According to John Gottman:

“Contempt is the single greatest predictor of divorce. It must be eliminated.”

In Gottman’s Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, contempt is by far the most toxic to relationships. Contempt is characterized by being brutally mean in a way intended to make the other person feel “despised and worthless.” Behaviors such as mocking, ridiculing, name calling, mimicking, eye-rolling, sneering, scoffing, all code as contempt. Notice the facial expression in the accompanying photo of Dr. Jim Coan modeling contempt: one side of the mouth is raised in a sneer. There is a sense of superiority and distaste, almost disgust.

Gottman and Coan looked at couples. But we all know that contempt sneaks into the work place, certainly into politics, and more and more into what used to be simple disagreements. If contempt is the most toxic behavior in intimate relationships, it is certainly toxic elsewhere.

What does Gottman prescribe as the antidote? Read on…

We’ve been digging into John Gottman’s work, specifically what he calls The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, or the four behaviors most correlated with toxic relationships.

Last week we looked at Defensiveness.

This week we look at Criticism. Criticism is a global attack, often using words like, “never,” “always,” and often invites defensiveness. Gottman makes the distinction between criticism and complaint: “A complaint focuses on a specific behavior, but criticism attacks a person’s very character.”

I’d like to add another distinction between “complaint” (a specific request) and “complaining” (whining). Whining did not make it into the Four Horsemen, but it sure is a connection killer, if you ask me.

See if you can distinguish between criticism (global personal attack) and complaint (direct request), below. Read on…

In exploring John Gottman’s Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, I begin with Defensiveness mostly because it is the one I find most common in my own relationships and interactions. Yes, indeed. Why? Because I want everyone to love me and I’m always right. A perfect recipe for defensiveness.

Gottman notes that defensiveness is usually a response to criticism (we’ll get to that!).

Importantly, Gottman reminds us that “being defensive never helps to solve the problem at hand.” Defensiveness does not work! It does not solve the problem! It only serves to dig deeper into the conflict.

What does Gottman advise as an antidote to defensiveness?  “The antidote is to …read on.

Though John Gottman’s research focuses on romantic partnerships, I find his work very useful when thinking about all sorts of interactive communications: tense conversations, co-parenting, parenting, facilitation, interviews, community meetings. Gottman’s Four Horses of the Apocalypse are particularly useful; these are the behaviors Gottman has found to most negatively impact relationships. Of course, we all fall into these behaviors sometimes! They key is to notice when they dominate interactions and practice their antidotes when possible. In heightened, high-stakes interactions where we need to influence others, gain momentum, create coalitions, change systems, ignite ideas, or overcome obstacles, avoiding these behaviors is an essential skill.

Gottman’s Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse are: defensiveness, criticism, stonewalling, and read on…

In this photo we have the ‘seen’ and the ‘hidden’ ,the sunlit tracks and the mysterious tunnel. In communication we see this dichotomy in the words we use, or the text, the ‘seen,’ and the true meaning, or the subtext, the ‘hidden.’ In a recent post, I talked about how Intention animates language and even changes its meaning; HOW we say something carries more weight than the words themselves. In fact, HOW we say something is sometimes in opposition to the WHAT we are saying. Sometimes it sounds like people are “speaking in code,” saying one thing but meaning another.

What would happen if we answered and addressed the hidden, the subtext, rather than the spoken words? This is fun to play with. Read on…

Just after I posted last week’s blog about generosity (thanks, Jake!), I began to think about overflowing generosity, endless outpourings, infinite neediness, The Giving Tree, boundless desire, the eternal teat, being bled dry. Yes, I am a parent. The expectation of limitless generosity that some of us might feel, is not healthy. For anyone—not the giver, nor the receiver.

So how do we maintain our abundant generosity and our whole selves? How do we balance taking care of ourselves and giving to others?

Read on…

Have you ever watched a talk, performance, or concert that felt like a gift? Like the performer is giving us something precious? Wouldn’t it be amazing if we all could harness that generosity when speaking?

Last summer, while spending the afternoon with a dear friend, writer and musician, Jake Slichter, my son asked him who is favorite musicians were. The first name Jake uttered without hesitation was Stevie Wonder. Luke asked him, “Why?” And Jake answered, “Because he is generous.”

The truth is that Stevie Wonder is always in my top three favorite musicians ever, along with Bonnie Raitt and Everything But the Girl, but I couldn’t contain myself and butted-in, “What about the Beatles, Joni Mitchell, Al Green? Aretha Franklin, Steely Dan, Ella Fitzgerald, Beck, PRINCE!”

Jake agreed that these are all wonderful artists. But to him, the thing that makes Stevie Wonder so phenomenal is his generosity.

Before writing this post, I reached out to Jake to dig a little deeper into his idea of generosity. Here is what he had to say…

What’s at stake when we do not communicate our vision directly? As leaders, it is our responsibility to hold the vision and communicate it clearly and often, while also trusting our teams to be expert in their own realms. If we do not find this balance, we risk misunderstanding, internal squabbles over siloed priorities and resources, and wasted time and energy spent moving in the wrong direction.

As an actor in a play, I see things subjectively, from my character’s point of view. The theater director holds the vision, sees the big picture. They are two different jobs. The director has to allow the actor to discover and develop their character within the vision and world of the play as the director sees it. This is a tricky dynamic, but an important one for all leaders to balance.

Many years ago I was in a profound and disturbing play called Thatcher’s Women about the women who took up prostitution in the 1980s during Thatcher’s reign to support their families. I played two characters, both sex workers. The sets were dark and moody with female body parts protruding. The feeling for the play was bleak, cold, and raw. We did a lot of exploration, visualizations, and exercises to “find” our characters. As my characters revealed themselves, the one who lived on the streets, really came alive for me. I saw her as gritty, messy, punk rock, sassy, sleeping in train stations and waking up with cigarette breath. Maybe not the most original image, but she emerged this way. Despite witnessing my character’s journey in rehearsal, I got the sense that the director didn’t like where I was going. Nothing I offered worked for her, yet she gave me no direction. Her slight look of contempt said it all. I felt negated at every turn, but my questions only received vague hints I could not decode. A week before opening I received my costume: I was to wear bubble-gum-pink fishnets, purple leather shorts, a multi-colored, sequined bustier with my hair teased high, red lip gloss, and an enormous pink bow. Where did this technicolor caricature come from?

Read on….

Ultimately, saying NO is simply setting a clear boundary.

We say no to say, “stop.” We say no to say, “enough.” We say no to say, “this is my time/space/body/voice/energy/priority/choice.” Saying no, is not being mean or rejecting others. It is simply creating clarity. And clarity is good for everybody involved.

There are three different kinds of “no” I want to explore: the Structural No, the Yes-No-Yes, and the Definitive No. Read on to play with saying NO!

My friend, Selena, just sent me a text asking if I’d ever jumped out of an airplane. NO! And do I want to? NO! Do I think she is planning to go skydiving? YES! Absolutely. No doubt.

I call Selena, “My friend who says, yes!”

This week, practice saying YES to experiences, to life, to connecting with others. Read on for more on saying YES!

Next week, Selena teaches me to say “no!”

The theater director and father of modern acting technique, Konstantin Stanislavski, used the term “objective,” to help actors focus on playing an action, rather than pushing for a state of being (“to persuade” vs. “to be upset” see “To Be vs. To Do”).  I like the term, “intention,” rather than objective because I find it more direct. Stanislavski believed that we always have an intention, even if we are not aware of it.  That is what makes us behave in wonderfully quirky, positively human ways. We always want something from the other characters in the play and we always want something from the other people in our lives.  That is our intention. If we do not choose a clear intention, we can default to intentions that are not helpful, undermine us, focus our energy on ourselves, and leave us expressively flat and disconnected.

We communicate our intention, not our words.

This is really important. 

Imagine a person saying, “I love you,” while sneering.  What message do we get?  Read on to learn how to use intentions…

In my last post, I made the case for more you, more people, more human interaction, and fewer slides and less text. Today I add, CAMERAS ON!

We all have reasons that we keep the camera off during meetings:

• I’m in my pjs (robe, undies).

• I’m in my unfinished basement (attic, dorm room).

• My kids (dog, cat, bird) could come in at any moment.

But we all know the real reasons:

• I’m multitasking.

• I’m on screen all day and need a break.

• I’m in the finals of a Clash of Clans tourney.

So really, why meet at all? Why not have a conference call? A nap? Because, when we do meet virtual-face-to-virtual-face, we get a lot more done, we get a sense of our team and how they’re doing, we have an interpersonal dopamine bump, and we are able to be more creative, productive, and innovative.

Use the One-Third Rule: Read on…

This week we talk about using slides in a way that supports, rather than obstructs, our communication.

Anyone who’s worked with me has heard this refrain:

There is a reason that we fly people all over the world in airplanes, put them up in hotels, feed them, host them, give them swag, congregate, meet, and convene, face-to-face.

There is something ineffable about human connection. Do not squander it.

So why then, do we squander those precious moments by turning off our webcam, eclipsing our selves (face, expression, body) with slides? And why, oh why, would we litter the slides with text, which draws the audience towards the written words and disconnects them from the speaker?

Read more on how to use slides so slides don’t hijack our presentations…

It needs to be said: there is a vast spectrum that includes being silent, being heard, having a voice, contributing, listening, supporting, amplifying, interacting, expressing, and dominating. More often than not, I have to remind my clients that speaking up is not dominating. We all deserve time, space, self-expression, and a voice. To be heard. All of us. And when any of us stifle our expression, we all suffer. Voice can mean simply speaking up, being bold, having a say, asking a question, supporting other people and ideas, contributing. And speaking up also includes other modes of expression: writing, painting, performance, photography, dance.

Read more about having a voice…

My dear friend, and friend to many, Deb, said the simplest and truest thing on our walk today. She tossed it away as if this was common knowledge: three things to do in order to make friends. Now listen, I am a big fan of Dale Carnegie and there is a reason his book, How to Win Friends and Influence People is still a best-seller 85 years since it first hit the bookstores. And yet, notice the language, “how to win friends.” For all his brilliance, Dale Carnegie puts me off when he uses the word “win” in relation to friendship. Not to mention the Machiavellian tone of influencing people!

Deb talked about making friends. Reminding us that friendship is built, forged, takes time and attention. ‘Winning’ reminds me of horse races with winners and losers.

Deb said simply, “Everyone knows how to make friends! You just have to…read on!

It seems obvious, doesn’t it? When we communicate, we do it to connect with other people: our audience, our team, our loved ones. But sometimes, we unconsciously obscure our communication, hiding behind a thick swath of hair or fancy jargon, averting our gaze, curling our bodies inward, speaking softly. When we are self-conscious, we hide.

One thing that helps us to shift from being self-conscious to being engaging is to remember to simply include others. This is an intention, is active, is a verb, gives us something TO DO: to include.

By working with active, positive, intentions, we take the focus off of ourselves and put it where it belongs, on others.

This week, take an inventory to make sure you can be SEEN (hair out of face…Read on.

In a post called “Questions that Connect Us,” I spoke of Ken Cloke, one of the leading experts in conflict resolution. Ken reminds us that we often fan the flames of conflict, polarize conversations, and take positions that only work to push us farther apart. As we look forward to voting this week, I wanted to share this treasure trove of Ken’s questions to ask in a political argument. I printed out the list and carry it with me. The questions also work on any argument with teens!

Read on for Ken’s great questions!

When my son, Luke, was in 3rd grade he had a wonderful, unforgettable teacher. In fact, Ms. Busching is something of a legend in our town. She has a way of connecting to the kids, seeing them, and like sun on a flower, her seeing coaxes the kids to bloom.

One afternoon Luke bounded down the school steps, beaming. Ms. Busching had given him a book to read!

“A book?” I asked, “I thought you didn’t like books.”

Luke answered, “Oh, I like books. Just not the ones you want me to like.”

Ah.

“It sounds like Ms. Busching really gets you.”

“That’s the thing about Ms. Busching. She gets everyone.”

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we all could capture a little of that magic? I know that Ms. Busching is a rare human being. And that we all can practice a few things that can help us “get” at least a few more people, if not everyone…read on.

Oct 13

Written By Kate Bennis

I love this photo of Agni Handy. She is self-aware (looking at the camera, breathing, engaging), and yet not self-conscious. There is an ease about her. We all can sense the difference between the two ways of being. When we are self-conscious, our focus is inward and often self-critical. When we are self-aware, we are able to balance our presence and behavior with an outward focus on others and the world around us. We are poised between the two.

Agni is a professional actor, so she has years of practicing this balance; she has poise. Actors have to remember their lines, where they need to stand to be seen by the camera and hit by the light, AND be present, available emotionally, and fully alive to the moment.

How can we move from being self-conscious to being self-aware?

Here are two tiny adjustments anyone can practice:

Read on…

John Gottman talks about the importance of, not only offering, but accepting the olive branch early and often during a conflict. He refers to these gestures, the offer of the olive branch, as “repair attempts.” They can be silly, playful, earnest, heartfelt. It doesn’t matter. They signal a desire to connect. Importantly, the way for these gestures to have a positive impact is for the receiver to accept the offer: to build on the joke, to accept the apology, to soften.

This week, notice when you might offer a repair attempt and do it. Notice when someone …read on.