When I took the Crucial Confrontations course at the end of September, my intent was to improve my conflict resolution facilitation skills. Within a few weeks of completing the course, I helped a key member of an organization get unstuck, see another story, and take a path to action that avoided a potential relationship blow-up. The added tools in my utility belt were a good fit. However, I really wasn’t expecting to have to call on them for myself since my personal and business relationships were pretty solid. True, I did have a mild case of masking to deal with, but I felt fairly good about my ability to carry on meaningful and important conversations. Maybe I was a little too smug about my skills, because they were soon put to the test.

November rolled around and I was leading a meeting to explore a possible process change. Before the meeting started, one of the directors pushed one of my hot buttons. He began to challenge, no denigrate, the validity and effectiveness of an initiative I was championing. The atmosphere went hostile in a moment. Before I knew it, my emotions went into hyperdrive. I could literally feel the blood leaving the reasoning part of my brain. Others in the room watched in amazement (some with horror) as they saw that I was visibly agitated. Some meeting attendees later told me they thought, “What is going to happen next?”

At the same time, it was like I was having an out-of-body experience. I began to think about the steps towards building a shared meaning even though I was steaming. The director was clearly out of line; nevertheless, I didn’t want to blow-up and make things worse. I was tempted to mask and go silent, stewing in my anger. So, I forced myself to think about some of the class exercises (it’s amazing how quick the mind can work). I put together my first sentence in response: “This adversarial behavior is not helping our meeting.” Maybe this wasn’t the best choice of words, however, calling things as they were did stop him in his tracks. I regained composure, asked to set up a separate meeting with him later to discuss his concerns, and then continued with the meeting. There was still a little tension left, but not near what it could have been. Several attendees came to me in private and thanked me for standing up. I’m still working things out with the director; however, our conversations are much more honest and I think he has a newfound respect for me. The Crucial Confrontations approach really does work!

If you have a Before and After story you’d like to share, please send your story to beforeandafter@vitalsmarts.com.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
 

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

READ MORE

Dear Crucial Skills,
My friend owns a catering company and has a large and valued client who doesn’t pay their bills for three to six months after an event. While the annual income from this client is excellent, my friend is unable to cover the expense of their events and often falls behind until he receives payment. He wants to have a crucial conversation with this client to let them know he cannot accept these payment terms, but he doesn’t want to damage the relationship or lose their business. Can you provide advice on this matter?

Friend in Need

Dear Friend,

Here are a few ideas from Crucial Confrontations. The subtitle of the book—Tools for Resolving Broken Promises, Violated Expectations, and Bad Behavior—is clearly applicable to this issue.

Before I turn to your friend’s problem, let me say a word about confrontation. Many people would rather eat a nail sandwich than confront someone. They would rather bite their lip and suffer in silence than engage in a confrontation. And from your friend’s example, we learn that some people would rather fall behind financially—and potentially risk the success and stability of their business—than hold a valued customer accountable. Many probably think of a confrontation as a verbally or physically dangerous situation, but we do not use that definition. Our use of the word comes from its root—which can be summarized simply as a face-to-face conversation. Rather than accosting or remaining silent, a person confronts another person about his or her behavior directly and courteously.

Clarify expectations. With that sidebar out of the way, I begin with this point—excellent performance begins with clear expectations. It is simply a sound business practice and an effective relationship strategy to clarify what’s expected, but it doesn’t look like your friend has taken this important step. He should visit with his client and clarify payment terms. There are several possible outcomes of this conversation:

• Quick agreement. The most likely outcome is a quick agreement that the client will make payments in full by a certain date and that late payments will be assessed a fee. Starting such a dialogue should be as easy as saying, “Jim, I’ve come to visit you today because I noticed that we didn’t clarify payment terms in our contract.”
• Different opinions. If your friend and the client can’t agree quickly, then they should jointly explore the consequences. What does this payment schedule mean for the client; what does it mean for the vendor? I suggest that in this sort of dialogue, both parties should be candid about what it means for themselves and for the other person. Often the offending party may simply be unaware of the consequences of their actions. Letting them know candidly and factually may be enough to solve the problem.
• A diminished relationship. The forethought of a negative outcome causes many people to choose silence, and what they don’t talk out, they eventually act out in ways that could ruin the relationship like gossip, sarcasm, or avoidance. However, our experience and research supports the idea that this outcome is less likely if your friend chooses to speak up, goes into the conversation with good intentions, and brings up the issue in a way that encourages dialogue instead of debate.

Make sure your motives precede your message. Your friend needs to make sure he has his heart and head right before he opens his mouth. He should ask himself, “What do I want? What concerns might my client have? How am I viewing my client?”

Let me emphasize this point by sharing a story from Kerry Patterson. Several years ago, Kerry was working with an 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.” When the actor delivered this line, he frowned and emphasized the words “AND I’VE RECEIVED NOTHING AS OF YET.” Because of this, it sounded like an accusation instead of an attempt to discover why the coworker had not met the deadline. After several failed attempts to remove the accusation from his delivery, Kerry told the actor the other person 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.

Let’s say the actor is your friend and needs to deliver a line as simple as, “Jim, I’ve noticed we don’t have an agreement about a payment schedule in our contract. Could we talk?” On the first attempt, your friend might deliver the line with a certain iciness—the nonverbal actions and the tone of voice drip with the idea that the client is guilty of something hideous. So you encourage him to, “Try that line in a more curious way, like you are trying to find out what’s going on.” Your friend is better this time—the overt nonverbal actions are gone, but the subtle ones still hint of “gotcha!” You patiently take a new tack and suggest to your friend, “Think of this person as your best friend.” And your friend gives the line perfectly—a mix of courtesy and curiosity. There is no hint of prejudgment or disappointment or anger.

Your friend needs to make sure his motives are right before he meets with his client. If he does, he will engage in a healthy, face-to-face confrontation. And when he can talk about it in a safe way, he increases the possibility of a win-win outcome. If he doesn’t talk about it in an effective way, there is little possibility of the payment schedule getting better, but by his silence, he will almost guarantee that the relationship will get worse.

Best wishes in coaching your friend,
Al

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
 

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

READ MORE

Dear Crucial Skills,

What do you do when someone is rude or publicly cuts down another person in the middle of a meeting? When this happens, I have noticed that group dynamics change as people become quiet or even jump on the bandwagon and gang up on the speaker. I have given private feedback to individuals after such meetings, but the moment is damaged and the group’s ability to communicate and make good decisions is compromised. How do you handle group conflict in the moment and return to safety without publicly chastising someone?

Cut Down

Dear Cut Down,

If your team had ground rules, team members would know what is and is not acceptable, and they would be able to (courteously) tell each other when someone said something that was rude or cutting, and remind others that they need to act in accordance with their ground rules. The little amount of time it takes to clarify ground rules is a good way to prevent this behavior and presents a clear option for a quick fix.

If your team hasn’t already done so, you need to clarify expectations. In the best case, your team leader will help the team agree to three or four specific behaviors that will help them perform well as a team. Here are a couple examples:

• “When we feel a teammate has let us or the team down, we will talk to them privately in a courteous manner.”
• “We will give feedback to our teammates in ways that are honest, detailed, and courteous.”
• “We will keep confidential what is spoken in confidence in our meetings.”

But how do you handle rudeness when you don’t have pre-established expectations? One of the tactics we teach people in Crucial Confrontations is to speak up in these awkward moments by making a statement about what is expected vs. what is observed. In the very moment when the cutting remark is made, any member of the team could state, “I think meetings like this work better if we speak courteously to one another. That last comment was less than courteous. Can we avoid rude or sarcastic comments?” It often just takes one person to make a big difference.

Now I’m not so naïve as to believe that one such comment will always stop the attack. It often can and does, but not always. This is why we teach people to clarify the conversation they really need to have. We define three types of conversations—Content, Pattern, or Relationship. When the comment is a one-time comment, the conversation needs to focus on content. The statement I mentioned above is a content statement. You mentioned in your question that you’ve talked privately to individuals about this. When they make rude or cutting comments again, you have a pattern. When you talk to the person, privately, you need to talk about the pattern and the negative consequences of this pattern. And you need to get a commitment that they won’t do it again. If the person continues to be rude, it is not only affecting the team, it is affecting your working relationship. If the person is rude again, you need to talk about the relationship and how their continued bad behavior is affecting the way you can work together. You need to be clear about the actions you will take if they continue to make these comments. If you are a supervisor, that can mean progressive discipline. If you are a peer, it might mean that you will stop the progress of the meeting and ask that the team figure out how to fix this issue.

What do you do to get the feelings and the meeting back on track? I suggest you take a short break—five or ten minutes. There are many reasons for doing this. When someone says something rude or cutting, everyone in the room becomes emotional because they are experiencing little (or big) bursts of adrenaline. If you say something like, “Let’s calm down and continue this discussion in a few minutes,” you are appealing to the cognitive system, which works fast. But when emotions are high, people need a little time to cool down. Call a time out. When you reconvene, you will have the opportunity to invite the group to act in ways that will help the team conduct the meeting in a safe and effective way.

So in short, set ground rules if you can, speak up when you need to, call a time out to restore safety, and remind the group that some actions help while some hurt.

Best wishes,

Al

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

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

READ MORE

  Dear Crucial Skills,

My coworker continuously boasts and brags about almost every aspect of her life. When anyone from our team discusses their successes or their life, she has to outdo them and frequently talks over people in order to be heard. I have tried to deal with her bragging but I think we are officially on the path to a crucial conversation. I do not want to damage the relationship or cause tension in our department but it has become so excessive that I have even contemplated finding a new job! Do you have any advice?

Thanks!
Brag or Bust

You are facing an interesting challenge—one I’ve seen or heard about many times. The most memorable comment came from an old high school buddy who, when we were about 40, made this comment about another person we knew: “When I toss pebbles in a puddle, he throws boulders in the ocean!” When my buddy made this comment, he sounded as frustrated and angry and perplexed as you do. Certainly, this is one of those conversations that is difficult and challenging to hold.

I once had a professor who had been entrapped by the same behavior as your coworker and who had overcome that particular challenge—with some help from his wife. My professor had a PhD, and he taught at the Air Force Academy and other universities. He was a full bird colonel and during his military career as a pilot, he traveled all over the world. At lunches, wine-and-cheese parties, and backyard barbecues, he would get entrapped. Someone who just returned from a cruise to the Baltic would mention a lovely dinner they had in Oslo, and the colonel would say, “Oh and isn’t the museum that’s next door to that restaurant lovely.” Another person would say, “I just got back from Rio and was on the greatest beach I’ve ever seen.” And the colonel would say, “It is grand, but I prefer the one about a mile south of that.” He had a comment to one-up just about everyone at the party.

The colonel didn’t see the problem until his wife said, “I don’t think you notice that you come across as bragging when you top everyone’s stories. Just because you’ve been all over the world, doesn’t mean you have to diminish what others have seen or done.” Then she added that old adage, “You have one mouth and two ears. You need to listen more and talk less.” He got the message. He changed. He found that if he asked the storyteller multiple questions, he enjoyed the conversation more. He could remember the places he’d been without topping the storyteller. And he found he could still be the one to take a turn at sharing a story. He had been topping people unintentionally, but his wife’s comment helped him see the consequences he hadn’t intended. The colonel didn’t change all at once. He commented that occasionally his wife tapped him with a stealthy elbow.

How do these examples relate to your challenge? Let me explain.

Get your motives right. What are you trying to accomplish? Are you trying to help or launch a guilt trip? Are you intending to be a coach or a critic? Ask yourself these questions, “What do I really want for her, for me, and for our relationship?” When you can feel in your heart that you are genuinely trying to help, then you are ready to talk.

Make it safe. What allowed the colonel’s wife to share her feedback? They had a wonderful and trusting relationship. It was safe for them to talk about annoying behaviors and they had both made corrections based on the other person’s assessment of their behavior.

The step above is essential to building safety. If your heart is right and your motive clear, it will be safe to talk. But if you come in with frustration and prejudgment on your face, you will make it unsafe. In order to make it safe, you should also make sure the conversation is private and convenient. You wouldn’t want to talk when you or your coworker is feeling stressed or tired.

You can also make it safe by clarifying your motive. We call this contrasting. For example, you might begin with, “I have an observation to share. I don’t want to come across as a critic. I do want to share an issue that will help our relationship and improve camaraderie within our team. I’m trying to be a friend.” When you have the right motive, you will find the right words to clarify what you don’t intend and rather, what you do intend.

Start with a specific observation and a question—not conclusions and emotions. Let’s explore the options. You could keep silent—the consequence being that you’d find a different job. To me, the stress and suffering of switching jobs far outweighs the costs of speaking up.

You could go in with moral indignation and say, “I can’t believe you are so dense that you brag and boast and interrupt people all the time! It’s horrible, and I, the other teammates, and most of the people in town, hate it. I’ve had it!” Also not a good option.

Instead of jumping ship or blowing up, I would say something like this, “Last week at our team lunch, I noticed that when Joyce talked about her camping trip with her kids, you commented that you and your family had taken your RV to Jackson Hole and then you talked about the elk and the art you had seen for several minutes. I noticed that Joyce frowned and shut up. I’ve seen you do this more than a half dozen times. I think it’s hurting the relationships in our team, and I’m not sure you even know you’re doing it. It’s difficult for me to bring this up, but I am hopeful that we can talk about it as friends. Can we talk about it?”

Prepare for alternate responses. Your coworker has a few options. She can say, “No I haven’t really noticed. I certainly want to do better. Could you help me?” Wouldn’t that be nice? And often that is what happens. However, there is the potential she will become defensive or emotional. If that happens, describe what you see, “I can see you’re upset.” And then contrast again. Share what you were not trying to do—offend her—and what you were trying to do—help. At this point, you can decide to end the conversation, or as often happens, your coworker will calm down and you can have a dialogue about the issue and some behaviors your coworker can practice when tempted to boast.

I hope this will help you prepare to talk to your coworker. If I had this problem, I’d hope for a coworker who would make it safe enough for me to hear how I could improve my relationship with my teammates.

Best wishes,
Al

Dear Al,

Your advice, as well as the many cues I took from Crucial Conversations and Crucial Confrontations, were extremely helpful to me as I sat down with the headmaster. I did dismiss him, but as you suggested, we gave him a more than generous severance package and I continue to be a reference for him.

Because of your advice, we also continue to improve all of our job descriptions—not just the description for the headmaster—and this has improved the effectiveness of so many conversations. Now the entire staff is more aware of expectations, and the leaders are able to see how well the people fit those positions or if they are actually suited for their job.

We were also able to take this step to the next level and found that there were a few other people who were better suited for a different job, so instead of having to dismiss more people for poor performance, we were able to put them in a job where they can be successful.

In less than a year, we have seen dramatic improvements. Morale has improved, the work output has increased drastically, and we have saved money. For example, we reassigned two employees in our maintenance department to different existing positions and the maintenance department has accomplished more in the past year than in the previous few years combined, and all with more than a 30 percent savings.  Less money, more work, happier employees.

Thank you for your help and advice!
Sympathetic, yet Certain

Editor’s Note: This letter was received in response to a question Al Switzler answered in the February 22, 2011 Crucial Skills Newsletter titled, “When It’s Time to Let People Go.” If you would like to share similar feedback about the authors’ advice, please e-mail us at editor@vitalsmarts.com.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Kerry Patterson is coauthor of four bestselling books, Change Anything, Influencer, Crucial Conversations, and Crucial Confrontations.

READ MORE

  Dear Crucial Skills,

In Crucial Confrontations, you give an example of teens parking in your parking spot, and although you pleasantly ask them to stop, they don’t. Unless I missed it, the book never answered how to motivate these teens, whom you don’t really know well enough to figure out how to motivate. I occasionally face problems with people I don’t know and I’d really appreciate some help on how to handle them.

Still Waiting

Motivating others is always tricky because you can go wrong in so many ways. So how can you address the challenge of influencing others who you believe should—and easily could—change their behavior, but won’t? In short, what do you do when others don’t face an ability barrier; they just need to be motivated?

You don’t motivate others—you only tap into their existing motivation. Humans have agency. You can’t swing a magic wand or put them under a spell and force them to behave in new ways. They’re going to choose how to act on their own. That means you have to affect what they’re thinking and feeling, because their thoughts will drive their behavior—certainly any behavior as complicated as parking in your parking spot. So, give up on the notion that you’re going to motivate others. Instead, you’re going to tap into their existing wants and desires, plus affect how they think, and in so doing help direct how they choose to act.

Using power, threats, authority, and other forms of compulsion is easy and dangerous. Many people’s primary influence tools are power, threats, and other forms of compulsion. At one point, all of us have been upset enough that we too have employed threats, insults, verbal attacks, or even physical abuse (perhaps when we were kids). The forms of abuse vary from actual physical abuse to hostile glances—but the message is the same. Do as I ask, or you’ll suffer in some way.

Why would some people routinely exert force? It’s what they know. They’ve tried several methods of encouraging and inspiring others, only to see their efforts fall short. So, they reach down into their bag of tricks and pull out their power. One’s authority and control over resources is ever so handy and so easy to use. You can threaten others with little more than formulating a sentence or two. You can put the fear into someone by merely staring at him or her intently with a look of disgust. You can shake your head, tighten your jaw, bark a harsh word, and the other person quickly complies—for fear of what you might do to them. That is, if you have power.

Of course, when you use your power to create a real or implied threat, you can pay dearly. Your relationship may no longer be the same. The nature of the other person’s job may have changed. Now, instead of completing their work—even taking pleasure from completing their job—they’re avoiding punishment. They may need to be closely monitored. They may dislike or even despise you. You may spend countless hours playing cat-and-mouse as the person you threatened gets even with you every time you leave the building. You’ve moved from supervisor to warden and nobody likes that job.

Explain natural consequences. So, instead of quickly employing your power, explain to the other person why you’d like him or her to change his or her behavior. That is, explain the natural consequences currently associated with the wrong behavior. For instance, “When you’re going to be late for a meeting and don’t let us know, we sit and wait for ten or fifteen minutes.”

The natural consequences associated with a behavior make up the reasons you want the behavior to change. Natural consequences occur independent of outside action, and require no authority or power. They also motivate in your absence. Once others understand how their actions affect you, the job, the customers, other employees, and so forth, this knowledge keeps them motivated in your absence.

Be patient. Sometimes you may have to explain several consequences until you find one that motivates the other person. This puts you on a consequence search. You explain the effects on the job—the person doesn’t seem to care. You explain the consequences to other employees—also to no effect. You point out how it affects the customer—now they come around. This, of course, takes us to our earlier point, you can always rely on your power—”I’m going to call the police.” You can always make a threat—”I’m going to tell the boss.” But it’s not the place you want to start. Instead, begin with natural consequences.

So, what happened with the teenagers and the parking spot we talked about in Crucial Confrontations? In truth, that was a slightly altered story. The real story consisted of neighborhood kids letting the air out of my father’s back right tire—forcing him to pump it up with a bicycle pump each morning before going to work. I was in my early 20s at the time and visiting from college, so I gathered the neighborhood kids to play basketball in our driveway. After a few minutes, I drew the kids into my confidence. I explained I had just learned that somebody was letting the air out of Dad’s tire and this had me worried. Maybe they could help catch the offenders and get them to stop. You see, my dad wasn’t all that young anymore and I was worried about his heart. Plus, it made him late a couple of times and his boss didn’t like that. I wasn’t certain these kids were the offenders, but they now knew why I was concerned.

Nobody ever let the air out of Dad’s tire again.

I could have threatened the kids with police action. Instead, I explained the natural consequences associated with the act, and let that knowledge work its magic. Do natural consequences always work? No. Sometimes you have to either back off your request or escalate your methods. Sometimes you simply can’t find anything the other person cares about and you have to draw down on your authority. But this should be your last resort, not your starting place. And by the way, whether you’re talking to your closest friend or an absolute stranger, your best motivational tool is always the same. Explain natural consequences.

Kerry

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Ron McMillan is coauthor of three bestselling books, Influencer, Crucial Conversations, and Crucial Confrontations. His fourth book, Change Anything, was recently published.

READ MORE

Dear Crucial Skills,

My in-laws live six hours away, but frequently visit and stay at my home. They have a wonderful relationship with my three young children, but I’m worried because they bring their dog, and in the last year, the dog has started nipping at my kids. Although my husband and I told them in no uncertain terms that the dog is not to be near the children, we found out that my father-in-law sneaks the dog out when we’re not looking. This rule was ignored and the dog recently bit the hand of my oldest child and drew blood.

We recently visited family, and because the dog was around multiple children, I told the mothers that the dog bites and everyone was beyond angry that my father-in-law kept letting the dog out. He knows how we feel, yet refuses to put the safety of his own grandchildren over the coddling of his dog! It has created an extremely tense environment and is affecting our relationships. We have tried asking nicely, stating directly, and are on the verge of an ultimatum. What should we do now?

Signed,
Mother Lion

In a situation where we are weighing Dad’s convenience and preference against the safety of children, it’s time for a crucial confrontation. You said you tried “asking nicely” and “stating directly” but your father-in-law continues to sneak the dog out when you are not looking. Your father-in-law is likely seeing this conflict in terms of his “sweet little dog that wouldn’t hurt a fly” and is “practically a member of the family” against some “nervous Nelly” moms who are over-protective. He thinks his little allowance in letting the dog out to play with the kids is a minor infraction that doesn’t matter all that much.

He is obviously discounting your collective wishes and ignoring your fears; he is minimizing the importance of your concerns. The way you motivate others to give your concerns more weight is by helping them understand the consequences that could result from a given course of action. Natural consequences are those that will naturally result without any imposition on your part. In this case, even a misplaced nip from a small dog could result in blindness to a child or life-long scarring.

Imposed consequences are consequences you enforce if others do not comply with your requests. Such a consequence is that you will call animal control. However, I don’t recommend using this consequence. It’s best to talk about natural consequences first.

Talking through the consequences should motivate Dad to consider your concerns. If you don’t get compliance with natural consequences, then carefully consider whether to move to imposed consequences. Damaging the relationship is a real possibility. However, when dealing with danger to your children, Dad’s compliance with your standards may be more important to you than sparing his feelings.

I will assume you shared consequences in your earlier conversations. If Dad still misbehaves, what do you do next?

Verbal persuasion has failed to change Dad’s behavior; the children’s safety is paramount. It’s time to impose consequences. Be respectful! Emphasize that you want to continue the relationship with Dad but not the dog. Begin by factually reviewing how you arrived at this point. Try something like this:

“Dad, we’ve talked to you several times about our concerns with having your dog around your grandchildren. Yet the dog continues to get out, and last time you visited, he bit Jeremy’s hand. Dad, we want you to visit. Your visits with us and our visits to your place are very important to us, but to make them work we have to arrange for the dog to go to a kennel or find a dog sitter. We can help arrange one here or you can find one near your home, but we will not let the dog come to our home or visit your home if the dog is there.”

Use contrasting to prevent misunderstandings. “We don’t want you to shorten your visits or make them less frequent. We love you and your visits. We do want you to make other arrangements so the dog is not present during our visit.”

Listen to your father-in-law’s feelings and concerns, then brainstorm workable solutions. Don’t jeopardize your children’s safety with an unrealistic compromise.

Now, follow through. Be prepared to pack up if the dog is there when you arrive at Dad’s. Be prepared to not let the dog in your house if he accompanies Dad on a visit. Reaffirm your love for Dad and your resolve to protect your children, even if the cost is Dad’s hurt feelings.

Ron

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Kerry Patterson is coauthor of three bestselling books, Influencer, Crucial Conversations, and Crucial Confrontations. His fourth book, Change Anything, will be available April 2011.

READ MORE

  Dear Crucial Skills,

I work in a large international company and lead a team of eight experienced human resource managers. Several of the managers use irony and humor to downplay their colleagues, and I strongly feel that this creates a bad atmosphere because most of the colleagues do not appreciate this way of talking. Should I confront the issue with the entire group or should I deal with the misbehaving colleagues individually?

Wisecrack manager

This is an interesting challenge because it deals with the use of humor at its worst—humor used as a tool for taking shots at people, but done in a way that maintains plausible deniability.

“Hey, I was just kidding, can’t you take a joke?”

I know a fair amount about this particular tactic because it was a huge part of my influence repertoire during, say, the first thirty years of my life. I—like most of my close friends—developed keen skills in the use of sarcasm and irony. It was a huge part of my identity. Then, one day, after my wife stumbled awkwardly and I retorted, “Smooth move, did you enjoy the trip?” she responded: “You know what? If you never again use sarcasm—until the day I die—that would be just fine with me. I don’t like it, the kids don’t like it, and there’s no place for it in our home.”

“Hey! Who died and left you in charge?” I shouted boldly and firmly within the confines of my mind as a way of testing out my response before actually putting my foot in my mouth. Then I thought better and whined: “But I really like being sarcastic.”

As the conversation unfolded, I learned that it’s actually quite difficult to defend your right to take cheap shots, dole out insults, and cut people down—all in the name of humor. Trust me. You never want to be the defense attorney when sarcasm goes to court. So, maybe I needed to reconsider my stance. Perhaps, getting a laugh at the expense of a coworker, colleague, friend, or loved one isn’t nearly as endearing as I had once thought it was. And so, I said goodbye to that part of me and my wife has been ever grateful.

Now, to your question as to whether you should bring up the problem individually or in a group. It’s tempting to say something to the entire team. That way you don’t have to accuse anyone directly, plus it’s efficient. One conversation replaces five or six. But then again, you take several risks when you hold a team problem-solving discussion.

First, as you talk with a group, one or more of the people who abuse humor might conclude that you aren’t talking to them. They, after all, are actually quite funny and their cute remarks are loved and appreciated by all. Or so they think.

Second, those who don’t fall into the trap of abusing humor won’t like being thrown into the pot with the actual offenders. Nobody likes being accused of a crime they haven’t committed.

Third, it’s hard to anchor your discussion in facts by pointing to the last instance of abusive humor when you’re talking in general terms. When it comes to discussing problems in an effective way, you need to point to actual instances, preferably on the heels of the occurrence, so the person understands the exact nature of the offense.

It will take longer, but you need to talk to the offenders one-on-one. And as the conversation unfolds, follow the steps we outline in Crucial Confrontations.

Assume the best of others. Perhaps others do think they’re only having fun and they’re unaware that their use of humor can be hurtful. Respectfully and unemotionally describe the last instance, focusing on specific behaviors.

Ask if others see the problem differently. If others seem unmoved to drop their use of sarcasm and irony, explain the consequences of their actions in detail. Talk about how it has affected you. Suggest an alternative means of dealing with the issues.

Discuss the pros and cons. Jointly discuss the benefits of honestly and openly addressing problems rather than approaching them obliquely and possibly at the expense of others.

Thank others for their efforts. End by thanking them for the frank conversation and express your appreciation for their willingness to drop harsh humor from their repertoire.

You are right to confront this damaging behavior immediately, especially because a few managers are creating a bad atmosphere for the rest of your team. As you talk to each employee individually, don’t let him or her use the excuse I mentioned above—”Hey, I was just kidding, can’t you take a joke?” Make sure each employee is aware of the damage he or she is doing to morale, productivity, and results. Establish a zero tolerance policy and encourage employees to hold others accountable when they violate that policy.

Kerry

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Todd King is a Master Trainer and Senior Consultant at VitalSmarts.

READ MORE

How do you handle a crucial conversation/crucial confrontation with somebody who is a really difficult, or even malicious, person?

Great question! We should first define “difficult” and “malicious.” Likely we are talking about some form of silence or violence in either case. Remember that any time you see silence or violence, it indicates a lack of safety.

The fix here is to use a safety tool. If you think the “maliciousness” is due to the other person feeling disrespected, apologize to restore the respect. If you think it stems from the other person believing that you don’t care about him or her, create mutual purpose. If perhaps the other person has misunderstood you, use a contrasting statement.

Perhaps most important is to remember that tough issues don’t necessarily get resolved in one conversation. It may take several interactions to build, or rebuild, trust with the other person.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Al Switzler is coauthor of three bestselling books, Influencer, Crucial Conversations, and Crucial Confrontations. His fourth book, Change Anything, will be available April 2011.

READ MORE

  Dear Crucial Skills,

I am the president and chairman of a large private school. I recently came on as the president and found the school to be in worse shape than I was previously told. After studying the leadership structure, meeting with teachers and parents one-on-one, and reviewing numerous surveys, I think I need to dismiss the current headmaster. The problem is he has only been here for two years, owns a home in town, and has another home for sale in another state. While I know he needs to be dismissed, I want to be sensitive to his family. How do I sensitively dismiss him while protecting the future of the school? Did I mention it is a Christian school? Sensitivity and perception are important around here. Help!

Signed,
Sympathetic, yet Certain

This situation is certainly challenging. You want to do what’s right and you want to make sure you do not impose unintended consequences as a result of your actions. I’m right with you there. At this point, I think you’ve taken every necessary step to show that you are sympathetic and interested in understanding the situation from multiple perspectives. You have made a careful diagnosis. I commend you for this, and I advise others who face similar tough issues to do the same. Diagnosis comes before prescription.

While you know what you should do, you still wonder how you should do it. Let me address your question in two parts.

First, has the headmaster been given the clarity, the support, and the time to improve? Often when there is a pattern of poor performance, one of these components is missing. Sometimes, there is lack of clarity in what was expected or in the feedback about the person’s performance. Any HR professional can attest that too often in the case of poor performance, behaviors are not documented or clearly noted in the employee’s file.

In the rare case that the poor behavior has been clearly discussed and documented, the next most common problem is that the person has not had the time or access to the resources needed to improve—resources such as training, coaching, mentoring, and feedback. That’s because leaders often assume the employee should already have the skills and judgment to perform. In either case, without the components of clarity, support, and time, questions of fairness will undoubtedly arise. That is why the best organizations have clear, written steps for progressive discipline. The steps are clear to everyone and the process is fair. The reason I bring this up is to ask if you have a progressive discipline process and if so, whether or not you have followed it. If you haven’t, you need to take these steps first. If you did follow it and performance has not improved, then it is time to let the headmaster go and you can do so fairly and confidently.

My second piece of advice concerns what to do next as many groups watch and wait for your decision. If you have followed the progressive discipline steps above and performance has not improved, then you are not helping any of the groups, including the headmaster, if you do not let him go and soon. If he is not effective, staff, faculty, parents, and students—and probably community leaders—will wonder why they have to live with lower than expected performance.

This situation will most likely be painful for the headmaster who, I’m almost certain, comes to work every day feeling bad. Aware that he is not meeting expectations, he probably feels like he is swimming in dark, deep water and something dreadful could happen at any moment. I believe we do a disservice to employees when we avoid letting them go and allow them to feel unsettled and frustrated every day. We need to respectfully remove them from that situation, and to the extent possible, we need to help them transition to the next phase in their lives. That may mean providing a good severance package or serving as a reference for a job we think they can handle. Whatever you choose to do, just make sure to do it with respect.

In conclusion, you need to quickly clarify what is not working and provide the headmaster with a path to improve or to exit. These actions have helped many to improve. If he improves, then your problem is solved. If he does not, then you need to help him out of a painful situation by letting him go. As a leader, your job is to take that action so others in your team or department don’t have to create work-arounds or carry the extra load. This is a leadership lesson worth learning early in your career.

I think you have been sympathetic and you’ve certainly been respectful. Now it is time to be candid and help him out.

Best wishes,

Al