READER EXTRAS
Engaging in Difficult Conversations
STEPS FOR MANAGING A DIFFICULT CONVERSATION
This process works because it never lays blame, or challenges the person for their behavior. Instead, it looks for acknowledgment of the problem and presents the rationale for why change is needed.
This process empowers the “difficult” person to create their own solutions for change. And, it holds them accountable.
Before engaging in any discussion – set the stage:
Conversation must be private and professional throughout the process.
- Ask to meet. Inform that the meeting will be (at least) 30 minutes
- Share general information that describes the purpose of the meeting (ie – to discuss responsibility for projects)
At the Meeting:
- Explain the problem (facts)
- *Pause* and Check in (give them time to defend themselves or explain)
- *Transition back to focus of discussion* Thank them for sharing or say “Nevertheless….”
- Provide reasons + opinions (Describe why this issue is important to address)
- For the business
- For them
- Empower them to think of solutions
- Make suggestions (if needed)
- Solidify plans/next steps.(Where appropriate, create a formal agreement for change)
- Thank them (for taking time/coming up with workable ideas)
After
Follow-up – This solidifies the importance of the change.
Check in:
- When change is happening to confirm to them that it’s been noticed and successful. OR
- Focus on the lack of change and therefore the need to readdress it, perhaps creating new solutions.
ENGAGING IN A DIFFICULT CONVERSATION
CASE STUDY FOR STUART
Quick Overview:
Stuart is the executive director over a newly formed group of directors whom he selected and hired. He established rapport with his team by fostering a personal connection with each member. Stuart, a firm believer in autonomy, gave his team full authority for fulfilling their obligations to the organization and the rest of the team. The problem, however, was that Stuart did not ensure that the team worked well with each other. When one particular team member, Oliver, was interfering with the work of others, and team members complained, Stuart spoke to Oliver privately. Oliver, however, did not bring about any noticeable change. This went on, and eventually, the team lost faith in Stuart’s ability to manage the situation, so they took matters into their own hands.
In the example that follows, I’ll show you how Stuart could have had a more appropriate and fruitful conversation with Oliver using the process for having a difficult conversation that is outlined in Chapter 13 of Find Fix Fill your Leadership Gap.
Stuart will prepare by noting what is wrong (the facts), why it is a problem (for both Oliver and the organization as a whole), and any ideas he has for a solution. Then, Stuart will schedule a face-to-face conversation with Oliver. He will schedule it for at least thirty minutes (I would recommend he set aside forty-five minutes for this conversation).
Here’s how the meeting might go:
Stuart: Thank you for coming in to meet with me today. I know how busy things are right now.
Oliver: Yes, I have a lot on my plate.
(Let’s assume Oliver goes on to discuss critical issues that need further discussion).
Stuart: We’ll definitely need to make time to talk about that (the critical issues just shared), but first, let me tell you why I called this meeting.
I want to discuss some issues happening between you and those on the team. There have been several complaints by members of the team that you are overstepping your role and interfering with their job. There have also been complaints that you do not pitch in and help the others, even after you bring about the added work. I’d like to hear your version of things. (Notice Stuart is not going into any specifics or long-winded description)
Oliver: (Let’s assume he defends his actions, explaining the circumstances of the situations he imagines we’re discussing). He might say he was only trying to help; he was asked for his opinion and gave it, or it was a spontaneous opportunity to get feedback.
Stuart: I understand you were taking advantage of an opportunity that presented itself for the good of the team. But here’s what happened, your actions put the team on a course of action that was not well thought out. It cost us in time and money and created tension on the team. It has also damaged your reputation among the team, which reflects on your performance and my ability to see you as the right person for this role.
(You might feel this is a bit heavy-handed, but the point is Stuart needs to ensure Oliver sees the impact and cost to both the organization and himself).
Stuart continues: What ideas do you have that will remedy this situation?
Oliver: Well, I could meet with the team and explain the situation to them.
Stuart: That might help. But what will you do differently in the future?
Oliver: I could run my ideas by the team? But sometimes, it just comes to me spur of the moment.
Stuart: I think that’s part of the issue. Your spur-of-the-moment ideas are not well thought out. Would you like to hear my thoughts on this?
Oliver: Yes, sure.
Stuart: I think that you need to come to the team meetings and listen to what each of them is working on. You’ll get a different appreciation for where things are heading, and you’ll be able to share your ideas with the team—not our stakeholders. That will help you rebuild the relationship that has become fractured.
Oliver: Sure, I can attend more meetings.
Stuart: I would like you to attend all meetings. Which ones do you expect will be a challenge?
Oliver and Stuart may go on to negotiate and fine-tune the plan. After they reach an agreement . . .
Stuart: I think this is a good plan, Oliver. I’m going to jot down our agreement and email it to you as confirmation of your commitment to attend the meetings and my commitment to check in more regularly to be sure things stay on track. This is important—to you, to me, to the team, and the organization.
Thank you for taking the time to come meet with me. I knew we could work out a great plan together.
Now, I know you had another issue you wanted to discuss. Shall we schedule a time for that? (This assumes the end of the difficult conversation and a shift to the needs Oliver addressed as the meeting began). The meeting might also end with a simple, “I look forward to seeing you at the next team meeting.”
ENGAGING IN A DIFFICULT CONVERSATION
CASE STUDY FOR GARY
Quick Overview:
As the newly hired Dean of a university department, Gary brought about necessary and substantive changes to the department. His changes impacted the faculty in different ways – and as such, were not well-received by those who were negatively affected. Gary invited those who were interested to speak with him in confidence. These private conversations gave way to further changes, which Gary made in a vacuum. He did not engage his direct reports, Berniece or Andrew, who should have held authority over these added changes. Without understanding the consequences of these ad hoc changes, Gary’s actions caused gossip to escalate and rumors to spread. Eventually, the faculty fractured into untrusting siloes.
In the example that follows, I’ll show you how Gary’s department heads could have engaged with him about his behavior using the process for having a difficult conversation that is outlined in Chapter 13 of Find Fix Fill your Leadership Gap. This example is unique in that it shows how direct reports can address an issue with their supervisor. It allows you to see how the conversation can be effective regardless of the power dynamic.
While either Berniece or Andrew might request this meeting, and while it would often be ideal for the three to meet at one time, this is not always possible or practical. For this reason, I choose Berniece to be the one who initiates this discussion because she and Gary did not have as friendly a relationship.
Berniece would prepare by knowing what she wanted to discuss, why it was important, and the changes she would like to see. She would then request a meeting with Gary. Since she reports to him, she might express her request like this:
Berniece: Gary, I feel the issues creating conflict among the team could be quickly addressed if the two of us could become better aligned. Can we set up a time to speak this week? I can set aside an hour anytime on Tuesday or Thursday or Friday.
Gary: That’s a great idea. I’ve been wanting to address this. Should we invite Andrew?
Berniece: He is welcome to join us. But I think we can figure this out and then fill him in too. It’s more important to me that we get on top of this quickly. It’s become quite a distraction.
Gary: Agrees, meeting is set. (With or without Andrew)
At the meeting . . .
Berniece: Hi Gary. How’s your day going?
Gary: Great. Yours?
Berniece: Also, pretty good. I’m glad we’re setting down to discuss what’s happening in the department. I’m concerned about all the complaints.
Gary: Me too. I think that . . . (Gary goes on to identify all the people who are gossiping, his concerns about confidentiality, etc.)
Berniece: (Not distracted or baited by this conversational shift). I think the key to our getting things back on track is to create better alignment between you, Andrew, and myself. There are changes being made without our input or awareness. The faculty are getting frustrated, and we can’t intervene because the decisions have already been made.
Gary: (A bit defensive). Some faculty have been very glad for these changes. They bring balance and fairness. That’s why I’m making those judgment calls. You and Andrew have relationships with these people. The faculty don’t feel safe coming to either of you. And you wouldn’t be able to make an objective decision. There’s too much history there.
Note: This moment might tempt you to see Berniece share her solution, spelling out to Gary that he needs to first run things by her and Andrew. However, this is not the time. You will not get buy-in by giving the answer. It will more likely build resistance and add to the friction. It is far better to follow the scripted plan and build Gary’s awareness of the problem, and then allow him to determine the right solutions.
Berniece: I understand your reasons for getting involved. But I am also aware that this is wreaking havoc. The gossip and rumors that you mentioned are coming from these changes. People are wanting to know why these things are happening and who is behind them. The impact is distracting the team from their faculty responsibilities and their work toward accreditation. And I can tell that it is taking a toll on you as well.
Gary: To tell you the truth, Berniece, I’m sick of it. The faculty are acting like a bunch of children. This is all for the greater good. If they can just let it go and move on, we’ll be just fine.
Berniece: That doesn’t look likely. Do you have any thoughts on how we can create a different dynamic?
Gary: Well, you mentioned running things by you. I can give you the heads up when I make a change.
Berniece: That would help. But I have another idea that might work better.
Gary: I’m listening.
Berniece: While your meeting with the staff may provide them with a safe place to bring their issues, if you could hold off making any decisions until you discuss the ideas with Andrew and me, it would ensure the changes don’t have repercussions.
Gary: I would want to keep the identity of those coming to me confidential.
Berniece: Of course, I would expect that.
Gary: So, we can have a pow-wow after my meetings and discuss the situations as a group?
Berniece: Yes, that’s the gist of what I’m suggesting.
Gary: I can make that work. Yes, that would be a great idea. You and Andrew might be in a position to help alleviate some of this drama too.
Berniece: I’m sure we can. Shall we set up a regular day and time to meet? That might be easier than scrambling to get things on a calendar.
Gary: Sure, how about every Friday afternoon at three?
Berniece: That’s good for me. I’ll let Andrew know. I’m sure he’ll be glad to be involved. Thanks for meeting with me today, Gary. I feel like we’ve got a good plan ahead of us.
Since this meeting was led by a subordinate member of the staff, follow-up is not as straightforward. But the two have set up a routine and a schedule that would take the place of a follow-up plan.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Candice Gottlieb-Clark
Candice Gottlieb-Clark is a renowned business advisor, leadership coach, conflict management specialist, and the founder of Dynamic Team Solutions. Her passion and expertise for helping businesses raise the level of their functionality, teamwork, productivity, and performance are boundless.
As a sought-after speaker and thought-leader, Candice has delivered programs and keynotes to both local and national audiences, and she has been published in numerous business and professional journals, including Business Insider and Forbes.
A native of Los Angeles, California, Candice and her family now enjoy the wider expanses and outdoor activities of living in Broomfield, Colorado. In her free time, Candice enjoys cooking, hiking, snowshoeing, and taking long walks with her husband.
Interested in up to date tips for creating healthy teams & leaders?