10

Open the Dialogue

“There are two dogs inside of every person.

The one that dominates is the one that is fed.”

—Chinese parable

Typically, when we avoid reaching out to clarify our perceptions, it is because we fear we will make a moderately troubled situation worse, or, we may lack courage and skill. In this chapter, we will discuss a template to open a dialogue that is both safe and effective. Never again will you have to wonder what someone's behavior means. Rather than resorting to distorted and damaging speculations, you can ask for the other party's help to understand their actions, and you will be able to do it in a way that entices him or her to join you on a hardheaded search for solutions.

In Third Assumption, we assume that individuals want to be part of a high-performing group and have an intrinsic desire for achieving goals and meeting the expectations of their customers and supervisors.

Whenever tension is high or morale is languishing, it is fairly safe to assume that something—a policy, workflow, anxiety, fear, miscommunication, negative reciprocity, a personal constraint or pressure—is blocking the person's or group's ability to achieve and feel valued. In my work, I have found this to be the case vastly more often than not. As we discussed in Chapter Three, we have a drive to belong and positive workplaces are primed to fill that need.

People don't change unless they feel accepted

How can we think about others' destructive or inappropriate behavior in a way that will enhance our effectiveness? Destructive behavior is not going away, and there is plenty of it.

In order to be more effective, we do not have to take a Pollyanna approach, and think, “Isn't everyone wonderful?!” In fact, the opposite approach is more useful. Assume everyone (including you) is a nutcase. Everyone is flawed. So what is to be gained by indignation and flooding?

This is definitely not saying anything goes. Clearly communicated values, and enforcing methods for holding people accountable, are basic building blocks of healthy groups and organizations.

To be effective in addressing concerns let's add the concept of assertiveness to our conversation. High or low assertiveness combined with hostility or warmth results in four combinations.

Figure 10.1. Creating positive change.

Quadrant 1: Individuals act with high hostility and high assertiveness. At Thera Rising our name for this combination is “hot contempt.” In this approach, individuals are intimidating, insulting, and often flooded. In the workplace, these make up very few of the situations we address. As I mentioned earlier, unfortunately, we often save hot contempt for the people we really love at home.

Quadrant 2: When we combine high hostility with low assertiveness, the result is “cold contempt.” This is a workplace favorite. The most common behaviors in this quadrant are avoidance, backstabbing, and building adversarial factions.

Quadrant 3: The bottom right of this mental model is low assertiveness and high warmth. We call this the “Doormat” quadrant. In this approach, individuals in leadership roles (at work or home) abdicate their responsibility to shape behavior. My tongue-in-cheek example of this approach is the parent who says to his or her teenage son, “Oh, don't worry about that ‘D’ in algebra, honey. I failed algebra. Can you get me a beer?”

None of these approaches are effective. In the first two combinations, the other party responds with defensiveness and negative reciprocity. In the third, the supervisor or parent neglects to set and enforce healthy standards of behavior and performance.

Quadrant 4: The remaining quadrant consists of high assertiveness and warmth. This option is very effective—and it is the style that people use the least!

It's amazing to watch people gossip, stew, explode, rant, shame, stonewall, avoid, steam, make excuses, go numb, vent, roll over, use sarcasm, tease, retaliate, and suffer—reactions that take enormous physiological and emotional energy—rather than open the dialogue with warmth and clear expectations.

Asking for different behavior while treating a person with acceptance increases the odds we will maintain the relationship and work through the problem—together. If we are not experiencing connectedness, the other person is unlikely to be receptive. In the fourth quadrant, we have high standards that are clearly communicated, and there are consequences for both behaviors that are substandard and those that are optimal. However, we also convey a genuine interest in the other party's well-being, hence the warmth.

Addressing behavior in this manner has overwhelming advantages. When we give feedback with another party's interest at heart, they are tempted to listen and consider our input. The story of Rick in customized machines is a good example of how warmth made it possible to give him critical feedback.

As the following example shows, we can be warm even in situations that require dramatic corrective action.

Hard on the problem, soft on the people

I had the privilege of working with Michael, a highly skilled CEO. He has a grasp of every element of the business. He is trained in system thinking, skilled in the company's technology, is business savvy, and he has high emotional IQ.

However, Michael was stymied about one of his high-earning sales reps. Clients and board members loved Alana, but she had a reputation for being disrespectful to her peers and a bully to individuals who reported to her.

Michael told her that he kept hearing complaints about her behavior and asked her to meet with me. She agreed, and we developed a plan that we both felt was fair and constructive. Alana and I came up with a list of questions that would get at the nuances of her behavior, and, with her permission, I interviewed a variety of people across the organization. As agreed, I turned their feedback into a summary with all identifiers removed.

Alana's feedback was mixed, but most of it was harsh, and it confirmed the CEO's perceptions that she intimidated her peers and direct reports. Alana and I immediately started turning the themes of her feedback into goals. As planned, a few days later she and I met with Michael, so Alana could give him a summary of her feedback and the goals we had set.

In our meeting, Michael was a master of “hard on the problem, soft on the people.” He talked with the kindness of an elder deeply concerned about Alana's future. Then, in the same gentle tone he gave her a rock-solid bottom line. No more complaints. Not one, from anyone in the organization. Michael told her if he heard one complaint, he would begin disciplinary action.

Authentic warmth wrapped in the belief that we can do better is inspirational. Alana and I met a few more times but it was hardly necessary. She had already realized that this was the opportunity of a lifetime. She could work on the necessary changes in an atmosphere of accountability and support. I stayed in touch with Michael and Alana for the next two years, and she maintained her hard-won gains.

The Chinese gave us the “two dog” parable at the beginning of this chapter, and I often think of it when I work with individuals or teams set on destroying other people's careers. When people behave defensively or aggressively, I know the other dog—the dog of empathy and cooperation—is waiting in the wings. I can put the distressed person at ease, reduce his or her fears, and identify a way to feed the dog that wants to be appreciated and connected.

As I mentioned, we often avoid tackling tense issues head on because we fear we will make the situation worse. Opening up a conversation on a touchy or ambiguous topic takes skill and courage. In the past, if we were not prepared, we may have found that direct communication is risky, or if the other person flooded, we lacked the ability to navigate emotionally choppy waters. Rather than risk an explosive situation, we resort to withdrawal or drama-venting. However, let's look at a powerful and proven technique as an alternative.

Once you master this technique and it becomes part of your skill set, you can address sensitive issues, clear the air, and feed the dog of appreciation at the same time. It's a very empowering experience.

A Template for Success

We'll go through an overview of the five steps, and then you can sketch out a dialogue about a situation you would like to improve.

1. Affirm the relationship and mutual goal

Let's revisit several important pieces of information. John Gottman found that, 96 percent of the time, conversations end in the same energy in which they begin. Harsh setups trigger harsh endings, and conversations that open in appreciation almost always end in the same tone.

Using biofeedback data, the HeartMath Institute (HeartMath.org) found that when we feel and speak with appreciation, our body rhythms become coherent, and we experience a harmonization of emotional, physical, and intellectual rhythms that allow us to perform at our best. In this physiological state, we are relaxed, clear, and receptive.

Barbara Fredrickson discovered the physiological state of connectedness including the synchronization of brain waves and biochemicals between two individuals. The prerequisites of this state include a positive voice tone, eye contact, and a mutual investment in each other's well-being.

An example of connectedness: The powerful, gentle dad

I watched my friend Bob demonstrate the power of connectedness perfectly. Bob farms with his family in South Dakota, and he was one of the best parents I've ever had the pleasure of observing.

Years ago he was out in the yard with his seven-year-old son, Tommy. Bob was seated on the tractor, anxious to get to his work in the field, while Tommy was running around the yard romping about with the family dog. Bob glanced in Tommy's direction and gave him a warning about playing too closely to the auger, a dangerous, rotating conveyer belt that is used to move grain. Tommy paid no attention to his dad's instructions as he was entirely focused on his playful pal. Bob stopped the tractor, climbed down, sat on the edge of the tiller, and called his son over.

I stopped breathing. I adored Tommy, and he had disobeyed his dad. I expected Bob to yell at him, scold him harshly, or even shake him. Instead, Bob put Tommy gently on his lap, circled his arm around him protectively and asked, “Tommy, what did Daddy tell you to do?”

I was mesmerized. I had never observed anyone correct a child in such a loving fashion. I witnessed the two of them wrapped in a warm connection as Bob calmly explained the dangers of Tommy not listening. Bob had Tommy's total attention as Tommy relaxed into the curvature of his dad's arms.

Bob could not have claimed this child's rapt attention if he had flooded. We can think about flooding as static electricity that blocks the message. However, with a gentle approach, clearly based on his love for his son, Bob built a strong connection and thus increased the possibility that Tommy would respond to his warnings.

In the workplace, you can hardly sit down on the edge of the desk and invite a colleague to sit on your lap! However, you can create a climate of relaxation and acceptance by starting with a positive statement about the desire to strengthen your relationship that puts them at ease.

Remember: People need to feel accepted before they will change. As a friend and client, a vice president of IT (and a man with staggering intellect) told me, “My effectiveness skyrocketed after I realized I had the most impact when I was the least threatening.”

Warmth dissolves a corporate stalemate

Alexis, a project manager at a large construction firm, gave me this example of how warmth can break through tension.

She and another project manager were in a meeting with two architects from an outside firm. The four of them were collaborating on a joint project, but they had been unable to come to an agreement about a variety of issues. The meeting was not going well, and the tension between the two groups was increasing. Unexpectedly, the president of Alexis's firm, Isaac, dropped in. Alexis told me she was thrilled and thought, “Isaac will put these architects in their place!”

However, Isaac is a master of warmth and appreciation. He greeted the visiting architects with a smile and shook their hands. He gave them a sincere compliment on a building their firm had just completed. As Isaac praised their artistry, Alexis said she could feel the tension melt on both sides of the table. Isaac expressed his delight in having great people on the team from both firms and that he couldn't wait to see their preliminary designs. He thanked them again, welcomed them to the company, shook hands, and left the room.

Alexis said that the atmosphere in the room shifted from chilly frustration to warm relaxation. Within minutes of his departure, they were on their way to resolution. Appreciation taps into the cortex where problems are solved.

This insight is priceless. When you open the dialogue, make your first statement a message that conveys your appreciation for the relationship. If we did not value the relationship, we would not try to fix the problem. We can learn to put those commitments, desires, and investments into words.

I helped reconnect two executives at a radio station. Ruby, the general manager, and her COO, Clyde, had not talked in more than a year, which threw their small organization into chaos. Ruby and Clyde had been close colleagues, but they both applied for the general manager position; after Ruby got the job, they stopped speaking to each other. Deeply frustrated and hurt, they each created a faction and had a cadre of loyalists. When I met with them alone, each individual was quite certain the other person was the reason for their estrangement.

The next day Clyde told me how much he missed their companionship, the laughter that had been a spontaneous byproduct of their conversations, and the ingenious radio spots they created. He thought of the much younger Ruby as his daughter and that yes, not getting the general manager job had stung, but now he wished her nothing but success.

When it was time for Clyde to sketch out how he was going to open the dialogue, his first attempt was dry and formulaic. I asked him if he would be willing to tell her what he had just told me about missing their friendship and rapport. Clyde agreed, and his energy shifted toward optimism. Reconciling with her meant a great deal to him.

The next day, when he kicked off our discussions, he acknowledged how much he missed their relationship and nonstop creativity. He spoke straight from his heart, and he was so direct and endearing that Ruby, who had been defensive and guarded, burst into tears. She too had been grieving their friendship. Although we still had several hours of work to complete, in that one-minute monologue, Clyde got us more than halfway there.

When we sincerely articulate how important someone is to us, the other person relaxes and is inclined to join us in fixing the problem. Anxiety dissipates in the face of warmth.

With a child or family member, we can say words similar to, “You're one of the most important people in my life. I want to talk to you about last night because when things aren't right between us, it troubles me throughout the day.”

In the workplace we can say something similar to, “We work closely together, and it's important to me that we have a relationship based on honesty and trust. I'd like to talk with you about something that has the potential of getting in the way of our connection.” Or “Unless the nursing department has a good working relationship with administration, we can't respond to clients efficiently. Would you help me with a problem that keeps tripping up customer relations?”

In the first step of opening the dialogue, we need to demonstrate that we laid down our swords; we do not intend to blame, alienate, or shame the other party. We need to make a statement about how much we value the relationship and our desire to preserve it.

How would you affirm the relationship with the person with whom you would like to speak? Why is this relationship is important to you? Like Clyde, be vulnerable. Put your intentions into words.

2. State the facts

The ability to separate fact from interpretation is a highly valuable skill. Facts don't determine how we feel; our interpretations and assumptions do.

After an event, there is a split second before interpretations and facts mingle. Being able to sort out the difference takes practice because even what we pay attention to is shaped by our mindset.

The following is an example of how the same event can trigger different interpretations and emotions: Imagine three people are walking down the hall at work and pass their boss, Nancy, who is walking in the opposite direction. Although Nancy is generally friendly, this particular morning she doesn't say good morning or make eye contact with anyone in the group.

When Andy interprets ambiguous behavior, he usually assumes the worst about others. He thinks, “Since she became our manager, her nose has been up in the air!” As a consequence of his thinking, Andy will be irritated and later may seek out others to validate his conclusion.

Kari's automatic interpretation is to blame herself. She thinks, “Wow, Nancy must be mad! I should not have disagreed with her in the staff meeting yesterday! Why can't I keep my mouth shut?” As a consequence of her thinking, Kari will feel anxious about their next encounter and make a commitment to stop challenging her supervisor.

Skylar is aware that interpretations are tricky. The possibilities are endless. She has learned to be curious about other individuals' behaviors. Her reaction might be, “Gee, Nancy acted like she didn't recognize us. I wonder if she has her contacts in.” As a consequence of her thinking, Skylar's emotional reaction will be negligible.

Although I've listed three interpretations of one simple behavior, there are many more. Every time we interpret someone's behavior, we select from an infinite number of possibilities.

Opening the dialogue doesn't require that every assumption is correct. However, it is absolutely essential that when we make an interpretation, we know it is just that—speculation—not fact.

The wildcard of accurate interpretation: Self-confidence

Ironically, self-confidence, which is about our own state of mind, plays a role in how we interpret other people's behavior. Self-esteem is a filter. If we feel self-confident and worthy, we see others' actions in a neutral, or even positive, manner. When we feel lonely or undeserving, we view neutral behavior as additional proof of our isolation.

Whether it is about our looks, competency, ability to parent, cook, problem solve, make friends, influence, reason, sell, motivate, coach, or speak, in situations where we feel insecure, we will interpret behavior differently than in situations where we feel self-assured and competent.

The fidgeting boss

When we fail to differentiate between facts and interpretations, we often act as if our fears are real, and that assuredness can play a role in bringing our anxiety into reality.

Elliot went in to see his boss, AJ, with a draft of a floor plan that Elliot and his team created. As he showed AJ his work, AJ stared out the window, doodled a bit, and glanced at his laptop.

Elliot might immediately speculate about AJ's behavior: he hates the plan; he is about to leave for a doctor's appointment; he just got bad news from home; doodling helps him concentrate; he just learned that he has to cut 10 percent of his staff; and so on.

Imagine that Elliot frequently interprets AJ's behavior as dismissive and believes he is fidgeting because he dislikes the plan. Elliot rushes through his presentation and walks out of AJ's office fuming that he will never again volunteer. He tells his team that AJ is two-faced and asking for employee input is a sham. He throws the plan on a shelf.

Later, when AJ tries to follow up, Elliot brushes him off. AJ assumes that Elliot has lost interest. AJ draws the design without the team's input, muttering about how little initiative employees show these days. When Elliot learns that AJ drafted a design without input, Elliot believes his boss really did not care about the team's ideas. The next time AJ asks for input from the team, no one volunteers.

Without questioning his interpretation, Elliot never learns that AJ was distracted because just before their meeting, AJ's director had chewed him out about neglecting an important report. AJ's nervous preoccupation had nothing to do with his dislike or disapproval of the team's work.

There is a simple solution. In this step, Elliot could have checked his interpretation by stating his observations of AJ's behavior. Elliot could have said, “AJ, I noticed you have glanced at your laptop several times since I started my presentation.”

If it is appropriate, use specifics. Avoid exaggeration; it will be seen as dishonest and manipulative. State your facts in such a way that the other party will agree with the accuracy and impartiality of your statement.

If the behavior is a pattern, with a history of failed promises, start with an accurate statement that summarizes the history. An example might be, “You've made two commitments to arriving at our meetings on time, and today you were twenty minutes late.” If it is a high-stakes conversation and you do not have much practice separating facts from interpretations, ask a trusted colleague or friend to review your work. What are the facts in the situation you are trying to improve?

3. Ask for help to understand the behavior

When we approach the third section, humility and curiosity are our best friends. We may not understand the reasons behind the other person's behavior, but we assume something is driving their actions.

In some schools of thought, individuals are advised to share their interpretations. For instance, Elliot could say to his boss, “I think you're glancing at your laptop and doodling because you don't like my draft.” However, it is more efficient to just say, “Can you help me understand why you keep glancing at your laptop? Is everything okay?” This simple question short circuits the guessing game and leaves the door wide open for the other person to reveal his or her hidden “baby.” Asking for help in understanding behavior is a respectful and neutral request for information, grounded in benign curiosity.

In general, individuals want to explain their rationale. No one wants to be judged negatively by others. Even though I often work with people who are considered unpleasant by their peers and supervisors, in three decades of conflict resolution work, I have never received a hostile response from asking, “Can you help me understand why . . .?” You may be surprised by the answer, and it might change the course of the conversation.

4. State the ideal behavior

This is a powerful and important step that we often overlook. When we are flooded or defensive, we state and restate facts and interpretations. The escape hatch from this particular dead end is to move to the future. We need to articulate what the other person or group can do to resolve the issue and restore the relationship.

You need not feel anxious about stating what you want; it is not a demand. The other person can respond with their own request or modify yours. Think of it as a starting point. Most people appreciate knowing what you want, especially if you have stated your preferences in terms of specific behavior. Avoid global statements such as, “I wish you were considerate about time” and substitute something more exact: “I wish you would call me if you're going to be more than fifteen minutes late, so I can decide if I want to wait.”

For instance, after learning that AJ's focus was on other issues, Elliot could have told him how he wanted to resolve the situation. He might have suggested, “AJ, I need your reactions to the floor plan design before the team moves ahead. Can we reschedule our meeting for tomorrow morning?”

Before you open the dialogue, think about what you want from the other person. It might be as simple as setting aside time to talk, or a commitment to gather cross-functional data to work together on a problem. Do not make the mistake of the two men in the following story who argued for years without being specific about what they wanted from each other.

A specific request is a pathway back to the relationship

I was facilitating a strategic planning retreat with the management team from a chemical dependency treatment center. When a corporate client suspected an employee had a substance problem they utilized the agency for assessment, referral, and treatment.

As I gathered background information before the retreat, I learned that Joseph, the marketing director responsible for acquiring new clients, had a long-standing conflict with his peer, Mack. Mack was a recovering addict and the program director. He supervised the treatment groups and therapists. The CEO made it clear I was not hired to address this conflict. The executive team had set aside our time together to rewrite their strategic plan.

However, midway through our first morning together, this longstanding conflict erupted, and the two directors started to argue. The rest of the team pulled away from the table or turned away. Some of them walked out of the room to take phone calls or get coffee. They had heard it before and knew that once this conversation started, it took center stage.

I stood listening for several moments. Was there a way to get them unstuck within a few minutes? Or did I need to request that they table their discussion and their emotions?

As I listened, I realized that they were stating and restating facts and interpretations. Neither person was articulating what they wanted.

I interjected, “What do the two of you want from each other?”

To my amazement, instead of ticking off a list of requests, they both fell silent. This argument had been simmering for two years, yet neither person had suggested any type of solution.

Finally, Mack, the program director, said accusingly to Joseph, the director of marketing, “You don't know anything about chemical dependency. You are selling our program and don't know squat about substance abuse or how people recover.”

I prompted him again: “Mack, tell Joseph specifically what you want.”

There was another pause, followed by a tentative, “I want you to go through the program as if you are a client. I want you to attend orientation and sit in on groups.”

It was a pivotal moment. Everyone at the table froze.

Joseph paused for a moment and then to my amazement he said, “Okay. Actually, I've wanted to sit in on group sessions, but I was afraid it would be inappropriate.”

I turned to Joseph. “Joseph, what do you want from Mack?”

There was another moment of silence. It stretched on—and on. Finally, Joseph gathered up his courage to say what he had held back for two years: “God, man, do something about your hair! When we go on sales calls, I'm embarrassed by the way you look.”

In his days of using drugs, Mack hit rock bottom and remained there for a long stretch of time before he was able to maintain sobriety. Although he had been clean for many years, his days as an addict were reflected in his appearance. The clients that came to their agency were unaffected by Mark's informality. They knew Mack had walked the walk and recovered. However, when Joseph took him on sales calls to corporate offices, his unkempt hair was a definite liability.

Mack's reaction to Joseph's request was a stunner.

“Sure. I would have done it a long time ago if you asked.”

I have never forgotten that moment. When we don't ask for what we want, we sacrifice the possibility of resolution.

Don't let this happen with your important issues. Again, before you open the dialogue, identify the ideal behavior you want from the other person. Make it specific and positive. What would you like the other party to do?

5. State what you are willing to do

You just asked someone to alter his or her behavior. Are you willing to change your behavior in return? For instance, Elliot might say to his boss, “Why don't I check in later, and we can look at your calendar?” Or the statement may be a negotiation: “If you can give me two minutes on this one detail, I can wait until later in the week for a more thorough discussion.”

This statement can also be a consequence of what you will do if the other person does not change his or her behavior. If the behavior is a pattern of unkept promises, your statement may be a consequence. If you are in a position of authority, your statement may be similar to, “If this happens again, I will move to a written warning.”

In the situation you want to improve, what are you willing to do to meet the other party halfway? What might be the consequence if the situation doesn't change? If at all possible stay in the energy of assertiveness and warmth.

Starting out

The first time you try this approach, use the following outline before you have the conversation. It will give you time to sort out your thinking and express those thoughts in your own words. You could open the dialogue with the situation on which you based your Cycle of Contempt.

Don't start with the worst problem in your life. Begin with more manageable situations. As your skill and confidence grows, you can tackle more complex or sensitive concerns. At some point, talking in this manner will come to you naturally, and you won't have to think it through in advance. This approach can become your best ally.

1. Affirm the relationship. “I want to talk to you because . . .” Tell the other party why you value the relationship and want to preserve it.
2. State the facts. “I noticed . . .” State the facts accurately. Be specific, and use numbers when appropriate.
3. Ask for help in understanding his or her behavior. “Can you help me understand why . . . ?” Is there a hidden constraint of pressure? A baby in the back seat?
4. State what you want. “I would prefer if you would . . .” You cannot repair this relationship by focusing on the past. What do you want in the future? Describe the ideal behavior or result.
5. State what you are willing to do. “I am willing to . . .” What are you willing to do to solve the problem? What is your part in reaching a solution? Is it necessary to impose consequences? Be specific.