Quotes from The Art of Asking Questions (Ken Cloke)

These are my notes and quotes from The Art of Asking Questions, which is Chapter 4 in The Magic of Mediation by Ken Cloke. I wrote my key takeaways elsewhere, for the subscribers of my Future of Conflict series.

Why Ask Questions?

Ken:

There are two primary reasons for asking questions.
The first, of course, is to find answers. The second is to find deeper questions, which are themselves partly answers, and may lead to still deeper questions and answers.

The primary reason for asking questions in mediation is to reveal the deeper, disguised, repressed sources of conflict that are hidden beneath the issues people are arguing about, and surface the complex wishes, desires, and interests that inform and give rise to each party’s positions.

Alternatively, we can describe the reasons for asking questions in conflict resolution as:

Helping people gain insight into the sources of their conflicts, the reasons why they are stuck, and reveal a path forward.

Helping people gain perspective on themselves, their opponents, and the issues; strengthen their capacity for empathy and humility; recalibrate their attitudes and intentions; surface their interests; and seek ways of jointly satisfying them.

Ank’s translation:

Why ask questions?

To end the conflict
1. Get objective answers
2. Prove one side is right and the other is wrong
3. Persuade the other side they are in error
To understand the conflict
1. To get to deeper questions
2. To understand the sources of conflict beneath the issues
3. To gain insight into why we have chosen the conflicts we have chosen
4. To gain perspective, holistically, on ourselves and our opponents
5. To strengthen our capacity for empathy
6. To surface everyone’s interests
7. To see ways of jointly satisfying those interests

What Are Questions?

Ken:

We can think of questions in mediation as:

Methods for stimulating and strengthening curiosity

Means of pointing awareness toward hidden meanings

Ways of looking together in the same direction

Invitations to a journey or adventure of discovery

Explorations of the unknown and unknowable

Dialogues with the truth

Paths to insight, awareness, and self-discovery

Sources of permission to change, adapt, and evolve

Searches for buried treasure

Scalpels to excise what is diseased or harmful

Meetings with mystery and surprise

Expressions of love and caring

This is important because knowing what a question is can transform it:

…from a blunt instrument into a precision crafted probe that can disarm the natural defenses people in conflict throw up to protect themselves from their own vulnerability

And that’s our goal. How we can refine our questions so they are “precision crafted probes” instead of “blunt instruments”?

Three Types of Questions

Ken presents another question taxonomy: Power, Rights, and Interests.

Questions based on power, resulting in answers that directly and indirectly reinforce:
Obedience,

Loyalty, or acceptance of ranking

Dominance in hierarchies and status
A simple example might be:
“Who is the oldest or tallest person in the group?”

This will result in a single correct answer for everyone, as there can only be one oldest or tallest. Every answer will be located on a line, generating a hierarchy or ranking system from best to worst, and reinforcing other hierarchies.

Questions based on rights, resulting in answers that directly and indirectly reinforce:
Compliance with abstract rules and regulations

Bureaucratic forms and processes

Single, uniform, objective facts
A simple example might be:
“How old or tall are you?”

This will result in a single correct answer for each person, as we can only be one age or height. Every answer will be located on a plane, creating hierarchies or ranking systems as before, along with “breadth” or diversity.

Questions based on interests, resulting in answers that directly or indirectly reinforce:
Unique personal wishes and desires

Complex emotions

Multiple, diverse, subjective truths
Simple examples might be:
“What issues are you facing at whatever age you are at?”

“What does your height mean to you?”

“What did it mean to you growing up?”
These questions will result in multiple correct answers for each person that cannot be ranked hierarchically. The answers are far more complex, diverse, and interesting… These questions evoke reflection, resist simplification, and invite deeper insights.

The first type is most useful is more useful for exercising power and proving one side is right. The second type can establish objective truth, and also stimulates heirarchy and comparison if they are present in the relationship. The third type has infinite depth and is most useful in relationships.

Slow Questions

In conflict resolution, there is a lot of talk about “slowing down”. One way Ken slows down the conflict (and deepens it) is by asking questions about the parties’ experience of the conflict and experience of themselves in the conflict.

Some examples:

What question, if it were answered, would mean the most to you right now?

What hidden opportunities do you see in this conversation?

What is the next level of thinking you need to get to in order to solve this problem?

If there is one thing that hasn’t been said, but needs to be said in order to reach a solution, what would it be?

What would it take to improve the way you are communicating with each other, or addressing this issue?

What would enable you to feel more engaged, energized, or effective in solving it?

What most needs your attention right now, or going forward?

What conversation, if you started it today, could create new possibilities for your future?

What seed could you plant together that would make the greatest difference to your future?

What questions might you ask each other that could change everything?

What question would you most like to be asked right now?

What question have you been waiting for? What question do you yearn or pine for?

What question have you always wanted to ask him/her, but were afraid to ask?

What question do you, or they, most hope you will not be asked?

What question have you been withholding or hoarding? Why?

What question, when you are going home afterwards, will you wish you had asked today, or be disappointed that you didn’t ask?

What kind of person would you most like to be in this conflict?

What values or higher qualities would you most like to bring to this conversation?

What questions might you ask that would allow you to be and do that?

More on the role of this type of question:

These questions encourage people to reflect on how their conflicts have trapped or confined them in ways of thinking, feeling, acting, and being that have kept them stuck and blocked their capacity for dialogue, learning, and growth

Why are we asking the question?

Another part of the art of asking questions involves the motivation of the questioner.

Often, this motivation is based on curiosity, a desire to connect on shared experiences, a desire to solve the problem at hand, or a desire to take control of the conversation.

Different motivations lead to different questions. To get to the questions that allow deeper transformation of the conflict, it’s helpful to know our own biases and tendencies.

Why do you want to know? What is driving your curiosity?

Why do you care what the answer is?

What, in your life or theirs, could change based on the answer?

What is the significance of the question, to you and to them?

What is the type and quality of energy contained in the question?

How much audacity and kindness are represented in the question?

How willing are you to ask the same question of yourself?

How prepared are you to be shocked, or touched deeply by the answer?

How might you turn the answer into a deeper question?

One very simple “test” is whether the question is asked based on what’s important to me (my curiosity) or what’s important to them? The questions that go deeper will be based on tuning into their experience, not my own.

What to listen for

Similarly, questions are more effective when guided by a deeper listening of the answer before them. Here are some things we can observe, through verbal and non-verbal cues, that can guide future questions:

Facts

Subjective Experiences

Emotions

Intentions

Interests and Positions

Dreams and Visions

Humiliations

Family Patterns

Defensiveness

Denials

Insults

Metaphors

Stereotypes

Openings to Dialogue

Need for Support

Universality

Conflict Styles

Cries for Help

Interpretations

Modes of Perception

Roles

Expectations

Wishes and Desires

Fears

Ego Defenses

Self-Esteem

Resistance

Confessions

Self-Doubts

Subconscious Meaning

Prejudices

Offers to Negotiation

Need for Validation

Uniqueness

Vulnerabilities

Desire for Forgiveness

Many of these things can trigger a sense of danger in the conversation, leading to shutting down or moving away. The real opportunity lies in moving towards them through a question that defuses the antagonism and gets to “What is important about X?” or “How does X show up in your experience?”.

By learning to listen for these qualities in ordinary conflict conversations, we get better at designing questions that give people permission to answer with honesty, caring, and authenticity. By doing so, we strengthen their ability to tell each other what is real and true for them, and convince them that their interests are more likely to be satisfied through collaborative, than by adversarial methods.

Ken’s Critique of Persuasion

For the most part, people engage in conflict conversations to persuade the other side that they are right—or at least not wrong—hoping thereby to increase the likelihood that their needs, desires, expectations, hopes, and interests will be met. Unfortunately, their approach to persuasion is nearly always adversarial and defensive, which triggers the other person’s “fight-or-flight (or-freeze-or-fawn-or-flock)” reflex, resulting in cycles of defensiveness, counterattack, withdrawal, and similar adversarial responses.

These adversarial approaches to persuasion often take the form of factual assertions that are denied, ignored, minimized, or countered with alternative facts by the other side, or by self-serving references to logic, character, or emotion.

That’s why we try to persuade. Of course it usually doesn’t work:

As mediators, we recognize that these are nearly always ineffective in convincing the other side. We may therefore want to ask different, deeper questions, which are answers to a practical philosophical question: What is better than persuasion?

Lasting conflict transformation and resolution is marked by:

Self-discovery

Profound realization

Fresh insight

Heightened awareness

New ways of thinking

Increased ownership of the problem

Discovery of complex, multi-sided truths

Improved capacity for communication

Creative problem-solving

Better and more satisfying relationships

Learning and wisdom

Greater humility and increased skills

Transcendence of the problem

Personal, relational, and systemic change

If we want those things:

We can reverse engineer the conflict resolution process by asking: “What kinds of questions might be able to achieve these outcomes?”

And let that be our guiding star.

Questions for Close Relationships

Much of what takes place in couples, families, friendships, and other close relationships lies buried beneath layers of unspoken desire, expectation, anxiety, hope, fear, anger, shame, guilt, jealousy, and similar emotions. These emotions can be stirred up by a combination of uncaring, uncertainty, attachment to outcomes, dysfunctional responses to conflict, and lack of skill, all of which lead to an accumulation of unasked and unanswered questions. This diminishes our capacity for intimacy, connection, and authentic, loving relationships.

Here are a few questions couples, families, friends, and others in close or intimate relationships can ask one another to cut through these layers and surface unspoken concerns, with the goal of strengthening their communications and relationships—or that mediators can ask in joint sessions or in caucus:

What qualities initially attracted you to each other?

What did you first love or appreciate about each other?

Have those changed, now that you know each other better?

Why are you interested in being in a relationship with each other?

What words or phrases would you use to describe the kind of relationship you most want to have with each other?

Do either of you disagree with any of those words? If so, you haven’t yet reached consensus. Now how can you make them happen?

Do any of us have permission to stop the conversation if we begin moving away from those words?

What do you hope to achieve through this conversation that could strengthen your relationship?

Do you have any fears, anxieties, or concerns about talking about your relationship? What are they?

What is one thing the other person could say or do that could help you reduce your fears, anxieties, or concerns?

Would you like to know one thing you could say or do to reduce their fears, anxieties, or concerns?

What is one thing about you, your history, or your wishes that you haven’t yet communicated to each other but would like to?

What is one argument or conflict you have had in your relationship? How often have you had it? What triggers it for you?

What happens when you argue that you wish would not happen—or would happen differently?

What is one thing the other person could say or do that could help you communicate better when you have a disagreement? Would you like to know one thing you could do or say that would help the other person communicate better with you?

What is one thing you would like the other person not to do or say the next time you have an argument or conflict? What does it mean when the other person does that? Why does that matter to you?

How did people in your family of origin argue or behave when they disagreed or had conflicts?

What issues did your parents argue about? Were those the real issues? If not, what were they?

How did they finally stop arguing, overcome their differences, or resolve their conflicts?

Would you like to do the same as your parents? If not, what would you want to do differently?

What are some of the patterns you slip into when you argue that you would like to break? How can you help each other break them?

Are there any ground rules or protocols you would like to propose to help resolve future conflicts and disagreements with each other?

Were there patterns to the conflicts in your family of origin regarding money? Physical intimacy? Emotional issues? Illness? Time or space? Eating? (etc.). What were they?

Which of these patterns would you like to change? Why? What do these patterns mean to you?

What do you want from each other? Why do you want it?

What are you afraid will happen if you don’t get it, or can’t agree about it?

What does the word “relationship” mean to you? The word “love”? The word “conflict”?

What other issues would you like to discuss that we haven’t talked about, but you feel are important to your relationship?

If you were to write a “Constitution” for your relationship, what would you want to include? What would the Preamble say? The Bill of Rights? Etc.

What do you most want for your future?

How would you like to make decisions regarding divisive issues that arise in the future?

How might you sabotage your own happiness? What can you do to make sure that doesn’t happen?

What issues, concerns, or fears have you been holding on to that you haven’t mentioned? Why have you been holding on to them?

What would you like to say to each other right now, as a reassurance that, in spite of talking about these difficult issues, you still want to be in a caring relationship with each other?

Questions for dialogue and political polarization

Some questions intended to:

deepen the dialogue between people who disagree with each other—especially ethically, morally, religiously, or politically—and assist them in discovering how to turn their adversarial, hyper-polarized responses in the direction of deeper understanding, empathy, communication, problem-solving, collaborative negotiation, and consensus building.

(courtesy of Ken Cloke in The Magic in Mediation)

What life experiences have led you to feel so passionately about this issue?

What is at the heart of this issue for you as a person? Why?

Do you see any gray areas in the issue we are discussing, or ideas it’s difficult to define?

Do you have any mixed feelings, uncertainties, or discomforts regarding this issue that you would be willing to share?

Is there any part of this issue that you’re not 100% certain of, or would be willing to discuss and talk about?

Even though you hold widely differing views, are there any concerns or ideas you may have in common?

What underlying values or ethical beliefs have led you to your current views?

What values or ethical beliefs do you think you might have in common?

Do the differences between your positions reveal any riddles, paradoxes, contradictions, or enigmas regarding this issue?

Is it possible to view your differences as two sides of the same coin? If so, what unites them? What is the coin?

What is beneath that idea for you? Why does it matter to you?

Can you separate the issues from the people you disagree with? What might you do if you can’t?

Is there anything positive or acknowledging you would be willing to say about the people on the other side of this issue?

What processes or ground rules might help you disagree more constructively?

Instead of focusing on the past, what would you like to see happen in the future? Why?

Are you disagreeing about fundamental values, or about how to achieve them?

Is there a way that both of you might be right? How?

What criteria could you use to decide what works best?

Would it be possible to test your ideas in practice and see which work best? How might you do that?

Would you be willing to jointly investigate your conflicting factual assertions? How could you do that?

How is everyone in the group feeling right now about the tone of this discussion? What could we do to improve it?

What could be done to make each side’s ideas more appealing?

Could any of the other side’s ideas be incorporated into yours? Which? How?

Is there any aspect of this issue either of you may have left out? Are there any other perspectives you haven’t described?

Are there any other ways you can think of to say what you just said?

Do you think it would be useful to continue this conversation to learn more about each other, and what you each believe to be true?

How might we make this conversation more ongoing or effective?

What could each of you do to improve the ways you’re disagreeing with each other in the future?

Would you be willing to do that together?

What did each of you learn from this conversation?

What would you like to do differently in the future if you disagree?

How might you make your future conversations more effective?

Heart-to-Heart Questions

It often happens that people in conflict get emotionally triggered by their interactions and find themselves engaged in angry, destructive, superficial, disrespectful diatribes or shouting matches—when they would rather have deeper, more caring, constructive, heart-to-heart conversations with each other, but don’t know how to switch from one to the other.

When this happens, they will often drop subtle, subconscious clues to indicate their preferences. But because these clues are subtle and subconscious, they are often missed or misinterpreted—both by their opponent and by the mediator.

So here is Ken translating these clues for us.

1.

Declaration:
“He doesn’t think I’m a very good person.”

Possible Translation:
“I’m not entirely confident that I am a good person, I feel vulnerable to what he thinks of me, and am exaggerating what he thinks because I need some reassurance that he doesn’t hate me.”

Opening Questions:

(To him) “Is that right? Do you think she is not a very good person?”

“If not, can you give an example?”

(To her) “Why does it matter to you what he thinks?”

2.

Declaration:
“She did it for no reason.”

Possible Translation:
“I really don’t know why she did it but am afraid to ask, because she could have done it because of something I did that I don’t want to admit, or for some reason that will force me to stop playing the victim.”

Opening Questions:

“Would you like to know why she did it?”

“Why don’t you ask her right now?”

3.

Declaration:
“He’s lying.”

Possible Translation:
“What he said does not match my experience, I feel defensive about what he said, and I need him to hear my experience before I can hear his.”

Opening Questions:

“What truth do you know that is not reflected in his statement?”

“What do you think is the underlying truth he is trying to communicate?”

4.

Declaration:
“I don’t trust him.”

Possible Translation:
“I am feeling insecure about what is going to happen, distrustful about his intentions regarding me, and need to hear that he is really committed to making our relationship work.”

Opening Questions:

“What are you afraid he will do?”

(To the other person) “Is that what you are going to do? If not, why not?”

“Do you want this relationship to work? Why?”

Conclusion:

Every sincere question in conflict resolution conveys a heart message—if only in the form of: “I care enough about you to want to know what you think and how you feel.”

Who’s on what team?

The attitude of questioning is already, automatically, inherently respectful, and if done correctly, can instantly give rise to a shift in the orientation of both sides in a conflict, helping them transition from a competitive, hostile, punitive focus on “me vs. you,” to a collaborative, restorative, problem-solving approach of “us vs. it.”

That seems to be the essence of it. We come into a conflict thinking “me vs. you”. The only sustainable exit happens after we have transformed to “us vs. it”.

Finally, love the questions

From Rilke’s Letters to a Young Poet:

I want to beg you, as much as I can, to be patient toward all that is unsolved in your heart, and to try to love the questions themselves—like locked rooms, and like books that are written in a very foreign tongue.

Do not now seek the answers, which cannot be given you because you would not be able to live them.

And the point is, to live everything. Live the questions now.

Perhaps you will then gradually, without noticing it, live along some distant day into the answer.