Choices at the Point of Conflict Emergence

There is considerable leverage available to both individuals and groups if everyone has a general sense of what's happening and one's options at the point when conflict first manifests—when you first realize that there is significant reactivity in the room. Regardless of whether you are conflict avoidant or fully embrace fulminating upset, it helps to have a general sense of how to respond, beyond flight, fight, or freeze.

There are, essentially, three cases:

Case A—The other person is in reaction, and you aren't

Try to make your first step an attempt to acknowledge what the upset person is going through, which includes both a reflection of their emotional response and what the trigger was. Try to do that with minimal judgment. Note that a reflection (what is going on for them) is different than a response (what you think about that). This is the most deescalating thing you can do.

A complication can arise when the upset person is aggressive or attacking in how they express themselves. They may be clearly crossing a line of acceptable behavior in the context of group norms and it may be tempting to call them on that as a first response—both because you may experience what they've done as outrageous and damaging; and because you may hope that putting up a firm stop sign may interrupt the abuse.

Although it may be counterintuitive, I've learned that it's generally more effective to first show that you see that the upset person is in reaction and you are paying attention to what's happening for them. Even if you don't understand their reaction, you can acknowledge it. It demonstrates that you care and that you are not shying away from them when they're hurting.

Think of it this way: the person in distress is drowning, and their thrashing about (lashing out at others) is a cry for help. What they most need in that moment is oxygen, not a critique of their swimming strokes. When you hold someone accurately, they will feel less isolated, and the reaction will tend to diminish.

There will still be an opportunity to point out that they expressed their upset in a damaging way, just don't attempt offering that feedback until after you've bridged successfully to their reaction and been acknowledged by them as having been heard.

Case B—You alone are in reaction

The first step is recognizing that this is going on for you (as you cannot do something about a condition you’re not conscious of). Once you know (or can admit to yourself) that you are in reaction, try to accept that with as little judgment as possible, and seek self-care as your top priority. This can look like many things and can vary considerably from person to person. The key is knowing what you need. In general it helps to be offered what I proposed you extend to someone else in reaction (see Case A). 

Some people are able to manage this step on their own; others need help. You’ll know when this has been successful because you'll feel the deescalation (track your sensations—your body will tell you your degree of upset). If possible, try to articulate what's going for you, stripped of aggression. Note that it’s entirely different to report having an emotional response (“I‘m angry”) than it is to in the emotional response (“You asshole”). This is not about denying feelings; it’s about recognizing the potential danger of lashing out in a state of upset.

A word of caution about self-care. When someone moves away from the trigger to attend to themselves, this can proceed in a couple of ways:

Option 1: Acknowledging the reaction and moving through it

In this approach, the person asks questions like:

• What am I feeling?

• How do my feelings serve me?

• Can I accept that I did what I did, and not judge myself?

• What part of this can I own?

• What can I do to make it better?

Option 2: Armoring up

The person may indulge in self-laudatory statements (I'm OK; I didn't do anything wrong) or adopt the role of victim (I was mistreated; It was all their fault). When this happens it's laying responsibility at the other person's feet, complicating relationship repair.

There is a significant difference between the two.

Case C—Both are in reaction

This is the messiest version. Both of you need self-care at the same time yet neither can reasonably be expected to extend support to the other until you’ve received it yourself. Your mantra here should be: put your own oxygen mask on first. That probably means breaking off engagement with the other person for, at a minimum, the time it takes to effect self-care, either alone or with the assistance of others. Once you’ve accomplished that, you can consider whether there is still a need to extend reflection to the other person, to help them deescalate (I frame it this way because the other person may be getting what they need without you and by the time you're ready to reach out, they may no longer be in a raw place).

If you attempt to reach out to the other person sooner than they're ready, well-intended offerings are likely to be misconstrued simply because something you said or did may have been triggering for them and you are the last person they can trust in that moment to hear them fairly—even if you are able to, you are not likely to be trusted.