ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Joseph Grenny is coauthor of four bestselling books, Change Anything, Crucial Conversations, Crucial Confrontations, and Influencer.

READ MORE

Dear Crucial Skills,

I have found that applying the concepts in Crucial Conversations works well, and that the ability to convey an important crucial message and maintain relationships is very helpful in the work setting; however, I sometimes struggle with the concern that I am “sugarcoating” an inherently tough message. How can I “make it safe” even when the results of the conversation will most likely be negative, such as talking about serious performance issues, letting an employee go, etc.?

Signed,
Straight Talk

What a great question! Your question shows you are right on track with trying to achieve the essence of dialogue—absolute candor coupled with absolute respect. Far too many times people go through Crucial Conversations Training and emerge with a dangerous misconception. They believe the point is to be “nice.” And for them, “nice” means understating their point.

We once gave managers a test of their crucial conversations skills. We asked them to imagine a friend handed them a brief passage from the friend’s forthcoming book. We gave them an actual passage to read, then asked them to write their thoughts about the writing, and of their friend’s intention to quit her job and become a full time author. The passage they read was so bad that they were merciless in describing their opinions of it. “Drier than dirt!” or “Pointless” were common characterizations. When asked about the friend’s prospect for improvement, they typically said, “You can’t get there from here. Whoever wrote this has no hope of improving enough to make a career of this!”

Then we asked them to practice giving their feedback to another person in as effective a way as they could. The results were shocking. After writing “Drier than dirt” they would say, “This could use some improvement.” After writing “No hope of a career!” they would say, “It could take a lot of work!” Can you see what’s going on here? They’re making the classic “sucker’s choice.” They fundamentally believe that, if they were completely candid, they would destroy the relationship—or irreparably harm the other person.

The most important challenge Crucial Conversations offers the world is the challenge to find a way to do both—to be both 100% honest and 100% respectful.

Now with that as your goal, there are two things to keep in mind as you measure your crucial conversations progress:

Volatility is not honesty. Some people think that if their affect doesn’t match their message, that they’ve sold out. It could be that you are doing a terrific job—and are not sugarcoating—but that in the past you were more vociferous, loud, and demonstrative. Now you worry that without the added volume, people might mistake your message. If that is the case, worry no more. The show of emotion many people use during their crucial conversations often undermines their message rather than enhances it. It can come across as an attempt to control or manipulate others and distracts from the power of the message itself. That’s not to say the ideal is to be emotionally flat. All I’m suggesting is that excessive emotion is not a measure of candor—it’s crossing a line into something else. You can say it respectfully and somewhat calmly, and have all the power with none of the defensiveness.

The measure of success is not that they like—or even agree with—the message. You ask, “How can I make it safe when the result of the conversation is going to be negative?” That very question demonstrates a misunderstanding of this key point. Dialogue does not mean everyone is happy at the end. It just means they are able to hear you and understand your point of view—and in the end, see how a “reasonable, rational, decent person” might think what you think—even if they disagree. There are times when your conversation might lead someone to revise their view of themselves, their world, etc. and that revision can be painful. They may want to deny the truth of what you share for a period of time in order to forestall the painful revision, but if the conditions for dialogue are present in the conversation, you’ll significantly increase the likelihood that they will eventually get there.

Years ago, I had a crucial conversation with an employee where my message was, “You’re fired.” I sat down with my employee and explained the facts of the situation. He had committed a crime. It was just before the Christmas holidays and I was sick at the thought of how his dismissal would affect his family. I was also in agony over the effect his criminal proceedings would have on him and his family. But the truth was the truth. I laid out the facts and asked him if there was any other reasonable way to interpret them. His shoulders slumped and he confessed to what he had done. I told him I was letting him go as a result of that offense. And then I added, somewhat choked with emotion, “I am sorry. I love your family and I know this will break their hearts. I will help in any way I appropriately can through this.” I then elaborated on some ways I thought I could help. He went to jail. His family suffered. And yet a year after he got out of jail, I was happy to receive a note from him thanking me for how I handled things and reporting on the better direction of his life.

He did not like my message. But he heard it. And because he felt safe with me—felt I cared about his interests and cared about him—he was more capable of contemplating what I was sharing with him. That’s the measure of whether we get it right.

Best wishes to you in your ongoing effort to do the same!
Joseph

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
 

David Maxfield is coauthor of two bestselling books, Change Anything and Influencer.

READ MORE

Dear Crucial Skills,

In our hospital, we have a person who made a grave mistake during surgery. As the manager’s pet, she was not disciplined or reprimanded, but anyone else would have been fired on the spot. The rest of the staff noticed the special treatment given to this individual and are extremely resentful. How do I, as one of those staff members, interact with the offending person without letting my resentment show?

Resentful Coworker

Dear Resentful,

We studied this very problem in our research, Silence Kills, and found that 84 percent of healthcare professionals observe colleagues take dangerous shortcuts when working with patients and yet less than 10 percent speak up about their concerns.

I applaud you for raising your concerns. Nobody wants to work in an atmosphere of resentment that could compromise your paramount concern of patient safety. However, the situation you describe is complicated. There are many parties and probably many perspectives on the same set of facts. Let’s begin by examining your concerns.

1. Ask yourself, “What do I really want?” Think about what you want long-term for yourself, the other person, and for your relationship. This is what I learned from your question:

• You want fairness and justice. You think your peer is “the manager’s pet,” receives “special treatment,” and perhaps should have been disciplined, reprimanded, or even fired.
• You want to make sure your team provides patients with the safest, best care possible.
• You want a positive set of relationships so people don’t feel resentment toward one another.

2. Master your stories. Each of these concerns is based on a set of facts and/or a series of incidents, including the mistake that happened during surgery. But different staff members, and your manager, may interpret these same facts in different ways. All of you are telling yourselves stories about what these facts mean.

Treat your story as a story, not as a fact. Your story should be your best, most honest interpretation of what the facts mean. But also look out for what we call “clever stories”—interpretations that let you off the hook for feeling resentful and letting your feelings show.

Interrogate your story with two questions: a) “Do I really have all the facts I need to be certain my story is true?” and b) “Is there any other story that could fit this same set of facts?” Let’s examine two of the stories you’re telling yourself:

Your story about fairness and justice: What are the facts or incidents that combine to make you tell yourself a story about injustice? How confident are you that your story is true? Here are a few questions to consider:

It sounds as if you are holding your peer accountable for not being disciplined. Shouldn’t that concern be with your manager more than with your peer?

I wonder whether you and your manager are telling yourselves different stories about the “grave mistake.” Your manager may not have witnessed the mistake and that may mean he/she has less information. On the other hand, your manager may have interviewed your colleague as well as others who were there and this information might be both important and confidential.

Your story about patient safety: Any time you have a concern about patient safety you need to deal with it. It’s one of those non-negotiables. However, before you have this crucial conversation, examine your story.

It would be easy to tell yourself the story that your manager is putting friendship above patient safety. That would be a very troubling conclusion. But is it true?

In the old days, errors were often blamed on whoever touched the patient last. Every error was considered “operator error.” Then the pendulum swung toward “system error.” Errors and near misses were seen as caused by faulty processes and procedures rather than individuals. Of course, sensible people demand both capable systems and capable individuals. Neither is sufficient by itself. Do you see how this interplay complicates the stories you and your manager tell about the very same incident?

I don’t have enough information to know whose story is closer to the truth. But I think there is a lot of room for people who value fairness, justice, and patient safety to disagree. Have this conversation with your manager, but don’t assume he or she has bad intentions.

3. Start with the facts, then tentatively share your story. Take the time to prepare for this conversation. Try writing it out as a script and then review it to make sure you:

• Avoid accusations or any “hot” words or phrases.
• Begin with your good intentions—what it is you really want. Explain that this conversation is about patient safety. That is your mutual purpose.
• Start with the facts. These facts include the incidents you are fairly sure you and your manager will agree on. This is your common ground.
• Tentatively tell your story. Draw the pattern these facts are forming for you. But remember, your manager may see the facts—and almost certainly sees the pattern—differently than you do. Be careful to be respectful of your manager’s story.
• Stop so that your manager can share his or her perspective. Understand that some of the facts your manager has are likely to be confidential.

I also encourage you to review our latest study, The Silent Treatment, at www.silenttreatmentstudy.com or register for The Silent Treatment learning series to learn how to solve critical communication breakdowns and avoid dangerous mistakes in the hospital.

David

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Joseph Grenny is coauthor of four bestselling books, Change Anything, Crucial Conversations, Crucial Confrontations, and Influencer.

READ MORE

Dear Crucial Skills,

When one of my managers comes to me with a problem that involves another department, I have taken the stance that he or she should work it out with the other party. If they cannot work it out on their own, I offer to sit down with both of them. However, I know at least one manager who thinks I should intervene on his behalf and probably sees me as passing the buck. Do I need to explain the value of resolving the issue independent of my judgment, or am I passing the buck too soon?

Signed,
Carry Your Own Water

First, let me tell you that, in principle, I think you’re doing exactly what a leader should do. In most organizations, leaders enable their employees’ weakness at holding crucial conversations by allowing them to escalate far too many issues. The measure of a high-accountability organization is NOT—as most leaders think—the quality of downward (boss-to-direct report) conversations that get held, but the quantity of horizontal (peer-to-peer) conversations that get held. Building a culture where people are both willing and able to address crucial issues is the essence of a high performance team.

Now let me play devil’s advocate.

There are times when it is your job to hold a crucial conversation on your employee’s behalf. Here are two I can think of:

When the solution requires resources or authority unavailable to the employee. For example, if a colleague chronically fails to perform and key contributors to the problem are policies, new software, overtime approvals, or other things the employee cannot address, it may be wise for you to at least participate in the conversation—and possibly lead it.

However, I encourage you to use a policy I learned from Tom O’Dea, a colleague at Sprint—he called it Mutually Agreed Escalation—that is, both parties have to discuss the decision to escalate, and cooperate in doing so. This will help you assure the employee has dealt with any elements of the concerns he or she should deal with at his or her own level and only involves you in those issues you should uniquely address.

When it is a “relationship” conversation. In our book, Crucial Confrontations, we describe three levels of conversations you need to have:

• Content: An immediate problem that is generally occurring for the first time.
• Pattern: A problem that is becoming chronic.
• Relationship: A more fundamental challenge dealing with competence, trust, or respect—and generally calling for a change in relationship if a solution cannot be developed.

One of the best practices I’ve seen leaders use is to teach this concept to employees and help them understand that it is their responsibility to deal with content and pattern problems. The first time something happens, they should address it at their level. If—after receiving assurances it will not happen again—it happens again, they should address the pattern. However, if they have candidly addressed the problem at those two levels and do not see appropriate change, then they should escalate the problem. However, in the healthiest of situations, they should also notify the other person(s) when they have the pattern conversation that if the solution does not work, they will need to escalate to find some other answer. That lets the other party understand all of the consequences of noncompliance—hopefully adding motivation to follow through—and avoids the accusation that they are simply pulling a power play when they later escalate the problem to you.

For example, let’s say I have a colleague who is supposed to fill out patient reports before the end of his shift to ensure we have safe handoffs. I notice that on occasion, he fails to do so, so I have a crucial conversation with him. Things are good for a couple of weeks, then it begins again. So I raise the issue of the pattern and check to see if a larger solution is needed. At the end of this conversation I add, “Great, it sounds like we have something that works—but if we can’t reach a solution on our own, I think we should talk about this with our managers. Do you feel the same way? Or is there something else I should do if this doesn’t work?” This statement puts the responsibility where it belongs—on the other person—lets the other person know what can be done at your level before escalating, and helps him or her see your point of view in needing to escalate after this attempt.

Good luck in your wise effort to create a culture of candid and crucial conversations.

Joseph

According to a study we recently conducted, three out of five parents fail when trying to help their kids lose weight.

The research found that parents and children alike have far less control over their behavior than they think they do because they’re blind to the influences keeping them stuck. Parents can’t change their behavior, much less their child’s, until they understand the six sources working against them and marshal the sources to influence their behavior for good.

Here are some tips for reversing childhood obesity by changing bad behavior:

Change their impulses: Help your kids change the way they think about what they currently consider to be unpleasant behaviors such as healthy eating or exercise. For example, show them how healthy habits are important to their favorite sports hero.

Overcome ignorance: Teach your kids skills for making and keeping new habits like enrolling them in a new sport or teaching them about the food pyramid. For example, in an experiment to resist eating a marshmallow now for two later, 50 percent more kids were successful at earning two marshmallows when they were taught distancing tactics to distract them while waiting.

Turn accomplices into friends: Don’t underestimate the power of your kids’ peers. Bad habits are a team sport. Encourage your kids to spend time with friends who model good behavior.

Call in a coach: Coaches are crucial to behavior change success. While you might be a great cheerleader, enlist the power of an external coach to support your child, such as a sports coach. Research shows those with a half dozen coaches or mentors are almost 40 percent more likely to succeed than those without a half dozen coaches.

Reward small successes: When used in moderation, rewards can motivate kids to keep good habits. For example, if your kids meet their weekly goal of exercise, reward them with their favorite game, small treat or additional time with you.

Restructure your home: Make physical changes to your home that enable new behaviors. Put out healthy snacks instead of junk food. Schedule active family time, such as bike riding, as opposed to TV watching.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
 

Al Switzler is coauthor of four bestselling books, Change Anything, Crucial Conversations, Crucial Confrontations, and Influencer.

READ MORE

Dear Crucial Skills,

I have been a certified Crucial Conversations trainer for more than a year. Prior to my certification, I learned the strategies by teaching them to my family. While we aren’t perfect, we have come a long way in improving our communication.

I have a friend who is miserable in her marriage mostly because she and her husband frequently move to silence and violence or toggle between the two during even everyday conversations. It is painful to watch their marriage crumble. I lent them my copy of the Crucial Conversations audio companion, but I’m not sure they bothered to listen to it. I want to offer to mediate an argument so I can show them how to communicate effectively during a crucial conversation. What do you suggest?

Sharing the Love

Dear Sharing,

One of the toughest challenges is knowing how to help someone—especially if they haven’t asked for your help. There are some principles in Crucial Conversations that will help you, and I’ll use a couple in my advice to you.

First, I point to chapter eleven of Crucial Conversations, “Yeah, But . . . Advice for Tough Cases.” Some situations are tougher than others and we discuss seventeen of these situations in this chapter. Here are a few subtitles that might deal with the challenge you face:

• My Overly Sensitive Spouse
• Failure to Live up to Agreements
• Failed Trust
• Won’t Talk About Anything Serious
• Shows No Initiative
• Endless Excuses
• Regretting Saying Something Horrible

One of the findings of our research is that sustaining good results and strong relationships is based on how rapidly and respectfully people can resolve differences. Our work supported the findings of Howard Markman, a friend and one of the best researchers on relationships in the world. In his book, Fighting for Your Marriage, he states that the number-one predictor of lasting, happy relationships is “how people argue.”

You mentioned that you lent them your audio companion, and I think that is a good first step. This conversation might have sounded something like this. “My husband and I have found this CD very useful. It has helped our family communicate more effectively. I was wondering if you’d like to listen to it.”

A little note here. You said that you lent “them” the CD. Were they both present, or did you lend it to your friend and expect her to find a way to invite her husband to listen? If so, that may have been the problem.

You might want to get permission from your friend to see if you could try a more proactive step with both of them. By getting her permission, you would avoid any surprises. As an important side note, a recent study shows that when individuals have problems in their relationships and they go to their “friends,” the vast majority of the “friends” are quick to join in criticizing the spouse or partner rather than encouraging them to save the relationship. It looks like you’ve tried to help, but it’s important to note that your friend’s husband may not see the relationship the same way.

I suggest you use contrasting to clarify what you are not intending and what you are intending. In tough conversations, make sure your intentions or motives are clear before you engage in the conversation. So make sure both of them are in the room and that it is a safe and private environment.

It might sound like this. “I’d like to share some of the skills I train. I don’t want to be pushy or step in where I’m not invited. What I want to do is offer something that is helpful to both of you. I’m wondering if it might help if I share some of the communication skills I train at work and that I’ve found useful in my marriage?” And then you pause.

You might choose different wording, but the point I want to make is that clarifying your intentions first helps make it safe. Your friends might say no. They might say yes. They might question your expertise. They might get mad. But you made it clear that you were trying to be a friend—trying to be helpful and not wanting to meddle if your offer wasn’t accepted.

Even if they refuse your help, speaking up is so much better than saying nothing. I’m sure there are many, many individuals and couples who wish they had a friend like you.

Al

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

I’m writing this article, as I have many times in the past, during my plane ride home (Woo-Hoo!). However, I’m not returning from conducting a training, as is often the case, but rather from a number of certified trainer workshops that were held on the East Coast.

These sessions really reinvigorate me. I see familiar faces of those I’ve certified and worked with in the past. I get to hear about how others are using the materials. I’m exposed to a whole range of best practices (e.g., some people have taken questions submitted to the authors via the newsletter and sent them as part of the invitations to attend training with a teaser like, “Come to training to find out how to best respond to this and other similar questions.”). And I especially enjoy hearing the firsthand accounts of how participants responded to and utilized their newly acquired skills.

This whole last week has got me really excited to see everyone at the REACH Conference this year. I can hardly wait. So help me out. Give me something to tide me over. Please send me some of your recent experiences with the training or cool new ideas you can share with me to help the time go more quickly.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
 

Joseph Grenny is coauthor of four bestselling books, Change Anything, Crucial Conversations, Crucial Confrontations, and Influencer.

READ MORE

Dear Crucial Skills,

I have a longtime friend who is an Operation Iraqi Freedom veteran, experiences combat stress, and has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. He was being treated at a Veterans Affairs hospital and things seemed to be going well. But recently, I’ve seen a change and increased symptoms—angry outbursts, avoidance, etc.—and can even see the strain reflected on his face. I tried to gently tell him I was worried about him and he told me he’s fine and “not going to group hug therapy.” And now that he knows I’m concerned, he is avoiding me.

I know many of the veterans who finally get appropriate help do so under extreme duress. Do you have any suggestions on how to broach this with my friend and let him know he should think about modifying his approach to managing his condition?

Signed,
PTSD & Me

Dear PTSD & Me,

I asked for some extra advice on your question from my father—a WWII and Korean War Veteran with a PhD in counseling who still helps dozens of vets from the past seventy years of conflicts, even at age 84. Yes, I’m proud of him. I want to be sure I don’t speak beyond my competence in your very sensitive situation with one of our beloved servicemen—so I forwarded your question to him.

He suggests your friend’s delay in getting help is quite common. There are a host of “stories” he may be telling himself in order to justify delay—anything from minimizing the symptoms, trusting time will heal all wounds, doubting the efficacy of treatment, or fearing a loss of self-esteem by admitting he has a mental health problem.

The line you walk in this crucial conversation is determining when you are exerting influence and when you are provoking resistance. Push too hard and your friend will resent your intrusion on his autonomy. Say too little and you’re enabling his illness and unwittingly prolonging his suffering. Each of us is likely in a similar situation with one or more loved ones. Here are some thoughts to keep in mind as you find the balance between influence and patience:

Make it about him not you. When someone ignores counsel, it’s easy to take it personally. You can tell you’re taking it personally when you start feeling hurt and angry rather than concerned and fearful. It’s so easy to begin with well-intended motives, but let them drift into a desire to control others—without even being aware of the seismic shift. Keep focused on what you really want, “For my friend to be as happy as he can be on the time schedule of his choosing.”

Make it safe. Make your motives crystal clear—and don’t just create present safety—create it for the likely future conversations you’ll hold. If your friend is resistant to being treated, get ready for the long haul. When you have your crucial conversation with him, anticipate the likely need of periodic conversations until he concludes he is ready to take action. If this were a dear friend of mine, here’s how it might sound. Please adapt to your own level of relationship and verbal style.

“Hey bro—I want to talk to you again about getting checked for PTSD. Would you please tolerate me for the next two minutes so I can make my pitch? If you think I’m full of it at the end, please know that I am okay with that. Even if you disagree with me, I just want to be sure you know that the only reason I’m bringing it up is because I love you. Also, I want to warn you in advance that if I continue to see things that make me think a real friend should speak up, I’ll probably bug you again. Is that cool?”

Your goal here is to clear a path for future conversations while asking permission to have this one. And of course if he says, “Back off!” you are obligated to do so. But even in doing so, I would make the following statement:

“Okay. I’m sorry to come across as crowding you—but I want you to know I am concerned and if you ever change your mind about involving me, I am here. Until you give me that permission, I’ll honor your request to leave it alone.”

Your goal here is to make sure he interprets your silence in the next few weeks not as agreement that there is no issue, but as respect for his autonomy. Of course, you should break this agreement if he begins to do something that puts himself or others in harm’s way.

Share facts not judgments. If he allows you to have this conversation, watch to see if your words sound like judgments or threats, or make him feel guilty. If so, you’ve crossed over to controlling rather than influencing. “You’re blowing it, dude” or “Your family can’t take any more of this” are attempts to coerce him not influence him. If he is defensive at this point, you cannot motivate him. All you can do is help him find his own motivation to get attention. An attempt to rush it will cross the line into provoking resistance rather than exerting influence.

When you hold a crucial conversation with your friend on this topic, come armed with a handful of the most persuasive facts you can find to help your friend self-discover the need to be treated. For example, you could share that:

Psychological injuries are common. A recent study showed more than one in five Iraqi war veterans received psychological injury.
Typical symptoms include . . . The Nebraska Government has a brief self-survey on their Web site—you could pick the two to three symptoms which are most akin to what you see in your friend and use them for reference in your conversation.
Treatment can help. Often people avoid taking action not because they aren’t motivated, but because they doubt the efficacy of solutions. So they try to cope with things as they stand. A brief factoid sharing the percentage of people who see reduced symptoms after a couple of sessions might give him more confidence in trying a new treatment. It could be that his mental image is of laying on a couch for five years regurgitating pain with no real benefit.

Invite dialogue about his views. The only way to help a resistant person find motivation to change is to help him or her discover his or her own reasons. You could open that possibility by ending this little monologue with a statement like, “Are things working out the way you’d like lately? If so, then I’m off base. If not, let’s talk about what’s going on, what you don’t like, and what it might cost you in the future if it continues or escalates. We don’t have to have that conversation now—but I’m here when you want to have it.”

I hope something in what my father and I have said provides a useful direction for you and for him. You have my heartfelt and sincere best wishes for your positive influence on this good man.

Warmly,
Joseph

Thank you to all our readers and fans who have helped us launch our new book Change Anything to bestseller status. The book has been an immediate hit on all the major bestseller lists and we couldn’t be more ecstatic. See for yourself:

#3 New York Times (Hardcover Business)
May 1, 2011

#3 New York Times (Advice, How-to)
April 20, 2011

#1 Wall Street Journal (Business)
April 23, 2011

#1 USA Today Money

#2 Amazon.com
April 10, 2011

#1 BarnesandNoble.com
April 11, 2011

#7 Publishers Weekly (Hardcover, Non-fiction)
April 21, 2011

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

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

READ MORE

When trying to commit to seek mutual purpose, what if the other person refuses to open up and share his or her meaning to find and/or create a mutual purpose?

It can be difficult when the other person seems to be holding back what it is they really want. There are a couple of things you might keep in mind when dealing with this situation.

Sometimes the refusal to open up is a sign others are not feeling safe. One of the first things you may want to do is ask yourself a couple of “heart questions”: A) Do you really care about what they care about? B) Do you really care about them? If you can’t answer in the affirmative for both, you may merely be going through the motions of seeking mutual purpose having failed to start with heart.

Next, keep in mind that you can only do your best to create conditions that make it safe for them to open up. You cannot force them to open up. You cannot dialogue with someone who doesn’t really want to dialogue, but you can demonstrate your willingness to solve the problem by your commitment. Remember that the first step in finding mutual purpose is to “commit to seek.” By definition, “seeking” doesn’t mean this is going to be easy or quick. Demonstrating with heart and actions that you are willing to commit to the time needed for the search can show your level of commitment to the process.

I would also spend time on step # 2 —recognize the purpose behind the strategy. Make the needed effort here to make it clear to others that you really want to better understand what it is they want and why they want it. This is more than merely asking “What do you want?” Take time to dig a little deeper here so that they feel you really want an understanding of their purpose.

If things still are not moving in a direction you feel is productive—if others seem guarded and not willing to open up—you might ask them about the issue from your perspective. You might say: “I’m not sure that I have a better understanding of what you want and why you want it. I could be wrong, but it seems like you may be holding back. Am I doing something that is making it difficult for you to be open and honest with me? If so I would really like to know.”

Since this is a process of seeking, end well by stating that you are willing to continue this search. If the other person would like to think about this a little more and perhaps get back together at some later time, it would be okay with you. This demonstrates your commitment to finding something that will work for both of you.