Assertion and rights

Again, assertion is about assertively your rights while respecting the rights of others. 

At each session of the workshop, participants reacted strongly when they heard "I have the right to state my own needs and set my own priorities". Wasn't that being selfish?, they asked. Dickson uses a wonderful phrase to capture this sentiment - "the compassion trap". This trap "is usually defined as a sense of obligation that, as a woman, you should put everyone else's needs before your own all of the time. You should always be available and accessible to others."  (p.54) Do women continue to fall into this trap today? Yes, we do. We still tend to feel guilty if we put ourselves first ever. Note the words "all" and "always" - if you fall into a behavioural pattern of submissiveness, beware. We have the right to state our feelings and our needs, and to set our priorities. On the other hand, being assertive does not give you the license to insist on getting your way. That's the point.

The literature on assertiveness that I read all listed these types of rights - basic "human rights". However, very few dealt specifically with the workplace. The one I found and used in workshops is called Assertiveness at work. A practical guide to handling awkward situations, by Ken and Kate Back (McGraw-Hill Book Company (UK) Limited, London, 1982). Their book covers much of the same territory as Dickson's and others. What makes it different is their explicit sections on how non-assertive behaviour between staff and between staff and managers negatively impacts an organization. 

Job rights cover: international conventions; national legislation; policies of the particular organization; and "the rights between you and the people you work with". ..."these constitute the most important category of rights within your job... because they are the ones that influence your behaviour in most of the day-to-day situations you encounter."

Common rights "that many people believe they may have in their jobs:

• the right to be clear on what is expected of me

• the right to know how my manager sees my performance

• the right to get on with my job in my own way once objectives and constraints have been agreed

• the right to make mistakes from time to time

• the right to have a say/veto in selecting the people who work for me

• the right to expect work of a certain standard from my staff

• the right to criticize the performance of a member of staff when it falls below the required standard

• the right to be consulted about decisions that affect me

• the right to take decisions about matters that affect my department or area of work

• the right to refuse unreasonable requests." (Back & Back, p.41)

Some of these rights may be clarified through organizational policies and practices, e.g. performance management. What the Backs don't cover in their book is the multicultural dimension. Rights are intertwined with a belief system - which again is based on one's experience, including shared experience - i.e. culture. These "rights" generated a lot of discussion and disagreement among participants at the workshops. For example, the "right to be consulted" - Wow! Evident to some, not to others.

One participant was really at a loss to find an example of a situation where she got angry or had a conflict at work. "I never get angry," she claimed. But later discussion triggered a memory of an incident where she wasn't consulted by her manager. An inalienable right, she would claim given her age and her culture. Not so evident to her manager, from a different culture. Some participants believed that there was (almost) no such thing as an "unreasonable" request. Others felt they had a right to a reasonable work/life balance (and therefore the right to leave after an 8-1/2 hour day). Others felt they had the right to negotiate a solution. In other words, the human to human ("we are all equals") connection was stronger than the hierarchal staff member/manager relation for some of the participants, not others. Usually the difference was along cultural lines.

Drawing conclusions, though, about cultural differences can be risky (more about that later). Speaking of drawing, I would love to be able to insert a Far Side cartoon right now!

That crumple button!

Responding to criticism is also extremely difficult because any criticism - whether valid or invalid - is bound to stimulate defensiveness and negative feelings. Dickson has a wonderful phrase to cover those put-downs or negative criticisms that go right to the solar plexus - "crumple buttons" ... “those chinks in your defensive armour, where you are most vulnerable. We all have them. Words or phrases which are so highly sensitive that the mere mention has the effect of making you crumple instantly inside... it may be a reference to your appearance ... your background .... your competence. It may be a specific word: such as selfish, over-bearing, hard, stupid, aggressive, tight." (Dickson, p. 86). Whatever the crumple button, it packs a wallop and has an impact on you that may not apply to others - including the person who pushed it.

"I" statements. An important element in being assertive is acknowledging your feelings to the other person - "I feel guilty...", "I find this difficult ..."

Beware: contrast "That was a stupid thing to do." with "I think that was a stupid thing to do". Same difference! Prefacing your statement with “I” is no guarantee. Saying "I feel angry...", "I am upset.."is a good starting point, but then the rest of the statement needs to be equally assertive. Calling someone stupid is an act of aggression no matter how you package it. The temptation to do so may be overwhelming, but you can - and should - stop yourself. 

In real life you find out that one beautifully crafted assertive statement is not enough. Anger seeps out into your voice, your body language - the non-verbal communication speaks louder than words. So, getting your emotions under control at the same time you channel them positively to address a problem that needs to be surfaced and discussed, is an emotional balancing act that requires skill and practice.

You need to be prepared for the fact that the other person may not be listening. So when you launch an often heavily-charged statement - again, no matter how assertive - it is bound to generate defensiveness because the person feels under attack. Listening and acknowledging the feelings of the other person helps reduce the level of defensiveness and reach an understanding.

More about listening later, first  ...

Non-verbal communication

I - along with many others - referred to Mehrabian's research on how we tend to decode messages that involve some level of emotion:  7% words, 38% tone of voice and 55% non-verbal (e.g. facial expression). Staggering findings. A cursory glance at the net shows that this research has been taken out of context and other researchers have criticized the methodology and thus the conclusions. As a non-scientist, my attitude is the numbers may not be accurate but we do tend to trust body language more than words in emotionally charged situations. As Mehrabian's research showed:  "... the non-verbal elements are particularly important for communicating feelings and attitude, especially when they are incongruent: If words disagree with the tone of voice and nonverbal behaviour, people tend to believe the tonality and nonverbal behaviour." 

Clearly, if we fidget or avoid eye contact or stoop or act in any way that undermines the meaning of the words we are conveying or contradicts the emotions we want to express, the other person senses the incongruence. Smiling while telling someone you are very angry doesn't work!

A session on non-verbal communication is an essential part of assertiveness training. When I ran an adapted workshop for colleagues whose posts had been abolished, I told them to act assertively (posture, eye contact, etc.) when been interviewed for a job because it would help them to truly be assertive. That just made sense to me. Then recently I saw a presentation over TED delivered by Amy Cuddy, a social psychologist who has done research that supports this feeling I had. The presentation was recorded in June 2012. Amy Cuddy’s research on body language reveals that we can change other people’s perceptions - and even our own body chemistry - simply by changing body positions. “Power posing” - standing in a posture of confidence, even when we don’t feel confident - can affect testosterone and cortisol levels in the brain, and might even have an impact on our chances for success. 

Being assertive = being clear on what you want... and what else you want

Even a seemingly simple situation like asking a waiter to return your overcooked steak and reminding him/her that you requested rare (that's how I prefer it!) can be difficult. Why? Because of the context and conflicting interests. You are unhappy about the food since it is not what you ordered, on the other hand, you are in the midst of an important and personal conversation with a friend. Contacting the waiter and getting what you had ordered would undoubtedly interrupt the flow of the conversation and, you fear, destroy the mood. What do you do? You decide - you choose - to eat the overcooked meat because you do not want to risk the change in mood that calling the waiter over would mean. Emphasis on you making a choice. That is being assertive. Others might choose differently. That's OK. How do you know whether you made the right choice? No emotional aftermath - you feel good about it. 

The exercise at the workshops I ran was designed to help participants think about a past situation where they did not act assertively and wished they had. They needed to think about what they wanted, and then think about whether there was anything else they wanted. Usually the "anything else" had to do with relationships and the fear of hurting someone else. That's the sticky part. Trying to figure out whether your fears are imaginary or real. Will you really hurt or deeply offend a good friend by letting her know that you would prefer to stay at home and read a book than have her over for a chat when she suggests it one particular evening? Is there a pattern to the relationship you need to examine?  If you refuse an unreasonable request at the workplace, are you really risking your job or is that an imaginary fear?

Working in pairs the participants had to note down: (1) what did I want from this situation? (2) what else did I want? are they compatible? (3) who were the people involved? (4) what would have been an assertive response? (5) what prevented you from acting assertively? what was your inner dialogue? (6) how did I suffer (what was the impact) by not acting assertively (7) what should I have done or said instead? 

When this exercise was "assigned", there was usually a collective groan. Sounded like any classroom when being given a math quiz! It was partly a reaction to the effort involved in thinking of an example that could be shared. And this points to one of the limitations of running this type of workshop at a workplace among colleagues. The examples involve other colleagues or managers, and they do not think it is appropriate to air these situations when they cannot ensure the anonymity of those involved, even though all participants pledge confidentiality. 

Usually they did manage to find a situation they wanted to work on that would not compromise someone else at the workplace - and would not make them feel too stupid in front of peers. The next hurdle was getting them to actually say the words. Yes, it felt awkward and strange - the point was, however, to give power to the words by saying them out loud. Practice, practice, practice. It will help next time round. That is, of course, if it is a situation involving a verbal exchange. I only realized at the end of the exercise that one of the participants had chosen a situation involving road rage - not something that lends itself to assertive response! The assertive (mature!) response to such a stimulus would be to just let it go. Move on, literally.

Stimulus - response

One of the opening exercises at the workshop was to brainstorm all possible behaviours to a stimulus (someone on your team is not pulling their weight; someone is always asking favours from you; you are tired and want to spend the evening alone, someone you know comes by .... etc.).

It was always interesting to watch the group dynamics. Some groups had a hard time listing negative behavioural reactions (shout, slam door, and so on). Remember the exercise was to generate a list of any type of behaviour - no matter how inappropriate or non-productive. Other groups laughed and squealed as they allowed themselves to - at least on paper - react aggressively. Letting it out.

The object of the exercise was to make participants aware that to any one stimulus, there were a variety of responses - and that the knee-jerk response, the immediate one, didn't have to be the one they used. There is a gap between stimulus and response where we can choose the appropriate reaction.

How to express negative feelings - especially anger - assertively was the question everyone asked. And the answer is easy in theory, difficult in practice (understatement!). Feelings will out one way or another. Self-disclosure is a good starting point: "I feel nervous about xxx", "It is difficult for me to ask, however yyy", "I feel angry about zzz". "The immediate effect of this is to reduce your anxiety. It allows you to relax and take command of yourself.  When we feel confident and secure, the overall physical sensation is relaxation. ... we feel looser and stronger." (Dickson, p.66)

Assertiveness? What's that?

So back in 1987, armed with tons of material I launched the first assertiveness workshop at my international, i.e. multicultural, workplace. In my nearly monolingual brain, I had not reckoned on the need to explain what assertiveness meant. We'd do that as part of the workshop, I thought. Fun to explore together, I thought. According to colleagues (who collectively represented more than 40 different nationalities) there didn't seem to be an equivalent in their mother-tongues. Directly translated into Danish, for example, "assertiveness" took on a negative connotation. More like "annoyingly persistent". The closest positive translation was "self-confidence building". Which, granted, is at the heart of being assertive but still not a translation. Working around that came much later as the workshop evolved. For now, I was set on running workshops on assertiveness - with strong support from the staff development officer at the time (thank you again, CM!).

Barraged by questions by potential participants, I realized I had to communicate this in a way everyone would understand, so the text on the announcement stated: I know that you believe you understand what you think I said but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

That got them. Everyone could relate to that!

How did I "translate" assertiveness during the workshop? Not in one word - rather a series of key words that we continued to add to: Honest, direct, empathetic communication, respecting the rights of others while asserting your own rights. At the very start of the workshop, participants - usually women but some men - were asked to supply key words and concepts they associated with the word "assertiveness". No problem. They all had a sense of the behaviour, even though it could not be directly translated from English. 

And they were all eager to react to difficult situations more assertively. The big question was whether they could really do it at the workplace. Could they say no to a manager's request to do a particular task at the end of the day, which would mean having to work overtime? Note, most often with no compensation, neither time nor money.

Saying no

Again, back in the 80s, assertiveness training was popular  - not only for individuals but at workplaces. Why? Was this type of training really supported by line managers? Did they even know that their staff had enrolled? Hard to say now. I do know that my own supervisor, a mild mannered Brit, was aghast that I would be teaching co-workers how to "say no". "You can't say no here", he said. My reply was that staff wouldn't just be bluntly refusing a request or neglecting their jobs. They would still be committed to fulfilling their duties. It just seemed reasonable to me, at the time, that staff should be able to refuse - nicely - unreasonable requests. The question was how to define “reasonableness”.

Assertiveness became part of the training programme at my workplace, because of a proposal made by a study group on stress management. At least, that’s how I like to think it happened! The study group was composed of "we, the people". By not being able to set limits, staff were suffering. The energy and commitment they once had was being drained. Burn-out was a real threat. 

This is supported by the literature - lack of assertiveness has severe health impacts, both on individuals and organizations. There is a danger in saying yes when you actually mean know. Your body is screaming - “say no, please say no”. Our bodies are sinking as our mind abandons ship. Doing that often will have negative effects over the long term, both on you and your relationships. "When you do not remain true to  your own needs and wishes, when you put aside a heartfelt 'no' for a half-hearted 'yes', do not kid yourself that it does not matter. The heartfelt 'no' will seek expression through some outlet. A refusal if not open and direct will always emerge somehow indirectly." (Dickson, p. 52). 

This is where cultural differences really emerged.  For some, the right to assert oneself at the workplace was obvious. They just needed to be more skilled at communicating it, they felt. Others strongly felt that they did not have the right to set limits. They were working for the public good - they was no such thing as "work/life balance". The American refrain I had grown up with -  "happy workers are productive workers" - did not necessarily chime with my colleagues from other parts of the world. "Personal happiness is not the issue. It's about duty.", a colleague informed me. Still, there was a strong interest across different cultures - especially among women - to develop assertive communication skills.

Word of caution: "saying no" is a slogan. It is more about being able to set reasonable limits and finding alternative solutions, when possible. This approach is especially important at the workplace. Flatly saying no to a request from a manager can be risky (duh) - it depends on the work climate, staff/management relations and the rights of the employees. That does not necessarily mean we have to say yes all the time, regardless. A fair distribution of work is a reasonable expectation. And this is not just about job descriptions and contractual arrangements. It's the grey area I'm talking about. Take the example of peak performers - those staff whose managers tend to ask again and again to do certain tasks because they know they will be done well and in time. Gold Star. Peak performers are people who tend to work "above and beyond" and get an energy boost doing that  - until they hit the wall and suffer burn-out. Meanwhile, their co-workers become increasingly demotivated. Why bother when you have someone in the team who always eagerly raises their hand first? A managerial issue. So help the manager out by saying no at least once in a while and ensure that someone else on the team is ready and capable of doing the task instead.

In sum, “saying no” is about setting reasonable limits - in public and private life.

Hurricane hits London 1987

I was sent to a train-the-trainer workshop in London (thank you, CM!) It was a two-day course on assertiveness. On the eve of day one, a nasty hurricane swept through London. Trees went down. Cars were smashed. Public transport was blocked. Major delays. So, rather difficult to get from A to B. That meant the facilitator had to cope with starting up on day two with less than half the participants in the room. I was in awe of her ability to improvise and re-direct the course so that late-comers could catch up. This was one of the biggest lessons - facilitators need to navigate, redirect and reach the end point, regardless of the challenges along the way. Plan for contingencies - like hurricanes!

"Process", she said, "is just as important as content." Workshops, meetings, have a flow, a dynamic that the facilitator needs to take into account in the design of the event. And of course also needs to be highly conscious of throughout the event. Ice-breakers, post-lunch energizers and other types of exercises that get participants out of their seats and even laughing  (Gosh!) and jumping around are not a diversion from the real substance of the meeting. They are an integral part of reaching desired outcomes by the end of the day. Because results are dependent on the people in the room wanting to be there, wanting to work together, wanting to approach old issues in innovative ways. 

Oh yes, and assertiveness ... the content of the workshop! Assertiveness training was a big deal in the 80s. One of the key people working in this field at that time was Anne Dickson. In 1982 she published A woman in your own right. Assertiveness and you. Although aimed at women, men were not excluded. She also developed a programme for Channel 4 called Assert yourself. The 4-part series was narrated by Andrew Sachs - well known then as now for his role in Fawlty Towers as Manuel. A perfect choice to illustrate that assertiveness - or lack thereof - is not just a women's issue. Search Assert Yourself on YouTube to find clips.

Dickson today

So now in 2013, I was curious to find out what would happen when I re-read the book. Would it seem dated? Both content and tone? Turns out I was as engaged in re-reading, as I was in reading it the first time. Dickson is still relevant - which is sad news. That is, sad that there is still a need among younger generations. Assertive behaviour is based on a sense of self-worth and esteem. I can see from a search on the web that assertiveness training is still being offered. Just observing young people I come in contact with confirms that Dickson's stories of Dulcie (doormat), Agnes (aggressive), Ivy (indirectly aggressive) speak to us today. The Selmas (assertive) are still in a minority. The lack of self-confidence and esteem is pernicious. By the way, Anne Dickson updated her book, which was re-published in 2012. I'm still using my dog-eared copy from the 80s. In her preface Anne Dickson explains that the book "is designed to help women who feel that the are too passive, too aggressive, or too manipulative. It explains how to be assertive instead. It is about basic patterns of behaviour and how to change them." (p. xi).

We regard each one of those non-assertive behaviours as negative, yet we all tend to adopt one or more of those reactions in times of stress and anxiety. The instincts of flight or fight are so ingrained that we need to make tremendous efforts to learn new behaviours to overcome them. Don't know whether we will mutate into beings where assertiveness becomes instinctive. Seems that is the best way to ensure survival of the species. Being naive? Perhaps.

Assertion of what? Of basic human rights. Do we know what they are? Do we feel that we can apply them to ourselves - at home, in relationships, at work? No, not really. This is where it gets fuzzy.

The point

The insights I have made over the years - lots of years - may not be earthshaking to anyone else but me. I like the idea of a blog, though. Could be that what I have learned - and have yet to learn - resonates with someone out there. Someone perhaps in a part of the world I have never seen, someone I have never met. Or could be someone I know, where we have never had the possibility of sharing thoughts like this.

The intention is to record my professional journey, which started in the mid-1980s  - and test its relevance today. As an American, as someone who grew up in the 50s and 60s in a middle-class home as part of a multicultural NYC environment, I have been privileged - Maslow got it right. Survival needs were covered. Assertiveness, interpersonal communication, listening, cross-cultural communication, these were the areas I developed an interest in. Whatever I learned I tried to pass on to others. Just as it was passed on to me. Since I learn through both reading and interaction, I will refer to several key works that paved my way. Now almost 30 years later, I am re-reading some of the material that spoke to me, curious about whether it is still relevant today. The answer is basically yes. “Normal” people are still in need of help when "normal" everyday interactions go awry. I can’t answer the why - explanations point to psychological, social, cultural, gender factors that run deep. The good news, though, is that it is learned behaviour which we can change. “We can learn to stop and remind ourselves that others may not mean what we heard them say.” (Deborah Tannen, That’s not what I meant! p. 14). More on Tannen later. Now for a word or two on assertiveness ...