Whenever you can substitute negative feelings like anger, resentment, or contempt with curiosity, you will generally end up happier and more understanding.
There's also a strategic advantage to training yourself to do this when it comes to negotiation and conflict resolution. First of all, conveying negative feelings will dissolve the illusion of cognitive ventrilloquism you'll want to use to ../../../remove-yourself-from-the-room. This will shift the focus to you which is why we group anger etc under ../../ego.
If you've ever witnessed an experienced customer service representative, such as a host in a hotel, deal with an unruly customer, you may recognize immediately how this guideline is so useful.
"This is criminal. I'm paying $300 for a night. I shouldn't have to pay for parking. Are you just trying to ruin my vacation?"
"I'm so sorry, sir. I do understand where you're coming from…"
The host is wise to use ../../../validation and ../../../yielding in this case. However, I want to turn your attention to what they don't do.
"…Are you just trying to ruin my vacation?"
An expert cothinker knows not to answer this question. See ../../../questions/evading.
Answering with something like "No, I'm not trying to ruin your vacation" is the very statement that would break the illusion. Taking their lead would mean accepting their frame (../../../framing) and thereby make the conversation about a disagreement between you and them.
The host could take this a step further by doing two things:
- To really remove themselves from the room, avoid the personal pronoun "I" after the apology.
- Engage in some curiosity.
Use their personal accusation as forensic evidence they've leaked to you about what is important to them:
"I'm so sorry, sir. Your vacation should be a pleasant experience. What is the occasion you're celebrating for this vacation?"
You can also use ../../../mirroring.
"Ruin your vacation?"
"Yes! I've been saving for this vacation for almost a year. This was supposed to be a pleasant experience for my family and…"
Both of these strategies calm down the irate customer by validating their concerns and letting them let off some steam. Mirroring goes a step further because it encourages the customer to provide us with more information we can use to connect with their concerns (the patience they had to gather and the cost of the vacation is important to them). When we align with people's values, they begin to trust us and are more willing to collaborate.
Perhaps in this case the host is not allowed to remove the parking fee but they may be able to give them a discount for one of the activities they were planning with their family thanks to the activities concierge. Knowing that they feel a personal connection to the parking fee's setback to their family's enjoyment could make this alternative route worth it to them. Or if nothing else, people like to feel listened to. Sometimes validating their feelings is more important than solving their problems.
There are more ways to engage in curiosity you can try in /adam/cothinking/core-concepts