The authors state that even though some people may think that as long as people spend time together, their relationships will eventually become stronger, most likely they will not be unless people have experienced and responded to each other in ways that create feelings of being heard, understood, and valued. The authors open this chapter by discussing the “chaotic” school environment at Stanton Elementary School in Washington D.C. after new Principal Carlie John Fisherow tried to do a “rapid turnaround” in 2010. Although she had hired a new teaching staff and improved the lighting and aesthetic of the school and also changed the school’s curriculum, the school’s culture continued to be chaotic.

Based on this example it appears that simply changing the physical appearance of a school and how things operate cannot overcome a lack of trust among people who work there. By the end of the first week of school, elopement was a regular occurrence, the number of student suspensions had climbed to 321, and truancy had risen to 28%. This created a situation where teachers felt like they were “at war”.

When the academic performance of the students declined, Fisherow searched for something that would improve relationships instead of creating additional rules to enforce compliance. She found that by working with the Flamboyan Foundation, she could improve the way her teachers interacted with the parents of her students. The foundation recommended that teachers visit with the families of their students at home before the start of the school year. The teachers were given one specific constraint for these visits—no papers, contracts, or agendas could be brought.

While this approach seems straightforward, the authors argue that including documentation could potentially send the message to the families that the teacher is just looking for compliance, so eliminating those things allows the interactions to focus on the needs and experiences of the family.

Teachers were instructed to ask their families a series of prescriptive questions regarding their previous experiences with the school, what they hoped for the child, and what things would help the child succeed in learning. The questions were structured enough to ensure that the teachers were asking similar questions to all of the families they visited with, but flexible enough to allow the teacher to listen and adjust their response accordingly, as opposed to simply checking off a box.

While initially many of the teachers were hesitant to participate in the program due to concerns that the parents would view the visits as nothing more than an opportunity for the teachers to evaluate their parenting, they quickly began to see positive results from the visits. As a result of the increased level of familiarity, conflicts between the students and the teachers decreased. In addition, a much larger number of parents began attending conferences and Back-to-School Nights.

For example, while only 25 percent of the parents attended the Back-to-School Night at the beginning of the school year, by the end of the year, attendance had doubled. Similarly, the number of parents who attended conferences grew from 12 percent to 73 percent. Truancy rates decreased to 11 percent and suspension rates decreased from 321 to 24. Additionally, the students’ test scores showed improvement over time. The rapid transformation of the school environment at Stanton Elementary supports the authors’ claims that the relational peaks they describe can transform behavior much more quickly than a gradual increase in exposure to a particular type of person or situation.

In order to understand why relational peaks can cause such rapid transformations in behavior, the authors turn to research conducted by social psychologists. Specifically, the authors use research conducted by Harry Reis on perceived partner responsiveness. Perceived partner responsiveness occurs when people believe that their partner has responded to them in ways that show that he/she understands them, validates them, and cares for them. The authors then apply this concept to various areas of life such as health care—”what matters to you?” (174)—customer service (“baggage handling” that acknowledges a customer’s frustration), and workplace settings (Gallup items related to whether or not employees feel valued).

Finally, the authors discuss how responsiveness, combined with openness, can facilitate greater levels of intimacy through the process of turn-taking—small disclosures of self that encourage others to reciprocate. However, the authors caution that this process requires a safe psychological environment and can have negative consequences if forced upon others or if there is a mismatch between the relationship and the types of self-disclosures that occur. Like many other techniques they propose in the book, this kind of relationship building is best handled by a trained professional rather than someone who lacks appropriate expertise.

Chapter Lessons

• Design moments that signal responsiveness by practicing understanding, validation, and caring in concrete behaviors.
• Replace generic, transactional interactions with listening-first conversations that focus on the other person’s goals and needs.
• Acknowledge “baggage” (past frustration or context) so people feel seen and you avoid repeating unhelpful steps.
• Start intimacy-building turn-taking by sharing something real, then inviting the other person to respond.

Reflection Questions

• Where is one relationship (at work, home, or in a service context) stuck on “small talk autopilot,” and what would a responsive question look like that shows understanding, validation, or caring?
• What small self-disclosure could you offer this week to begin turn-taking and invite a deeper, more honest exchange?