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

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Joseph Grenny 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 live in a very nice, quiet, upscale suburban neighborhood. A new family recently moved into one of the homes and is doing some things that distract from the value of the neighborhood. We have covenants that restrict what is permitted, but enforcing them could be difficult and possibly costly. How can I approach my neighbors personally and express my concerns without making an enemy out of them?

Sincerely,
Not in My Backyard

This will be the shortest answer I’ve ever written. Not because the issue isn’t crucial, but because your options are limited. I say this because I feel your pain!

With that said, here’s how I would approach this situation.

Talk to the right person. If you have a Home Owner’s Association, the association should inform your neighbor of the rules and the penalties for breaking these rules. They should then hold your neighbor accountable. If they aren’t doing this, your conversation should be with the association.

Do your research. You mentioned that your community has covenants, but you need to be sure the covenants are in force. Just because they are in the original neighborhood documents doesn’t mean they’ve been enforced over time. And if they have not been enforced, they may have no legal validity today.

Build the relationship first. If possible, you should build a relationship with your neighbor before you confront him or her about his or her distracting behavior. If your first conversation with the neighbor is about his or her transgression, it will be harder to create safety. To the degree you can help your neighbor unpack boxes, mow his or her lawn, or provide any other kind of assistance, he or she will be less likely to hear your concerns as attacks and characterize you as an enemy and more likely to actually change his or her behavior.

Be direct and polite. If there is no enforcement body and it’s up to you to speak up, then do so. But work on your story first. See them as reasonable people with different habits and perhaps no understanding of your covenants. Do whatever it takes to feel respectful and caring toward them before opening your mouth. Be friendly and polite, but don’t water down your message. If your bottom line is that this is a rule and they have to follow it, say that. For example, “Hey Pat, there’s a goofy thing in our covenants that you may not know about. Trust me, this isn’t a persnickety neighborhood and we’re glad you’re here, but I thought I should let you know before you get too settled so you’ll know how to address it . . .”

Finally, you should decide if this is important enough to you to deal with legally should they refuse to comply—or whether after your attempt at a crucial conversation you prefer to let it slide.

Good luck with your conversation. I’d tell you about mine but I worry about 140,000 of my closest friends finding out!

Joseph

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,

My boss and I have weekly one-on-ones to stay up to date on ongoing projects and initiatives. However, more often than not, my boss uses this time to gossip about her subordinates, coworkers, and superiors. On occasion, I ask, “What does this have to do with me?” but it never ends well, so I am forced to listen.

I’ve also repeatedly asked my boss to stop gossiping about me to my coworkers, but without fail, after my boss finishes a one-on-one with someone else, they run up to my desk with a tidbit about me.

I want to address this once and for all, but I also want to keep my job so I know I must be delicate. I’d like to have a better relationship with my boss, but can’t help but keep the boundaries high and thick given the circumstances.

Seeking a Trusting Relationship

Dear Seeking,

Before I get to some advice, I’m going to share a few words about issues that affect job satisfaction. My comments here are not based on a scientific study, but on more than thirty years of consulting with organizations and teams. I hope that at the end of this, you’ll see why I started here.

It’s important to make a distinction between a “friend” and an “accomplice.” A friend is someone who helps you; an accomplice is someone who helps you get in trouble. It is often hard to tell the difference. In the moment, when someone encourages you to do something or engages you in a conversation, it is difficult to foresee the consequences. So, what seems to be a friendly gesture can become the act of an accomplice. Over the years, in hundreds of organizations, I’ve seen numerous ways in which colleagues become accomplices. Two categories are clearly at the top of the list.

First, colleagues go to silence. There is an epidemic of silence in organizations all around the world, and the consequences are severe. Problems aren’t addressed, standards are lowered, wasteful practices are continued, and so on.

When people don’t speak up about crucial issues, they become accomplices. Being silent can be a private, individual act because each person has to weigh his or her options and decide if speaking up is the best option. More often than not, the person chooses caution over candor and so problems persist or fester. Peer pressure is also involved in a person’s decision to remain silent. Colleagues become accomplices when they make suggestions like, “We don’t bring things like that up.” Or, “You do that and it will limit your career.” Or, “Upper management doesn’t listen, ever!” Beware of similar comments.

The second way colleagues become accomplices is by gossiping. Gossip can be identified when you or someone you see talks about a person but not to the person. Almost everyone identifies gossip when they see it or hear it, and yet sometimes this gossip is labeled as something more positive like, “I was just venting.” Or, “I was just talking with a friend.” Gossip clearly comes with many negative consequences. Trust and respect are diminished—this is true of the team and it is ultimately true of the gossiper. In addition, the time people spend gossiping is non-value-added time. Work isn’t getting done. And with weaker relationships, future work will be harder to do.

My point is that you are right to concern yourself with these issues. Silence can be deadly. Gossip is hurtful. So what do you do when you face these immediate, costly issues?

I’ll start with a common indirect strategy people use particularly when they don’t feel personally capable to hold a direct conversation or they don’t think they have a strong enough relationship to hold a direct conversation. This strategy is known as the “ground rule” strategy. Ground rules are specific commitments a team agrees to work on that will help them function more effectively. This is done in a small group by brainstorming and it ends with a couple of commitments.

Ground rules help clarify needed behaviors and define boundaries. For example, I’ve seen the following ground rules:

1. If we have an issue with a team member, we will talk to that person directly, privately, and in a professional way.
2. In our conversations about our colleagues, we will be positive and supportive.
3. If someone talks to us about a colleague in a way that is not positive, we will encourage him or her to enact rule #1.

These ground rules are not a panacea. They need to be modified when necessary. You should address these rules in team meetings by asking two questions—”How are we doing?” and “What could we do better?” Ground rules create clear expectations that can positively influence behavior and can make holding others accountable more likely. One of the benefits of this strategy is that it engages the boss and the whole team. You don’t have to hold a dozen conversations over time. You might want to see if your boss will lead this conversation. If you can, you are more likely to deal with the issue “once and for all.”

Finally, I would like to offer some advice for a more direct conversation. I talked about silence and gossip at the beginning of my response because, when you talk to your boss or your colleagues, you will need to explain what you are trying to achieve. What are the benefits, and what are the costs you are trying to avoid? I hope my descriptions will help.

As you’ve noted that you’ve had several conversations with your boss, I think you need to make sure you address the real topic. It could be gossip is not the main issue; it could be that when you have a talk and your boss agrees to take some actions, she doesn’t. The real topic is that you see a pattern of breaking commitments and that is affecting your working relationship. If you share your intentions—what you are trying to do and what you are not trying to do—and then share the facts that you see, you will have the right issues on the table.

I talked about ground rules because I think you have a group problem and you need a solution that will include the group. You may want to practice with a partner or friend before you address the issue again. But you need to address it.

I wish you well,
Al

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 am having problems at family mealtimes. My husband’s table manners are not good—he eats like a hungry animal and spoils the dining experience. I have done my best to ignore his behavior over the years, but my teenage daughter is upset by it and I think his manners are getting worse.

Disgusted

I read your question at the end of my workday, so it was on my mind when I sat down to dinner with my wife. I can be guilty of poor table manners—eating too quickly, taking large mouthfuls, and talking while I chew. And I don’t always react well to being reminded about my table manners. After all, it’s not like I’m spilling food on the floor or eating with my hands.

I see three challenges in this conversation. First, you don’t want your husband to feel attacked or disrespected. That’s not your goal, and it would provoke defensiveness. Second, you’re dealing with an entrenched habit that will take some time and attention to change. It won’t be a single conversation. And third, because your husband will need reminders, you run the risk of coming across as a nag. Somehow you need your husband to take responsibility for making the change.

Find mutual purpose. Before the discussion, consider your mutual purpose. What purpose does your husband share for making the change? What goal does your husband have that his eating habits are impeding or thwarting? For example, many couples see family meals as opportunities to communicate and connect. Do you and your husband share this goal?

In addition, your husband may have other goals that are thwarted by a slow dinner. Maybe he is rushing to get to an activity. Or maybe the current dinner conversations are less about communication and connection than about tasks and assignments. Are there ways to make family dinners more convenient and pleasurable?

Describe the gap. Start by explaining your positive intentions, and then describe what you expect and the behaviors you are observing. Avoid inflammatory language, e.g., “You eat like a hungry animal.”

Here is an example: “I’d like to see if we can use our family dinners to connect more as a family, especially with our daughter. Is it okay if I share some specifics that I think would help?” Give your husband a chance to respond here. You want to create safety so he won’t feel attacked.

Be ready to present your issue. For example, “I have noticed that you eat very fast, making dinner time feel more like a race than a time to be together. I’d like us to spend more time together over meals, and to include more conversation. Are you aware of how fast you eat?” Again, give your husband time to respond. Listen to his perspective, but don’t lose track of the issue you want to address.

Be ready to respond and reinforce the behavior you want to change. For example, “I would like you to slow down when you eat and help all of us take advantage of the time we have together.”

Check with your daughter before you bring her into this discussion. Make sure you aren’t hiding behind your daughter—that you present this issue as your concern. But also, don’t keep your daughter’s concerns a secret from your husband. Every father has a right to know when he’s spoiling a relationship with one of his children.

Get his buy-in on the broad issue, and then ask for permission to remind him. Our eating habits are both personal and tough to change. We’ve practiced them so often that they’ve become a part of our automatic pilot. Even when we want to change, we fail to notice when we slip into our old ways. Ask your husband whether it’s okay to remind him when you see him slip, and together develop a cue that won’t be embarrassing. For example, you might use a question like, “What was the high point of your day?”

Actually remind him. It’s inevitable your husband will slip, and exhibit his bad table manners. Let’s suppose you see him take a giant bite out of a pork chop, argue a point while balancing a meatball on his tongue, or pick his back molars with his index finger. Use your cue, and, if necessary, talk to him later in private. Remind yourself that when your husband slips, it’s not because he doesn’t care. It takes time to change long-standing habits.

Focus on a positive vital behavior. If you determine that one of the purposes for having your husband eat slower is to improve family connections during meals, then you can take some positive steps that will help promote the kind of exchange you desire.

I’ll share one strategy you can use to promote dialogue among all parties at the table. I learned it from Al Switzler, my VitalSmarts colleague. It’s a game that’s designed to build and practice conversational skills.

Having a conversation is like playing tennis. One person serves up the topic, and then you both volley the conversation back and forth. The goal is to keep the conversation in play. If I serve up the topic, then your role is to respond to my volley in a way the keeps the conversation alive. After a while we switch servers, so the other person has to come up with topics to discuss.

Imagine that you, your husband, and your daughter practiced this conversation game for at least part of your dinner meal. It’s incompatible with speed eating, and it contributes to your long-term mutual purpose. Try to have your husband, not you, take the lead on explaining and initiating this kind of activity.

Finally, be patient, and put this problem into its proper perspective. Many habits are much worse than bad table manners, but few are harder to change.

Best wishes,
David Maxfield

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Joseph Grenny is the author of three bestselling books, Influencer, Crucial Conversations, and Crucial Confrontations.

READ MORE

Dear Crucial Skills,

Our employee, “Mr. Ned,” will turn 70 in September after working for us for 17 years. He has been one of our most productive employees and a model for the younger technicians to aspire to. However, in recent months he has started to slow down and the quality of his work is declining.

While we care for him and appreciate his years of hard work, how can we tell him that we must let him go?

Signed,
Shy about Retiring

In order to get this conversation right, you will need equal measures of respect, firmness, and clarity.

1. Respect. There’s a good chance Mr. Ned will find this conversation terribly unpleasant. However, you can reduce his suffering immensely if you make it plain that he is talking with someone who regards him highly. If he walks away concluding that he is not respected, your message about his performance will be lost. Share specific expressions of appreciation and recollections of important contributions he has made over the years. Use these compliments judiciously throughout your conversation.

2. Firmness. If you’ve concluded that he needs to retire, do not string him along by turning your conversation into a performance review. If you fail to communicate that this is not a motivation problem, but an insolvable ability problem, he may try to bargain with you for things that are not physically possible.

Now, I’m assuming in this situation that you have followed proper HR procedures and documented concerns over some period of time so that it is your prerogative to require retirement. If you have not, you will need to step back and begin that process.

3. Clarity. This is one of the most common areas in which people under-prepare for crucial confrontations. You need to be crystal clear on the facts. What evidence do you have that his performance has slipped to unacceptable levels? Can you demonstrate that it is a pattern? Do you have enough examples persuade him that this is not a motivation problem? If he is desperate to hang onto his job, he may try to refute your examples. To avoid this, you need to do two things: 1) refer regularly to the recurring pattern; 2) provide enough data points to establish the pattern.

For example, if he says, “But the customer kept feeding us new requirements on that drawing, so of course it would take longer!” You need to say, “I understand there may have been special circumstances. The issue is that over a period of months, with over a dozen drawings like this, your turnaround time has more than doubled. The pattern is the problem.”

Now, he may have noticed the same problem and is relieved to have it in the open. I watched this happen several years ago with a very senior engineer who was losing his hearing in a way that impeded his performance. He was too proud to wear a hearing aid until a colleague had a crucial confrontation with him in a wonderfully respectful but firm way. This storied engineer was grateful the issue had surfaced as the burden of pretending there was no problem had become quite taxing. The conversation helped him acknowledge he was moving to a different phase of life and take steps that prepared him for retirement. If your colleague tumbles to the conclusion, stop sharing data and simply move to a supportive conversation to explore next steps.

Finally, let me suggest an alternative option. I have seen many instances when companies are prudent enough to be creative and retain the wisdom aging employees have to offer. For example, could he move to a part-time role? Could he become an advisor? Could he mentor younger employees—even on a contract basis? Or could he simply be invited back now and again for project reviews?

It’s easy to underestimate the immense tacit knowledge senior employees have and later regret letting all of their experience walk out the door. One of the most sincere expressions of respect—and wisest HR moves you could make—would be to find a creative way to not “put him down,” but keep him up!

I can tell you care deeply about Mr. Ned and am confident he’ll know that as you hold this very crucial confrontation.

Joseph

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

Dear Crucial Skills,

I have one brother, whom everyone loves dearly. He is the guy with the golden tongue—a natural charmer who gets out of many conversations that, to me, are crucial. He is not one to put family first—his priority is looking good and charming whoever may be around him. As a result, I become the younger sister who is left to pick up the pieces and bear the brunt of his unreliable ways. When I confront him, he makes me feel like I have overreacted and I end up feeling bad about bringing it up. How do you have crucial conversations with those who are so good at words? Please help me face this golden tongue.

Fed Up Little Sister

You describe your brother as a “natural charmer” who does not put family first and leaves you to “bear the brunt of his unreliable ways.” It’s hard to confront someone who is fun and flaky. Everyone wants to have fun; everyone loves a charmer who makes things fun. Relationships are easy when we avoid uncomfortable problems. But a relationship characterized by charm over character and style over substance is like a beautiful shade tree with shallow roots. Everything is fine in good weather, but it only takes a mild storm to topple the tree.

Shallow and superficial relationships might suffice in social settings, but family relationships—relationships that should be loving, nurturing, supportive, and enduring—require work. In order to make a family work, you have to be responsible and hold each other accountable. If you choose to do less, you undermine your family relationships.

So, how do you begin this crucial conversation with your brother? To minimize his defensiveness, factually describe the gap between what occurred and what you expected, then ask why. For example, you might say, “Phil, when we were together at Thanksgiving, you told us you would call and arrange for a snow removal service for Mom. After talking with Mom, I realized you didn’t make the arrangements.” Next ask a diagnostic question: “Why?”

Let’s suppose he responds by trying to make you feel bad for bringing it up. He says, “You know I do a lot for this family and I don’t appreciate you nagging me and making such a big deal of such a little thing.” Clearly, this is a manipulation. Your brother assumes that if he can get you on the defensive, you’ll feel you’re the bad guy for bringing it up and you’ll back off.

Don’t give up or give in. Doing so only rewards him for being irresponsible and manipulative and undermines your relationship with him. That’s not serving you, your mother, or your brother.

This is a good time to use a contrasting statement to share your good intentions. “Phil, I am very appreciative of the good things you do for the family and I don’t mean to nag you. I also don’t want to make a mountain out of a molehill. I do want to solve the problem of how we get things done in our family and I want us to be able to count on each other. I don’t want to quarrel, nor ignore important issues. Do you see it differently?” By sharing your intention, you clarify your motives, treat your brother respectfully, and suggest a mutual purpose.

If your brother responds that the snow eventually got cleared and missing the call was no big deal, you could share the consequences of him not following through. “Phil, when you didn’t make arrangements to have the snow cleared, Mom was snowbound. When she couldn’t reach you, she called me, and I had to cancel an important meeting and spend an afternoon on the phone.” Confronting him with the consequences of failing to keep his commitments can create the motivation on his part to do better in the future.

At this point the conversation is not over; you may have to share other consequences, check out your own story, or have a conversation about the relationship between the two of you. However, with this simple beginning of describing the gap, sharing your good intentions, and explaining consequences, you have established new expectations.

Over time, don’t let his failure to fulfill his commitments pass without confronting him. Use these skills to address bad behavior and stay focused on the problem, rather than allow him to talk around the problem or charm his way out of being accountable.

If you persistently and consistently confront his bad behavior, he’ll quickly realize his old ways don’t work. He will come to understand that when he is flaky, you’ll call him on it. This could be the key to helping him change. It will improve your feelings and quality of life, and perhaps strengthen your entire family.

All the best,
Ron