We have all been there. Whether working a traffic stop, providing event security, responding to a DV call, receiving complaints or helping campus citizens navigate bureaucracy, we have interacted with angry, frustrated, confused and unreasonable people.
Article author Lt. John Weinstein will be presenting “Overcoming Obstacles to Innovation” at this summer’s Campus Safety Conference being held in Austin, Texas, July 21-23. For more information and to register, CLICK HERE.
The signs of their frustration and anger are obvious. The indications may include a red or flushed face; vocal extremes, such as very loud or soft speech, a faster pace or a higher pitch; rapid respiration; protruding veins; a bladed stance; hands balled up into fists; or an unwillingness to listen. Sometimes, these behaviors are accompanied by a subject’s lack of awareness of his or her surroundings, clothes in disarray, the odor of alcohol or drugs, or actual threats. These are toxic situations.
The challenge, in keeping with our “protect and serve” mandate, is to protect ourselves from violence and complaints while meeting the citizen’s needs, when possible, without resorting to physical means and arrest. These challenges are not unique to police and security officers. They extend to all service personnel, whether public or private, who deal with the public.
The following 10 tips will help you prevent an interaction from becoming toxic and de-escalate one that does.
1. De-escalation 101: remember the Golden Rule
Everyone wants to be treated with dignity and respect. People want to be asked rather than told to do things, and they want to be given options rather than threats. Most importantly, they want to be told why they’re being asked to do something. Remember: by virtue of being in a position of authority, you are the “superior” in a superior-subordinate relationship. Think of this relationship as that which exists between a parent and a child. Note there is inherent conflict in this interaction because nobody wants to be seen and treated as a subordinate. Ordering people to do things may work in the short term, and sometimes, there is no other choice. However, such commanding behavior often antagonizes people, resulting in resentment and complaints. Even if your command carries the moment, ask yourself how that member of your campus community, whom you’ve just over-ridden, is likely to interact with the next officer or service person encountered.
2. Provide relevant information
What’s the first thing most citizens ask in a traffic stop? Usually, it’s “why did you stop me?” We are an information society, and everyone wants to know what’s going on. People want explanations because they want to understand what’s happening to them and why. They abhor feeling powerless. Again, we want to avoid the parent-child relationship. Telling your child to do something because “I’m your father (or mother) and I said so!” may work, especially when your kids are young, but it is a losing proposition with a citizen who expects and has a right to be treated with respect. And, by the way, answering the speeder’s question with “It’s my job” won’t cut it. Perhaps your explanation will touch on the fact there are children in the area, there have been recent accidents there, etc.
3. 2 = 6
In any conversation between individuals A and B, there are six rather than two people involved. Consider the speeder I stop. There is the “real” me (i.e., the product of my background); the person I think I am (I see myself as a dedicated, brave, honest and exceedingly handsome officer); and how the speeder sees me (old, fat, donut-eating cop filling his ticket quota). Then, there’s the actual, existential speeder, the speeder’s self-perception (i.e., an excellent driver, and with a legitimate need to go faster than the silly laws allow), and the speeder I see (a law-breaker endangering the public). You can see how a conversation in which I allow myself, how I see myself, to interact with the speeder as I see him or her, is going to skew the interaction in a way that will upset the citizen and deny him or her the respect and understanding they deserve. In short, recognize all people see themselves and each other differently. You must be sensitive to these often conflicting perceptions to understand the dynamics of the conversation and to minimize conflict.
4. Get all the information
If you are relying on words alone to communicate, you are probably missing most of the information you need to deal with a difficult situation. Psychological research suggests words constitute less than 10% of the message. The other 90+% come from non-verbal indicators. When I tell my wife on a Saturday that instead of working at home on her honey-dos, I am going to take a ride on my motorcycle, she might say “yes”, but her eye-roll is a definite “you’d better not.” Similarly, think about your own non-verbals. If a citizen is interacting with you and you’re standing there with your arms folded across your chest (bad officer safety, by the way), your hand is resting on your sidearm, or you’re checking your phone for a text, you are effectively telling the citizen his or her message is not important to you. Hands on your hips, finger pointing, and in some cultures, prolonged or direct eye contact send messages you wish to avoid. Besides posture, your tone is crucial. More than 90% of complaints come from tone. If your responses drip with sarcasm or are made in a disinterested monotone (remember Dragnet’s Sgt. Friday: “just the facts, ma’am”), citizens will conclude you don’t care about their problems.
Related Article: De-Escalating Angry People: A Critical Safety Skill in Education and Healthcare
5. Empathize
In the rough world of Washington, D.C., politics, it’s often said if you want a friend, get a dog. People want others to care about them. If you are dealing with a person who is upset about something, tell him you understand and know how he feels because the same thing has happened to you. Even if you haven’t experienced the same situation, make up a plausible story to establish a bond between you and the citizen. It humanizes you and best of all, when you’re talking, the irate citizen isn’t! He or she is listening, which is what you want. For instance, you are called to the financial aid office because a student standing in line is upset at the delay. Perhaps you can tell him of your similar experience at the Department of Motor Vehicles and how you realized the people there were understaffed but doing their best. The ability to empathize may be the most important means of de-escalating a conflict.
6. Keep your ego in check
Remember we do more than protect; we also serve. We enforce the laws as representatives of the college, hospital, district, local jurisdiction or state. We cannot take violations personally. And “disrespect of cop,” which at one time or another has angered each of us, only clouds our judgment and reduces our ability to empathize with the citizens we serve. Your ego will always get you into trouble. How often have you wanted to give a smart-ass response to a citizen’s statement that he or she pays your salary. Your zinger asking for a raise will feel good for a few moments, until you learn the citizen has filed a complaint. (A better response is, “Yes you do, and so do a lot of other persons for me to keep these roads safe”). So what if a citizen calls you names? Remember “sticks and stones?” Whom does it hurt to give a citizen the last word as long as you have the last act?
In the same vein, forget giving someone an attitude adjustment. In the movies Cool Hand Luke and One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, both the warden and Nurse Ratchett tried to get their charges’ minds right. It just doesn’t happen. It’s arrogant to think you can change the totality of someone’s prior experiences during a brief 5-minute encounter.
7. Know when to shut up
Part of treating someone with respect is listening to what they have to say. You can’t figure out what’s wrong if you’re talking.
You also need to understand what you’re hearing. Verbal Judo teaches practitioners listening to a rant, to interject themselves into the conversation and then paraphrase what they think is upsetting the citizen. For instance, an officer might say “Whoa. Hold on a second. You’re telling me you’re upset because … (provide the reason).” If the response is “you’re damn right,” now you know the problem you need to address. Sometimes, you’ll find there is another reason. For instance, a speeder may actually be upset because his insurance is going to go up. You may respond saying you were in an off-duty accident years ago (empathy), and you took a driver improvement course, which saved you long-term insurance costs. You will be perceived as understanding and trying to be helpful.
8. Know what not to say
It’s the rare cop who has never told someone to “calm down.” When we say this, however, we imply the person is out of control and has a behavioral problem; not the best way to calm a situation. Similarly, consider the actual messages we send when we say the following, or words to the same effect: “You wouldn’t understand” (you’re stupid); “What do you want me to do about it?” (I’m not smart enough to help you); “Because those are the rules” (I am a robotic bureaucrat with no discretion); “Be reasonable” (you’re unreasonable); “I’m not going to say this again” (get ready to fight, run, stop listening, etc.).
9. Provide options that appeal to the citizen’s self-interest
We’ve already discussed the need to give people explanations and information. Having done so, a citizen may still not comply. In this event, provide options, with the positive first. For instance, if someone refuses to sign your ticket after you’ve explained it’s not an admission of guilt, tell him if he signs it, he’ll be on his way in a few moments with a simple and relatively inexpensive traffic ticket he can contest in court. If he signs, you may say you’ll tell the judge he was cooperative. If he still refuses, tell him there are negative consequences to this option: you’ll be forced to arrest him and take him before the magistrate. He will incur a criminal charge, additional fines, the embarrassment of being arrested and being cuffed, additional expenses associated with towing his vehicle, additional time in court, etc. More than 90% of the time, citizens will choose what’s in his or her best interest, which, by the way, is the same behavior you’re seeking.
10. Know when to escalate
Sometimes, despite all your attempts to de-escalate a toxic situation, words fail. In this instance, prolonged attempts to gain compliance may actually be counterproductive and perceived as a sign of your uncertainty or weakness. At some point, you may have to make an arrest, go hands on, call for back-up and/or a supervisor. Knowing when to abandon words for action is learned with experience, but be assured, the above techniques are successful in the vast majority of instances.
In these days of dash cams and cell phones, expect to be recorded. Officers who explain, listen, keep their egos in check, empathize and use language designed to calm are not only professional; they look good and sound good. They have nothing to fear from witnesses in court or accusations of conduct unbecoming. They will also develop reputations within their campus communities as caring professionals who are in the solutions business.
Our brains are the most powerful and effective weapons we carry. The use of these techniques will improve officer safety, improve the services we provide to our customers, increase “attaboys,” and reduce complaints. It’s a win-win situation all the way around.
John M. Weinstein PhD is a retired chief of police and senior commander for Northern Virginia Community College. He is a member of Campus Safety’s advisory board and is a popular speaker. He currently serves as a deputy sheriff and is the lead instructor for a local criminal justice academy. Deputy Weinstein can be reached at [email protected].
Note: The views expressed by guest bloggers and contributors are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, Campus Safety.
This article was originally published in 2013 and the recommendations still apply today.
