When both partners have expressed their desires explicitly in terms of outcome, the stage is set for the discussion of any differences. To ensure a win/win approach during this phase, the couple must stick rigidly to the “we versus it” approach, as opposed to the “you versus me” approach. The “we versus it” approach implies that they are both on the same side, confronting a problem. The “you versus me” approach implies that they are on opposite sides confronting each other. When a wife tells her husband, “You never help me around the house,” she is taking a “you versus me” approach in that she is directly confronting him. If she says, “I would appreciate your help around the house, because I can’t cope with all the chores. Can we talk about it?” she is taking a “we versus it” approach. Notice the accusation in the “you versus me” statement and the positive approach in the “we versus it” statement.
There may still be times when your partner interprets this as an attack and comes up with all kinds of excuses to defend himself. The golden rule is not to join the argument or try to prove your point. Rather acknowledge the excuses and then go back to the problem. You might say, “Yes, I understand why you acted the way you did. But how do you think we can solve this problem?” In this way you avoid attacking the person (you versus me) and concentrate on attacking the problem (we versus it).
Let’s illustrate this with an example in an area that is a common source of conflict — the amount of money that the wife spends on clothes. The win/lose approach is for the husband to accuse her of squandering his hard-earned money. This will immediately put the wife on the defensive and she‘ll come up with countless arguments to prove that she is not spending money unwisely — or she may counter-attack by accusing him of spending too much on motorcar accessories. In an argument like this nobody wins. Adopting the win/win approach the husband would probably start off by saying, “I would like you to balance your budget.” In turn the wife would state her desire: “I would like you to give me a larger housekeeping allowance because I cannot make ends meet.” Neither one has attacked the other, nor have they defended their actions. At this point they are ready to say, “How are we going to solve this problem?” and the stage is set for resolving the differences.
Resolving differences involves three basic steps
- obtaining relevant data
- listing all possible alternatives
- evaluating the alternatives.
- Obtain relevant data
Relevant data means both factual information as well as reasons and insights. In our previous example the applicable factual information could be a record of housekeeping expenditure over the past few months, the increase in the price index of food and clothing, the level of income, how it is currently spent, etc. In discussing reasons and insights partners might compare the wife’s present wardrobe with the estimated clothing needs for the season. She might point out her need for additional winter clothing, or remind him that her coat is twelve years old. He might point out that a present increase in allowance would mean a reduction in saving for the deposit on a house of their own. When a couple adheres strictly to this approach, it somehow reduces the emotional content of the discussion. Data is impersonal and enables them both to view the situation more objectively, especially when the facts are written down.
One of the most severe arguments that Joy and I have ever had, lasted throughout the Friday evening and continued on the Saturday morning. By mid-morning we were simply hurling insults at each other — and the atmosphere was very tense. Just before lunchtime Joy suggested that we write down our differences. To our utter amazement (and relief) we discovered that there were no major differences. The worst fight of our marriage was due to a misunderstanding. The problem was that we had allowed our emotions to cloud the issue. We had stopped listening to each other, and had been trapped in a vicious attack/counter-attack cycle. By writing down the facts we were able to look at the situation objectively.
