In the spirit of the season, I have been hearing a few people talk about making New Year's resolutions.
I reflected on common resolutions that people make -- to lose weight, stop smoking, be nicer to their spouse/partner, or whip themselves into shape in some fashion.
It seems like about 95% or more of the time, people are not successful at keeping their resolution. This reminds me of when I worked as a Nutritional Counselor for 5 years, and found that people's success rate at implementing my nutritional advice was very low, maybe 25% at best.
For a long time, I scratched my head and wondered why this was. I don't claim to have an expert analysis, however I suspect there is a major factor at play in both of these scenarios -- namely, that people set out to make a behavioral change with the idea that willpower alone will be sufficient for them to sustain the change.
What they don't realize is that their current behavior -- whether that is overeating, abusing alcohol or drugs (or any other addiction, for that matter), or yelling at people -- is meeting some of their needs; if it wasn't, they wouldn't be doing it in the first place.
To use willpower alone in an attempt to change behavior, even if that behavior is very harmful, is a losing game. My experience is that it's almost not even worth the effort, because virtually every time, the person cannot maintain the life changes, and through this failure blames and judges him or herself, which only exacerbates the problem.
So what might the alternative be: Dr. Marshall Rosenberg, founder of Nonviolent Communication, suggests that we might first take time to acknowledge -- and even celebrate -- that the present behavior is meeting some precious need of ours. Only once we recognize the need and accept ourself for having the need can we make positive and lasting changes.
In other words, greet our harmful behavior with love and acceptance, and resist any and all efforts to change ourselves against our will. There is always a part of us that will "rise up" in the defense of a pattern, because it got there in the first place to meet an important need of ours.
So for instance, if a person drinks alcohol to the point of harming their health and alienating him/her from the people in their life, the idea would be to connect with the "good reasons" behind the choice to drink. A person might be longing for relaxation, in agonizing tension in fact, and just doesn't know any other way to get it.
Or, some people might have a lot of self-judgment and self-deprecation happening, even tearing themselves apart inside... and drinking is the only strategy they are aware of to calm the inner demons, and experience some inner peace and freedom from the blame and judgment... just to be free from that.
That's not to say that the behavior itself (drinking more than is good for their health) is a desirable thing; in fact, it probably doesn't meet a lot of their other needs, such as health and well being, consideration for others, healing, resolution, growth or development, to name a few possibilities.
But one thing is for certain -- if people brow-beat themselves into behavioral change, and attempt to maintain that through willpower, the willpower will run out sooner or later... and probably sooner. We just cannot marshall up enough willpower to counteract an energy of a need that motivated us to do the behavior in the first place.
So my playful New Year's Resolution is to avoid making resolutions... that is, unless and until I love the part of me that is energizing whatever behavior I wish to change... and greet that part of me with love, acceptance and honor.
Once I have done that, the change takes place organically, from a place of inner connection with my power. Happy new years to al1!
2 comments:
I feel intrigued reading your ideas about the possible motivating behaviors and I'm thinking I have a different idea about that. Maybe we have the same idea; I'm not sure.??
I'm not thinking that the behavior the person might want to change is meeting some needs, only that the behavior is the strategy they have adopted to attempt to meet their needs, and that it might not meet those needs (or any needs!) at all. I'm curious if that is what you meant, if I've been clear about what I have registered as a difference in our view of this, and would like to hear your response. I'm uncertain if you will read this now, four months later, but replying here now cuz it is up in me. :-) -Mair
Hi Mair, I like the further distinction that you are making (if I understand you accurately) -- that there is even a difference between doing something IN AN ATTEMPT to meet some need, versus actually fulfilling the need successfully.
In other words, many things we do are motivated by some need(s), but they don't even end up meeting the needs we thing we're after (not to mention other needs that are left hanging in the balance).
I like making this distinction, and yet for me, whether or not the need gets met is secondary to the motivating influence of the need itself that inspires us to do certain things.
I have heard a few in the NVC community speak about how there really is no such thing as an "unmet need" (Kelly Bryson, Francois Beausoleil, Charles Jones) per se -- Kelly once referred to it as, "the funny idea of the existence of 'unmet needs'."
In other words, holding needs as met/unmet can create a sort of duality that we are seeking to soften through the very practice of NVC. So, more and more, I look at needs as "the life energy that motivates all human actions," and look less at the metness/unmetness factor.
I'm curious what this brings up in you?
Post a Comment