ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Kerry Patterson is author of three bestselling books, Influencer, Crucial Conversations, and Crucial Confrontations.
READ MORE

  Dear Crucial Skills,

I used to think I was kind and careful with my words, but I am a month and a half into a new job and feel I can’t trust myself to communicate well over e-mail at all. The time-sensitive nature of solving problems for people means I can’t always ask for the feedback that would help them feel respected, and I find that the tone of my words is rarely interpreted the way I meant them. Do you have any advice for holding crucial conversations over e-mail?

Electronically Challenged

As you’re suggesting, real conversations rarely occur via e-mail. That makes e-mail a particularly dangerous tool for engaging in a crucial conversation. When stakes are high, opinions vary, and emotions run strong, that’s the one time you really need to make use of a genuine, face-to-face conversation. You need all of your faculties for reading the other person’s reaction and electronic tools can severely limit this. To make matters worse, when you’re typing messages back and forth (often separated by a fair amount of time), there’s no room for subtle give and take. For instance, in a face-to-face discussion you might immediately pick up on the other person’s reticence to comply with a request and choose to back off and try a different tactic. You have no such option when you type out your entire request and then wait for a response.

I know I’m preaching to the choir, but allow me to continue with some of the challenges of electronic communication. Imagine writing a lengthy request you know will be difficult for the other person to complete. You also suspect the work you’re asking the other person to do will put his or her work-life balance at risk. That’s not the kind of thing you want to communicate via e-mail. Inevitably, such a request would lay out every element of the project. To the receiver, that would look like one demand heaped upon another—creating stress, concern, and even anger.

I’ve found myself reading such electronic requests and becoming miffed because the other person seems to blindly plow along with further demands despite my growing frustration. While he or she can’t see the frustration on my face, I assume he or she is just being insensitive to my clearly hostile reaction.

Then, of course, time and distance only make matters worse. As I push back from the offensive e-mail request, I fill in the detail about the other person’s motives. Because I can’t see the concern on his or her face or detect the warmth in his or her voice, I assume he or she doesn’t care about me. This person is cold and calculating and not at all in touch with the fact that I will now miss my daughter’s birthday thanks to the request.

It’s little wonder you’re concerned about holding crucial conversations by e-mail. Bad things can happen when you do—particularly when people don’t know you very well. So here are few steps you can take to eliminate or at least lessen the risks.

First, don’t hold truly crucial conversations via e-mail. Whether you’re making a request, offering an unpopular opinion, or disagreeing with someone in a position of power—whatever the high-stakes dynamics—do everything in your power to hold a face-to-face conversation.

If you can’t meet face-to-face, then find a reasonable substitute. Try talking by means of video-chat software. There can be short delays with this medium, but this form of conversation allows for a simple statement, followed by a pause that allows the other person to respond before you’ve plowed on ahead with a massive request. You can also see brows furrowing and other signs of hesitation or even anger and quickly take steps to mitigate the reaction.

If you don’t have video capabilities, a handy invention created on March 10th of 1876 can be of great assistance. Although the telephone cuts off visual clues, it does allow for two important elements of a healthy conversation. One, you can speak, pause, and allow the other person to speak, avoiding the data dump of a single written missive. Two, you can notice pauses, tone of voice changes, and other vocal indicators that the other person is feeling reticent or emotional. Since you’ll miss visual cues, you’ll have to take special care to listen for signs of stress, but you can typically pick up signs before the conversation spins out of control.

I recently asked my son-in-law, who constantly holds high-stakes conversations with people all over the world, what he does to succeed given the challenge of distance, lack of visual cues, multiple parties on the line, and language differences. His response came immediately: “I listen for pauses, tension, and other signs that not everyone is on board with the proposal. I also take special care to invite the opinion of individuals who have remained largely silent. I never assume silence is a sign of agreement. In fact, I assume the opposite until I hear genuine confirmation.”

Now, if you’re facing circumstances where you can only communicate electronically, then use the medium as an invitation to a real conversation. Explain that you need to chat as quickly as possible. Don’t lead with your controversial content. Instead, start with a simple invitation.

Finally, if you don’t have time for a delayed response, then start your request tactfully and tentatively. Since people don’t know you very well, it sounds as if they may be making the worst rather than the best assumptions about your sensitivity to their circumstances. With time, as others learn about your caring nature and willingness to cooperate, people will begin to trust you and you can communicate by multiple methods.

Until then, when forced to follow an electronic path, apologize for using e-mail for making a challenging request. You’d much prefer to talk face-to-face, but demands require immediate action. Explain that you’re sensitive to the other person’s differing opinion or horrendous workload (or whatever it is that will put you at odds), and then lay out (1) the reason you’re pressed for time and (2) the rationale behind this specific request. This typically includes the consequences you, others, and the company will experience if the request isn’t met. Take care to share the context, not just your demands. Then tactfully ask if the other person can comply or can come up with an alternate solution. Finally, thank the other person for his or her kind consideration and end by asking for an immediate response so you know where you stand.

Once again, this is the sort of thing you do only when you have no alternative or if you already have a relationship of mutual respect and trust with the other person.

Kerry

ABOUT THE EXPERT
Steve Willis is a Master Trainer and Vice President of Professional Services at VitalSmarts.
READ MORE

A little while back, I showed up for a class and found myself surrounded by introverts. And not just any old introverts, I’m talking about an elite group of genetically enhanced super-introverts hand picked from across the company to attend my class.

I asked a question . . . silence. I waited them out . . . in silence. We watched funny videos . . . (you guessed it) in silence. And just to be clear, I’m talking the kind that’s way beyond the sound of silence that Simon and Garfunkel were singing about.

Anyway , nuff said about my group. I’m interested in your input here. Write in and tell me what you’ve done to work with a group like this one. Yours truly . . . in silence.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Kerry Patterson is the author of three bestselling books, Influencer, Crucial Conversations, and Crucial Confrontations.
READ MORE

The following article was first published on November 24, 2004.

As we embark on two months of holiday gatherings, many of us are wondering what it’ll take to survive the unavoidable conflicts that lie ahead. Friends and loved ones will gather around a cornucopia of recently harvested food and, despite their best efforts to avoid all things hostile, controversial topics will weasel their way into the conversation.

Here’s your common holiday fare. Dad denounces his firstborn for canceling out his vote in the latest election. Granny asks her grandniece why she’s dressed like a hussy—Halloween has already passed. Mom plays the martyr as she tries to guilt-trip anyone who walks through the kitchen into working. She’s been serving up heaping spoonfuls of guilt along with the feast for years.

Eventually, two or more loved ones end up in a contentious debate. What starts out as a pleasant gathering with relatives wassailing each other left and right, transforms into a scene from A Jerry Springer Holiday. And as a result (to put a twist on Jim Croce’s famous tune), we think about the gatherings that lie ahead and we all come down with: “The steadily depressin’, low down mind messin’, celebratin’ holiday blues.”

In fact, 85 percent of the readers we recently polled stated that their family holiday gatherings include at least one heated argument where a valued relationship suffers. Rather than strengthening family bonds with each holiday gathering, one more link in the chain of family unity is further corroded. I speak from experience.

As a boy, I looked forward to each Thanksgiving and Christmas season more than any other time of year. It was a time when I got to sit next to my brother, dad, grandfather, and uncle and watch football. I don’t remember much about the games, but I can still smell the faint aroma of granddad’s nickel cigar and feel the afterglow of the camaraderie that enveloped each event. At dinner, the men would compete for who could load up their plate the highest while the women mockingly chided them for courting a coronary. Of course, nothing earth shaking happened at these gatherings. I guess if the world looked in on these events they would think they were sappy. I thought they were wonderful. We loved and respected each other and it showed.

So why was it that when my beloved family members met in full force for the last time (before kids married and moved away and grandparents passed on), I had to be such a moron? I was now an adult fresh out of grad school where I learned all about the importance of theoretical rigor and solid methodology. So when my cousin mentioned that she was “into” subliminal learning, I couldn’t help myself. Not only did she believe that if she played audio tapes while she slept her brain would magically take it all in (something that had been discredited years earlier), but she also believed that if she listened to her favorite guru yammer on about who knows what, she would be healed.

No sooner had she announced to the crowd that she was speeding down the subliminal highway to sound mental health than I laid into her arguments like a pit bull on a pork chop. Unfortunately, her claims couldn’t be disproved. Her arguments always ended with, “but it works for me.” She was a master at ducking scientific inquiry. For instance, years later she moved a chair in her living room to “alter the room’s karma,” and sure enough she was “back on the road to psychic balance”—or so she claimed.

Not being able to discredit my cousin’s arguments, I pointed out that the one-room-school over a garage where she currently studied family therapy wasn’t a school at all—it was a loosely-coupled gathering of flakes and charlatans. I offered up this heart-felt remark to no effect. In fact, my cousin merely smiled knowingly. I hated that smile. It hit me like a punch to the forehead.

So I punched back. Quickly I moved from lobbing cheap shots to launching a full-fledged personal attack. As I raised my voice, the spirit in the room changed from merriment to discord. My tone clanked against the pleasant background music and gentle chatter. All by myself I defiled the very spirit of the holidays. All by myself I upset the delicate balance of the successful family shindig. And hot dang, I was proud.

My cousin rose to the fight, matching insult with insult. Soon we were one more casualty in the book of failed holiday gatherings—all because of one thing. I just had to be right. I just had to set the record straight. I just had to attack the faulty details. And then for years to come, instead of apologizing for taking a sacred family tradition and sullying it with ill will, I acted as if what I had done was somehow noble.

That’s right. I was just doing my part to defend sound logic and thinking. Others could listen politely while my cousin raised idiocy to an art form, but I wouldn’t take it. I’d challenge her outlandish claims and if I hurt her feelings in the process or dealt the family gathering a death blow, that’s the price I’d pay for defending scientific rigor. All great things come at a price.

This was my story and I stuck to it for two decades.

So, here’s why 85 percent of the people we recently polled experience discord right along with their annual mug of eggnog. Every family gathering that has been brought to its knees by a heated and unsuccessful confrontation contains two or more participants who not only refuse to apologize for their role in the debacle, but who justify their mean-spirited and selfish attacks by explaining that they were merely defending a core value—and how wrong can that be?

Dad wants nothing more than to help sonny-boy come to his senses. That’s why he tries to set him straight. Granny wants her grandniece to quit sending the wrong message with her scandalous attire—so she won’t attract the wrong guys. Mom just wants some credit for all that she does for everyone—is that asking too much?

Let me break from the pack by making a pact. This year I’m not going to sacrifice family unity no matter what anyone says—or no matter how important the value I think I’m defending. Should a cousin announce that her health has greatly improved since she’s started eating a bushel of pine cones for breakfast while spinning hubcaps on her thumbs, I won’t laugh out loud. I’ll ask why and then actually listen. And if I still have a different view, I’ll express it in a pleasant and caring way.

Here’s my plan. I’m going to start every discussion by asking what I really want. Does everyone really have to believe what I believe? Do I really have to win each and every point?

One thing’s for sure—I don’t want to turn every gathering into an event where you can’t talk about anything substantive; I just want to talk about interesting and important issues in a way that doesn’t violate the spirit of the holidays. I want my own children to enjoy the sweet taste of healthy family discourse, good will, and genuine camaraderie. And to keep on track, I’ll continually ask myself: “What is it that I really want?” That’s the plan.

Who’s with me?

Our research shows nine out of ten people who are skilled at holding crucial conversations enjoy their family gatherings—despite the unruly behavior of their relatives.

So to kick off the festivities, our award-winning video team presents Holiday Spice: Relatively Speaking . . .

Share with your friends:

Follow these four recommendations for talking to unruly relatives about their bad behavior so you can strengthen relationships and enjoy your family gatherings:

Work on me first. How you see your relatives determines how you treat them. To soften judgments, ask yourself, “Why would a reasonable, rational and decent person do what they’re doing?” For example, do you see your Uncle Fester with a poor driving record as criminally irresponsible or as harried and in need of help?

Make it safe. When confronting bad behavior, first help the other person know you care about his or her interests. For example, if Uncle Fester is coming down with the flu and kissing everyone he greets, begin with, “Uncle Fester, it wouldn’t be a holiday if I didn’t get a hug. I’m glad you’re so affectionate and warm to all of us, but . . . .”

Just the facts. Start with the facts and strip out accusatory, judgmental and inflammatory language. “Uncle Fester, I notice you are sick. And I noticed you’ve been double-dipping your chips in the bowl . . . .”

Tentatively share concerns. Having laid out the facts, tell the person why you’re concerned, but don’t do it as an accusation—share it as an opinion. “My concern is that with all of us in such close proximity, we’re all going to come down with the flu. I know you don’t want that either.”

Invite dialogue. After sharing your concerns, encourage the other person to share his—even if he disagrees with you. One of the best ways to persuade others is to listen to them. “So Uncle Fester, is there a way we can get your warmth and love without getting more than you mean to give? Or am I seeing this wrong?”

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Kerry Patterson is author of three bestselling books, Influencer, Crucial Conversations, and Crucial Confrontations.
READ MORE

  Dear Crucial Skills,

Can you address nonverbal communication and ways to control sending messages that you do not intend? I often get feedback that it is my tone of voice rather than my message that people are offended by and that my tone is negative and condescending. This is not my intent. How do I get a handle on it?

Misunderstood

We’ve all heard the old adage that ninety percent of communication is nonverbal. While I’m not sure how one actually measures such a squishy thing, there is indeed truth in the notion that our words alone are not our only way of sending messages. Our facial expressions, volume, tone of voice, and body movements combine to send messages as well.

Not only do we communicate with more than words, we also tend to give more credence to others’ nonverbal forms of communication. For instance, your sister opens a present you’ve just given her, frowns, pauses, puts on what appears to be a forced smile, and says robotically, “Thanks, it’s exactly what I wanted.” Then she tosses your present into her growing pile of bounty.

In your view, your sister’s words of appreciation don’t match her tone, delivery, and other body movements and you’re betting this less-controlled (and possibly more-credible) nonverbal message of disappointment is the message you should believe. In your view, she told you a white lie to avoid hurting your feelings. You may be wrong, but when faced with what appear to be incongruent words and actions, we frequently come up with similar conclusions.

Now, back to you. If others tell you that you sound negative and condescending, it’s possibly because your thoughts are negative and condescending. You might actually be thinking bad things about the other person and you can’t hide your feelings well. Some people are actually quite adept at hiding these negative thoughts, putting on an upbeat face, and moving on without coming across as harsh or condescending. But most of us are not all that good at masking the emotions our stories create. We can only solve our problem by changing what we think about others. When we want to discuss issues professionally and calmly, we can’t hold court in our head, find the other person guilty, and expect to act respectfully and cordially toward them.

We learned the simple truism that the body follows the heart when producing a training video some twenty years ago. We were directing a marvelous character actor who was supposed to deliver the line: “You agreed to have the write-up to me by noon. It’s two o’clock. I’ve received nothing as of yet and I was wondering what happened.” The idea behind the script was to simply describe a problem to a coworker and find out what was going on.

When our friend delivered the rather innocuous line to the other actor, he frowned and emphasized the words “AND I’VE RECEIVED NOTHING AS OF YET.” His delivery came off as an accusation and not as a legitimate inquiry. When we asked him why he was so tough on his “coworker,” he explained he didn’t like being let down and the guy deserved harsh treatment. Now take note; he didn’t change the line one bit, but his tone, expression, and nonverbal actions were aligned with his negative conclusion about the other actor. He thought the guy represented someone who was guilty and treated him as such.

So, for the second take, we told him neither to frown nor to emphasize “NOTHING AS OF YET.” He smiled this time. He also leaned in—nose to nose—and spoke so slowly and deliberately that it came across as a threat. The other actor actually blinked nervously and backed up as if being attacked.

No matter how many times we told him to stop doing something nonverbal and threatening, he’d come up with a new nonverbal cue that implied “you’re an untrustworthy moron” without changing a word from the original script.

Finally, in desperation we told him the other fellow was a good friend who was normally quite reliable and that he was curious as to why he had failed to deliver on his promise. When given this background he delivered the lines perfectly. His new feeling, based on new assumptions, led to new and congruent behavior. Ergo, if you want to repair your nonverbal behavior, alter the conclusion you’ve drawn before you say a word.

This, of course, is what we now teach in Crucial Conversations. As part of the notion “work on me first,” we suggest you inventory the conclusions you’ve drawn about others before you speak to them. If you think others are purposely causing you grief, you’re likely to open your discussion with an accusatory comment. You might even choose tactful words, but your overall demeanor and tone will be accusatory if you’ve already held court and found the other person guilty.

So, when talking with someone who has let you down, start by asking yourself why a reasonable, rational, and decent person would do what he or she just did. Remain curious. Don’t pass judgment before you’ve gathered all the facts. Then, set aside a time to talk in private. Start the conversation with the hint of a smile. You’re not angry; you’re curious. You don’t feel superior; you simply want to surface and discuss the facts. In short, manage your nonverbal behavior by managing your conclusions. See if “fixing your heart” helps to fix your delivery.

Kerry

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

David Maxfield is the author of the New York Times bestselling book, Influencer: The Power to Change Anything.

READ MORE

Dear Crucial Skills,

I have a problem at work involving a boss who is never satisfied. Our branch has the highest ratings possible and yet our annual letter from the boss always says, “I know we have the potential to be good.” This wording sounds as if we are not good now, despite having the highest possible ratings. How can I show my boss that a more positive approach would improve employee morale and help productivity?

Discounted Employee

What a frustrating situation: the glass seems to be full, but your leader describes it as half empty. This is a perfect opportunity to use the Crucial Conversations skills: master my stories and explore others’ paths. You receive an ambiguous and disappointing message from your manager. You see his or her story, but you don’t know the facts behind it. In addition, you draw conclusions and tell yourself a story about your manager.

The key to solving this issue is to learn what your manager is really trying to say—and to make sure you interpret the message accurately. Let’s imagine his or her motives and then explore solutions.

The annual letter may be more ceremonial than informational. Your leader may send similar letters to every branch every year. In this case, the letter isn’t meant to be taken personally. Instead, it’s meant to convey your manager’s overall philosophy: that your company has great potential to do good work.

Before you talk to your manager, touch base with a coworker from another branch to make sure you’re not overreacting. If you find out the letter is just ceremonial, then put it in perspective. It may not be worth a conversation.

Your ratings may not tell the whole story. There may be other metrics, such as overtime, staffing levels, market penetration, profitability, and the like, that aren’t captured in the ratings but that still matter to your leader. If this is the case, then your team needs to track these other metrics and work to improve them.

This is a conversation you and your peers need to have with your manager. Here is a possible starting point: “Your letter made me wonder whether our number-one rating isn’t really telling the whole story. You said we had the ‘potential to be good.’ Are there measurements of our work that aren’t reflected in the ratings—aspects we need to improve on in order to be ‘good’?”

Your manager may fear complacency. Even the best individuals and teams need to continually improve or they’ll be left behind. Some leaders are afraid too much praise will cause people to become content with their current level of performance and slow their continuous improvement efforts. If this is the case, then your team needs to have clear and visible stretch goals so your manager can recognize your progress while acknowledging your achievements.

This is another conversation you and your peers will want to have with your manager. A starting point might be, “As you know, our branch is ranked number one. Yet, your letter didn’t exactly celebrate our achievement. You said we ‘had the potential to be good.’ I want to check in with you to see if you think we’re becoming complacent or if there is some other problem I’m not aware of.”

Overall, it sounds as if you have two tasks: First, to make sure you and your leader agree on how the branch is performing. That’s the focus of the suggestions above. Your second task is to help increase the motivation, morale, and productivity in the branch. Here are a few suggestions.

Manage the data stream. Make sure your leader and your team monitor the same dashboard. Work with your manager to determine a few metrics that create a balanced snapshot of the branch’s performance. Set challenging improvement goals and then update your progress daily, weekly, or at least monthly. Frequently seeing this feedback and progress will reduce any gaps between how your leader and your team judge the branch’s performance.

Increase opportunities for feedback. An annual letter should be one piece of feedback among many. Additionally, this feedback should come from a variety of sources beyond your immediate manager. Consider the variety of internal and external customers your branch supports and then create forums for getting their feedback. Listen for the good, the bad, and the ugly. When possible, include your leader in these information-gathering sessions so he or she can hear about your performance from those who are most affected by it.

Create personal experiences. A letter isn’t nearly as impactful or motivating as face-to-face dialogue. Find ways to visit internal and external customers. Invite leaders—your manager and others—to visit your branch. Encourage these leaders to share their views on how your branch can achieve broader business goals, where your performance is on track, and how you can improve.

Share mission moments. Take time to relate incidents that tie the branch’s work to its mission. One story per meeting is plenty. These stories should be timely and involve everyone. These stories of actual incidents will prove far more motivating than any yearly letter could ever be.

I hope these suggestions help you get started. Please don’t have the crucial conversation with your manager until you’ve first checked your perspective with a few trusted peers. Focusing on an annual letter your manager sees as nothing more than symbolism might get you labeled as a complainer or as overly needy.

David

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Stacy Nelson is a Master Trainer and Senior Consultant at VitalSmarts.

READ MORE

Can you offer any insight on how to help a participant apply the learning from the Left Hand-Right Hand column exercise (Start with Heart) when the participant states that they are an extravert and they always share exactly what they are thinking?


Assuming that this person has completed the “Acid Test” exercise in “Get Unstuck”—-there are probably some conversations where they are frustrated in their ability to influence another person to think differently or act differently by engaging them in “Dialogue.”

As far as the Left Hand column exercise is concerned, meet them where they are. Have them focus on the Right Hand Column and the impact of always sharing exactly what they are thinking on creating conditions of “dialogue” and “safety.” Would it be better to pause and reconsidered the impact of their thoughts and feelings before “openly” sharing?

This style of “openly sharing” can be further validated by their style under stress assessment. It may be that they have a very low score on “silence” due to the fact that they simply share the raw, unedited conclusions and attributions. But how is this impacting safety and the free flow of meaning?

We encourage people to be honest in their interaction, not in an abrasive manner, but rather a persuasive manner. In order to move from abrasive to persuasive, they have to reconsider their emotionally charged thoughts and feelings and find a way to express themselves in a more reasoned, reflective and persuasive manner. This may mean that as an extrovert, they have to learn a new skill of creating a gap between stimulus and response before expressing thoughts and feelings.

The key here is for this person to honestly ask; what do I really want for myself, for others and for the relationship? Then pause before expressing themselves to see if what they are about to say will result in getting what they really want.

Part of the skill set of Crucial Conversations is learning ways of altering thoughts and actions to facilitate safety and dialogue, regardless of whether they are an introvert, or extrovert. Don’t let the DNA determine the destiny.