{"id":646,"date":"2021-03-23T06:37:19","date_gmt":"2021-03-23T06:37:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/trellisterium.de\/?p=646"},"modified":"2022-12-14T18:18:27","modified_gmt":"2022-12-14T16:18:27","slug":"problemloeser-werden","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/trellisterium.de\/en\/problemloeser-werden\/","title":{"rendered":"Become a Problem Solver!"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>\n

\n

Once again, a frustrating meeting that somehow got out of hand. Actually, all participants had expressed their best will before the meeting. But instead of discussing the essentials, once again only mutual recriminations were exchanged. What is going on? How to prevent this?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

\u201cWhy did you do that?!\u201d<\/h1>\n

Do you remember what it was like to be confronted by your parents or teachers when you were a child? \u201cWhy did you do that?!\u201d I well remember what that was like: not nice.<\/p>\n

How you got out of such situations remains your secret. However, my basic repertoire of reactions might sound familiar to you: Denial, evasion, attack. (Admitting was a real option only in cases of ultimate emergency.)<\/p>\n

Did you know that childhood experiences decisively shape adult actions and deeds? We learn how to speak, think and act by observing what our immediate caregivers do. We imitate, try out and practice \u201csuccess patterns\u201d until they become automatic or at least almost automatic.<\/p>\n

\n

The classic Case of Problem Orientation<\/h1>\n

Asking why is just as much a part of these automatisms as the reactions to it. The classic case of problem orientation. The reason for all those conversations that are potentially aggressive and anything but goal-oriented.<\/p>\n

Asking Why directs the focus away from the actual goal and towards the past (which cannot be changed after all). It immediately puts people under pressure to justify themselves.<\/p>\n

The result is a \u201cchemical\u201d chain reaction that activates bad feelings and ingrained patterns. And this on both sides. For everyone involved, it means a lot of negative emotions, concentration, and attention, and thus: consumption of energy.<\/p>\n

Energy wasted in this way would certainly be better invested in solving a problem. Also, the why-question also introduces the moral-ethical category of \u201cguilt\u201d into the conversation, which has seldom contributed to a solution in matters of fact.<\/p>\n

With luck, this only delays agreement on important issues. Usually, however, the \u201cwhy\u201d question causes the participants to retreat to positions instead of discussing interests and the common path. They do so in the firm conviction that they have the right to enforce it \u2014 even with brute force if necessary.<\/p>\n

When this happens, everyone has long been in a downward spiral that can \u2014 if at all \u2014 be stopped and brought back on track with a lot of effort, and often enough only with the help of an external mediator (and a lot of goodwill from all involved).<\/p>\n

\n

Avoid the Justification Trap<\/h1>\n

What can you do if you want to be more positive and solution-oriented? The answer is simple. All you need is attentiveness and a certain amount of self-discipline. And, of course, a little practice:<\/p>\n