It’s natural for challenges to come up with other people. Problems are inevitable. It’s part of the human condition.  What creates conflict is in direct relation to your expectations. A critical factor that determines how we experience conflict is the distinction between “must” rules and “should” rules that we have for ourselves, and others.

“Must” rules are rigid expectations that we believe must be followed. Generally, “must” rules don’t have exceptions. Ever know someone whose standard is that they “must” exercise daily? Even when they have a cold or flu, they’ll exercise for a couple of minutes.  They might not jog 5 miles that day, but maybe they’ll do push-ups for 5 minutes.  “Must” rules dictate conduct. “Must” rules can be incredibly powerful in ensuring we adhere to a specific code of conduct that serves us, and others -- think of the need to be compassionate, to act with integrity, to be honest, and a variety of other values.

The problem with “must” rules is when we apply these rigid guidelines as codes of conduct that others must follow. Granted, there are situations where we must have a black-and-white view of conflict. For example, having a “must” rule that other people must not hurt us physically is a good “must” rule to have.  Sometimes though -- we can feel that another person is entirely wrong because they didn’t comply with our “must” rule. Perhaps we expect someone to never interrupt us when we speak, or they must reply to our email within a few hours.  When we hold others to these standards, that they must comply with our “must” rules (especially if they have no idea we even have these standards) - it will create conflict.  When we feel that others must adhere to our rules, and we become entrenched in our view, this strictness can damage the relationship.

“Should” rules, on the other hand, are more flexible. When we have “should” rules for ourselves, we give ourselves flexibility and choices. For example, perhaps we “should” exercise daily but if we’re sick on a certain day, or just not feeling it, we might then not exercise that day. “Should” rules give us flexibility, but their downside is that we hold ourselves to a lesser standard than a “must” rule.  Similarly, when we have “should” rules for others, we create space for flexibility on their part and even extend some grace when problems come up.

I’m not here to dictate what your “should” and “must” rules should be, but to simply offer the distinction between the two.  Knowing the difference can help you decide which rules are truly serving you.  “Must” rules serve us more when they apply to ourselves versus others; “should” rules serve us more when we apply them to the others.

Singer/songwriter Jewel said it best when she stated, “We must demand more not from each other, but more from ourselves.” The wisdom in this belief is that it reflects the reality that we can’t control the actions of others -  but we can control our own individual actions.

Here are some 7 reflection questions that can help you evaluate your expectations with others when working through conflict:

  • What specific behaviors do I expect others “must” do in their interactions with me?
  • What specific behaviors do I expect others “should” do in their interactions with me?
  • Have I communicated these expectations to others or are they assumed or unspoken?
  • How do I react when others violate my “must” rules versus my “should” rules?
  • Am I allowing space for flexibility and understanding in how others interact with me?
  • How do these rules impact the quality of my relationships with others?
  • Which rules must I change to improve the quality of my interactions?