Dear Crucial Skills,

I was recently involved in a crucial conversation with my husband and no matter how hard I try, I can’t get rid of the anger and hurt I’m feeling. I have re-read parts of your book, and everything you say is reasonable, but I am still stuck. I know it may be silly, but I don’t see a path to resolution. How can I get over the hurt and anger I’m feeling towards my husband?

Signed,
Over But Not Forgotten

 Dear Not Forgotten,

Let me begin with a confession. I carried similar resentment toward a friend for a few years because I felt he had wronged me. When I spoke to him about it, he admitted he was wrong—which felt good to me, but I still felt badly about the harm he did me and when I saw him socially, I felt lingering hostility. I didn’t like looking him in the eye and felt critical of anything he said. When others would praise him, I felt irritated—like they didn’t understand who he really was.

Now I know your relationship with your husband is far closer and more consequential, but I hope this example suffices to teach a principle that has profoundly affected my life. Learning it has literally enhanced the quality of my relationships with most everyone I know and love, and has brought me greater peace than I ever had before.

If you’ll be patient, I’ll work up to this principle after sharing two other issues to consider in helping you feel resolved about this problem.

Did you raise the right issue? Often you can feel unresolved at the end of a crucial conversation if you didn’t get the right issue on the table. For example, you may have talked about your husband’s decision to make a risky loan to his brother without your consent. He may have apologized and you may have walked away unresolved because the real issue is you no longer trust him. That’s because it’s not the first time he violated promises he made about involving you in decision making. At this point, even his profuse apology does not restore trust. The real discussion should have been about the trust issue—and what provisions you would make to ensure such transgressions of trust would not happen again; or what changes you would make as he demonstrated over some reasonable period of time that he was worthy of your full trust.

Do you believe in the solution? Perhaps you discussed the right issue, but walked away realizing you committed to a solution you don’t believe will work. For example, if your husband simply promises to do better, and previous promises were broken, you probably fell short of a solution you can feel good about—which may make you feel less capable of forgiving and moving on.

Now, before I move to the big idea, I need to add an aside. Since I don’t know the details of what he did, I want to be exceedingly careful to point out that if your solution leaves you vulnerable to psychological or physical injury, the problem is not that you’re not forgiving him, it’s that you need a more aggressive solution—like reconsidering the entire relationship. In cases like this, the first order of business is probably not moving on, it’s moving out.

Is the real problem my inability to love flawed people? Okay, please forgive me for reiterating that last point one more time: If his weakness involves habits that lead to significant psychological suffering or any degree of physical harm then forgiveness is not the immediate issue—safety is. Do what you need to do to ensure your present and future safety now, and then worry about moving on psychologically.

But if his weakness—while not malignant—is still hurtful and you’re having a hard time feeling tenderness and forgiveness toward him, I’ll offer what to me is the central challenge of my life. I believe that the measure of my soul is my capacity to love imperfect people. I also have found that my inability to accept others’ weaknesses is usually caused by my unwillingness to acknowledge my own.

Let me give an example. I spoke with a woman years ago who had just held a crucial conversation with a colleague who had a disgusting habit. While she would talk with him, his eyes would drift up and down along her body in a way she found offensive. She held the conversation in a remarkably candid but also incredibly graceful way. I was stunned at her reserve and kindness with someone I thought was a complete lout. I asked her how she managed to suppress her disgust for him and she looked at me a bit askance. She said, “I guess it was easy because I didn’t feel disgust for him.”

“What?! After what he was doing? He deserved your derision—if not more!”

She then taught me something I have never forgotten. “Before I spoke with him I asked myself, ‘In what way am I just like him?’ It didn’t take long before I thought of a couple of ways that I had behaved inappropriately when I thought I could get away with it. As soon as I accepted that I was kind of like him, I felt more forgiving of his weakness. I wasn’t going to put up with it, but at least I could see that he was a human not a villain—a human kind of like me.”

I was blown away by this idea. And I have found that, when I embrace it, I find an increased capacity to love the imperfect people in my life.

I recently used this idea with the friend against whom I had harbored resentment. I found it repulsive to stop and think about weaknesses I had that were similar to his. I did not want to be like him. I did not want to acknowledge I was. But as I relaxed into the idea, the insight came immediately. I recognized, in fact, that some of the resentment I felt was probably self-disgust at my own deficiencies and that I was aiming that disgust at the wrong person.

He still has the weakness I was hurt by. And I love him. I see him as a reasonable, rational, decent person—at least in every sense in which I deserve that same description.

I sincerely hope at least one of these ideas helps you restore some of the intimacy you clearly want.

Sincerely,
Joseph

It’s football season! And with football comes fun, food, friends, and sometimes fights—fights over who roots for the best team or players.

Sports fans with Crucial Conversations skills can keep their friendly banter without fighting. Here are some tips for how to talk sports and keep your friends:

1. Look for areas of agreement. Begin by reinforcing what you have in common—your love of the game. Sports rivalries are usually over team loyalties or favorite players, not the sport itself. Let the other person know you share a common interest, even if your preferred teams and players differ.
2. Avoid personal attacks. Find ways to remind the other person that you respect him or her. Look at the situation from his or her perspective by asking yourself why a reasonable and rational person would hold that viewpoint. While you don’t have to agree with the view, you can still acknowledge the point is valid rather than “idiotic.”
3. Focus on the facts. Arguments often become heated when people exaggerate, twist, and spin the facts. Consider the source of your facts and ask the other person to do the same.
4. Keep it safe by looking for signs of silence or violence. If the other person grows quiet or starts to become defensive, step out of the content of the discussion and reinforce your respect for him or her.

Is it ever appropriate to move to silence?

The first question to ask yourself is, “Is this conversation crucial?” If the stakes aren’t high (someone was rude, but you’ll never see them again), emotions aren’t strong (sure you disagree, but you’re not upset or that passionate about it), or there are no opposing opinions (it may be a touchy issue, but you’re all in agreement), then silence may be an appropriate course of action. That said, know that your silence communicates something, and by not speaking up, you inherently give other people the power to determine your meaning rather than stating it clearly yourself.

If the conversation is crucial, then what?

If you find that your motive for speaking up is not healthy, your negative emotions are controlling you, you lack respect for someone, and/or you don’t feel safe, it may be appropriate to move to silence—but only temporarily while you take a quick step back. Be careful not to use this “pause” as an excuse to sweep the problem under the rug or venture down a road of paralyzing analysis and unending preparation. Taking an hour or two to collect your thoughts, connecting to a healthy motive, finding a way to respect the other person’s dignity, and/or finding a private space to talk can make a big difference. Your opinion that someone else is an idiot is better left unsaid. Starting a dialogue about working better together with that same person in a private, safe space is essential.

More than 2 million people have used the skills in Crucial Conversations to navigate life’s most difficult moments. What’s more, great influencers and leaders consider Crucial Conversations a staple of effective management:

• Management guru, Tom Peters, listed Crucial Conversations as one of three “must reads for change agents”
• #1 New York Times bestselling author, Stephen R. Covey, calls the work a “breakthrough book”

Ten years after the book’s release, the authors have written a second edition complete with a new preface, foreword from Stephen R. Covey, research, case studies, reader success stories, and more. Join the millions worldwide who use the skills in Crucial Conversations to realize significant professional and personal results while improving the relationships that matter most.

Watch as Joseph Grenny introduces Crucial Conversations Second Edition:

Dear Crucial Skills,

How can I apply my newfound crucial conversations skills to an uncomfortable issue in my marriage?

After fifteen years together, four of them as a legally married couple, I’d like to start a family but I can’t get my husband to talk about it. I’m almost thirty-three years old and I would like to have this conversation sooner rather than later for obvious reasons!

To complicate matters, my husband knows I attended a Crucial Conversations trainer certification workshop last year, and may resist having my skills forced on him.

Mommy Dreams

 Dear Mommy,

It sounds like you are facing an undiscussable—an issue that, like an exposed nerve, sets off a strong negative reaction when touched. Every time the subject is mentioned, the conversation turns contentious and ends in an icy silence or an angry fight. Over time, this becomes a topic we can’t discuss without bad feelings and we conclude, “It’s better to let a sleeping dog lie.”

Without really intending to, we’ve created an undiscussable. We find its better to keep the peace and endure the occasional irritation than have yet another blow-up. We lose hope that it will ever get resolved. We live with uncomfortable silence and sometimes pain.

To effectively dialogue, you must make it safe for the other person to talk with you. Resolving undiscussables requires an extra portion of safety, because, almost by definition, undiscussables are created by a lack of safety which pushes participants into silence and violence. It takes a lot of safety to initially engage in an undiscussable and even more safety to see it through to completion.

You want to have children together but can’t get your husband to talk about it. This undiscussable is not a peripheral family issue, it is a core issue. This lies at the heart of who you are as a family, your joint aspirations, and the quality of life you will enjoy. To let this undiscussable fester without resolution will be to undermine your marriage and family.

Build safety. Safety is created by two essential conditions: mutual purpose and mutual respect. Start deconstructing this undiscussable by demonstrating respect. Rather than blind-siding your husband by bringing up the subject during his favorite ball game, ask to set a time to talk with him that’s mutually convenient. “Honey, I would like to talk with you about an important subject and I want to pick a time that we won’t be disturbed for about an hour, a time we can focus on each other and not be distracted. Would tonight after dinner work for you?” This courtesy helps to build mutual respect.

Set expectations. When you actually begin the conversation, set some expectations and guidelines that will help maintain the respect you show each other and continue to build safety. “Thank you for clearing time for our talk,” you say without sarcasm. “My goal is not to make a decision tonight. I just want to fully understand how you feel and help you understand how I feel, as well. Can I make one request? Let’s agree that neither of us will leave until we’re both done, until we both feel heard. Is that okay?”

If he’s impatient and interrupts with something like, “What’s this about? What is it you want to talk about?” Try, “I’m not trying to be dramatic, it’s just that before we talk, I want to agree on some guidelines for our discussion. Is that okay?”

Establish mutual purpose. Help to establish mutual purpose by telling him what you really want. “I love you so much and I want us to always be together. I don’t want anything to strain our relationship. I want to understand how you feel and I want you to understand how I feel.” Having re-enforced respect and mutual purpose, share with him what you are thinking and how you are feeling about inviting children into your family.

Don’t judge. A few no-no’s: Don’t attribute motive to him; don’t judge him based on a standard in your head, and don’t make threats or ultimatums. A bad example: “You are so irresponsible and lazy. That’s why you don’t want children. You don’t care one bit about me or what I want. Well, Peter Pan, it’s time to choose . . . ” Rather, keep thinking back to what you really want: to respectfully and lovingly share your thoughts and feelings and deeply understand his. You don’t want to shame, manipulate, pressure, or trick him. You want this dialogue to be honest, open, and loving.

If the dialogue takes a hurtful turn—if he becomes silent and/or gets upset or if you feel the same—go into a listening mode: inquire, paraphrase, reflect, prime. Don’t push your point. Demonstrate your understanding of his meaning.

Take a break. If the dialogue breaks down, if feelings become too raw, or if he doesn’t want to continue, show respect. To continue at this point could be to cross the line into controlling or disrespectful behaviors. Call for a strategic withdrawal.

First, suggest a break. “This is proving to be a tough issue for us. Why don’t we take a break for now?” Second, thank him. “Thank you for being willing to talk this over with me. I appreciate your sharing and listening.” Third, establish the next step and time frame. “Why don’t we take some time and put some thought into this and see if we can get clear about what having children would mean to us and our life together. Then how about this weekend we do a picnic and see how we’re feeling?”

Sometimes taking a break can help us collect our thoughts, process what we’ve experienced, and help us restore our emotional batteries. The danger becomes that in disengaging we are “putting off” our dialogue or cementing the subject as an undiscussable. The key comes in respectfully agreeing to take a break from the topic and agreeing when you will continue the conversation.

The title of our book, Crucial Conversations is plural. This conversation with your husband about having children might not be the resolution of the issue, but rather, the beginning of several conversations—each one expanding the pool of shared meaning, each one building respect, mutual purpose, and safety. Over time, feelings and ideas can change, options can surface, and a crisis of disagreement can form the foundation for a stronger love and a family that has learned how to work through the toughest of issues.

All the very best,
Ron

What if the other person doesn’t change despite my efforts to use the skills?

Great question.  I hear someone ask this almost every time I teach. While it’s true that Crucial Conversations skills don’t fix everything, there are a few things I have found helpful when feeling at a loss on how to improve a relationship with a challenging person:

• Don’t forget motive — The best place to start when the conversation goes badly is with our heart, our motive. What is that you REALLY want? Do you want the other person to “change?” Or do you want to stay in dialogue and build a relationship? If you are hoping, wishing, and praying for the other person to change (believe me, I’ve been there), chances are your behavior might become more forceful, coercive, and maybe even manipulative (I’ve been there too).  When we can focus on good goals (dialogue, results, relationships), we’re more likely to have a more open approach to others, which in turn allows us to get what we really want.
• It takes work — a lot of work. Not too long ago I asked a Crucial Conversations graduate what she had learned from the course and how she’d benefited. Her answer changed my perspective completely. She said, “I had a thirty-year-long relationship that was struggling significantly. I learned the skills and went to work on it. I worked and I worked and I worked . . . and I can honestly say it’s gotten better.” Isn’t that interesting? What she didn’t say was, “The other person is finally fixed,” or, “Everything is perfect now.” She saw progress for what it was—progress. She wasn’t looking for perfection in the other person but for improvement. Often we need to shift our expectations of what “progress” really looks like.
• Make it safe — I’ve come to realize that creating safety can take time . . . a lot of time. Sometimes safety is created quickly in just one conversation and other times it requires more effort over a longer period of time. When we think of safety as more than a few quick-fix tactics and see it as a true principle of creating mutual purpose and mutual respect between two people, we realize how much time (and work) it really requires to establish a safety zone that allows for healthy dialogue. As much as we’d like situations that are causing us pain, grief, and frustration to be resolved overnight, that’s not always the case. These things take time, so remember safety is conversational and relational.
• If all else fails — Sometimes we give a relationship all we’ve got and things still don’t improve. That’s the reality of life. In cases like this we may choose to end the relationship (personal or professional), and move forward with our lives. Sometimes that means moving departments  or not interacting anymore with a friend; either way that decision is personal. I find that if I care about the relationship at all, even if things are not going well, I owe it to myself and the other person to come back tomorrow and give it another shot…hopefully a better shot.

Best of luck,
Justin

Dear Crucial Skills,

Does anyone on your team have suggestions for holding a crucial conversation with an employee regarding his or her grammar and spelling in written communications?

I have an employee who is an outstanding performer—absolutely top notch in every way, except one. She struggles with basic grammar and spelling in her e-mail—simple things like using the word “well” instead of “will” or “ruff” instead of “rough.” How do you tell an outstanding performer that something as basic as grammar and spelling is holding her back? I would like to help her improve in this area, but the discussion is exceedingly difficult to have without hurting feelings.

Wanting to Help

  Dear Wanting,

Your question is connected to a variety of issues that people face regularly. Let me begin with a few comments before I answer your specific question.

When do I speak up? How serious does something have to be before I hold the conversation? Many people face this common challenge. First, let me say that sometimes something as basic as grammar, punctuality, or dress can seem to be a minor issue. Yet these issues bug us. We think about them and mentally frown and rant.

One approach for dealing with this is to give it time. Occasionally, time is a cure. And sometimes, it is not. So let’s take it a step further. When we go beyond simply being bothered by the issue to venting to others about it, the issue now has greater consequences. We are now part of the problem because we are affecting the person’s reputation. If an issue is so serious that we find ourselves acting it out instead of talking it out, we need to hold the conversation with the person in question.

How bad is bad? How bad does something have to be before you bring it up? If an issue affects only you, you can be exceptionally patient. But if the issue affects others, then bad becomes worse very quickly. Because grammar reflects on the quality and credibility of the organization, I consider it an important enough issue to address. So when the problem affects coworkers, customers, colleagues, and (in your case) people who determine who gets “held back” and who gets “promoted,” the issue is certainly serious enough to require a crucial conversation.

Your question: Here are some of the “givens” I see in your description of the situation. The issue is serious—her lack of good grammar affects many people. Her issue is an ability issue—it is not simply a motivation issue. She is a high performer in all other areas of her work. Your intention should be to help her not only with this skill, but also with her career. The following skills will make this challenge easier.

Make it safe to talk. Choose a time when you are in a good mood and a time when the employee is not stressed. You also need to choose a time when you can discuss this issue privately. Having observers will only reduce safety.

Begin with contrasting. Tell her what you are trying to achieve and what you are not intending. For example, “I would like to share an observation about one aspect of your work. I don’t intend for this to be a performance appraisal. What I’d like to do is share something that I think would be helpful in your career.” If she agrees, then share your observations—provide specific examples—and suggest you’d like to talk about the importance of grammar.

Come to an agreement. Does she agree that this is an issue? If she does, don’t give her solutions. Instead, ask her for potential solutions. If she has a good idea, make a plan. If she would like suggestions, come prepared to offer ideas. There are a lot of effective tools to help people with grammar—books, online tools, and public courses. If you are comfortable, you might suggest that you help coach her. However, I would like to add a point of caution: Many people feel more comfortable working to improve ability issues with people other than their boss.

In closing, if someone has bad grammar, turns in assignments just a few minutes late, or dresses in ways that cause you to cringe, you have an opportunity to decide how to take the next step. Remember, if it is affecting others or if you are acting it out instead of talking it out, you need to step up to the conversation.

Al

During the month of July, we will publish “best of” content. The following article was first published on January 6, 2010

Dear Crucial Skills,

One of my coworkers has refused to communicate with me in any way for more than a year, but I don’t know what I did to offend her. I spoke to the office manager and my immediate supervisor regarding the situation, but they told me I should not confront her. Now it is very difficult to go to work each day because several of my coworkers ignore me and exclude me from meetings, lunch invitations, and more. What should I do?

Ignored

Dear Ignored,

Iced out. The silent treatment. The cold shoulder. Brrrrrrrrrrrr.

This is the extreme form of going to silence and is a common strategy we use in dealing with each other. Not only have most of us experienced the silent treatment, but most of us have also used this strategy to protect ourselves or manipulate others into trying to get what we want.

Many of us have experienced first-hand the awful consequences of yelling, screaming, and even physical violence. As a result, we have vowed not to allow violence to be part of our repertoire. When we encounter a crucial conversation, we eschew violence and engage in silence, believing that we are choosing a more virtuous path. Unfortunately, when we do this, we are fooling ourselves.

Silence is a hurtful strategy. At best, by avoiding a subject and making it an “undiscussable,” we assure problems will not be resolved and will likely fester or get worse. Giving someone the silent treatment can also convey a painful message: you are not worth the effort it takes to talk with you. You are worthless. This message—whether intentional or not—can be devastating and play upon a person’s deepest fears.

The situation you describe at work seems beyond petty and is certainly dysfunctional. The fact that the silent treatment you are receiving extends beyond a single coworker suggests a conspiracy and is more than working through a single relationship. In especially tough situations, our tendency can be to see ourselves as victims of the situation and of others. We also tend to assume that we have no options. Overcome this victim story by asking yourself, “What can I do right now to move toward what I really want?” The answer to this question is “the rest of the story” that you are not considering. By considering other perspectives you can escape any victim stories you may be telling yourself.

What can you do? You have at least three options:

1. If you don’t like your current situation, change it.
2. If you can’t change your situation, remove yourself from it.
3. If the cost of removing yourself from the situation is too high, decide how you can cope with it in a healthy, helpful way.

If you decide to work on changing the situation, I recommend you hold a crucial conversation with your supervisor and office manager. You initially involved them, but their solution is not working so you should return to them. Factually describe the gap between what is happening and what you would expect to happen in an efficient, effective work team. Share the consequences of your coworkers’ behavior on productivity and quality of work, on others on the team, and on yourself. Ask for your leaders’ help in changing the situation. It might require a team meeting where you have a crucial conversation with your coworkers. In this meeting, talk openly about what is happening. Identify the behaviors you see and ask your coworkers why they are behaving in this manner.

Have you said or done something that caused problems or offense? Be open. Listen. Honestly diagnose the cause. Share the consequences as you see them. Seek resolution and agreement as to how you will all interact going forward.

If you cannot get a satisfactory resolution, can you transfer to another work unit? Can you leave this job and go to a more healthy work environment? If so, begin planning your exit.

If this option is too drastic or does not provide a better situation, how can you cope with an unhealthy situation in a healthy way? Can you see this as a long-term influence effort where you will continue to seek mutual purpose and be unconditionally respectful to others, with the intent to help, not hurt? Can you see their silence as their problem and continue to do your job in a satisfying manner? Can you continue to grow in your job and career and find fulfillment even if your coworkers don’t invite you to lunch? Can you be happy and healthy in the short-term, even as you develop long-term solutions to the current situation?

Intentionally avoiding tough conversations and “freezing” others out is dysfunctional; it hurts relationships and team results. Do not accept such a situation as a “given.” You do not control others, but you do control your response to others. Choose to be an influencer. Influence for the better—both others and yourself.

All the best,
Ron

  Dear Crucial Skills,

As we all do from time to time, I find myself having to call a company to resolve an issue, and am often frustrated at the very beginning of the phone call when I’m asked to press a series of buttons before I’m allowed to talk to a human. By the time I get to this point, I’m so frustrated that I don’t always use my best Crucial Conversations skills. How can I make the best of these call-center crucial conversations?

Frustrated Customer

  Dear Frustrated,

I’m sure thousands of people share your annoyance with being sent to what feels like electronic purgatory. I too become quickly irritated when I’m forced to punch a half dozen buttons before I’m given the opportunity to talk to someone.

I’m equally convinced many of us button-haters aren’t exactly on our best and most respectful behavior when we finally interact with a human being. After we’ve had our fill of instructions such as, “If you’re a left-handed vegetarian, please press seven,” we tear into the customer service representative (to quote comedian Ray Romano) “like a monkey on a cupcake.”

Even if we’ve only become moderately snippy with the unfortunate employee, after we’ve hung up and had a chance to review our snarky remarks, many of us look back and ask, “What was I thinking? It’s not as if that poor employee came up with the policy that puts people in a foul mood before he or she talks to them. So, why did I just abuse an innocent bystander?”

It’s hard to come up with a convincing response to this question, although I did hear an explanation at the airport a few months back that almost fits the bill. It seemed the fellow standing in front of me at the service counter had landed in Minneapolis a few minutes after his connecting flight took off. I listened in on the conversation as he delivered a tirade so heated, vitriolic, and yet curiously clever, that people walking by stopped, pulled out their laptops, and took notes.

The fellow put on quite a show. He raised his voice, used insulting and hurtful terms, and waved his arms wildly as if he were guiding in a jet fighter. And yet, the guy kept his threats just veiled enough and his tone just controlled enough to keep from getting sprayed with mace and wrestled to the floor.

When the gate agent finally did get a word in, she explained that there was no reason for the passenger to yell at her—after all, it wasn’t her fault he missed his connection (a well-worn expression that is sure to throw gasoline on the fire). Prepared for just such a retort, the furious passenger explained why he did have the right to tear into her.

“Despite the fact that this airline leaves me stranded in airports, flies my baggage to the wrong city, rarely gets me to my destination on time, has forced me to miss birthdays and countless other precious family events—despite all of this—you still choose to work here. You sat back and watched this freak show you call an airline inflict untold damage on your innocent customers. That makes it okay for me to be angry at you because you’re part of the problem.”

Despite this carefully constructed argument, nothing the fellow said justified his verbal abuse. Nevertheless, this hurtful response does demonstrate what can happen to a presumably reasonable, rational, and decent human being after years of being subjected to poor customer service. To bystanders, such an explosive reaction always seems far too large given the triviality of the precipitating event. However, that’s because bystanders watching such an incident only observe a snippet from current events and not a broader sampling from history.

Which brings us back to your problem. Being electronically routed throughout the ether adds one more annoyance to a growing inventory of petty offences that could lead to an unhealthy tirade or at least an uncharacteristically snippy response on your part. So, when you ask what you can do to make sure you’re using your best crucial conversations skills after being given the electronic run-around, you ask against a backdrop that includes years of customer abuse—adding to the complexity of the problem. So, what’s a person to do? Here are a few ideas to help you keep your cool.

Master Your Story
Let’s start with the story you tell yourself. Simply being aware that you might respond historically rather than episodically is a step in the right direction. When being shuttled around the electronic universe, keep in mind that this phone call is a single instance—not the sum total of every uncaring, bureaucratic, save-the-company-money-at-your-expense response you’ve experienced to date.

Start with Heart
As you begin your conversation, think about the poor person on the other end of the line, how he or she has had nothing to do with the policy, and most certainly doesn’t deserve your criticism. Besides, he or she isn’t likely to be in a place to change the policy anyway. Additionally, realize that what you really want isn’t to send a hostile message to the company via the customer-service worker. What you really want is to get your problem solved. You know from past experience that lashing out with anger and resentment only delays resolving the issue you are calling about in the first place.

Consider the side effects of anger
Keep in mind the impact you have on your health every time you become angry. When you allow petty annoyances to heap one upon the other until you eventually blow your stack, you harm not just those around you but also yourself.

Anger sends the message to your body that it’s time to prepare for an upcoming blunt trauma. In response, your body thickens your blood so you won’t bleed out. That’s right, every time you get angry you produce cholesterol. And if this isn’t enough to give you the yips, keep in mind that every time you blow a gasket you also weaken your immune system, stress your heart, and maybe worst of all, you become an angry person you really don’t want to be.

So, the next time you’re required to go through a button-pushing ritual—be prepared. Before you make the call, take a deep breath and be ready for the fact that you may be transferred around or otherwise bureaucratically pummeled. Fight your natural proclivity. Put on a smile—don’t conjure up a counter-attack. In short, take charge of your response rather than vice versa. Don’t brew up a fresh batch of cholesterol.

And remember, the person on the phone shouldn’t be your target. If you want to provide the company with feedback, ask to talk to the shift manager or send an e-mail explaining your position on the phone game. In pleasant and honest terms, explain that you much prefer an immediate human response. This may have no effect on the policy, but it is the professional and healthy way of trying to make a difference. Equally important, taking the civil route doesn’t vent your frustrations on a hapless employee, and it also won’t make you ill.

Kerry

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

  Dear 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