'How Much Do We Really Remember? Managing Memory-Related Conflict At Work.'
- paul08129
- Aug 28
- 5 min read
‘How Much Do we Really Remember?’
was recorded (via Skype) in 2015. It was inspired by a book by my guest (the late Prof. Suzanne Corkin of MIT):
‘A Permanent Present Tense: The Man With No Memory’,
I’m re-releasing this show in a series about work-related conflict for a few reasons, including that:
· Whether or not we ever experience memory loss ourselves, any of us could have a customer/client or colleague who does; and
· Even a healthy human memory is a slippery beast – more than capable of stirring up conflict at work!
Suzanne’s book tells the story of her forty-six-year working relationship with Henry Molaison (‘HM’), who taught science a huge amount about how our memories work –or don’t!
On the show, she explained:
· Why we should remember ‘HM’;
· How he made sense of recognition without remembering;
· Why he forgot fear; and
· Who he really was as a person.
She also referred to:
· The work of Prof. Elizabeth Loftus – who has shown how easy it is to implant false memories; and
· Research into memory editing.
In theory, because facts and emotions are stored in different parts of the brain, it’s possible to break the link between them. As it’s the emotional part of a memory that makes it stressful, being able to tone that down while leaving the factual recollection intact could have real value for people living with, say, PTSD.
Ten years on from this conversation, clinical trials (of drug and behavioural approaches) have shown potential; but there are a lot of variables which make for unpredictable results; and (as Suzanne pointed out) there are ethical questions (which I won’t get into here).
In the work context, I’ve seen memory-related conflict in action – several times! For example:
Before I went into business for myself, I worked for a local law firm. One morning, when I got into the office, two colleagues(I’ll call them Matt and Danielle) were in the middle of a heated discussion.
They were both trainees, working on background research for the same client. Matt swore Danielle had agreed to write up the report; but Danielle said she’d only promised to ‘help knock the draft into shape’. Both were convinced they were right - but their memories told completely different stories.
This kind of conflict happens more often than we realise. That’s because, as Suzanne explained to me a decade ago, a memory isn’t a reliable audio or video recording. It’s a ‘creative’ reconstruction, which we retouch with every remembering.
Matt and Danielle had been in the same meeting, but their diametrically opposing reconstructions were shaped by all sorts of subjective influences – from deep-rooted biases to the mood of the moment.
The creativity of our recall creates:
· Disputes over commitments – ‘You said you’d handle this!’ ‘No, I said I’d help!’
· Attribution errors – remembering who had an idea, or who made a mistake. (Psychologists call this source misattribution; and)
· Misinterpretation of tone and intent – we often remember how something felt more vividly than what was actually said.
In 2016, Prof. Pat Rabbitt told me the most likely evolutionary purpose of memory is to help us use past experience to understand the present and plan for the future. So why is it so flawed?
Researchers have identified a few key reasons:
· Efficiency - memory stores the gist, not every detail. (Schema theory explains how we fill in missing pieces with patterns we already know);
· Bias – our choice of which jigsaw pieces we’re going to use in a reconstruction is highly likely to go through filters which protect our beliefs – including our self-image;
· Emotion - strong feelings can magnify or distort memory;
· Time –temporal distance works in much the same way as the physical variety - the further we are from an event, the more detail we lose – so the more gaps our brains fill in with other experience or assumption etc.
We can’t rewire how memory works, but here are five tips to help you prevent it from creating conflict:
1 Remember, everybody’s reality is equally real to them:
After talking to Suzanne, I thought that was obvious; but when I said it to someone working at my Mum’s care home (a specialist dementia unit), she looked surprised and said,
‘Of Course! … I hadn’t thought of it like that.’
It’s so frustrating when you know ‘the truth’, but someone else can’t see it! – until you step back and accept, they believe their brain as much as you believe yours – and either, or both of you, could be wrong.
2 If it matters, it stands repetition:
I talk a lot about attention investment – which is central to another regular topic – effective listening. The combination doesn’t stop memory-related conflict – although it does help. Specifically, summarising and reflecting back what someone else has said (or written), to check understanding, helps to make sure there’s a shared interpretation in the moment. Although after the moment, that can change – which is when you need the next tip!
3 Forget ‘truth’ and focus on ‘proof’:
Early in my legal career, I was coming over all evangelical about my client having ‘truth’ on their side, when a senior colleague pointed out:
‘”The truth” is irrelevant – it’s subjective anyway. It’s about what you can prove. What you need are the three Es: Evidence, evidence – and’ … well, you get the idea!
What is definitely ‘true’ is how important evidence is when our memories clash. Documenting conversations with customers/clients, colleagues (or anyone else) – and making sure everyone involved accepts the record, saves a lot of time and energy later. In Episode 3 of this series of the pod, I mentioned that in relation to contracts – but it applies to any meeting, call or other exchange which might be relevant later.
4 Make an assumption:
No, I haven’t forgotten that I’m always asking you not to do that!; but this time, it’s useful. Assuming someone who doesn’t remember things as you do is misremembering, rather than being malicious, keeps the temperature down – which helps to stop a specific dispute turning into a deeper conflict.
5 It all comes back to understanding:
From the customer who doesn’t seem to be able to take in and hold on to what you’re explaining, to the team member who swears you said something you know you didn’t, it’s easy to think: ‘You’re just not listening!’, or to wonder, ‘Why are you making stuff up?!’;but the more you understand about:
· How memory works in general and
· What might be getting in the way in the particular case,
the easier it is to accept that what you’re dealing with is a glitch in the incredibly complex network of networks which is the human brain.
There are two more shows in the archive, looking at memory from different angles. I’ll probably release the full set, before I kick off the new series, next month.
In the meantime, if you need help with any aspect of conflict management at work (memory-related or otherwise), come and talk to me! All my details are on the website:
Comments