Posts
Negotiation is really the ultimate expression of communication skills. It is the real test of one’s skill at influencing, managing relationships, and openly discussing different perspectives. Just think of the skills that a Police or Government negotiator must have to create safety and trust; to recognize behaviors that signal the underlying reasons for differing points of view; to be able to influence another (sometimes irrational) individual to reconsider their current course and adopt a new one.
Most of us will never be involved in such a high-risk negotiation, but we will all want to be able to handle those that are important to us well. I will talk a bit about negotiations over the next few weeks.
When we talk about a negotiation, we are talking about resolving differences. Perhaps you have something that is of value to me (a boat) and I have something that is of value to you (money). How do you get me to see that the value of the boat is equal to a certain amount of money?
Before we go into that, let’s talk about the two kinds of negotiations: Distributive and Integrative.
Distributive negotiations are those in which there is a fixed amount of value to be distributed between the negotiating parties. In my boat example, there is the boat and the money. How those things get divided between the two parties is all that is involved. The person with the boat wants to get top dollar and the person with the money wants to pay the lowest price. This a potential win-lose if I overpay (or underpay) for the boat. These kinds of negotiations are usually conducted when there is no thought of a long term relationship between parties. Our interests are opposed (everything I “give up” to you, is something I lose). My motivation is individual gain.
Integrative negotiations are those in which there are opportunities to create (integrate) new kinds of value into the equation. As you might expect, these kinds of negotiations are usually conducted when there is a probability of a long term relationship between parties, our interests are different but not necessarily opposed and we are motivated by group gain.
Let’s say I liked the boat, and was willing to pay your price for it but had no place to store it at the moment - couldn’t take delivery. Then you (the boat owner) would have some choices – another way you could create value and make the deal more attractive. You could offer to store the boat (at a charge or no charge) until I could take delivery. Let’s also say I had never actually owned a boat before. You could, for a charge or no charge) offer to help me get acquainted with some of the maintenance chores associated with a boat.
Finding new ways to create value in a negotiation is the way to transform win-lose into win-win.
Next time we’ll talk about the 4 things you HAVE to know before you start negotiating.
Insist on great business results! Go to Pathfinder Communication
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Influence, Persuasion, and Negotiation
I gave a presentation for the Program Management Institute’s San Diego chapter (component) last Friday. As always, it was a good crowd of very engaged professionals, all looking to improve their effectiveness and the effectiveness of their organizations. I felt as if I was able to pique their interest in the idea of working to improve communication skills. It seems that everyone that I know is trying to improve those skills, and this group was no exception. It is a wonderful bunch of people. I received a lot of good email and questions afterwards.
I have been doing a lot of teaching lately, in addition to speaking, and a question has been raised more than a few times so I’d like to address it in this week’s newsletter – “What is the difference between Influence, Persuasion, and Negotiation as far as the mechanics go?”
I understand where the question comes from; I mean, if you influence someone, aren’t you changing their mind? Isn’t that what you do when you persuade? Isn’t that what you do when you negotiate?
Sort of. The difference in these three concepts is the kind of problem you are trying to solve. When you influence, you are trying to cause a group to address something that isn’t currently being addressed. So you are “changing their minds” to address something that they already know about, but aren’t aware that others are seeking to address it too. When you are persuading, you are providing someone with a new perspective by either changing an old perspective or asking them to look at something they haven’t considered before. So, you are “changing their mind” by giving them reasons to adopt a new perspective. When you negotiate, you are looking at something you both have perspectives on and trying to address the differences between those perspectives to settle on a mutually beneficial way of looking at things.
There are differences in the methods used to solve these three “mind-changing” but ultimately separate discussions. The methods used to influence others are many and varied. The variety of options narrow as you begin to look at maintaining long term relationships with those you are influencing, and narrower yet if you have a reciprocal relationship. I usually try to view influence as something you exercise with a group, as in influencing your workgroup to adopt a new view. This is done by open discussion of a topic, and using our Critical Discussion skills. Review the newsletters I wrote between last September and December for details. The purpose here is to make a private discussion public, remembering that it was probably private because no one felt safe in raising it, often because they are not sure of the soundness of their perspective – are they justified?. The central issue is usually “How can we be sure things are really as they seem?” The task centers on gathering and presenting compelling evidence to the group. Please review the past newsletters on Evidence to refresh yourself on the 6 different “relative weights” of evidence.
The methods used to persuade are different. The reason that the person sees something differently than you is often because they value things differently. In many cases, you may be asking a person to examine and question some of their deeply help beliefs. This is never a manipulative or coercive effort. The task centers on maintaining safety in the discussion, with you exercising great care to create safety. I tend to think of persuasion happening one-on-one. Please review my newsletters on Relationship Management and THE SCORE.
Negotiation has a special set of techniques all its own. In this case, we are actively trading with another party in order to develop a win-win proposition from which all parties benefit. It is specifically about assessing the differences in two positions and resoving them in a mutually beneficial way. There are special preparations that each side makes (such as determining the point at which you will walk away from the negotiation and creating a strategy that includes providing value to both sides) and lots of times where you actually may NOT reveal all that you know or suspect about the situation, so in that way it is very different from either Influence or Persuasion.
Insist on great business results! Go to Pathfinder Communication
I have been doing a lot of teaching lately, in addition to speaking, and a question has been raised more than a few times so I’d like to address it in this week’s newsletter – “What is the difference between Influence, Persuasion, and Negotiation as far as the mechanics go?”
I understand where the question comes from; I mean, if you influence someone, aren’t you changing their mind? Isn’t that what you do when you persuade? Isn’t that what you do when you negotiate?
Sort of. The difference in these three concepts is the kind of problem you are trying to solve. When you influence, you are trying to cause a group to address something that isn’t currently being addressed. So you are “changing their minds” to address something that they already know about, but aren’t aware that others are seeking to address it too. When you are persuading, you are providing someone with a new perspective by either changing an old perspective or asking them to look at something they haven’t considered before. So, you are “changing their mind” by giving them reasons to adopt a new perspective. When you negotiate, you are looking at something you both have perspectives on and trying to address the differences between those perspectives to settle on a mutually beneficial way of looking at things.
There are differences in the methods used to solve these three “mind-changing” but ultimately separate discussions. The methods used to influence others are many and varied. The variety of options narrow as you begin to look at maintaining long term relationships with those you are influencing, and narrower yet if you have a reciprocal relationship. I usually try to view influence as something you exercise with a group, as in influencing your workgroup to adopt a new view. This is done by open discussion of a topic, and using our Critical Discussion skills. Review the newsletters I wrote between last September and December for details. The purpose here is to make a private discussion public, remembering that it was probably private because no one felt safe in raising it, often because they are not sure of the soundness of their perspective – are they justified?. The central issue is usually “How can we be sure things are really as they seem?” The task centers on gathering and presenting compelling evidence to the group. Please review the past newsletters on Evidence to refresh yourself on the 6 different “relative weights” of evidence.
The methods used to persuade are different. The reason that the person sees something differently than you is often because they value things differently. In many cases, you may be asking a person to examine and question some of their deeply help beliefs. This is never a manipulative or coercive effort. The task centers on maintaining safety in the discussion, with you exercising great care to create safety. I tend to think of persuasion happening one-on-one. Please review my newsletters on Relationship Management and THE SCORE.
Negotiation has a special set of techniques all its own. In this case, we are actively trading with another party in order to develop a win-win proposition from which all parties benefit. It is specifically about assessing the differences in two positions and resoving them in a mutually beneficial way. There are special preparations that each side makes (such as determining the point at which you will walk away from the negotiation and creating a strategy that includes providing value to both sides) and lots of times where you actually may NOT reveal all that you know or suspect about the situation, so in that way it is very different from either Influence or Persuasion.
Insist on great business results! Go to Pathfinder Communication
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Book Review "Blunder: Why Smart People Make Bad Decisions"
I just finished a great book called “Blunder: Why Smart People Make Bad Decisions” by Zachary Shore. The book was a terrific historical study of both bad and good decisions and the differences between them. The author has a doctorate in Modern History from Oxford and performed postdoctoral research at Harvard’s Olin Institute for Strategic Studies. He teaches at the Naval Postgraduate School.
Dr. Shore uses numerous examples from history and politics and a very engaging writing style to demonstrate that the key to good results is good decision making, and that good communication underlies those decisions.
Dr. Shore indicates that Failure to Collaborate is a recurring theme in bad decisions, and that one reason that people fail to collaborate is their fear of being perceived as weak. This is related to what I call in the Pathfinder classes “The Kindergarten Model” of communication, in which we point out that the school system in North America tends to promote individual achievement over team achievement. You may remember the “advocacy versus inquiry” models that we discuss, that detail the key characteristics of a collaborative discussion and how we describe the mechanics of critical discussions in detail.
Another reason that smart people make bad decisions, according to Dr Shore, is over-simplification of cause and under-analysis of analogies. In other words, bad decisions result when we fail to recognize all the factors that contribute to a situation and try to attribute events in a complex system to just a few factors. The act of thoroughly analyzing the causal chain of events can surface subtle differences between the way things appear and the way they actually are that drive us to new ways of looking at them. This is accomplished by the “Critical Discussion” model we use at Pathfinder.
Lastly, I’ll mention that the Dr. Shore makes a great point that curiosity and empathy (characteristically absent in he advocacy model) are key ingredients for the best decisions made throughout history. And predictably, their absence from the decision-making process nearly always contributes to regrettable conclusion.
Verdict? I would highly recommend this book to any of you that are serious in your study of decision making. AND I would recommend you sign up for the summer round of Pathfinder Communication Public Workshops that I will be announcing in Three Weeks.
Insist on great business results! Go to Pathfinder Communication
Dr. Shore uses numerous examples from history and politics and a very engaging writing style to demonstrate that the key to good results is good decision making, and that good communication underlies those decisions.
Dr. Shore indicates that Failure to Collaborate is a recurring theme in bad decisions, and that one reason that people fail to collaborate is their fear of being perceived as weak. This is related to what I call in the Pathfinder classes “The Kindergarten Model” of communication, in which we point out that the school system in North America tends to promote individual achievement over team achievement. You may remember the “advocacy versus inquiry” models that we discuss, that detail the key characteristics of a collaborative discussion and how we describe the mechanics of critical discussions in detail.
Another reason that smart people make bad decisions, according to Dr Shore, is over-simplification of cause and under-analysis of analogies. In other words, bad decisions result when we fail to recognize all the factors that contribute to a situation and try to attribute events in a complex system to just a few factors. The act of thoroughly analyzing the causal chain of events can surface subtle differences between the way things appear and the way they actually are that drive us to new ways of looking at them. This is accomplished by the “Critical Discussion” model we use at Pathfinder.
Lastly, I’ll mention that the Dr. Shore makes a great point that curiosity and empathy (characteristically absent in he advocacy model) are key ingredients for the best decisions made throughout history. And predictably, their absence from the decision-making process nearly always contributes to regrettable conclusion.
Verdict? I would highly recommend this book to any of you that are serious in your study of decision making. AND I would recommend you sign up for the summer round of Pathfinder Communication Public Workshops that I will be announcing in Three Weeks.
Insist on great business results! Go to Pathfinder Communication
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Complexification
I went to an event this weekend for Quattro University. I was thoroughly impressed by the university staff, and the speaker they had for the event was really top notch. A question came up at the very end of the presentation that really never got answered as fully as the I am sure the speaker would have liked due to time constraints. I was reminded what an important concept Complexification is, and so I thought I would discuss in this newsletter.
There are three areas in which out own judgments of ourselves can really do a lot of harm:
Competence ("Am I competent?")
Worthiness ("Am I worthy?")
Value ("Am I a Good Person?")
If you look at these and the FIRST THOUGHT that comes to mind is "Well, it depends" then good for you (although you aren't out of the woods, you DO have a head start!)
If you look at one (or more) of these as questions with 'Yes' or 'No' answers, you need to think a little more about it. You may have found a very tight spot from which you escape if you learn to Complexify.
Many of us feel, due to lessons learned from well-meaning people, that you are either competent or incompetent; either worthy (of love, for instance) or unworthy; and either good or not good. If you agree with these two options (dichotomies) on any one of the topics, we need to explore this a little more.
If you believe that these are absolute qualities, you are destined to be disappointed. Let's take for example competence. Many men feel that either people are competent or not - no middle ground - and so in order not to fall into the "incompetent" category, they behave as they believe a "competent" person would, since that is the only alternative. What does that behavior look like? Let's see:
1) When asked if they are willing to take on a special project, maybe one with an unusual importance or challenge associated with it, they say sure. Why? Because the only reason to turn something down is that you think you would fail - the very definition of incompetence.
2) When they find that the project represents an unanticipated amount of difficulty and is impacting other work they had previously committed to, they work harder - spend more time on it. They certainly don't ask for help. A competent person would NEVER ask for help - they don't need it.
3) When they find things going badly, they blame others, they claim they were tricked, they claim that the project was doomed from the start, they do many things EXCEPT ask for help or instruction. There's only one kind of person that asks for help, and they are NOT that kind of person.
4) Finally, when they are unable to complete the task, they become overwhelmed by the idea that they MUST be one of those other people - they must be incompetent. Because there are only two kinds - and they must be incompetent because they failed. Which is the signature of the incompetent.
I don't mean to pick on men, or to single out the competence dichotomy as the most severe of the three I mentioned. I am just most familiar with that one. Women certainly experience this kind of "binary" thinking too.
The destructive part is, that if you think in terms of dichotomies (only two choices that are opposites), then you almost certainly will be trapped in this kind of "mind game" that prevents you from being the thing you most want to be. People that INSIST on being competent eventually come to believe that they are incompetent just because they aren't ALWAYS competent in everything they do. Guess what happens once they believe that they are really incompetent? It limits the things they try, the things they can enjoy, and ultimately colors their world so that they feel they are "faking" it. Nobody is happy when they feel like a fake.
The same thing happens, in a slightly different way, for people that struggle with a worthiness dichotomy or a goodness dichotomy. They eventually come to believe that they are unworthy or not good, because they can't be those things in the absolute, universal, inflexible way that think they must.
Complexification is the act of replacing a dichotomy (an overly simplistic interpretation) with one that is proportionally complex.
In Complexifying, we:
1) Understand that competence is not absolute - there are degrees.
2) Understand that on some days, we will be more competent than on other days.
3) Understand that failure is not NOT incompetence; it is the first step of learning.
4) Understand that failure is not NOT incompetence; it is an essential part of building resilience.
5) Understand that it is not a good use of time to strive for extreme competence in all the things we do.
Think about these examples -
Would we call Tiger Woods incompetent if he is bad at Calculus?
Would we say Gandhi was not a good person if he only helped people in his own country?
Would we say that a stranger is unworthy of love because we don't feel love for them?
No, because these views are overly simplistic. These views could only be true if the dichotomies are true. and they aren't. Things are more complex than that, no matter what you were told.
Now is a great time to rethink them, before they cause you any more pain.
Insist on great business results! Go to Pathfinder Communication
There are three areas in which out own judgments of ourselves can really do a lot of harm:
Competence ("Am I competent?")
Worthiness ("Am I worthy?")
Value ("Am I a Good Person?")
If you look at these and the FIRST THOUGHT that comes to mind is "Well, it depends" then good for you (although you aren't out of the woods, you DO have a head start!)
If you look at one (or more) of these as questions with 'Yes' or 'No' answers, you need to think a little more about it. You may have found a very tight spot from which you escape if you learn to Complexify.
Many of us feel, due to lessons learned from well-meaning people, that you are either competent or incompetent; either worthy (of love, for instance) or unworthy; and either good or not good. If you agree with these two options (dichotomies) on any one of the topics, we need to explore this a little more.
If you believe that these are absolute qualities, you are destined to be disappointed. Let's take for example competence. Many men feel that either people are competent or not - no middle ground - and so in order not to fall into the "incompetent" category, they behave as they believe a "competent" person would, since that is the only alternative. What does that behavior look like? Let's see:
1) When asked if they are willing to take on a special project, maybe one with an unusual importance or challenge associated with it, they say sure. Why? Because the only reason to turn something down is that you think you would fail - the very definition of incompetence.
2) When they find that the project represents an unanticipated amount of difficulty and is impacting other work they had previously committed to, they work harder - spend more time on it. They certainly don't ask for help. A competent person would NEVER ask for help - they don't need it.
3) When they find things going badly, they blame others, they claim they were tricked, they claim that the project was doomed from the start, they do many things EXCEPT ask for help or instruction. There's only one kind of person that asks for help, and they are NOT that kind of person.
4) Finally, when they are unable to complete the task, they become overwhelmed by the idea that they MUST be one of those other people - they must be incompetent. Because there are only two kinds - and they must be incompetent because they failed. Which is the signature of the incompetent.
I don't mean to pick on men, or to single out the competence dichotomy as the most severe of the three I mentioned. I am just most familiar with that one. Women certainly experience this kind of "binary" thinking too.
The destructive part is, that if you think in terms of dichotomies (only two choices that are opposites), then you almost certainly will be trapped in this kind of "mind game" that prevents you from being the thing you most want to be. People that INSIST on being competent eventually come to believe that they are incompetent just because they aren't ALWAYS competent in everything they do. Guess what happens once they believe that they are really incompetent? It limits the things they try, the things they can enjoy, and ultimately colors their world so that they feel they are "faking" it. Nobody is happy when they feel like a fake.
The same thing happens, in a slightly different way, for people that struggle with a worthiness dichotomy or a goodness dichotomy. They eventually come to believe that they are unworthy or not good, because they can't be those things in the absolute, universal, inflexible way that think they must.
Complexification is the act of replacing a dichotomy (an overly simplistic interpretation) with one that is proportionally complex.
In Complexifying, we:
1) Understand that competence is not absolute - there are degrees.
2) Understand that on some days, we will be more competent than on other days.
3) Understand that failure is not NOT incompetence; it is the first step of learning.
4) Understand that failure is not NOT incompetence; it is an essential part of building resilience.
5) Understand that it is not a good use of time to strive for extreme competence in all the things we do.
Think about these examples -
Would we call Tiger Woods incompetent if he is bad at Calculus?
Would we say Gandhi was not a good person if he only helped people in his own country?
Would we say that a stranger is unworthy of love because we don't feel love for them?
No, because these views are overly simplistic. These views could only be true if the dichotomies are true. and they aren't. Things are more complex than that, no matter what you were told.
Now is a great time to rethink them, before they cause you any more pain.
Insist on great business results! Go to Pathfinder Communication
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Curiosity
Curiosity – The state in which you continue to ask questions about why your counterpart holds a given belief until you understand why as fully as you can. You need to be curious - ACTIVELY curious - because it transmits SO MUCH about your willingness to understand and your respect for your counterpart.
Whether you are engaged in a relationship conversation or a critical discussion, one of the hardest and most important things to do is to remain curious. That means DEEPLY curious about the other party's perspective. Many students write me after trying some things they've learned in class and tell me about "unexpected" things that happen. Almost always, the problem lies in their level of curiosity.
Curiosity is hard to attain because:
1 - It is common for us to hear a little bit of the other party's perspective and "fill in the blanks" for ourselves. This is gives us the impression that we heard the other side out, but clearly we didn't. We are taught early on to try to guess what the other party thinks from their actions. We have learned that we are usually wrong, and thus the need for curiosity.
2 - The "voice in our head" that helps us in our dealings with others is busy preparing what we will say when the other side is finished. Thus we aren't really listening to them.
3 - We feel that our perspective is more important, or more correct, than the other party's.
It is imperative that we hear the other side out for several reasons:
1 - If the other side feels that we aren't "getting it", they will escalate until they feel heard. This is usually the cause behind raised voices. What we commonly attribute to anger is usually due to frustration from not being heard. When you get to the point of raised voices, you will usually have to stop talking about the topic and shift gears in order to re-connect again. Sometimes, this is where we get defensive and one party withdraws or attacks.
2 - The purpose for the conversation is almost always mutual understanding. You won't achieve mutual understanding unless you ask questions about their perspective and listen to their answers
3 - The other party has information you don't have that could be critical to understanding the issue at hand. It is important to gather this data in order to develop an informed conclusion.
In order to maintain curiosity in spite of the desire to react, try the following:
1 - Instead of filling in the blanks for the other party, use active listening skills (listen, paraphrase, acknowledge). Ask questions that help you understand why they think the way they do ("what makes you say that?", "can you tell me more about that?", "help me understand why...").
2 - I frequently try to help the other party make their perspective and help them find supporting evidence for it. In doing so, I quickly come to understand it. Also, this lets the other party see you are objective. If you find something that you don't understand, they becoming willing to question it with you.
3 - Stop trying to silence the voice in your head. I have tried it endlessly, and it doesn't work. But it is EASY to train that voice to be curious, rather than distracted by preparing responses. When your inner voice is curious (asking questions like "I wonder how he/she got from point A to point B?"), then your inner voice is aligned with your mission - to understand the other party's story - and your manner is more authentic.
4 - Realize that you will NEVER understand the other party's perspective as well as you understand your own, but that should be your aim.
Simple Test - Before you begin analyzing the differences between your perspectives, ask yourself the question "Are there things that I see as differences between the two perspectives that I didn't actually hear the other party state?".
If there are, then you either filled in the blanks or have some more questions to ask.
If you are truly curious about the other party’s point of view, what exactly is it that will make you defensive? The answer is “nothing” because nothing they say is an attack – it is just their point of view, which is what you are seeking.
Let’s say I ask someone a very unsafe question like “What do you think of my performance on the Jenson project?” If I am curious, and they say “Frankly I thought you could have done better.” I would naturally ask “How?” If I am not curious, I might have a different response.
If I remain curious and ask how I might have done better, they might say “Well, at times you seemed a bit unprofessional when we were meeting with them.” Again, if I fall out of curiosity I might guess at what they mean and try to excuse myself, or I might just tell them they’re wrong, or I might attribute it to my style, or I might tell them that if they knew more about what I do they would understand, or I might tell them “that we will agree to disagree (yuck!)”.
If I stay curious, they might tell me “Well, in many meetings you showed up late and several times without a tie!” AHA! Guess what? You just learned what the other person’s definition of professionalism is and how they apply it. YOU STAYED CURIOUS AND LEARNED SOMETHING ABOUT HOW OTHER PEOPLE DEFINE PROFESSIONALISM. It of course will be up to you to determine what you do with the information, but by staying curious is the only way to earn that option.
Insist on great business results! Go to Pathfinder Communication
Whether you are engaged in a relationship conversation or a critical discussion, one of the hardest and most important things to do is to remain curious. That means DEEPLY curious about the other party's perspective. Many students write me after trying some things they've learned in class and tell me about "unexpected" things that happen. Almost always, the problem lies in their level of curiosity.
Curiosity is hard to attain because:
1 - It is common for us to hear a little bit of the other party's perspective and "fill in the blanks" for ourselves. This is gives us the impression that we heard the other side out, but clearly we didn't. We are taught early on to try to guess what the other party thinks from their actions. We have learned that we are usually wrong, and thus the need for curiosity.
2 - The "voice in our head" that helps us in our dealings with others is busy preparing what we will say when the other side is finished. Thus we aren't really listening to them.
3 - We feel that our perspective is more important, or more correct, than the other party's.
It is imperative that we hear the other side out for several reasons:
1 - If the other side feels that we aren't "getting it", they will escalate until they feel heard. This is usually the cause behind raised voices. What we commonly attribute to anger is usually due to frustration from not being heard. When you get to the point of raised voices, you will usually have to stop talking about the topic and shift gears in order to re-connect again. Sometimes, this is where we get defensive and one party withdraws or attacks.
2 - The purpose for the conversation is almost always mutual understanding. You won't achieve mutual understanding unless you ask questions about their perspective and listen to their answers
3 - The other party has information you don't have that could be critical to understanding the issue at hand. It is important to gather this data in order to develop an informed conclusion.
In order to maintain curiosity in spite of the desire to react, try the following:
1 - Instead of filling in the blanks for the other party, use active listening skills (listen, paraphrase, acknowledge). Ask questions that help you understand why they think the way they do ("what makes you say that?", "can you tell me more about that?", "help me understand why...").
2 - I frequently try to help the other party make their perspective and help them find supporting evidence for it. In doing so, I quickly come to understand it. Also, this lets the other party see you are objective. If you find something that you don't understand, they becoming willing to question it with you.
3 - Stop trying to silence the voice in your head. I have tried it endlessly, and it doesn't work. But it is EASY to train that voice to be curious, rather than distracted by preparing responses. When your inner voice is curious (asking questions like "I wonder how he/she got from point A to point B?"), then your inner voice is aligned with your mission - to understand the other party's story - and your manner is more authentic.
4 - Realize that you will NEVER understand the other party's perspective as well as you understand your own, but that should be your aim.
Simple Test - Before you begin analyzing the differences between your perspectives, ask yourself the question "Are there things that I see as differences between the two perspectives that I didn't actually hear the other party state?".
If there are, then you either filled in the blanks or have some more questions to ask.
If you are truly curious about the other party’s point of view, what exactly is it that will make you defensive? The answer is “nothing” because nothing they say is an attack – it is just their point of view, which is what you are seeking.
Let’s say I ask someone a very unsafe question like “What do you think of my performance on the Jenson project?” If I am curious, and they say “Frankly I thought you could have done better.” I would naturally ask “How?” If I am not curious, I might have a different response.
If I remain curious and ask how I might have done better, they might say “Well, at times you seemed a bit unprofessional when we were meeting with them.” Again, if I fall out of curiosity I might guess at what they mean and try to excuse myself, or I might just tell them they’re wrong, or I might attribute it to my style, or I might tell them that if they knew more about what I do they would understand, or I might tell them “that we will agree to disagree (yuck!)”.
If I stay curious, they might tell me “Well, in many meetings you showed up late and several times without a tie!” AHA! Guess what? You just learned what the other person’s definition of professionalism is and how they apply it. YOU STAYED CURIOUS AND LEARNED SOMETHING ABOUT HOW OTHER PEOPLE DEFINE PROFESSIONALISM. It of course will be up to you to determine what you do with the information, but by staying curious is the only way to earn that option.
Insist on great business results! Go to Pathfinder Communication
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Simplicity and Sincerity
We like to be thought of as smart. It is so much nicer than the alternative. Sometimes we want to SHOW that we’re smart, and that is not an altogether bad idea either, IF it is done in a way that doesn’t make other people feel…well, NOT smart.
Since our objective is to make others feel safe in talking with us it is important to express ourselves clearly and to actively try to be easy to understand. My friend Dr Jon Wesick is one of the smartest people I know and he has a real knack for describing complex concepts using language that is easy for me to follow. I see it as a real gift, and always enjoy talking to him. It is never intimidating or difficult. Now I am sure it COULD be intimidating (Jon’s PhD is in physics and he is a poet and science fiction writer), but he works hard to keep things simple. In doing so, he keeps me engaged and open. I am reminded of a quote attributed to Mark Twain: “I didn’t have time to write a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead”. It takes considerable effort to “right size” the level of language for your audience. Not doing so (using jargon , acronyms, or inside jokes) will often lead to them feeling excluded and no longer willing or able to help you in achieving your objective.
Sincerity (authenticity) in your conversations is critical. Most people have well-developed radar for distinguishing authentic conversation from that which is not (sometimes called “phony”, “manipulative”, “fake” or worse). I discourage people from using wording or approaches offered by others (including those offered by me) UNLESS they understand the PURPOSE of the approach and can construct an equivalent approach that fits THEM. I spend a considerable amount of time teaching the purposes BEHIND the words so people can accomplish this critical process.
I have spoken about sincerity and authenticity before, and at the risk of sounding like a broken record, let me repeat myself to help reinforce this critical aspect of communication.
Authenticity is behaving in a manner consistent with your feelings. This needs to be done with respect and high purpose. For instance, without hurting another person’s feelings and for the good of your organization, you will need to tell just how you feel. Try this: Picture the person you love most in the world (your child, or spouse, or parent, or a dear friend). Picture the way you might behave in breaking some devastatingly bad news to them. It is hard, because you know how the news will hurt them. It affects you badly to have to tell them this, but you have to. You plan something to say and start to break the news, and when you see their reaction, you can’t help but feel genuine empathy for them. That feeling is an authentic feeling. There is nothing manufactured or calculated about it, and your behavior is completely consistent with that feeling. Now imagine you are delivering GREAT news to that same person. As you do, you feel amazing joy for them. You may laugh or cry, but whatever you do will be an authentic extension of your feelings. It is THAT unabridged connection between your feeling and your actions that portray authenticity.
Insist on great business results! Go to Pathfinder Communication
Since our objective is to make others feel safe in talking with us it is important to express ourselves clearly and to actively try to be easy to understand. My friend Dr Jon Wesick is one of the smartest people I know and he has a real knack for describing complex concepts using language that is easy for me to follow. I see it as a real gift, and always enjoy talking to him. It is never intimidating or difficult. Now I am sure it COULD be intimidating (Jon’s PhD is in physics and he is a poet and science fiction writer), but he works hard to keep things simple. In doing so, he keeps me engaged and open. I am reminded of a quote attributed to Mark Twain: “I didn’t have time to write a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead”. It takes considerable effort to “right size” the level of language for your audience. Not doing so (using jargon , acronyms, or inside jokes) will often lead to them feeling excluded and no longer willing or able to help you in achieving your objective.
Sincerity (authenticity) in your conversations is critical. Most people have well-developed radar for distinguishing authentic conversation from that which is not (sometimes called “phony”, “manipulative”, “fake” or worse). I discourage people from using wording or approaches offered by others (including those offered by me) UNLESS they understand the PURPOSE of the approach and can construct an equivalent approach that fits THEM. I spend a considerable amount of time teaching the purposes BEHIND the words so people can accomplish this critical process.
I have spoken about sincerity and authenticity before, and at the risk of sounding like a broken record, let me repeat myself to help reinforce this critical aspect of communication.
Authenticity is behaving in a manner consistent with your feelings. This needs to be done with respect and high purpose. For instance, without hurting another person’s feelings and for the good of your organization, you will need to tell just how you feel. Try this: Picture the person you love most in the world (your child, or spouse, or parent, or a dear friend). Picture the way you might behave in breaking some devastatingly bad news to them. It is hard, because you know how the news will hurt them. It affects you badly to have to tell them this, but you have to. You plan something to say and start to break the news, and when you see their reaction, you can’t help but feel genuine empathy for them. That feeling is an authentic feeling. There is nothing manufactured or calculated about it, and your behavior is completely consistent with that feeling. Now imagine you are delivering GREAT news to that same person. As you do, you feel amazing joy for them. You may laugh or cry, but whatever you do will be an authentic extension of your feelings. It is THAT unabridged connection between your feeling and your actions that portray authenticity.
Insist on great business results! Go to Pathfinder Communication
Monday, March 16, 2009
Message Board
I am EXCITED to let you all know that you can start using the Pathfinder Message Board to publicly and anonymously (or not) post the communication problems that you experience and receive a collaborative response. I will answer them daily (my responses will be in my own name, of course). I expect others will contribute as well in that this is a Pathfinder community project.
There of course is no charge for this service. The purpose is to offer coaching beyond what you've learned in the Pathfinder classes and lectures and to offer guidance in the practical application of the High-Performance Communication principles to everyday business situations.
You can find the message board by clicking the title of this message OR by going to www.PathfinderCommunication.com and choosing the 'Message Board' link from the menu.
You are invited to offer your thoughts to anyone's post and start a thread on any communication-oriented issue.
Insist on great business results! Go to Pathfinder Communication
There of course is no charge for this service. The purpose is to offer coaching beyond what you've learned in the Pathfinder classes and lectures and to offer guidance in the practical application of the High-Performance Communication principles to everyday business situations.
You can find the message board by clicking the title of this message OR by going to www.PathfinderCommunication.com and choosing the 'Message Board' link from the menu.
You are invited to offer your thoughts to anyone's post and start a thread on any communication-oriented issue.
Insist on great business results! Go to Pathfinder Communication
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)