Resolving Conflict Via Instant Messaging Services
Tone matters most
It’s happened twice. My Director read the instant message I sent him on the Microsoft Teams’ instant messaging service. He interpreted the words in a manner different than how I originally intended. And with a knee jerk reaction, I responded with defensiveness.
Conflict is rioting in the streets. Conflict is as minuscule as one word misinterpreted on a screen, causing a visceral internal reaction.
In a previous post, I wrote about the two wave approach to conflict and explained why it is worth waiting for the second wave to hit before responding.
Waves are metaphors, and in my circumstance, wave one embodied a reactive state based on ego and fear. I felt anxiety for believing I had done something wrong. When we respond to wave one through instant messaging services, our tone may be perceived by the receiver as defensive, worried, or rigid. The first response comes from the head.
In my previous work, I described wave two to be:
