CONFIDENT THINKING: COMMANDMENT NO. FOUR -- EXPECT TO BE CONFIDENT!

TEN COMMANDMENTS OF CONFIDENT THINKING
NUMBER FOUR

EXPECT TO BE CONFIDENT
EXPECT PEOPLE TO LISTEN TO YOU
CONFIDENCE IS A PSYCHOLOGICAL MINDSET

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.
© June 2006

If we agree success is ambiguous, then expectations are clearly ambivalent. It finds people dreaming of the weekend while working, dreaming of a near or distant future, dreaming of a special celebration, while the intervening present is so much drudgery that must be endured. Once we arrive, “nothing is so good as it seems beforehand,” as George Eliot puts it. Why is that?

We will examine the ambivalence of expectations in several ways. First with a discussion of the “Fisher Model of Conflict,” then “Patterns of Expectations,” and finally the “Triangle of Confident Thinking.”

We send and receive mixed messages everyday, not only to others but to ourselves as well. We tell people one thing, think another, with them hearing a third. We hear what we want to hear and build our expectations on what often turns out never have been said or intended.

We play psychological games with each other and with ourselves. We verbalize promises we never intend to keep, as similar promises are verbalized to us. Trust is often built on this flimsy skeleton collapsing into a pile of disappointment for everyone.

There is a perverse consistency in this psychological climate that is often driven by the dreamlike nature of expectations. People aren’t bricks and mortar and cement, but strangely enough, expectations are realized in a building process not unlike creating a structure. The problem with expectations is not having them; the problem is that the focus is more likely on the product of the attention, then on the process where creative effort takes place.

College students cannot wait to earn their degrees, not realizing that they will feed off the joy, sorrow, disappointment, ecstasy, success and failure of that experience for the rest of their lives. It will be their magic touchstone when everything came together, when freedom and insouciance were taken for granted. If they thought teachers were tough, it is a walk in the park compared to bosses. College is a time when adult-children are given permission to remain in suspended adolescence. Sadly, the pull of this nostalgia has found many never making the transition into authentic adulthood.


“FISHER MODEL OF CONFLICT AND STRESS RESOLUTION”
PSYCHOLOGICAL FORCES WITHIN INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS

“The Fisher Conflict Model” creates a dynamic between the individual’s “ideal self” and “real self,” and how this influences the perception of the situation and others in terms of “self-demands” and “role demands.”

There are two pressures acting on us at all times. One is the “real self. The “real self” is how we actually are, warps and all, with the snakes sunning themselves on the rocks in our heads. If we accept the “real self,” chances are we have resisted our programming at some point, and established our identity on our own terms. If this suggests the wisdom of rebellion, so be it. The point is only we can establish identity consistent with our nature. Nobody else can do it for us. This gives birth to the “adult ego state,” or the “real self,” which has the emotional maturity to see the situation as it actually is, not as it should be, and to deal with it accordingly. The situation is understood in terms of its real demands.


The “ideal self” is how we have been programmed to behave and believe and be. It is a combination of the “critical parent” (how we are supposed to be) and “nurturing parent” (forgiving us for our transgressions) that were programmed into us long ago, and which we have never managed to outgrow. It is the “superego state” or “moral self.” It is the judgmental self that owns everyone’s problems seeing the situation in terms of black and white, never gray, expecting the situation to behave, as it should, not as it is. Guilt and self-loathing are common with this state because the person cannot forgive himself for not being perfection personified, or the ego ideal. The “ideal self” denies the snakes and therefore is crippled by them in groveling immaturity.


“Self-demands” are prominent if we are needy: needing attention, needing to protect our fragile ego, needing to have a sounding board for our woes. Such a person needs to make a good impression, needs people to know how important he is; needs to be associated with people who are accepted, belong, well connected; needs to have confirmation of his biases; needs to be included in the right company. Self-demand finds it impossible for him to listen, as he is only interested in what is important to him.

“Role Demands” place the focus on the demands of the situation. The role constantly changes from listening to a friend, to completing a work assignment, to supporting a loved one in a stress situation, to being concerned for others. The person shows an easy grace and self-confidence as he changes from the demands of one role to another, never confusing them. He brings the best out in others because he pays attention. He actively listens. Complimenting others comes easily and naturally, as do criticism and correction in terms of what they are doing and have done.

To better understand the difference between these two demands in terms of confident thinking, there is a simple checklist:

With “self-demands,” it is evident that you need to protect your fragile ego; you need to let people know how important you are; how experienced and skilled you are; and how lucky they are to be working with you; you need to identify with people who are “somebody”; you are inclined to drop names of important people, to brag about your children as an implicit means of self-absorption; you need others to share your personal biases toward everybody and everything. If others don’t fall in line with your thinking, they are stupid and classified in belittling stereotypes.

With “role demands,” you perceive the situation in light of its demands. You demonstrate confidence and caring and for it earn group trust. You see a synergistic connection between individual and group needs, and don’t attempt to realize one at the expense of the other. You are kind, considerate, consistent, fair and respectful, and treat everyone with dignity, while holding behavior to a high standard. Put otherwise, you are no pushover. You display confident thinking without badgering others with this. Others feel better for being in your company. You know life is not fair. Nor are you sidetracked with self-esteem issues, convinced that everyone has to do something before he can feel good about himself. You expect your life and work to be judged critically, but fairly, and you expect you won’t always see eye-to-eye with your bosses. So, it is no surprise that others don’t always see eye-to-eye with you. You know life is not divided into semesters boning for exams, and then relaxing, but a continuing process of getting a report card everyday.

Consequently, if a person is obsessed with his “ideal self” and “self-demands,” the situation will likely be misperceived and misinterpreted. Reason will not convince the person to think otherwise. He is an emotional cripple heading toward personal chaos, self-destruction, and if allowed, toward disharmony, chaos and confusion for others.

On the other, the confident thinker will be comfortable with his “real self” and “role demands” of the situation. This will lead to personal influence, self-realization, and build toward health, harmony and satisfaction with others. He will demonstrate patience and a focus on the process required of the expected goal. “Role demands” will also be demonstrated in helping others define and realize their roles. Self-confidence is contagious and will permeate the group. His coach’s mindset allows him to adapt to the strengths and capabilities of others rather than forcing them to fit his system.

There is a natural zone of conflict in interpersonal relationships between the particulars and the situation. While we are at war within ourselves, this same conflict goes on within others as well. Consequently, a given situation can be perceived in multiple ways. This complexity can be mind-boggling but it need not be.

A simple rule to recognize is that cooperation is always voluntary and freely given, while compliance is always involuntarily and coercively given. Why do I insist on “always”? Because each of us has his own individual space. When someone violates that space, we either take exception and show our colors, or retreat as the case may be. It is well to remember:

The FIRST STAGE in interpersonal contact is the “politeness stage.” We are nice and want others to think well of us.

The SECOND STAGE is the “suspicious stage.” The natural inclination is to protect ourselves from the unknown and therefore to question the motives of others.

The THIRD STAGE is the “fight, flight, adapt, submit, or surrender stage.” Fight is questioning for understanding and clarification. Sarcasm or nonverbal moodiness is a form of flight. Adapt, submit and surrender represent the precipitous decline to personal enslavement. Where the body is there no spirit. With such passive workers, they bring their bodies to work but leave their minds at home.

The FOURTH STAGE is “cooperation, communication, and collaboration stage.” Once doubt is allayed, the individual is ready for a trusting relationship freely given. Unfortunately, because of impatience, impertinence and intimidation, many exercise “self-demands” by attempting to leap from the first to the fourth stage, skipping the “suspicion” and “fight” stage, hoping for cooperation but realizing only compliance. As a result, 80 percent of the effort in such an organization is directed at making an impression with only 20 percent directed at performance.

If the individual is comfortable with his “real self” and is guided by “role demands,” it follows that he is likely to perceive the situation correctly and be inclined to act consistent with situational demands. Conversely, if it is necessary to impress others with his “ideal self” and make certain they appreciate his “self-demands,” then there is little chance that the situation will be defined properly or acted upon competently.

We have all encountered this behavior. As soon as someone says, “do you know who I am,” the “ideal self” and “self-demands” are on display, and there is little chance the situation will be perceived clearly. Obsessed with sensitivity, the person strapped with an “ideal self” reacts blindly to criticism blurring an appreciation of the situation and relevance of the comment. More than a few ships have metaphorically sunk with this attitude.

The paradox is that people who exemplify brutish behavior often treat some people with respect and others not; applaud actions of favorites but fail to appreciate efforts of others. This feeds conflict, discontent, and divides effort. The “ideal self,” given to this display, is inclined to choose like-minded people to key positions while rejecting others with complementary strengths. This magnifies weakness and penalizes the organization. It often ends badly. The organization wheels eventually come off when the least powerful are treated shabbily by the most powerful.

If the tendency is for us to be anxious about how we look and are treated, it is inevitable we will vacillate between the “parent ego state” and the “child ego state.” We will suffer from the idealization of how we are supposed to be seen and treated compared to how others actually see and appreciate us. The emotional maturity flaunted will likely be that of the haughty or adolescent child in a grown up body, more worried about being hurt than understanding the situation.

To give you some sense of this, the VOICE TONE of the “parent ego state” would be condescending, while the “child ego state” full of feeling, with the ”adult ego state” demonstrating concern.

WORDS USED might be, “Do you know to whom you’re speaking?” (parent ego state) or “You are contemptible” (child ego state), or “It is obvious you’re upset, want to talk about it?” (adult ego state).

THE POSTURE of the “parent ego state” is likely to be very erect, “the child ego state” slouching, and the “adult ego state” attentive with eye contact.

FACIAL EXPRESSIONS of the “parent ego state” might be a frown, the “child ego state” quivering lips, and “adult ego state” alert eyes.

BODY POSTURE of the “parent ego state” might be hands on hips, the “child ego state” wringing of the hands, while the “adult ego state” might be leaning forward to pay closer attention.

If obsessed with how others see us, it is quite possible to become fixated with a victim’s complex looking for evidence of martyrdom in persecution. This is moving in the direction of the “ideal self” and “self-demands,” the direction of personal chaos and confusion and self-destruction. Unhappiness is not an occasional state for such a person, but a home. It is impossible in this climate to find completion or experience competence.

On the other hand, if we see ourselves as we really are, warts and all, and accept our status with humor, the snakes sunning themselves on the rocks in our head will cause us little or not trouble. We will be in touch with our “real self” and be guided by “role demands” and able to define situations we encounter clearly.

With this mature mindset, we are disinclined to be judgmental and therefore averse to owning other people’s problems. We have a firm grip on our power with which we feel no need to punish others, and therefore we have great personal influence. People like to be in our company because they feel good about themselves. For this disposition, our aspirations and expectations are also real, creating a climate for self-realization.

The dynamic of this “conflict model” goes on every day and every instant of every day in our daily lives. The conflict between the “ideal self” and “real self” and between “role demands” and “self-demands” goes on within us and between us and determines how situations are likely to be defined. The same dynamic goes on within the job, between family members, friends, and in other social situations. There is no escape from the danger of being hurt, misunderstood, criticized, or the possibility of losing our focus.

If the forces within the individual and the situation are in a healthy state, the individual should have little trouble balancing self and role demands. On the other hand, if the individual’s behavior is erratic to the extreme of paranoia, conflict is inevitable. The more mature the individual, which means the more ready to cope with conflicting situations, the more confident thinking the individual is likely to be.

What a difference confidence is when your personal system (values, beliefs, interests, expectations and perceptions) is working towards a purposeful goal. Likewise, when the forces within you are in balance with external demands, you can function at a high level. Conversely, when these forces are in conflict, you cannot function well at all.

It is well to remember that we all want to feel special:

(1) We all love ourselves. We are born egotists, and our fragile egos will do about anything to protect them which means relationships are difficult;

(2) We are more interested in ourselves than in anyone else, which finds us turning the conversation around to how we think and feel and what we value;

(3) Every person you meet wants to feel important. Treat people with respect no matter their station in life and it will return to you tenfold; and

(4) We crave the approval of others so that we may approve of ourselves. The hardest person to make friends with is ourselves, as well as the hardest person to love.

Everyone suffers this handicap to a greater or lesser degree. Kindest given brings the light of kindness out.

PATTERNS OF EXPECTATIONS

Examining the quality of our expectations allows our human nature to fall into the semblance of some accord. Everyone has hopes and dreams. They stimulate us into action. Some are immediate, others delayed, some realistic, others fanciful. We have expectations because we want to improve.

There are four aspects to patterns of expectations, which are on display when motivated. Our expectations are (1) real and attainable, (2) cohesive and not in conflict, (3) flexible and adaptable to our changing circumstances, and (4) self-generating.

To be achievable, our expectations must be consistent with our ability and the opportunities afforded us by circumstances. That means we must know, accept, understand, and show a tolerance for ourselves as we are. Without this self-awareness, the tendency is to aim to high or too low, or fail to aim at all.

A cohesive pattern of expectations means that the pieces are related and support each other and are not in conflict. You can’t expect to realize a college education if you also must have a thriving personal life partying all the time. The building blocks are in place when suitable choices are made, sacrifices accepted, and purpose, along with obstacles to be expected, is clearly understood.

Life is full of surprises, and a person must be flexible to their demands and adaptable to their consequences. Continuing the college analogy, let us say your health breaks and you’re not able to work a part time job and still carry a full course load. So, you take only a couple courses and project your graduation a semester or two later than expected.

You don’t seek a goal. You create the architecture for a goal and then pursue it. Goal generating is derived from self-generation. There is a theory in psychology called “expectancy valence motivation.” The idea of this theory is that we don’t make progress in nice linear progressions, but in static eruptions, which are human dramas.

There is no static or safe period in individual development. Once the individual attempts to play it safe, growth, paradoxically, stops and the person starts to vegetate at that level. Competence and confident thinking start to erode. In a word, it is all about self-generation. With expectations, struggle is the name of the game. Get used to it.

There is a man I know who hated school and went into the army. In the army, he found a knack for organization and a skill for strategy. He worked to qualify for officers’ training school. Once he was commissioned, he found he needed a broader understanding of the nuances of group behavior. So, he went to back school, while continuing his army career, first acquiring his high school diploma, then working his way to a degree in psychology, and ultimately a master’s degree in the discipline. He retired from the army a colonel, and immediately became active in community services, in which he is still involved. Some would say he is lucky, but luck is nothing more than preparation meeting opportunity.

This involved an encounter with resistance. The colonel embraced it, and was buoyed up by it to heighten his expectations. He had to “let go” of himself, trusting that his intrinsic self would suffice to give him control of ever changing situations. This is what happens when expectations are fed with pain, risk, struggle and dedication. The colonel embraced his resistance to self-consciousness, giving him permission to have a psychological edge when each new challenge came along.

TRIANGLE OF CONFIDENT THINKING

So, expectations bring the individual face-to-face with what he is and isn’t, and sometimes this face off can be derailing when it shouldn’t be.

The triangle of confident thinking could also be called “teaching smart people how to learn.” We have developed a surreal culture in which the only risk or pain involved is vicariously watching some reality show on television. In life, too many want to reach their fanciful goal by doing everything possible to avoid risk, pain, embarrassment, or indeed, failure. Paradoxically, success is only found in failure, never in success.

Failure is not something to avoid but to embrace. Success is realized by embracing resistance to struggle by enduring the pain and risk that expectations demand. That means you neither shoot too high nor too low but in the optimal range of your ability and experience.

The mistake many smart people make is that they consider learning simply problem solving. The problems we solve are usually the problems we create with the thinking in the first place. To get beyond this, it is necessary to realize that progress is not a linear curve, but a stuttered one.

You don’t wake up one morning and say, “I’m going to be a psychologist,” and expect all your ducks to fall immediately into place and your star to soar to its appointed orbit. That is a phantom curve to success. It will never happen.

Instead, you can expect success to experience many bumps along the way, which I call “plateaus of failure.” These bumps could be anything: personal problems, trouble with professors, difficulty managing your course load, financial reversals, losing a scholarship, or a sinking grade point. Whatever they are, they are crying for you to pay attention!

The failure plateau, whatever the cause, is a gestation period where real learning takes place. Your expectations are reevaluated, as well as your commitment and goal, while you are forced to reassess where you are versus where you expected to be.

One of the interesting accompanying aspects of a period of failure is that you are given quite a wide berth, as friends disappear, as if thinking failure is catching. This means you are not in a posture to “please others.” It also means you don’t have to appear smart. Nor do you have to pretend everything is fine. You are in a mood and disposition to take risks and endure pain. You are ready to grow.

So, at the moment you think matters couldn’t get darker or possibilities more dismal, your circumstances after a period of reflection take a quantum leap to a new stage of success, but of little real learning.

Learning takes place during the failure plateaus. Plateauing is a period when we finally confront our reality and ourselves. Processing knowledge gained during this period produces invaluable insights. I have called it “the chemistry of being in all its naked splendor if only we would allow it to happen.” All growth must have a gestation period of failure. This is yours.

So, the triangle of confident thinking has a rising success slope followed by a failure plateau with a base in which pain and risk take place, leading to the next burst of rising success, and so on, ad infinitum. You need never stop growing.

That is one reason why learning is so explosive when we are young. We are not intimidated by failure. We are not afraid to make a fool of ourselves. Failure is not even relevant to us. Indeed, the young are open to diverse experiences taking risks with the possibility of getting hurt or looking stupid. It is why young people have a facility for learning foreign languages whereas adults resist this challenge because of the possible embarrassment.

Incidentally, our aversion to physical pain appears to level off at an early age, whereas our penchant for psychological pain never seems to crest. This is important to note.

Since the pain we experience becomes more associated with psychological pain, we tend to go to great lengths to avoid it, staying in a job we hate, a relationship that is destructive, or a mindset that is self-alienating.

Likewise, we are reluctant to take on a more demanding project because the element of failure is in the back of our mind. Self-protection has formed a cage around our existence. It is as if success is a static form and a frigid substance. Because of past hurts or failures, we are fenced in and confined to self-imprisonment. This finds us avoiding certain relationships, economic opportunities, intellectual challenges, and other life experiences.

Confident thinking involves embracing failure to realize success; and that success, itself, is a process and not a product. We learn little from success, which is the outcome itself, but a great deal from failure, which involves the process.

Nor is confident thinking acquired by looking in the mirror and repeating a mantra: “I am confident, I should be confident, I will be confident.” Confident thinking comes in the same manner that growth and development come, that is, in strategic leaps.

We become a more confident thinker as we experience the process of gestation. This is when we are grappling with new information, learning how to handle it and employ it so that others may benefit from it. This is when we are learning to better understand ourselves independent of everyone else. This gestation period is a time of trauma, retrenchment, a period of assimilation of past failures and successes, a time of very important learning. It is not concerned with letting others down. It is not concerned with appearing smart. It is however open to taking risks and enduring psychological pain. The quantum leap will likely be a surprise, not something you can predict with accuracy. It is a time when expectations and life experience are in concert and you are moving forward no longer getting in your own way.


* * * * *