All posts by : Dr. Dennis O'Grady

Ever been criticized by your partner, team member, or boss for doing too much of this, or too little of that? And have you ever felt like your talk partner shoots tiny sharp, poison darts at your heart, then turns around and criticizes you for bleeding on the carpet, or being woozy, or staggering as you walk? Doesn’t that make you crazy? My point: If talk clashes hurt you, then likely you are an Empathizer-type communicator who is listening to the complaints of your Instigator-style partner as if they’re gospel.

HOW CAN I LEARN HOW TO STAND UP FOR MYSELF?

Men and women who are Empathizer (E-types) communicators are sometimes “too sensitive” and “too good” for their own purposes. For example, Willy (an E-type talker) sought personal communications coaching from me. “I’ve been married 33 years,” he explained. “Ninety-nine percent (99%) of the time my wife has something to complain about. She says I always think of myself first, and nobody else. She says I never take anything on, unless I’m told to. How do you learn to stand up for yourself, to say exactly what you think?”

THE TALKIN’ JAG

Criticisms and negative feedback aren’t ever useful unless they create new results that are good for all. Otherwise, why criticize? How can Willy stop himself from being stepped on and feeling like a doormat when comments like these are repeated, over and over again, to ad nauseam?

She says: If you don’t like it, then too bad.
She says: Why don’t you change your ways?
She says: You’re treating me like I’m #2.
She says: Why should I have to do it your way?
She says: You don’t communicate enough.
She says: Why don’t you listen to me?

Willy feels his wife shoots poison darts right at his heart. So he shuts up, shuts down or storms out of the room.

Willy asks: How do you get close to somebody when everything out of their mouth is a complaint about something?

THE TALKING TRIBUTE

Willy has a right and a responsibility to speak up for himself. He can express faith that he isn’t some old broken down junk heap of a communication car. How to start traveling in the right talk direction, when you feel like a Willy:

1. TALK SOME SENSE TO YOURSELF.

Example: “I’m feeling embarrassed and misunderstood, so something’s not going quite right here. Let me see if I can figure out what it is.”

2. PUT DOWN THE EMOTIONAL BAGGAGE OF OTHERS WHICH YOU MIGHT HAVE INADVERTENTLY PICKED UP.

Example: “Why has my mood changed so dramatically? Is it something I’m hearing that is negative? Is someone around me bringing me down with their depressed mood or talk?”

3. DELETE OR INTERRUPT THE DISCOURAGER.

Example: “Am I going to let someone make me feel like I’m not good enough, or be the final judge of whether or not I deserve to have good things happen to me?”

4. DWELL ON WHO ACCEPTS YOU UNCONDITIONALLY.

Example: “It’s up to me now to stand up for myself like Mom (or Dad, or my brother…) did.”

5. GET MAD IN A GOOD WAY.

Example: “I don’t tolerate put-downs or bad lectures about my good character. You haven’t even taken the time or made any effort to get to know who I really am!”

6. LEARN FROM THE CRITICISMS INSTEAD OF MULLING THEM OVER.

Example: “Am I an Empathizer-type communicator whose feelings are too easily hurt? Am I an Instigator-type communicator who is too driven?”

7. EXPERIENCE GOOD GRIEF.

Example: “I let hard feelings roll off my back like a duck.”

CRITICISMS DON’T DEFINE YOU OR HAVE TO BE CONTAGIOUS

Criticisms aren’t the end of your world. Go on with your life and enjoy the positive energy of the next person you chance to meet. Example: “Naysayers are negative nut cases.”

You have the power to make yourself matter more than what anyone thinks of you. Example: “No matter what you think of me, I really matter, and that’s my bottom line.”

CRITICISMS MAKE FOOTPRINTS IN THE SAND OF YOUR MIND

Criticisms for Empathizer communicators are a real mood downer, and criticism doesn’t typically motivate E-types to perform better. Unfortunately, E-types take a criticism as gospel coming from high. E-types are particularly prone to remembering junk that belongs in the trunk of the communicator car. No one can make you roll around in the slime of criticism for hours on end without your consent. Put criticisms in the garbage can, and take the garbage to the curb.

ABOUT PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST AND KEYNOTE SPEAKER DENNIS E. O’GRADY, PSY.D.

Dr. Dennis O’Grady, a Dayton region communications psychologist and author of Talk to Me: Communication Moves to Get Along With Anyone, is a husband, father, relationship communications coach and a guy who can’t stop talking about the art of talking. Dennis is a corporate trainer whose focus is positive and effective leadership communication strategies. He is the developer of the Talk to Me leadership communication system.

There seems to be some confusion concerning psychotherapy (counseling) and relationship communication training. Relationship communication training is:

Not needed due to differences of gender, as was thought in the past. After much research and testing, we now know that gender has nothing to do with differences in communication styles or abilities.
Not medical psychotherapy, but an educational process
Not for those with emotional illness or mental health diagnoses
Not a passive listening approach followed by, “Well, so what do you think?”
Not a nondirective counseling approach
Not a problem-focused or “complaining” approach

For normal people who are experiencing the frustration of miscommunication

A process utilizing several approaches:

• interactive–don’t plan to just sit and listen
• common sense–anyone can implement these strategies
• solutions-focused–don’t dwell on the past problems; how do you get what you want and where do you want to go?
• results-driven–focus on what you want your life to be like when sessions are completed
• interactive, directive recommendations–yes, homework will be assigned to all session participants

Your effective relationship communication training also incorporates:

• A process by which new talk habits are taught
• A time during which talk goes back-and-forth in a directive (not indirective) fashion
• Focusing on the thinking person who values improving the self and key relationships
• Meetings characterized by strategies which are productive, fast-moving, and enjoyable
• A time during which mistakes in communication are carefully and caringly pointed out by the communications coach for the communications client
• Discussions characterized by positive and non-blaming interaction – blame games are not allowed
• Finding out your communicator type and the communicator type of your partner, and having them explained in useful ways to promote good talk habits
• Teaching you tailored talk tools which can get you and your relationship out of the rut you may be stuck in
• An interactive session during which you receive good advice and talk strategies that work to produce positive results
• A program in which effective communication tools are specifically designed and tailored for you
• Talk tools which are beneficial to each partner, while the relationship understanding improves, strengthening the partners’ bond

WHO OWNS YOUR RECORDS?

Since relationship communication training clients are on a private pay plan, no insurance records are kept, and no personal information is held by outside doctors, insurance companies, or other parties, unless you make such a request. Dr. Dennis O’Grady, the developer of the Talk to Me© system, will personally work with you in a one-to-one situation, unless you opt for others to be present, such as in a couples situation. Coach O’Grady is available to you by e-mail and phone on a same-day basis, to help you work through problems you encounter along the way. Learning in sessions is reinforced in the free weekly communication articles at www.drogrady.com.

HOW MANY SESSIONS WILL YOU NEED?

Following positive results in the initial office setting, more than 50% of our clients want to learn the Talk to Me© system to use independently in their own lives. After the first evaluation session, you will know how and why this powerful new communication system will work for you. Typically, a client will need from 3 to 6 meetings to learn and practice the new communication strategies. What does and doesn’t work to improve communication is pointed out in an upbeat manner during role play and demonstration situations in the office setting.

CAN I LEARN THE TALK TO ME SYSTEM ON MY OWN?

This practical relationship approach is published in the self-improvement book Talk to Me: Communication Moves To Get Along With Anyone. The system is educational – when you implement the communication strategies you learn, your goals will become easier to reach. Over half of our communications clients simply want results, and the increase in their outcome measures demonstrate that they are getting the results they set out to realize.

WHO IS DENNIS E. O’GRADY, PSY.D.?

Dennis specializes in personal and business relationship communication and is the originator and pioneer of the clinically proven Talk to Me© communication system.
He is nationally recognized communications psychologist and is the author of three cutting-edge books. He currently serves as the president-elect of the Dayton Psychological Association.

Dennis teaches that in the past, miscommunication was thought to be due to differences of gender. But, with research and testing, that theory has been disproved. He clinically researched the effectiveness of his unique communication approach for 470 different relationship combinations. Focusing on results that are fast and which last, Dennis’s common-sense approach produces “the light bulb went on” effect. He prefers communications clients who want to help themselves, those who ordinarily handle stress well. These clients want to know how things work well and why.

More about Dr. O’Grady’s 30+ years experience as a doctoral-level licensed professional psychologist can be examined at www.drogrady.com. As an aside, the “Psy.D.” degree designation stands for “Doctor of Psychology,” which is both “practical practice” and “academic theory” centered.

This article was originally presented as a keynote speech on 27 July 2006 at the World TA Conference in Istanbul, Turkey, the theme of which was “Trust and Uncertainty in the 21st Century.” Drawing on Eric Berne’s vision of transactional analysis as a social psychiatry, the speech by William F. Cornell is grounded in the idealism that fueled the creation of transactional analysis. It examines the darker, more conflictual, often hateful aspects of life in and among groups. The author proposes the need for group leadership that provides a vital base that can embrace conflict and facilitate shifts in frames of reference. The article expands the concept of Cultural Parent and script to that of cultural character.

By William F. Cornell
Transactional Analysis Journal
Vol. 37, No. 1, January 2007, p. 8-169

______
It was nearly a year ago that I came up with the title for this speech. I was under a tight deadline from the ASAM [the Turkish group that helped organize the conference], who were in the early stages of preparing the program and needed a title and descriptive paragraph fast. I came up with “The Inevitability of Uncertainty, the Necessity of Doubt, and the Development of Trust,” probably under the influence of either too much coffee or too much wine—I can’t recall which. A lot has transpired during the year since, both in my own life and in the world at large, so if I were to title this speech now, it would be “Trust and Distrust/Hope and Hatred.”

I have come to Istanbul from Kosovo, where I was visiting my son Seth and daughter-in-law, Ghadah. Seth works for the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) at their headquarters in Pristina. It would seem, in spite of its name, that the OSCE is forced to spend much more of its resources providing security than promoting cooperation. In addition to staying in Pristina, we drove to Prizren, a predominantly Muslim community near Albania. Our route took us to Gracanice, a Serbian enclave and Roma (gypsy) village where Ghadah, a Sunni Muslim, worked for a foundation promoting education for Serbian and Roma children, and to Mitrovice, a Serbian identified city near the Serbian border. On our journey we drove in a white, clearly marked OSCE vehicle, and the welcome—or lack thereof—was palpable as we moved from one area to another. We were welcomed in the Muslim, Kosovarian territories but not in the Serbian/Orthodox Christian communities. We passed war memorials guarded by United Nations tanks, the UN facilities surrounded by bomb walls and razor wire, and the Christian churches surrounded by walls and razor wire, often guarded by UN soldiers and tanks.

Kosovo is relatively stable at the moment, but the tension, distrust, and hatred simmers just below the surface. It was a stark reminder of the compelling need for us to learn to work more effectively with hatred and violence through political, social, economic, educational, and therapeutic means.

I left Kosovo filled with a father’s pride and—given the continuing disintegration of Iraq, the renewed destruction of Lebanon, and the obvious tensions in Kosovo—a quiet despair. As I flew to Istanbul, the prime ministers of Serbia and Kosovo were meeting face-to-face for the first time since 1999, when NATO bombed Serbia to bring the ethnic cleansing of ethnic (Muslim) Albanians to an end. The talks ended in a stalemate.

My speech today will be more about hatred than hope, more about distrust than trust, for I believe if we do not learn to face our hatreds, there will be no true hope or trust. We are thrown into deep uncertainty and doubt at times of war and profound cultural conflicts, like those we are now facing throughout the world. We are thrown back to reexamining the nature of our cultural and social structures. It is probably no accident that the theme of last year’s international transactional analysis conference in Edinburgh was “Freedom and Responsibility” and that this year’s theme is “Trust and Uncertainty in the 21st Century.” The April 2006 issue of the Transactional Analysis Journal is devoted to papers from last year’s conference, and in my introductory editorial to that journal, I wrote that “these articles bring new meaning and spirit to Berne’s vision of transactional analysis as a social psychiatry” (Cornell, 2006, p. 76). As we can see from this year’s conference program, Berne’s vision continues to inspire us.