The Confront Model

I find myself using the confront model more and more in my work. There is much that needs confronting and yet it often feels to me like we are becoming less skilled at the art doing it successfully. Too often conversation leads to difference, which leads to debate and then breakdown; with entrenched views, righteousness and ‘othering’ being the norm. The difficulties we have with confronting situations lead to us become either more aggressive in our position or conflict-avoidant. This is the essence of the confront model.

I learned about the confront model working for Relume, and it is one of the challenger tools that are very much part of their work. It is an interpersonal tool that I mostly introduce when working with people who are having some difficulties getting their needs met or staying in relation with others will driving change. It can pop up in 1:1 work and particularly when working with teams.

I normally start by asking people what meaning they attribute to the word ‘confront’. This normally evokes ideas of battles, fighting and conflict. If I’m in a room I might get people to demonstrate it, and they usually end up standing toe to toe with their fists raised like boxers. At this point I explain that the Latin derivation of the word actually means to face (front) with (con). It’s more of a joint effort to overcome a challenge, even if the challenge is some aspect of their relationship. In the room I get the two people to stand shoulder to shoulder and face a common object. The object is the thing they are confronting.

After this I draw the diagram above and describe effective confronting as being the sweet spot, or sometimes the razor’s edge between power and concern. I explain those terms in a way that I think will help contextually, but broadly:

Power is the focus of attention on completing the task, or being right, or winning an argument, or making a point.

Concern is the focus of attention on the feelings of self and others, regardless of the task.

I then explain that too much power and not enough concerns can be seen, in the extreme (extremes are always good to highlight a point), as sledgehammering. This is where our protagonist effectively beats people up with the power of their truth, their rightness. This can lead to defensiveness, counter attacks and relational breakdowns.

Conversely too much concern and not enough power can lead to pussyfooting or tiptoeing. This where our protagonist avoids any ‘trouble’ out of concern for their own well-being or that of others. When this happens the issue to be confronted is sort of danced around. This can lead to avoidance, confusion and a sort of treacle in terms of getting things moving.

People usually see their own preferences playing out, as well as others who they are having difficulty with. They can also spot the contexts in which they may favour one extreme to the other. It can be quite useful to explore how they respond when they receive sledgehammering or pussyfooting from others, and how this might create a vicious cycle.

Sometimes it’s enough to stop here, knowing it and naming it being a catalyst for change in itself. But mostly people ask a question like “How can I improve my ability to confront effectively?” My response generally starts by saying that the key is to make the sweet spot larger, so that it is no longer a hard-to-hit razor’s edge.

I might then ask if they have someone in their life that they can say pretty much anything to and it won’t threaten the relationship.  Most people name a family member.  I ask “what would it take to have that sort of relationship with the person or people you are confronting with?”.  The answers they give usually include trust, rapport, relationship, respect, care, love, compassion, shared goals.  This is the work.  Investing in relationships allows us be able to confront more successfully.

 I find it quite handy to share stories of people, or even teams or organisations that are really good at this. That’s where the idea of Happy People Fighting comes from, it was in the Relume research on challenger leaders. I find it a lovely turn of phrase and it almost always really resonates with those who’ve been working with the model.