Just suppose a 10 year old child was sent, by his teacher, to the school’s withdrawal room. And, let’s further suppose that the school principal was the person staffing the room at the time. When the child entered the room, it could happen that the principal asked “Why are you here?” and it’s also within the realm of possibilities that the child replied “I’m never going to tell you”.
Before we go on to discover the “edge of your seat” ending to this tale, let’s pause to consider the dynamics at this point. Clearly, the teacher’s act of directing the child to the room was intentional. In other words, the teacher wanted the child to leave the class and transport himself to the withdrawal room. Another way of saying this is that the teacher wanted to control the location of the student within the school. And, just as obviously, the principal’s enquiry as to why the child came to be standing in the doorway of the withdrawal room was intentional. The principal wanted to control what she heard from the student. So, the teacher wanted something – to see the child move from one room to another; and the principal wanted something – to have the child tell her particular things.
While it’s very plain that the teacher and the principal wanted certain things, what often gets overlooked is the fact that the child also wanted certain things. We can assume that, for the child to move himself from one room to another, he wanted that to happen. So the child was controlling his location in the school as well. And, for the child to answer the principal as he did, he must have wanted to control what the principal heard from him.
With the scene paused, we have a situation where the teacher and the student were controlling the same thing (location) for the same outcome (classroom to withdrawal room) and also a situation where the principal and the student were controlling the same thing (what the principal hears the student say) for a different outcome (tell the story versus don’t tell the story).
So, if we press the play button once more we will discover that the principal asked the student again what happened to which the student repeated “I’m never going to tell you”. Over the next 40 minutes or so, the principal returned to the student a number of times. The principal asked the same question and received the same reply. With each return trip, however, the child became more irritated and confused. The child commented “You might have to tell someone something twice before they understand but five times?”. This increasing irritation eventuated in the child swearing and yelling and, ultimately, the child’s parent was called with a request that the child spend the rest of the day at home.
With the child controlling what he wanted to control the principal was unable to control what she wanted to control.
Could the scenario have had a different conclusion?
A key to building more satisfying interactions from a foundation of respectful relationships is to recognize that all people, regardless of their age or background, have wants and needs and goals. Life, in fact, is a process of tending the goal states that define who we are. This process of keeping our goals in the states we prefer is called control. And we all do it all the time. The reason that it can be so hard to control other people is because they’re controllers too.
Perhaps if the principal had considered that the child in front of her was doing the same thing she was doing – controlling – things might have ended differently. If a child continually asked an adult for something we might say that the child was “nagging” the adult so perhaps it is reasonable to suggest that the principal was using a nagging strategy to convince the child to adopt a different goal. Nagging people to change a goal state they’re currently nurturing rarely works. Finding out about the goal state and how it clicks into place with other goal states in a personal mosaic will create a greater understanding of that person’s perspective. With this enhanced understanding, the best way forward is likely to be much clearer.
Learning about another person’s controlling certainly takes time. Dealing with the aftermath of conflicted controllers also takes time. Perhaps the greatest irony is that helping other people control better ultimately enables us to control better as well.
If you’d like to know more about what it means to be Controlling People you can find lots of details in the book I’ve written with my good friend and colleague Rick Marken. The book, unsurprisingly, is called Controlling People. You can find it here: http://tinyurl.com/z4kbrab. I hope it helps you improve your controlling for more satisfying and rewarding relationships. .