Manipulation: A Matter of Intent

Since I was thinking recently about negotiation, I thought I would set down my thoughts on manipulation. This was in important issue for me to get clear because I grew up in such an intensely manipulative family. As an adult I caused a lot of damage being manipulative before figuring out there was a difference between manipulation and assertion. Keeping the distinction clear is important to effective negotiation.

Manipulation can result in a short term gain–you do what I want you to do. The problem with manipulation is the long-term effects. People aren’t stupid, not forever. If I manipulate you, you end up trusting me less. If we are in an important relationship, this lack of trust is costly. That’s the utilitarian argument against manipulation–it’s too expensive. An additional cost of manipulation is the personal cost–make a habit of manipulation and you come to see other people as objects instead of people. Since they stubbornly remain people, the gap between perception and reality is a significant overhead. Or you can rely on morality, that manipulation is simply wrong. This has the advantage that when you are tempted to manipulate, there is no short-/long-term tradeoff to tempt you.

I once asked a well-known figure in the software world, someone I respect and trust, about manipulation. He told me it was a matter of interpretation, much like the difference between and breeze and a draft. In both cases air is moving, the difference is up to the person experiencing the movement.

This definition is completely aresponsible (that is, lacking in responsibility). The problem with the definition is that it takes manipulation completely out of my control, but that doesn’t match my experience. If I talk about a topic, sometimes people take it as helpful and sometimes they take it as manipulation, but their reaction isn’t random. My thinking in discussing the topic influences their reaction, even though it doesn’t control their reaction.

Intent

What am I trying to achieve when I talk to you about, say, TDD? Am I trying to get you to try TDD so I can feel good about myself when you do what I advocate? Am I trying to get paid by your boss because I’m a consultant and I want to be seen as effective? Am I trying to positively influence my craft of software development so in twenty years I can look back with satisfaction on my career? These are all reasons I’ve advocated ideas, and they are all manipulative. What they all have in common is they are all self-centered. They are about me, not you.

Sometimes, though, when I’m talking about a programming topic, I’m just talking about that topic with others who really care. We each learn something. We might act differently as a result of our conversation, we might not, but no one will be offended either way. The conversation is a sharing of experience between people who care. The result is new knowledge, perspective, and deeper relationships.

Manipulation is intending for others to make less than a free and informed decision. If I have cars for sale (to pick another random example), I can sell them in a clear and direct way–help you understand your needs and resources and help you choose the best match between them. I can also sell in a manipulative way–try to get you to buy the car that makes me the most money. The flow of the conversation in each case might be similar. Many of the words and phrases might be identical. It’s the intent that’s difference.

Clues

How can you tell when you’re on the receiving end of manipulation? Intent becomes clear during conflict. Let’s say I’m telling you about TDD. You say, “All those tests would be too expensive to write.” How do I respond? If I’m being manipulative I’ll contradict you (“No they aren’t”), I’ll try to make you feel guilty or incompetent (“if you were a craftsperson you’d always right tests”), I’ll try to get you to ignore yourself (“C’mon, just try it.”) Would a friend do any of these things, someone you trust? No.

The question I have a harder time with is how to know when I’m being manipulative. At first I thought manipulation was just how everyone acted, and I interpreted everyone else’s behavior on that basis even when they weren’t being manipulative. Eventually, with a lot of helpful (i.e. painful) feedback, I started to learn that I could trust other people to make their own decisions and I would still be safe.

I still have the habit of a lifetime. When conflict becomes apparent, I know that I tend towards manipulation so I watch my own reactions. Do I feel angry? Frustrated? Fearful? The early signs of these emotions can be subtle–a twitching muscle, tightness around my mouth, my patterns of eye contact. These emotions tell me that I’m not trusting the other party to make their own decision. Unless I consciously choose otherwise, my arsenal of manipulative techniques will come next.

When I’m aware of myself and I encounter conflict, I remind myself that I can trust others to make their own decisions. I make a point of asking questions to understand their point of view. Where does it come from? What experiences led to it? What motivations lie behind it?

Maybe this sounds like a soft technique. Sometimes it is, but sometimes it isn’t. I can choose to be clear and direct even when in the presence of someone I don’t understand at all. I can try to understand without agreeing with them. Fortunately, I’m seldom in the presence of stark, raving lunacy. More often (maybe I should say “always”) there is a difference of opinion, as in the case of the cost of tests. Both parties have reasons for what they think. Maybe there is still a worthwhile exchange, maybe there isn’t, but I can always choose to help the other person make a free and informed decision.

I’ll come back to this again and again: we are, all of us, surrounded with unidentified, valuable possibilities every day. If I maintain the intent of helping others make free and informed decisions and maintain my own intent to make free and informed decisions, much of the time there is the possibility of a valuable exchange. If this is one of the times when there isn’t, okay. Move on. In any case I will have learned something by really listening and I will have given the other party the opportunity to learn something from me. There really isn’t any way to lose, unless I panic and pick up the puppet strings, strings that aren’t really attached to anything.