INKOVEMA Podcast „Well through time“

#111 – The apology conversation

Having difficult conversations V

To apologise +++ To ask for an apology +++ To regret +++ To forgive

In conversation with Rolf Balling

Well through time. The podcast about mediation, conflict coaching and organisational consulting.

Rolf BallingGraduate in business administration (University of Cologne) with a focus on social psychology, 7 years in management functions (marketing/controlling) at Alcatel-SEL AG, then 10 years as head of the management training and organisational development department, training in TA up to teaching transactional analyst in the field of organisation (12 years part-time), Training in group dynamics (2 years part-time), training in systemic counselling (7 years part-time), from 1990 to 2002 establishment of PROFESSIO GmbH, academy in the field of human resources, as teaching trainer and managing partner.

Contents:

  • Building blocks of successful apology communication (possible course)

    This also results in the individual building blocks of successful apology communication, which can only ensure de-escalation and a relaxed atmosphere in the life, friendship or work relationship when they work together. If individual building blocks are missing or are insufficiently expressed, the atmosphere between the parties involved will remain tense and irritable. 

    1. the guilty person's wish to apologise: The guilty person begins the "social apology process" by asking for it: 

    "I would like to apologise to you." 

    2. injured person declares their willingness to do so: The injured person must declare their willingness to participate in such an apology communication: 

    "OK, I'm ready to apologise."

    3. common basis of understanding: Both parties should then talk about the incident and clarify specifically and precisely what misconduct is involved, what behaviour is in question and is identified as morally and ethically reprehensible by those involved. This is by no means about the assessment as such, but only about the behaviour as such. The two do not have to consider this behaviour to be equally reprehensible. That is not the point, but merely that they are talking about the same thing.

    "OK, so we're talking about the same thing and the same specific behaviour."

4. guilty person takes responsibility for the offence: The guilty person then takes responsibility for their incorrect, hurtful behaviour and wants to be excused for the fact that they have hurt the other person with this behaviour and thus "brought guilt upon themselves and burdened the relationship". For this reason, attempts to justify or apologise ("But I was also completely overtired...standing next to myself...inattentive, unaware, etc.) do not belong here. This is about unconditional remorse and regret about what happened and your own contribution to it.

"I take responsibility for my behaviour and regret it."

5. formulation of the request for apology: The victim of the offence is asked to apologise/forgive/forgive. The guilt that both sides agree on (see 3. and 4.) should now be removed from the offender by the victim. As a rule, the uncertainty and emotional tension of the parties involved increases at this point because the request can of course be refused.

"I ask you to excuse me for this behaviour and the injury it has caused."

6. acceptance of the request for apology: The victim of the offence accepts this request if and insofar as forgiveness and thus an apology from the offender (not by the offender!) is possible. By accepting the request, the guilt is taken away from the offender. He is thereby apologised to by the victim. The offender is now free again (from guilt) in the interpersonal relationship and can feel liberated.

"I apologise."

In the event of an apology

the victim of misconduct has the "most" work -

and not the culprit of the offence!