Book review: Verbal Judo
Verbal Judo by George Thompson and Jerry Jenkins
This is a great book. I recommend it. It should be especially interesting and useful for those in a criminal justice or police career, as much of it is geared towards police. It pulls together a lot of good things I’ve read in other books.
For example, in Feeling Good, there was a passage about how to talk back to people who criticize you, how to handle potentially destructive criticism, pull the teeth on their comments, and possibly even turn it constructive. You could gain friends, respect, and salvage your ego all in one stroke. Burns’ suggested course of action was to first agree with the criticism (‘Yes, I can see where it seemed like I was ____ [an idiot, insensitive, ignoring you, etc.]’) then ask them to elaborate on it (‘Can you tell me what else I’ve screwed up that’s affected you?’). This gives you real information about the core of the issue - keep driving, questioning their upset, until you have actionable reasons for their criticism. Then you can fix those things, if they’re fixable. You can challenge them if they’re unreasonable, because they’re specific now.
That was Feeling Good. It was fascinating to run across the same general idea in Verbal Judo. Thompson’s strip phrases are the same thing as Burns’ first step - you agree with the other person. Thompson’s strip phrases are things like, ‘I understand that, but…’ and ‘oh yes, but …’ and ‘I got that, but …’. He’s more aimed at getting the other party to cooperate than Burns is, who is more invested in nurturing a healthy relationship, but the principle they’re both working on is the same. Thompson’s next step after agreement is to reiterate what nature of cooperation he needs. If the agreement and repeated request doesn’t do it, then he moves on to giving details of the situation to the person (even and especially if these are details the other person knows - it shows you’re invested in them and the situation), and explaining the options as you see them. Which runs parallel to another communication lesson I read in Taking the War Out of Our Words, which is to explain to the other person what unfavorable thing you will do if they don’t do what you want, then leave the decision up to them as to what happens. Thompson adds an extra step though if they choose the hard way - you lose no face by making one final appeal, asking them if they’re sure or want to reconsider. Then you bring down the hammer, whatever that metaphorical hammer might be. I used this process the other day at work when a supplier gave me a price increase. I asked them if they were really sure they wanted to do that, and reminded them that there were areas we could work together on to mitigate cost, so they could save money and I wouldn’t see an increase - but, you know, are you absolutely sure you want to send me this increase? My next email from them was them telling me they were going to re-examine the whole issue. Yay! If nothing else, I have stalled them. And maybe we’ll work something out.
Another part I liked was the process to deal with personal failings - define, name, own. I’ll see if this works. The idea is that you define and describe something you’re doing that’s self-sabotaging, whether that’s overspending, procrastinating, or losing your temper at people. Define it as precisely as possible. Then name it. Literally come up with a short, catchy name that symbolizes for you everything you just defined as the problem. That persona you’ve just created is your enemy. It’s the person you don’t want to be. This is utilizing powerful visualization tools I’ve read in other books, too, but Thompson doesn’t elaborate on them. Once you’ve defined and named that person you don’t want to be, then every time something happens that might trigger you to act in that way, you get to ask yourself, ‘Do I really want to be Temper Tantrum Guy right now?’ or ‘This is exactly what Procrastinating Polly would do. Is that the sort of thing I want to do right now? I’m not Procrastinating Polly!’ It’s very similar to what I’ve been using to motivate myself since my separation - I tell myself that I am free of my ex, no longer held back by him, and to prove it, I must succeed wildly. Doing so proves that he was the problem all those years, not me. (I know I bear responsibility for my inaction, but this works to motivate me so I don’t mess with it.)
My enemies are Surfer Gal and Insomniac Woman. Surfer Gal eats up time and energy by driving me to click just one more link, check out just one more page, scroll down just one more time. It’s time and energy I could be using to do things I think are more valuable - I could write, I could read useful books rather than Tumblr posts or FB updates, I can attend to the needs of others, or I could rest. Which leads me to my other enemy - Insomniac Woman. She’s the one who looks for one more thing, anything, to do rather than go to bed. She most often pairs up with Surfer Gal and I’ll find myself scrolling through the last couple days of Tumblr posts so I can put off going to bed. Sleep is a very important part of being healthy and feeling good. I won’t work or create or even live effectively if I don’t get enough rest. I must defeat Insomniac Woman and her evil sidekick, Surfer Gal!
Over and over, he talks about empathizing with people. That’s not something I’m good at, but I can follow and make sense of most of his other rules and suggestions. I had an email exchange the other day that I used some of his guidelines for. My vice president for the purchasing manager association sent me a surprisingly abrasive email. Instead of challenging her on her tone (which is pretty stupid when talking to your second in command), I restated the message I thought she was trying to get across and asked if I was understanding her. We had 8 or 9 emails back and forth, with her tone getting sweeter the whole time, until she was telling me we’d worked out a great plan and that I’d done a great job of getting to the bottom of things. I felt very happy about that - an argument avoided! And maybe I can handle this ‘president’ thing after all.