[Ordering Publications] [Email
Us] [Seminar Information] [Speaking
Information] [RETURN TO MAIN PAGE] [Chat
Room To Discuss Workplace Conflict]
Click
here to be updated when site changes
On The Line
Dealing
With Hostile Bait (Article)
When dealing with verbal
abuse or hostility from clients, it is important to be able to avoid responding
to the "bait" that is placed before you. Not only is that important,
but it is also important to know exactly what you can say, when you are
subject to attacks like:
"If you really cared about
my welfare, you would give me my check!"
"You guys in government
are lazy and over-paid."
"I bet if I wasn't [ethnic
group], you would give me...."
In this On The Line, we
will help you deal with these kinds of remarks.
Some Background
In order to deal with
these kinds of attacks there are a few things that you need to understand.
Verbal attacks follow
certain patterns, and have some hidden rules. The attacker expects
you to react in particular ways. Usually a verbal attacker will expect
that you will become either defensive and intimidated, or that you will
become aggressive and attack back. Unfortunately, when you do what
the attacker suggests, you give control to him or her, and increase the
probability that the attack will continue. So, the best way to stop
an attack is not to take either of these actions.
In addition, verbal attacks
tend to "run off" by themselves, in an almost automatic manner. So
long as you do what is expected, the attacker is able to continue.
So, you need to do something unexpected to stop the attack.
Also, verbal attacks contain
bait. Just like the fisherman, the attacker presents you with bait
in the hope that you will swallow it and be hooked. Bait is often
unsaid, or pre-supposed. What this means is that the attacker need
not attack you directly, but need only imply certain things, without really
saying anything. Let's take an example.
In the attack sentence
"If I wasn't [ethnic group], I bet you would give me....". If you
look carefully, you won't find the insult in the words. Still, most
people will react to the hidden bait...the implied suggestion of racism.
It is important to be able to identify the hidden attack, so you can understand,
and resist the attacker's effort to manipulate you.
Self-Defense Tactics
Dealing with these kinds
of attacks can be complex, but we can suggest a few options that are likely
to disrupt the attack.
1. The Disrupting
Question
The general principle
underlying this technique is that you want to do something somewhat unexpected,
while at the same time, acknowledging the implied insult. It is important
not to defend and not to be too passive.
The disrupting question
follows the following form:
When did you start thinking
that....?
where the end of the question
relates to the unspoken insult or attack. For example, faced with
the attack implying racism, disrupting questions might be:
When did you start thinking
that we allow your ethnic background to influence our behaviour?
When did you start thinking
that I am discriminating against you?
Both of these questions
are likely to cause the attacker to become a bit confused and have to stop
the attack so that he or she can figure out what to say next. This
kind of response brings control back to you. In addition, these questions
acknowledge, and respond to the issue brought up by the customer in a polite
way.
2. Computer Mode
An attacker will often
expect you to respond using an "I" statement (eg. I'm not racist), or a
"You" statement (eg. "You can't talk to me that way").
You have a third option,
that involves doing the unexpected. This option involves using what
we call "computer mode" because it is somewhat detached, and removes the
personalization from the attack. It does not involve I or You statements.
Some forms to remember
include:
"It's interesting that
some people think that [their ethnic background affects the way they are
treated]."
"A good many people think
that [government employees are over-paid]"
Note again that these
responses will be unexpected by the attacker, and while they show that
you heard the attack, they do not imply that you agree, or that your are
defending or attacking.
Conclusion:
We have described two
simple verbal responses to verbal attacks that tend to interrupt the attack
cycle. Of course, there are other techniques that can be used, and
it is important to realize that any attack defusing techniques must be
applied with care and good judgement, since every situation is different.
These techniques, coupled with others, can result in increasing your ability
to deal with the hostile bait.
|