fbpx

 

Among many other details when it comes to relationships and communication, it’s useful to be aware of the difference between two basic ways to express a wish or a request: directing and informing.

Directing style expresses a wish, a request or a demand directly: “Shut the window”, or more gently: “Shut the window, please”, “Would you mind shutting the window?”, or even, “Maybe you could shut the window?” Regardless of all the added courtesies and mollification, the request is still clear and unambiguous.

Informing style is descriptive and indirect; it gives information in which a suggestion or a wish is implied as a possibility, for example: “It’s too noisy in here with the window open!” Informing people prefer to motivate than to express expectations.

Needless to say, the difference between these two communication styles can often cause misunderstanding and frustration. An “informant” might ask, “Would you like an ice-cream?” when it’s actually they who would like an ice-cream. “Directing” people might not understand the embedded wish, so if they say, “No”, the possibility of compromise might be lost. “Informing” people then might hear “No” as a refusal of their own wish, rather than a statement of personal preference by a “directing” person.

People who use directing style might simply not notice when a request is expressed in an informing way, which might make the other person feel ignored or dismissed. If they do recognize the embedded request, “directing” people might perceive it as manipulative, passive-aggressive or even victimy. They prefer to have clarity: first, ist it a request? Second: what kind of request it is? Third, how important it is? They can find informing style way too … uninformative.

 

“Informing” people, on the other hand, might perceive directing style as bossy, especially if used without “please” or “would you”. They might feel that such a style gives more importance to a request than to people, which is what they wish to avoid. This is not how “directing” people perceive it; for them, it’s all about clarity.

Another example of communication used by “informing” people might be “Did you… ?” instead of “Would you… ?” For example, “Did you pack a bottle of juice?” instead of “Would you pack a bottle of juice?” A “directing” person might again be frustrated with the implication of unexpressed expectation.

I remember a conversation quite a long time ago, when a friend of mine said she preferred to imply a wish indirectly, so if other people wanted to refuse it, they wouldn’t have to say “No” directly, which might feel uncomfortable to some. I replied that I preferred to know if there was a wish at all, instead of wondering what was implied. A “directing” person might not recognize that the ambiguity is meant as courtesy and might even perceive it as lack of integrity. This is one of the reasons why, when working with couples, we repeatedly warn people: “Presume good intentions!

 

On the other hand, “informing” people can sometimes misunderstand a simple information as an embedded request, even when there is no request. This is understandable – if we use a certain communication style, we expect other people to use it too. This can be frustrating for such people if they feel they cannot fulfill the request or even understand it. If such a person is a man receiving an information from a woman (for example, when a woman just needs to vent her emotions), confusion and frustration can be even more pronounced, considering that men often have an urge to “fix women’s problems” (I’m not sure how it works with homosexual couples!) The person who gave the information might then be confused and frustrated that the information was understood as an indirect request when it wasn’t meant to be.

There is no “good” or “bad” here (although personally I definitely prefer clarity!). It’s important to recognize and appreciate these two communication styles, instead of blaming other people for using a different one than you. All by itself, this little difference probably doesn’t mean much if a relationship is good, but it can act like “fuel on the fire” if a relationship is already in a mess.

 

Verwandtes:

Non-verbale und subtile Kommunikation

 

Alle Artikel 

Online-Coaching 

"Bis du das Unbewusste bewusst machst, wird es dein Leben lenken und du nennst es Schicksal."

- C.G.Jung

Kosjenka Muk

Ich bin Trainerin für Integratives Systemisches Coaching und Sonderpädagogin. Ich habe in 10 Ländern Workshops und Vorträge gehalten und Hunderten von Menschen in über 20 Ländern auf 5 Kontinenten (on- und offline) geholfen, Lösungen für ihre emotionalen Muster zu finden. Ich habe das Buch “Emotionale Reife im Alltag” und eine damit zusammenhängende Reihe von Arbeitsbüchern geschrieben.

<

Einige Leute fragen mich, ob ich auch Körperarbeit wie Massage mache – leider kann ich nur Salz in Wunden reiben. 😉

Ich mache nur Spaß. Ich bin eigentlich sehr sanft. Die meiste Zeit.

neue Stellen

folgen Sie uns auf Facebook

Werden Sie ein Integrativer Systemischer Coach Trainer

Integrative systemische Coaching-Ausbildung ermöglicht es Ihnen, anderen zu helfen, ihre Beziehungs- und Gefühlsmuster aufzulösen, einschränkende Überzeugungen loszulassen und verlorene Qualitäten und verlorene Identität zu integrieren.

Online-Coaching für Einzelpersonen und Paare

Integratives Systemisches Coaching kann Ihnen in verschiedenen Lebensbereichen helfen, in denen Sie sich festgefahren fühlen, unangenehme Emotionen und Selbstsabotage erleben.

Kontakt

info@mentor-coach.eu

+385 98 9205 935
kosjenka.muk
© 2020
Integratives systemisches Coaching
Website entwickelt Danijel Balaban - Web Development Agency & Design Company
de_DEDeutsch
en_USEnglish es_ESEspañol fr_FRFrançais it_ITItaliano de_DEDeutsch

Bewerbung als Trainerin oder Trainer

Werden Sie ein Integrativer Systemischer Coach Trainer

Integrative systemische Coaching-Ausbildung befähigt Sie, anderen bei der Lösung ihrer Beziehungs- und Gefühlsmuster zu helfen, einschränkende Überzeugungen loszulassen und verlorene Qualitäten und verlorene Identität zu integrieren.