,” you are likely to say, “No, I am not. And you’re a slave driver and pushing too hard,” or whatever it may happen to be. But if instead, you say, “There’s a lot of work to be done, how should it be divided?” Nobody’s going to respond in the same way.
You can also shift the pronoun to an “I” statement. For example, “I feel disrespected when I’m doing work that clearly is difficult and that I don’t particularly want to be doing. And I see you sitting back and doing nothing to help.” That’s one form of “I” statement, which is a confession. And another form of the “I” statement is a request. Can you give me a hand? And if you say either of those two things, you’re going to create a fundamentally different kind of conversation.
Or you can also shift the pronoun to a “we”, which is, “There’s a lot of work to be done, how should we divide it?”, which is an invitation into collaboration. So we can see that just from the point of view of the very first word that you use, there are transformational possibilities that arise as soon as you shift the way that you approach the conflict, your attitude towards it, automaticity if you will; the emotional responsiveness and reactiveness that we have. And these are not easy things to do. So it oftentimes takes a third person to help us get to that place. But the truth is every one of us can do it in every one of our conflicts. All we have to do is just start from a different premise. And the premise that makes the most sense from my point of view, having done this now for a long time, is that the other person’s disagreement and what they are trying to say, often in an unskillful way, is actually a gift; it’s a contribution to the creation of a better outcome, a better solution, because it includes both of you, because it’s relational, because it feels fair, because there’s back and forth and creativity, because diversity now is linked to problem-solving. And so you have different ways of looking at the same problem and therefore possibly coming up with better solutions.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Well there’s so much that you’re saying that I find just so valuable and that the real attention to that beginning word reminds me of what the Gottman Institute promotes, that the very beginning of a potentially difficult conversation indicates how that conversation is going to go, and it really supports what you’re talking about. In addition to the questions that we ask [unintelligible 00:11:33.23] our mind and like you’re saying, our attitude to solving that. So if it’s, “There’s a lot of work to be done, how might we work together to get that accomplished?”, it’s a very different thought or even question than, “Why are you so lazy?”
Kenneth Cloke: Yes. So basically, what is happening is that each of us, all of us are highly sensitive to how other people see us, and to what they think of us, and to the possibility of our relationships with them. And so what we are doing is we’re not actually interpreting what is said according to the dictionary definition of the words that are being used. Instead, we’re reading it at a deeper level, which is, “What does this person think of me? How do they want to interact with me? What kind of relationship do they want to have with me?” And if you say the word “you” in an angry or adversarial way, it means the other person sees you not as a friend, or an ally, or someone who has a legitimate interest of their own, but as an obstacle, potentially even as a threat, as an enemy. Whereas if you frame it in a way that says, “No. No, I really do care about you. And I also care about me.” And now from that place of mutual caring that we each have for ourselves and for each other, we can figure out what to do about this issue and come up with solutions that actually strengthen our relationship, that deepen our intimacy and our affection for each other. And of course, in couples and in families this does not happen so easily; it frequently goes in the other direction, because people in families and couples are in such intimate relationship with each other, and because their feelings are so sensitive because they care so much about each other…
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Precisely.
Kenneth Cloke: …it’s impossible for them to actually show it.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Right. Because if we’re sensitive, we’re often protecting those vulnerable parts of like feelings being hurt, or how the other person might be receiving or holding. Like I said, me in this situation, if I’m speaking from my perspective… And as you’re talking ten it’s so interesting because I did a couple piece on the book Together by Dr. Vivek Murthy, and he was saying it’s really hard to have constructive dialogue when there is no relationship and there is no bond. And when you’re talking about couples and families it’s like there is such a bond, and it’s still really difficult, and maybe in some respects more difficult because the risks are so high.
Kenneth Cloke: Yes. But I think that the important element from the perspective of conflict resolution is that it is possible to design questions in dialogue that draw people into a relationship with each other, and therefore make the dialogue possible. So yes, that’s correct. It is difficult. And at the same time, we can ask questions that invite people into a conversation about what the problems are
Even in political situations where you would think that this could not happen, if you ask people for example, “What do you think?”, you will get a divisive response. “Which candidate are you supporting?” “What do you think about this issue, or that issue, or the other issue?” But instead, if you ask, for example, “What life experiences have you had that have led you to feel so passionately about this issue?” Then there is a basis for some conversation, because what you’re saying isn’t adversarial, it’s a revelation about who you are, about what your experience has been, and then other people can say other experiences.
So I think there are two parts to this. The first part is to ask a question that doesn’t have a single correct answer. And the second part is for that question to be oriented to some deep understanding of who the other person actually is. The question is an invitation for you to show up and be a part of this conversation. And then it becomes very interesting.
If you say for example, “Which candidate are you supporting?” as soon as you say the name of your candidate all conversation stops. If the other person doesn’t agree, even if the other person does agree, the conversation is still over pretty much because you are in agreement. But what’s interesting isn’t just kind of like, “Yes, we agree,” or, “No, we don’t agree” – that’s a simplistic way of dealing with it; it’s just yes or no, plus or minus, for or against. But a deeper conversation is, “Why? Who are you? What makes this important to you?”
The same thing happens in relationships, instead of saying, “What should we do this Saturday?”, you can say “What would you like to do this Saturday? And now would you like to know what I would like to do? And now let’s see if we can figure out something that we can both do together, that allows each of us to have some part of what we want for what we’re going to do on Saturday.” There’s just a deep shift that takes place.
The important part I think is to begin by realizing that relationship is at stake in every conversation. And the attitude that you show up with is what the person is looking at to determine what you want as a relationship with them. So they’re thinking about how can I interact with this person? Can I be friends with this person? And some people are very good at disregarding negative signals and just plowing in and just saying “It doesn’t matter. I really want to be a friend with you and I will be a friend with you regardless.” And this is kind of what parents do with their children; their children may behave in horrible ways but the parent still loves the child, and that love shows through. So I think it’s a similar kind of thing for all of our conversations.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: So important to just — I want to quote that, and I think we will, that relationships are at stake in every conversation, because like you’re saying, the quality and how we’re relating and what’s underneath and where we’re coming from, and how we’re being received, or how we’re being perceived, and that we’re really sensitive to that. I love that.
It sounds like you’re really inviting consciousness and awareness around how we’re approaching someone, and that can actually lead people down a path that’s so much more constructive, and really paying attention to not so much even the surface level of like all the thoughts or opinions, but the significance around it. “What does this mean to you? Can I understand you more deeply?” And that can help eliminate perhaps a lot of the hurdles and the barriers to the conflict challenges. Talk to me a little bit about, if you will – because you said a little while ago, it’s really hard to pivot when people are pretty entrenched or pretty escalated in their stance, without a third party. So what do you that helps people get out of this “you, you, you,” to this different orientation that’s more generous and looking at the relationship and orienting differently?
Kenneth Cloke: There are a number of different ways that you can respond, and of course this is really the heart of conflict resolution, is how you create that pivot point. So one of the ways of doing that is to, as I indicated before, focus on the problem as an “it” rather than as a “you”.
A second way of doing it is to focus on the future rather than on the past. A third way of doing it is to search for interests as opposed to positions. A position is what you want and interest is the reason why you want it. So you can ask, “Why is that important to you? Why does that matter to you?”
A fourth way of doing it is to go deeper into the underlying emotions that people are experiencing by asking questions about what they’re experiencing. “Are you feeling angry about this? And if so, why? What is the source of your anger?” In order to do that, you have to be able to hear their anger, and then what you have to is you have to be able to listen beneath their anger for the fear that oftentimes creates anger. So anger isn’t the deepest emotion, sometimes fear is. Sometimes it’s the perception of the possibility of grief, and loss, and pain, and guilt.
Sometimes it is an anticipation of what they think you are feeling and what your attitude is towards them. Sometimes it’s just frustration. But beneath all of it is caring. Because nobody gets angry over things they don’t care about. So if you say, “Why do you care so deeply about this?”, for example, you will get a different kind of response. And these are just a few of the probably hundreds if not thousands of possible ways of shifting conversations in a different direction. But in the beginning, people virtually always take the kind of stance that you’ve described.
Another way of think of this is that there are three basic categories of questions that I could ask you or your listeners. I could ask, for example, category one, “Who is the oldest person on this call? Who is the youngest? Who is the tallest? Who is the shortest?” And now there is a single correct answer for everyone.
Category two, I can ask, “How old are you? How tall are you?” And now there is a single correct answer for each person.” Or three, I can ask, “What are the issues that you are facing at whatever age you are at? What does your height mean to you? What did it mean to you as you grew up? What did you think of yourself in relationship to your height?” Or any number of different questions like this. And now we can see that with this third category there are multiple correct answers for each person. And aren’t those much more interesting?
And now what we do is we can see that what we have done beforehand is we have stereotyped the person. We have treated them as though there is a single correct answer for them, whereas the truth is they’re way more complex than that.
So conflict is a kind of oversimplification of the human being who’s on the other side of it. And I should say that not only is a relationship an issue in every conversation, you yourself are an issue in every conversation. Your understanding of yourself, the way that you manifest yourself is a part of every conversation and therefore your life literally depends on how you talk to people that you disagree with. Because all of that conversation comes in your life, come you and your relationship with others, and those define a large part of our lives.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Yeah. That’s so profound. I was meeting with a couple, I think two days ago, and it’s a newer couple that I’m working with, and the gentleman is — I think they’re more approaching retirement age; and the wife – one of her main concerns is that he will vent and have a negative outlook, and complain… And I was sitting and I was listening, and I was like, “Oh, I wonder if he’s not felt listened to?” Right? Or if his experience was not feeling acknowledged, or his opinion hasn’t been valued, and so he goes on his rants. And so I explored that, and in fact, as he was really speaking, both of them were acknowledging that… And as you’re talking about our individual self is at stake, there is so much in that. Because I also, I just transparently had a little bit of friction with my husband this morning. We normally don’t have a lot of tension, but I felt myself get defensive, and I feel myself wanting to protect how I’m being viewed or portrayed, and so that has meaning for me… But also how I show up has meaning, right? My integrity around how I treated him, how I showed up… But also – like I’m referring to this client – how I’m actually feeling hurt too, or received probably relates to how I view myself. Is that what you experience?
Kenneth Cloke: Yeah. Those are both very good examples. Oftentimes in conflict people feel so hurt that they can’t listen to the other person until then feel listened to themselves. But they both feel that way. And neither of them are ready to listen to the other person because they both feel hurt; or as you indicated in your conversation with your husband, they feel that their integrity is at stake, or something of this sort. And meanwhile, the communication just fails, because the other person is trying to say something completely different and the chances are good that your husband had something completely different in mind than challenging your integrity. And if he was challenging your integrity, the chances are good that he did so because he felt his integrity was being challenged.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Yeah. So for people listening, and for you, just to be more specific, he was. He was speaking generally about health and how even in the natural health realm that there are these fads. And I had a book out that one of my friends had given to me, and in my mind, like you said, I was assuming that he was speaking to me, but indirectly, and so I felt mischaracterized that I was like on this fad wagon… I very much feel like I like to educate myself and — anyway. So as you can tell — we didn’t go far down the road but, you’re right. I mean, I felt mischaracterized.
So coming back to what do people do… Because you said earlier, and I love this, that when someone’s even speaking and they’re offering something, there’s a gift in that. Even if at face value we can’t yet access it. And to your point, in couples, often both people are feeling hurt. I’m sure my husband did not feel like I was listening to him and didn’t feel that I was really hearing of valuing his perspective, and then I felt mischaracterized, and I was feeling hurt. So in a position where both people are feeling hurt, what is it that you do? I mean, I know some people recommend which one’s a little more stable and the sense of having their emotional balance and regulated, but what do you find as far as how to help couples when both are feeling hurt?
Kenneth Cloke: Well, this is very common. In fact, I would say that it is probably almost universal. That couples will have these kinds of difficulties with each other, where one will have their feelings hurt. And one of the reasons for that is of course because you love each other, and therefore you are in a relationship with someone in which you have consciously dismantled the boundaries that would ordinarily separate you, and do separate you, from other people; you’ve taken off the masks, you’ve taken off your emotional clothing. And even more difficult than that, you’ve actually given someone a roadmap on how to hurt you just by the things that you shared with them. And then in addition to that, there is a kind of desire for the other person to kind of be like you. To see things the way that you do as a form of self-validation.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Yeah.
Kenneth Cloke: Particularly in the areas where we feel a little unsure ourselves that we’re doing the right thing. Those are the places where we’re most sensitive. If we’re 100% confident, the issue doesn’t show up. It’s only because we aren’t 100% confident that what the other person says all of a sudden creates an internal conflict within us. So conflicts occur, we can now see, in really three locations. First of all, internally, inside of us. Second, relationally, between us. And third, systemically, that is almost environmentally, but in the systems that are larger than either of us or both of us together. The systems that we create – the family systems, the relational systems. And so conflicts take place in all three of those locations.
And then what you have to do as the mediator or the conflict resolver is to pick which one you’re going to go with to try to dismantle it and take it apart, to tease it apart and identify the different pieces of it, so people can see what they’re doing. And then what I call micro-surgery, that is fixing it piece by piece, tiny tiny little piece by tiny little piece. So you said this; do you think it would have been possible for you to have said it differently? How would you have said it differently? Would that have made a difference for you if you’d said it that way? What would have made a difference? What is something that you could have said that would have felt better for you? Right? So, those kinds of things, and then we do that consciously and try to shift really those three levels – the internal level, the relational level, and the systemic level.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Can you give us an example? I mean, I have my ideas around the systemic, but… For people listening, some examples of that.
Kenneth Cloke: Well the example I like the best is — here’s a clear systemic conflict. A two-year-old and a coffee table with expensive things on it that the parents care about. That a system; it’s going to turn in a circle. And what’s going to happen is that the parents are going to yell and scream at the child, who is going to feel bad about it, but it’s going to continue happening as long as there are expensive things on the coffee table. That’s the system. So as soon as you remove the expensive things from the coffee table, you remove that conflict. That’s one example.
Family systems in particular, if you take a look at the literature on family systems, basically there are a lot of different ways of describing it, but there are two fundamental forces – the force of individuation, and the force of integration. Individuation is each person becoming themselves, and doing things their own way; and integration is doing things together. Well, it’s clear as soon as you’ve said that that you’re going to have conflicts, because one is going to want to do it one way and another’s going to do it another way.
Here’s an example, I did a marital mediation, in which I met with a couple and we have a very successful first session, they came back for the second session. So I started with a question, “How has it been for you since the first session?” Because I wanted to find out what had worked and what hadn’t. And he said, “Great.” And she said, “Awful.” So of course, we have to go with awful, so I said what was awful? She said, “Well just this morning, as we were leaving to come to see you, he left his dirty dish in the sink.” And he makes a face and rolls his eyes and sighs; he can’t believe that she’s raising this. And then she turns to him and says, “Well it’s just like you to have that dismissive attitude.” You know, and then they’re off and running and arguing back and forth with each other.
So I allow it to go a little bit and I tried to jump in with a question but they won’t let me jump in, and I wait a little bit, and then I jumped back in again. And the way that I come up with a question is that I began empathizing with both of them, creating them inside of me. And I asked myself what is it that doesn’t make sense about this conflict? And the first thing that doesn’t make sense is there’s a high level of emotion about this, and on the other side is a dirty dish in the sink. And those two are not equal to each other in any obvious way, therefore something else is going on, so I have to find out what. So my question to her is – because I always assume that whenever there’s a high level of emotion and a relatively trivial topic, ignore the triviality; it isn’t trivial at all. What you’re missing is the meaning of what happened. So I said to her, “What did it mean to you that he left his dirty dish in the sink?” And she said, “It means he doesn’t respect me.”
Okay, so now this is much more serious and justifies a higher level of emotion, but it’s not quite enough yet, because I can feel that there is still inside of me, my playing her, finding her inside of me, there’s still a place deeper than that. And so I say to her, “What does it mean to you that he doesn’t respect you?” And she says, “It means he doesn’t love me.” And now his mouth drops open; he can’t believe that we’re talking going from the dirty dish to he doesn’t love her. He starts to explain to me, “No. No. No” Before that, I turn to him and I say, “Is that true? Do you not love her?” Because she’s now taken a risk and saying this, and she deserves some kind of response from him. So he starts to tell me, “No, That isn’t what I meant.” And I said, “Stop. Don’t tell me, tell her. Turn to her now and tell her.” And so he turns to her and says, “Honey, I do love you, and I’m sorry I left the dirty dish in the sink.” And he begins apologizing for leaving the dirty dish in the sink.
So this is alright, this is a step forward, but we’re not done yet. We have to figure out why it is that for her the dirty dish in the sink became disrespect, and “He doesn’t love me.” So I asked the question to her, “What is going to happen to this dirty dish in the sink?” And she stops for a second and she says, “I’m going to have to do it. I’m going to have to wash it.” And I said, “Why?” And she says, “Because that’s my role.” And I say, “Who says so?” And she says, “I do.” And I said, “And where did you get that from?” And now we come up with a deeper understanding that this has come out of her family of origin, it’s come out of gender roles that are communicated through society, it comes out of a whole series of different impacts and influences. But fundamentally, the reason why he’s putting the dirty dish in the sink means disrespect is because she feels she has to do it; and if she didn’t feel that way, he wouldn’t have done anything that felt disrespectful. And if he really loved her, he would understand that that’s how she feels and try to avoid putting extra work on her by showing that he cares about her and taking responsibility for his own clean-ups etc.
So now we’re at a still deeper level but there is one level still that we have to get to, because he’s not yet included. I mean he can hear this and we’re really having a good conversation about this. And then I asked him, “Are there things like this for you around the house that you feel are your role and your responsibility, that you feel you have to do?” “Yes absolutely.” “And are there way things that she does that make you feel somehow that she doesn’t respect your work?” “Oh, yes.” Right? So now what we’ve discovered is that there’s this division of labor that they both assume this is what a wife does, this is what a husband does and it supposed to do, and the other one doesn’t really get it, or understand it, or value it the way that you want it to be valued, doesn’t value you, in other words, the way that you want to be valued by the other person, as in “Thank you, that it’s so wonderful that you did that. I really appreciate it.” Right? Or whatever it may happen to be. And were back to heart math, and some of those issues that you mentioned before. But the point of this is, this is a way deeper conversation that they’ve ever had with each other; they just made assumptions and their hurt feelings were a part of those assumptions. But once we start this conversation, their feelings aren’t being hurt anymore. They’re getting it; they’re seeing what they’re doing that is not what the other person wants from them. So that was a long example, but I’m hoping it’s helpful.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Super helpful. And you know, as I’m listening, oftentimes people might not even be entirely aware of the threads of what gets that charge in them, or their emotion arising. So for this woman in this example, she might not have even quite understood the layers of that feeling dismissive for him to leave the dish in the sink, and like “Oh, she’ll clean it up” and all the implications of it. Do you find that to be true in your work, that people have insights and aha’s around perhaps the systems and that things that are working in them around norms from family of origin, and gender, and culture, and you name it.
Kenneth Cloke: Yes. Absolutely. Absolutely. So a lot of it is just what we don’t talk about. And there’s such a huge amount of stuff that we don’t talk about in relationships. I just read a wonderful little statement from Edmund Wilson, I think it is. I’m sorry Edmund White it was. He says “Sex is our most intense form of communication in a language no one can decipher or interpret.” I think that’s a really nice statement. So every intimate relationship, in particular, is a form of communication. But in a language that is influenced culturally by whether you’re a male or female, by what kind of family you grew up in, your family of origin, by what your siblings and your peers did in school, by experiences that have happened to you outside of school, previous boyfriends or girlfriends that you may have had that shifted your expectations around these needs… All of this, a tremendous amount of stuff that nobody is talking about, and that is very difficult to find ways of talking about, because there are so many different elements in it, and because it matters so much to us.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: No kidding. So Ken, I know we’re getting close to that end of our time but I want to ask — you’re really emphasizing the importance of you know starting the conversation, and the orientation, the questions that are being asked, and often times having a third party is really helpful to helping couples access some of this… But for people who are listening that perhaps want to try something on their own, are there things that you recommend to support people attempting some of this on their own?
Kenneth Cloke: Yes. When you’re ready to do this on your own, there are a number of very nice, very useful self-help books that I think are available. But in my experience, they don’t really ask the questions that take you to the most vulnerable places. If you wanted to see something that I wrote about how to do this, I wrote a book called the Dance of Opposites, in which there is a chapter on mediating marital, couple, family, relational disputes. And it reveals some of the techniques and the methodologies for doing this.
I think the most important technique, however, is one that you don’t have to go to a book for. What you have to do is to be simultaneously curious and courageous in your conversations with each other. The curiosity is not the same as prying; the curiosity is what makes you feel that way, what does it mean to you? Say more about that, can you just tell me a little bit more, in other words about who you actually are? And that, if it comes from a place of caring, of love and affection, that part of it will be heard, and the person will respond in a constructive way. And the courage comes from the realization that there is a dangerous kind of honesty that has to happen for relationships to work. And the danger is the danger of experiencing pain, because somebody doesn’t see you for who you are, or doesn’t love you, doesn’t love the one who you actually believe that you are, but maybe has some image of who you are that they’re in love with, or they’re in love with their need, and you’re just a projection of their need, or whatever it may happen to be. And in those cases, you’ll need some help.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Lovely. Oh, Ken, I’m so appreciative of all that you’ve done and continue to do. I know you’re writing another book… How can people learn about your work more?
Kenneth Cloke: Well, I have a website, which is http://www.kencloke.com and there’s a lot of information that’s there, and there are a lot of articles that people can download, and links on various other things. So that would be, I would say, a good start.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Lovely. And your books, right?
Kenneth Cloke: Yes. There are fifteen of them now, and another on the way, but not done yet.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Â And you mentioned the Dance of Opposites. Are there other books that relate to couplehood, or relationships that you would recommend, of which you’ve written?.
Kenneth Cloke: Yes. Probably the book The Crossroads of Conflict: A Journey Into the Heart of Dispute Resolution. And there’s a chapter called “Why every conflict breaks your heart” which is about the heart piece of it. And there’s also a part about spirituality, but spiritual not in the sense of religious but in the sense of energy, and the quality of life energy that is the life of most of our relationships.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Beautiful. And do you do workshops? Or do you do mediation remotely for people that are listening maybe not in your area?
Kenneth Cloke: Yes. Yes. I do both of those. I do training for mediators, I do beginning training, but I also do training on how to mediate couples, marriages, families, etc.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Nice. And so if people are looking, who is a good client if they were to want your support?
Kenneth Cloke: Well, I do lots and lots of different kinds of mediations, and probably your listeners are over a broad geographical range. I would suggest that if you want to find someone who does marital mediation or family mediation in your area, the best place to go is something called www.mediate.com. There’s a list of all the mediators, most of the mediators in the country, identified by their professional specialization, their degree of skill.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Got you.
Kenneth Cloke: That will be a good resource.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Okay, so you don’t work with a lot of clients, meaning personally?
Kenneth Cloke: No. I have a very small number of clients and work very intensively with them.
Dr. Jessica Higgins: Got you. Well, wonderful. It’s been such a gift to hear your wisdom, knowledge, insight, understanding around this topic, and it’s so critical, not only for relationships, but for any type of relationship beyond just the couple, the family, the culture that you know, larger — like, political, all the different levels that you address. In business… And I appreciate you spending time with us.
Kenneth Cloke: Thank you, Jessica. It’s been a real pleasure.
I hope you have enjoyed today’s interview, again with Kenneth Cloke. If you would like access to today’s show notes you can visit again drjessicahiggins.com, click on Podcast on the top navigation bar and you’ll find all of the episodes. Today’s episode is 243, “How to skillfully engage in a conversation to overcome conflict in a relationship, an interview with Kenneth Cloke.” And there you’ll also find a free guide that I mentioned, the “Shifting criticism into connected communication.” And thank you for listening. Until next time, I hope you take great care.
0 Comments