7
New Perspectives on Problems and Problem Solving
All couples have problems, and even the happiest couples don’t ever solve some of their key problems. Let’s repeat that in case it was not clear: some of the happiest couples we’ve seen still struggle with significant relationship issues over many years. We stress this idea because we’d like to adjust your expectations to be more in line with reality.
Many partners believe there is something wrong with their marriage if they have problems that are not readily solvable. This belief can be very damaging to a relationship. One of the pathways to unhappiness or divorce lies not so much in having problems but in believing that there is something seriously wrong with your relationship because you’ve not resolved all your problems. At the end of the chapter, we’ll tell you more about how you can have a great relationship despite unresolved problems.
There are times, however, when you’ll want to do the best job you can together to solve a particular problem in a way that satisfies both of you. That’s the focus of this chapter. We present a straightforward approach to problem solving that can help you through those times when you really need practical, workable solutions.
We have resisted the temptation to present our problem-solving model until this point because most couples try to solve problems prematurely—before they have thoroughly discussed the issue at hand and understood (not necessarily agreed with) each other’s perspective. Understanding one another is more important for maintaining respect and connection than is solving every problem that life throws your way. And for many problems, just understanding each other better is all the solution you need.
There are three assumptions, all of which are confirmed by research, that we want to explore in detail before presenting the specific steps that can help you effectively solve many common problems in your relationships:
Although the nature of the problems changes for couples over time, all couples encounter problems. There are some problems that are likely to remain much the same over the long term. For example, let’s say personality differences lead to fairly frequent conflicts between the two of you. Perhaps one of you is more compulsive and neat and the other more carefree. Or one of you is super-shy and the other the life of the party. Such differences are often what attract partners in the first place, but they can also become sources of conflicts over the details of life. These kinds of problems are not likely to go away over time. (What does tend to change in great relationships is that the partners develop the ability to accept one another in spite of the differences.)
In contrast to these kinds of problems, some are very specific and need real solutions. Maybe it’s July, you’ve moved to a new neighborhood, and you disagree about whether or not your children should go to the school down the block or to the new charter school a few miles away. That’s a problem that requires a real decision right now. The ideas in this chapter are ideal for such situations, when the two of you need a little extra structure to deal with the problem most effectively.
What you argue about will differ depending on your stage of life, your type of job, where you live, and so on. For example, we’ve worked a lot with military couples over the years. They have particularly intense issues related to such problems as where they will be living in a few years, whether or not to stay in the military, and preparing for deployments. Frequent, extensive travel can really stress a couple out over problems with who’s in charge, whom the children should obey most, who pays the bills, the risk of affairs, and so forth.
In one of our long-term studies of marriages, a colleague of ours at the University of Denver, Ragnar Storaasli, found that engaged couples tended to report that their key problem areas are with jealousy and in-laws. These issues reflect a core task that couples have early in a relationship: to establish boundaries with those outside the relationship. By the first year of marriage, couples reported other problems as being most important, such as communication and sex. These are issues central to how a couple interacts. Whether in a new or older relationship, most couples report money as a top problem, no matter how much they have. Money is a ripe area for conflict. In a more recent long-term study, we found that over time (from approximately 1996 to 2007), most couples reported that they were dealing with the same problems from early marriage up to eight years later. These data echo the main point we made earlier: it’s not the issues in marriages that cause problems, but how you deal with them. One issue was found to cause increased conflict in couples over time. Any guesses? If you said household chores, you were right.
In a related study that was part of a national survey, we found that for couples in their first marriages, the top argument starters were money and child rearing; other issues (chores, time together, in-laws, jealousy, alcohol and drugs, and so on) were mentioned far less often. For couples in a second marriage, the order was reversed: child rearing was rated as the most frequent argument starter, and money came in second. So for those of you in second marriages, you are especially likely to argue about how to handle the complex issues of raising children that come with blended families. Empty nest couples, whose children are grown, are most likely to argue about communication, conflict, and sex, according to a survey by our colleagues Dave and Claudia Arp, coauthors with us of Empty Nesting: Reinventing Your Marriage When Your Kids Leave Home (2001).
You have a choice when dealing with any problem. Either you will nurture a sense that you are a team working together against the problem or you will operate as if you are working against each other. This principle holds with all problems, great or small. How you handle problems is a decision—it’s up to you!
Jeremy and Lisa are a newlywed couple in their late twenties who have nurtured their teamwork, as illustrated by the following conversation. They were talking about how to handle the feeding of their newborn baby, Brent, while Lisa is away at work at the local hospital where she is a pediatric nurse. Jeremy recently lost his job as an executive when his firm merged with another, but was confident of finding another position in the near future.
LISA: The biggest concern I have is about breast feeding.
JEREMY: What do you mean? Can’t he do that when you’re at home—with me giving him a bottle during your shift?
LISA: No. That’s not going to work because I’ll swell up while away. I make milk whether or not he drinks it, you know.
JEREMY: I had no idea that would be a problem. You mean you can’t go through your shift without him nursing?
LISA: Not without exploding.
JEREMY: Ouch! What can we do to make this work out?
LISA: Well, either Brent nurses on my break or I need to pump.
JEREMY: What’s better for you? I could help either way.
LISA: Would you be willing to bring him over to work at lunchtime? If he’d nurse well then, I wouldn’t have to pump as often, and you could give him bottles the rest of the time.
JEREMY: Sure. I’d be glad to bring him over. No biggie with me out of work for now.
LISA: That would help a lot. I’d also get to see him during the day. Let’s give it a try this week.
Notice how natural it is for Jeremy and Lisa to foster a sense of respect and cooperation. This is the way they have learned to approach all kinds of problems—as challenges to be met together.
Contrast the tone of Jeremy and Lisa’s discussion with that of Shandra and Eric. Shandra, the owner of her own dry cleaning business, and Eric, a real estate agent, are the parents of two middle schoolers. This is Shandra’s second marriage, and it’s important to her that this marriage work. They have repeated arguments about housework, which generally go like this:
SHANDRA: (calmly) We need to do something about keeping the house looking better. It’s such a mess most of the time . . . it’s depressing to be here.
ERIC: (a bit annoyed) Look, that’s your job. My work requires me to be out a lot more than you. I just don’t have the time, and you know it! Keeping the place picked up is more your job than mine.
SHANDRA: (hurt and angered) Says who? There’s a lot more to do than you seem to think. And did you forget that I work, too? Besides, you don’t even clean up after yourself!
ERIC: I’d do more around here if you could generate more money in your business. You know, when you’re home, you spend lots of time watching the tube—you could use your time better.
SHANDRA: (anger growing) I need some breaks, but that’s not the point. I work just as hard as you outside the home, and you should . . . you need to do more of your share.
ERIC: I’m not going to give up my free time because you aren’t using yours well. We had a deal, it’s fair, and that’s all I have to say. (He turns away and walks out of the room.)
The only results of this discussion are that Shandra is more discouraged and Eric is annoyed that she even brought up the problem. There is a definite lack of teamwork. Eric refuses to accept any role in dealing with this problem. He sees Shandra as trying to take something away from him, not as a partner working to make life as good as it can be for both of them. Likewise, Shandra sees Eric as the problem, not as a teammate who is working with her to solve the problem.
All too often, people approach problems as if their partner were an enemy to be conquered. One woman recently told Howard that her goal when disagreements arise is to convince her husband that she is right and that he is wrong. For such couples, problems are approached as if there will be a winner and a loser. Who wants to lose? The good news here is that you don’t have to be locked into the cycle of one person trying to win at the expense of the other. You can decide to work as a team. As we say in our weekend couples retreats: Do you want to be right or to be happy?
In a study conducted at the University of Denver by Allan Cordova, couples who scored higher on measures of teamwork were also happier with their marriage. A major part of being a good teammate is following through on things you agreed to do. Most of us get upset when our partner agrees to do something but does not get around to doing it.
Following through seems to be more important to women than to men. According to Allan’s study, women react negatively when their partner doesn’t do the little things he says he will do. On the positive side, when a man does something he does not typically do to help his spouse out, this really counts in terms of his wife’s happiness. A man’s happiness in general may be more affected by more global factors, such as his wife being happy (or not unhappy) and feeling an overall sense of support from his partner.
You can say you are a team player (talking the talk), or you can actually be a team player (walking the walk). Are you walking, or are you just talking?
Many well-intended attempts at problem solving fail because couples don’t take the time needed to understand each other’s concerns. This is particularly true when one partner is upset about something. All too often, we want to fix what’s wrong—and all too often our efforts wind up making our partner even more upset. If you are deciding which movie to see, not much is at stake in rushing to a solution—except maybe sitting through a boring film. If you are deciding something more important, such as how to parent or how to divide up the household responsibilities, it’s critical that you take the time to listen first and then decide if resolution makes sense.
Two major factors propel couples to rush to solutions: time pressure and conflict avoidance.
We live in a “give-it-to-me-now” world of instant solutions to problems and desires. This might work fine when it comes to wanting a certain brand of shaving cream or a particular color of draperies at the store, but it’s not how relationships work. When it comes to the problems with which most couples struggle, hasty decisions are often poor decisions. You may have heard the expression “You can pay me now or pay me later” in regard to car maintenance, and it’s all the more true when dealing with problems in relationships.
Sometimes people rush to solutions because they can’t stand to deal with the conflict. Frances and Bjorn have been married twenty-four years, with one child through college and one a senior in high school. Bjorn is an insurance salesman, and Frances works nearly full-time as a volunteer with a local religious charity. They’ve always had enough money, but things have gotten much tighter with college bills piling up. An issue for Bjorn is that Frances devotes so much time to a job that doesn’t pay. An issue for Frances is that she does not feel supported by Bjorn for the important work she feels she does. The following interchange is typical of their attempts to solve the problem.
BJORN: (testy) I noticed that the Visa bill was over three thousand dollars again. I just don’t know what we are going to do to keep up. It worries me. I’m doing all I can, but . . .
FRANCES: (gives no indication that she is paying attention to Bjorn)
BJORN: (frustrated) Did you hear me?
FRANCES: Yes. I didn’t think we spent that much this time.
BJORN: How many clothes did Jeanne need, anyway? (really annoyed now)
FRANCES: (annoyed but calm) Well, we figured she needed one really nice outfit for applying for jobs. I guess we got more extras than I thought, but they were all things she can really use. It’s really important to her to look good for interviews. And you know, the sooner she gets a job, the better off our budget will be.
BJORN: (settling down a bit) I can understand, but this kind of thing adds to my worry. (long pause) We aren’t saving anything at all for retirement, and we aren’t getting any younger. If you had some income coming in for all your work, it would help a lot.
FRANCES: Why don’t we just get rid of that credit card? Then you wouldn’t have to worry about it anymore.
BJORN: We could do that, and also plan to put aside an extra hundred-and-fifty dollars a month in my retirement plan. That would help a lot to get us going in the right direction. What about a part-time job?
FRANCES: I can think about it. What I’m doing seems a lot more important. For now, let’s try to get rid of the credit card and save more. That sounds good. Let’s try it out.
BJORN: OK, let’s see what happens.
End of discussion. The one good thing about this conversation is that they had it. However, what are the chances that they came to a satisfactory resolution of their money problem? Two months later, nothing had changed, no more was saved, the credit card was still being used, interest was accruing, and they were no closer to working together on the budget.
This example illustrates what couples do all the time: make a quick agreement so that they can avoid conflict. Solutions arrived at in this manner rarely last because not all the important information is “on the table.” In our example, Bjorn and Frances didn’t really address his central concern about her volunteer job and hers about his lack of support. Furthermore, they drew up no specifics about how they would implement their agreement.
When you settle prematurely on a solution, you are likely to pay for the lack of planning with the eruption of more conflict about the issue later on.
Our approach to solving problems is structured. In other words, we recommend a specific set of steps. As we’ve said earlier, it’s when you are dealing with things that are difficult to handle that you’re most likely to benefit from added structure. We have featured these steps in our materials for couples for many years now. Similar models are contained in such works as We Can Work It Out (1993), by Notarius and Markman, and A Couple’s Guide to Communication (1976), by Gottman, Notarius, Gonso, and Markman—from which we have adapted a few ideas.
Although these steps are very straightforward, don’t be misled by the simplicity of the approach. You must be willing to work together and to experiment with change; you must be creative and flexible. We think of this structure as like a scaffold around a building under construction. You need the support to complete the project. Full discussion clarifies the issues, removes conflict, and increases the feeling of teamwork. Solutions flow naturally from working together against problems rather than working against each other.
The following shows the steps to handling problems well:
We’ve learned over the years that some couples really like to follow explicit steps like these—and greatly benefit. Others don’t care for quite as much structure when working on problems. We are going to strongly recommend practicing these steps because we believe that doing so can build your sense of confidence that the two of you can deal with problems in the future. Then, over time, you can decide how and when you want to use the specific guidelines.
As you read what follows, give a lot of thought to the principles reflected in these steps. The themes here are the essence of how people get to great solutions for difficult issues in life.
Problem solving is easiest when the two of you have created an atmosphere of mutual respect and acceptance. Therefore, we strongly recommend discussing problems before trying to solve them. In the Problem Discussion step, you are laying the foundation for a solution to come. Whether the problem is large or small, you should not move on to Problem Solution until you both understand, and feel understood by, the other. We recommend you use the Speaker Listener Technique for this step, to facilitate the kind of good discussion needed before attempting to find solutions to the problem at hand. If another technique helps you talk through your issues, use it here instead.
In many instances, you’ll find that after an excellent discussion, there’s really no problem solving to be done—just having a good discussion is enough. In fact, in our weekend couples retreats, we often shock couples by announcing that our experience indicates that approximately 70 percent of the issues couples face do not need to be solved as much as just aired out. It’s hard to appreciate this point without experiencing the power of good talk. The fact is, we often want something much more fundamental in our relationships than solutions to problems—we want a friend.
When the first edition of this book was published, Howard had the honor of appearing on Oprah. Although they disagreed on some issues, Howard and Oprah found a surprising area of agreement. Howard stated, “We have estimated that as many as 70 percent of the problems couples face don’t need problem solving as much as a good, open talk.” Oprah surprised Howard, who thought she was going to disagree. (And considering how much men like to avoid conflict—perhaps especially on national TV—you might imagine how he was feeling.) She didn’t merely agree with him, but went a step further and said that she thought it might be even 80 percent or more! Hey, this is better than research.
The couples described in this chapter experienced greater pain and distance because they failed to take the time to discuss the issues before coming to agreements. We have repeatedly seen that when good discussions precede problem solving, problem solving can often go smoothly and surprisingly quickly, even on difficult issues. When you’ve put all the relevant facts and feelings on the table, you’ve laid the foundation for working as a team.
Often we complicate our communication by expressing so much anger and general frustration that our real messages can be lost in the shuffle. In their book A Couple’s Guide to Communication, Gottman, Notarius, Markman, and Gonso discuss a great way to make it more likely that your message will be clearly heard by your partner; they call it the XYZ statement. This can be very valuable in or out of a problem-solving context. When you make an XYZ statement, you put your gripe or complaint into this format:
“When you do X in situation Y, I feel Z.”
When you use an XYZ statement, you are giving your partner usable information: the specific behavior, the context in which it occurs, and how you feel when it happens. This is highly preferable to the typical alternative: a vague description of the problem, and some character assassination instead of an “I” statement.
For example, suppose you had a concern about your partner making a mess at the end of the day. Which of the following statements do you think gives you a better shot at being heard?
Or let’s say you were angry about a comment your spouse made at a party last Saturday night. Which statement is better at getting your point across?
When you’re upset and angry, it’s easy to blame your partner and to say hurtful things you might not even mean. That kind of behavior is pretty much guaranteed to cause escalation and make your partner defensive, causing more conflict. Instead, the XYZ format keeps the conversation constructive. You’re avoiding the danger signs, taking responsibility for your own feelings, and showing respect for each other—all behaviors we know will help resolve conflict in a positive way.
Keep in mind that no one really likes to hear a gripe or criticism, no matter how constructively expressed. But unless you are hiding out in avoidance, there are times when you need to voice your concern, and you need to do it without fostering unneeded conflict. The XYZ format will help you do just that.
We have found that after couples have done the work of Problem Discussion, the following steps work very well.
The first step in the Problem Solution phase is to set the agenda for your work together. The key here is to make it very clear what you are trying to solve at this time. Often your discussion will have taken you through many facets of an issue. Now you need to decide what to focus on. The more specific you are at this step, the better your chances of coming to a workable and satisfying solution. Many problems in marriage seem insurmountable, but they can be cut down to size if you follow these procedures. Even a great rock can be removed in time if you keep chipping away at it.
Let’s say you’ve had a Problem Discussion about money, covering a range of issues, such as credit card problems, checkbooks, budgets, and savings. The problem area of “money” can contain many smaller problem areas to consider. So take a large problem such as this and focus on the more manageable pieces, one at a time. It is also wisest to pick an easier piece of a problem to work on at first. You might initially decide who should balance the checkbook each month, then deal with budget plans later.
At times, your Problem Discussion will have focused from start to finish on a specific problem. In this case, you won’t have to define the agenda for problem solving. For example, you may be working on the problem of where to go for the holidays—your parents’ home or your spouse’s. There may be no specific smaller piece of such a problem, so you will set the agenda to work on the whole of it.
As far as we know, the process referred to as brainstorming has been around forever. However, it seems to have been refined and promoted by NASA during the early days of the U.S. space program. The organization needed a way to bring together the many different engineers and scientists when looking for solutions to the varied problems of space travel. Brainstorming worked for NASA, and it came to be frequently used in business settings. We have found that it works very well for couples, too.
There are several rules regarding brainstorming:
The best thing about this process is that it encourages creativity. If you can resist the temptation to comment critically on the ideas, you will encourage each other to come up with some great stuff. Wonderful solutions can come from considering the points you’ve made during brainstorming. Following the rules we’ve listed here helps you resist the tendency to settle prematurely on a solution that isn’t the best you can find. Loosen up and go for it.
In this step, the goal is to come up with a specific solution or combination of solutions that you both agree to try. We emphasize “agree” because the solution is not likely to help unless you both agree—sincerely—to try it. We emphasize “specific” because the more specific you are about the solution, the more likely you will be to follow through.
Although it is easy to see the value of agreement, some people have trouble with the idea of compromise. We’ve even been criticized from time to time for using the term. Obviously, compromise implies giving up something you wanted in order to reach an agreement. To some, compromise sounds more like lose-lose than win-win. But we do mean to emphasize compromise in a positive manner. Marriage is about teamwork. The two of you will see some things differently. You would at times make different decisions. However, many times the best solution will be a compromise in which neither of you gets everything you wanted.
You’re not going to have a great marriage if you insist on getting your way all the time. The two of you nurture a great marriage when you can put the needs of the relationship above your individual desires at key times of life.
Many couples make an agreement to try a particular solution to a problem. It is just as important to follow up on how the solution is working out. Following up has two key advantages. First, you often need to tweak solutions a bit for them to work in the long term. Second, following up builds accountability. Often we don’t get serious about making changes unless we know there is some point of accountability in the near future.
At times you’ll need a lot of follow-up in the Problem Solution phase. Other times, it’s not really necessary: you reach an agreement, the solution works out, and nothing more needs to be done.
Some couples choose to be less formal about follow-up, but we think they are taking a risk. Most people are so busy that they don’t plan their follow-up, and it just doesn’t happen. There is an old but true saying: if you fail to plan, you plan to fail.
Once you find a partner who gives you a kick, the big question is, How do you keep love alive? First it helps if your partner gets a kick out of you, too! . . . I can’t imagine investing the time to learn problem-solving skills with someone who doesn’t give me a kick!
—PETER FRAENKEL
It did not take Frances and Bjorn very long to realize that their problem solving about the credit card, her volunteer work, and their retirement savings was not working. They decided to try the steps we are suggesting.
First, they set aside the time to work through the steps. It may not take a lot of time, depending on the problem, but setting aside time specifically for working toward solutions is very wise. Let’s follow the couple through the steps we’ve outlined.
Bjorn and Frances decide to use the Speaker Listener Technique for their Problem Discussion.
FRANCES (SPEAKER): I can see that we really do have to try something different. We aren’t getting anywhere on our retirement savings.
BJORN (LISTENER): You can see we aren’t getting anywhere, and you are also concerned.
FRANCES (SPEAKER): (letting Bjorn know he had accurately heard her) Yes. We need to come up with some plan for saving more and for doing something about the credit cards.
BJORN (LISTENER): You agree we need to save more, and can see that how we spend on the credit cards may be part of the problem.
FRANCES (SPEAKER): I can also see why you are concerned about my volunteer work—when I could be spending some of that time bringing in some income. But my volunteer work is really important to me. I feel like I’m doing something good in the world.
BJORN (LISTENER): Sounds like you can appreciate my concern, but you also want me to hear that it’s really important to you. It adds a lot of meaning to your life. (Here, he validates her by listening carefully.)
FRANCES (SPEAKER): Yeah. That’s exactly what I’m feeling. Here, you take the floor; I want to know what you’re thinking. (She hands Bjorn the floor.)
BJORN (SPEAKER): I have been anxious about this for a long time. If we don’t save more, we are not going to be able to maintain our lifestyle in retirement. It’s not all that far away.
FRANCES (LISTENER): You’re really worried, aren’t you?
BJORN (SPEAKER): Yes, I am. You know how things were for Mom and Dad. I don’t want to end up living in a two-room apartment.
FRANCES (LISTENER): You’re worried we could end up living that way, too.
BJORN (SPEAKER): I’d feel a lot better with about three times as much saved.
FRANCES (LISTENER): Too late now. (She catches herself interjecting her own opinion.) Oh, I should paraphrase. You wish we were much further along in our savings than we are.
BJORN (SPEAKER): (This time, he feels he is really getting her attention.) I sure do. I feel a lot of pressure about it. I really want to work together so we can both be comfortable. (letting her know he wants to work as a team)
FRANCES (LISTENER): You want us to work together and reduce the pressure, and plan for our future.
BJORN (SPEAKER): (suggesting some alternatives) Yes. We’d need to spend less to save more. We’d need to use the credit cards more wisely. I think it would make the biggest difference if you could bring in some income.
FRANCES (LISTENER): You feel that to save more we’d need to spend less with the credit cards. More important, you think it’s pretty important for me to bring in some money.
BJORN (SPEAKER): Yes. I think the income is a bigger problem than the outgo.
FRANCES (LISTENER): Even though we could spend less, you think we may need more income if we want to live at the same level in retirement. Can I have the floor?
BJORN (SPEAKER): Exactly! Here’s the floor. (He hands her the floor.)
FRANCES (SPEAKER): (responding to Bjorn’s clarification) Sometimes I think that you think I’m the only one who overspends.
BJORN (LISTENER): You think that I think you’re mostly at fault for spending too much. Can I have the floor again? (Frances hands him the floor.)
BJORN (SPEAKER): Actually, I don’t think that, but I can see how I could come across that way. (validating Frances’s experience) I think I overspend just as much as you do. I just do it in bigger chunks.
FRANCES (LISTENER): Nice to hear that. (Here she’s validating his comment; she feels good hearing him taking responsibility.) You can see that we both spend too much, just differently. You buy a few big things we may not need, and I buy numerous smaller things.
BJORN (SPEAKER): Exactly. We are both to blame, and we can both do better.
FRANCES (LISTENER): We both need to work together. (Bjorn gives Frances the floor.)
FRANCES (SPEAKER): I agree that we need to deal with our retirement savings more radically. My biggest fear is losing the work I love so much. It’s been the most meaningful thing I’ve done since the kids got older.
BJORN (LISTENER): It’s hard to imagine not having that . . . it’s so important to you.
FRANCES (SPEAKER): Yes. I can see why more income would make a big difference, but at the same time I would hate to lose what I have. I really like running those programs for the kids—especially when I see one of them open up.
BJORN (LISTENER): You enjoy it, and you are doing something really useful. I can hear how hard it would be for you to give it up.
FRANCES (SPEAKER): Exactly. Maybe there’s some way to deal with this so that I wouldn’t lose all of what I’m doing but could help us save what we need for retirement at the same time.
BJORN (LISTENER): You are wondering if there is a solution that would meet your needs and our needs at the same time.
FRANCES (SPEAKER): Yes. I’m willing to think about solutions with you.
They discontinue the Speaker Listener Technique.
BJORN: OK.
FRANCES: So, are we both feeling understood enough to move on to Problem Solution?
BJORN: I am; how about you?
FRANCES: (She nods her head, yes.)
Here they are agreeing together that they’ve had a good discussion and that they’re ready to try some problem solving. They are consciously turning this corner together to move into Problem Solution.
Bjorn and Frances now go through the four steps of Problem Solution.
At this step, the important thing is for them to choose to solve a specific piece of the whole issue discussed. This increases their chances of finding a solution that will really work this time.
FRANCES: We should agree on the agenda. We could talk about how to get more into the retirement accounts, but that may not be the place to start. I also think we need a discussion to deal with the issue of the credit cards and how we spend money.
BJORN: You’re right. We are going to need several different stabs at this entire issue. It seems we could break it all down into the need to bring in more and the need to spend less. I don’t want to push, but I’d like to focus on the “bring in more” part first, if you don’t mind.
FRANCES: I can handle that. Let’s problem-solve on that first, then we can talk later this week about the spending side.
BJORN: So we’re going to brainstorm about how to boost the income.
The key here is to generate ideas freely.
FRANCES: Let’s brainstorm. Why don’t you write the ideas down—you have a pen handy.
BJORN: OK. You could get a part-time job.
FRANCES: I could ask the board of directors about making some of my work into a paid position. I’m practically a full-time staff member, anyway.
BJORN: We could meet with a financial planner so we have a better idea of what we really need to bring in. I could also get a second job.
FRANCES: I could look into part-time jobs that are similar to what I’m already doing, like those programs for kids with only one parent.
BJORN: You know, Jack and Marla are doing something like that. We could talk to them about what it’s about.
FRANCES: I feel this list is pretty good. Let’s talk about what we’ll try doing.
Now they sift through the ideas generated in brainstorming. The key is to find an agreement that both can support.
BJORN: I like your idea of talking to the board. What could it hurt?
FRANCES: I like that too. I also think your idea of seeing a financial planner is good. Otherwise, if I’m going to try to bring in some extra, how do we really know what the target is? But I don’t think it’s realistic for you to work more.
BJORN: Yeah, I think you’re right. What about talking to Marla and Jack about what they’re into?
FRANCES: I’d like to hold off on that. That could lead them to try to get me involved, and I’m not sure I’m interested.
BJORN: OK. What about exploring if there are any kinds of part-time jobs where you could be doing something that has meaning for you and make some bucks, too?
FRANCES: I’d like to think about that. It’d be a good way to go if they don’t have room in the budget where I am now. I sure wouldn’t want to do more than half-time, though. I would hate to give up all of what I’m doing now.
BJORN: And I wouldn’t want you to. If you could make a part-time income, I’ll bet we could cut back enough to make it all work.
FRANCES: So, how about I talk to the board, you ask Frank about that financial planner they use, and I’ll also start looking around at what kinds of part-time jobs there might be.
BJORN: Great. Let’s schedule some time next week to talk about how we are doing in moving along for the solution we need.
FRANCES: Agreed. (They agree on a time to meet for follow-up.)
At the end of the week, Frances and Bjorn met to discuss what they were finding out and what to do next. To Frances’s surprise, the board member she had talked with seemed eager to try to work out something. In the meantime, she’d gone ahead with looking into various part-time jobs that would meet her needs. Bjorn had scheduled a meeting for them with a financial planner for the following week.
In this case, the solution really was a process made up of a series of smaller steps and agreements. Bjorn and Frances were moving on an issue that had been a problem between them for a long time, mostly because they were working together and no longer avoiding a tough issue.
Later, they went through the steps again and came to a specific agreement about spending less. They decided how much less to spend, and agreed to record all the credit card purchases in a checkbook register so that they would know how they were doing compared to their target. In contrast to their problem solving about income, which was a process lasting several weeks, this specific solution on spending was implemented right away, and not much tweaking was needed.
We’d like to tell you that this model always works this well, but there are times when it doesn’t. What do you do then? In our experience with couples, there are a few common difficulties that often come up when dealing with problems. Here we’ll make some suggestions for handling them.
You can get bogged down and frustrated during any segment of the Problem Solution phase. If so, you need to cycle back to Problem Discussion. Simply pick up the floor again and resume your discussion. Getting stuck can mean you haven’t talked through some key issues or that one or both of you are not feeling validated in the process. It is better to slow things down than to continue to press for a solution that may not work. While you’re getting used to the process, or when you’re dealing with more complex and difficult issues, you might cycle through the steps several times.
The best solution you can reach in one problem-solving session may not always be the conclusive solution to a problem. At times, you should set the agenda just to agree on the next steps needed to get to the best solution. For example, you might brainstorm about the kind of information you need to make your decision. Say you were trying to decide together if you should move to another place to live, and if you should, when. This is certainly not a decision you can resolve in one sitting. There are too many things to consider and figure out. So perhaps early on, you brainstorm how you’ll get to the next step. For example, what do you need to know to make the big decision? Which of you can find out what answers, and from whom? Divide and conquer.
There are some problems that don’t have solutions with which both of you will be happy. Suppose you’ve worked together for some time using the structure we suggest, yet no solution is emerging from your work together. You can either let this lack of a solution damage the rest of your marriage, or you can plan for how to live with your differences. Sometimes couples allow the rest of a good marriage to be hurt by insisting there must be a resolution to a specific unresolved conflict.
If you have a problem area that seems unsolvable, you can set the agenda in Problem Solution to protect the rest of your marriage from the fallout from that one problem area. You would be literally “agreeing to disagree” constructively. This kind of solution comes about from both teamwork and tolerance. You can’t always have your spouse be just the way you want him or her to be, but you can work as a team to deal with your differences. This is acceptance in action.
One couple we worked with, Barb and Zach, had both smoked for over twenty years. Zach finally decided to quit and was able to do so. As sometimes happens, Zach became rather adamant that Barb needed to quit, too. He was becoming less and less tolerant of the smell in the house. Even when they were out, it was starting to really upset him that she’d regularly need to find a place to go smoke. They’d had a great marriage for eighteen years, but this one problem started to threaten everything. Conflicts were escalating more and becoming nastier.
Finally, we said to them, “You have to make a big decision here. It doesn’t look like you’re going to resolve the smoking thing right away. What you can do now is problem-solve about how to protect the rest of what’s been a great life together from being destroyed by this one issue.” They took our advice, working out such decisions as where it would be OK with Zach for Barb to smoke at home and what to do about her need to smoke from time to time when they went out. Note that what they did was hardly rocket science. By taking this simple advice, they got themselves back on track: they were again a team with a common goal of preserving all the good things they had together.
In this chapter, we have given you a very specific model that will work well to help you preserve and enhance your teamwork in solving the problems that come your way in life. We don’t expect most couples to use such a structured approach for minor problems. We do expect that most couples could benefit from this model when dealing with more important matters, especially those that can lead to unproductive conflict. This is one more way to add more structure when you need it most, to preserve the best in your relationship.
EXERCISES
