Crucial Conversations Tools for Talking When Stakes Are High

by Kerry Patterson

What should you be doing instead? Openly, honestly, and effectively discussing the problem—not taking potshots and then justifying yourself.

However, when stakes rise and our emotions kick in, well, that’s when we open our mouths and don’t do so well. In fact, as we suggested earlier, the more important the discussion, the less likely we are to be on our best behavior. More specifically, we advocate or express our views quite poorly.

The best at dialogue speak their minds completely and do it in a way that makes it safe for others to hear what they have to say and respond to it as well. They are both totally frank and completely respectful.

How can we speak the unspeakable and still maintain respect? Actually, it can be done if you know how to carefully blend three ingredients—confidence, humility, and skill.

People who are skilled at dialogue have the confidence to say what needs to be said to the person who needs to hear it.

Humility. Confidence does not equate to arrogance or pigheadedness. Skilled people are confident that they have something to say, but also realize that others have valuable input. They are humble enough to realize that they don’t have a monopoly on the truth nor do they always have to win their way.

Skill. Finally, people who willingly share delicate information are good at doing it.

So what should you do? Start with Heart. Think about what you really want and how dialogue can help you get it. And master your story—realize that you may be jumping to a hasty Victim, Villain, or Helpless Story. The best way to find out the true story is not to act out the worst story you can generate. That will lead to self-destructive silence and violence games. Think about other possible explanations long enough to temper your emotions so you can get to dialogue.

Share your facts • Tell your story • Ask for others’ paths • Talk tentatively • Encourage testing The first three skills describe what to do. The last two tell how to do it.

Facts are the least controversial. Facts provide a safe beginning. By their very nature, facts aren’t controversial. That’s why we call them facts.

Facts form the foundation of belief. So if you want to persuade others, don’t start with your stories. Start with your observations.

When we start with shocking or offensive conclusions (“Quit groping me with your eyes!” or “I think we should declare bankruptcy”), we actually encourage others to tell Villain Stories about us. Since we’ve given them no facts to support our conclusion, they make up reasons we’re saying these things. They’re likely to believe we’re either stupid or evil.

Because the facts alone are rarely worth mentioning. It’s the facts plus the conclusion that call for a face-to-face discussion.

Be careful not to apologize for your views. Remember, the goal of Contrasting is not to water down your message, but to be sure that people don’t hear more than you intend. Be confident enough to share what you really want to express.

To find out others’ views on the matter, encourage them to express their facts, stories, and feelings. Then carefully listen to what they have to say. Equally important, be willing to abandon or reshape your story as more information pours into the Pool of Shared Meaning.

Talking tentatively simply means that we tell our story as a story rather than disguising it as a hard fact.

When sharing a story, strike a blend between confidence and humility. Share in a way that expresses appropriate confidence in your conclusions while demonstrating that, if called for, you want your conclusions challenged.

One of the ironies of dialogue is that, when talking with those holding opposing opinions, the more convinced and forceful you act, the more resistant others become.

Speaking in absolute

and overstated terms does not increase your influence, it decreases it. The converse is also true—the more tentatively you speak, the more open people become to your opinions.

Woe that is a significant observation. To be more persuasive and gain a hearing talk more tentatively.

“It’s starting to look like you’re taking this home for your own use. Is that right?”

They understand that the only limit to how strongly you can express your opinion is your willingness to be equally vigorous in encouraging others to challenge it.

So if you think others may be hesitant, make it clear that you want to hear their views—no matter how different.

Watch for the moment when people start to resist you—perhaps they begin to raise their volume and/or overstate the facts behind their views in reaction to your tactics—or perhaps they retreat into silence. Turn your attention away from the topic (no matter how important) and onto yourself. Are you leaning forward? Are you speaking more loudly? Are you starting to try to win? Are you speaking in lengthy monologues and using dirty tricks? Remember: The more you care about an issue, the less likely you are to be on your best behavior.

Of course, this isn’t easy. Backing off when we care the most is so counterintuitive that most of us have trouble doing so.

Tell me about it

When it comes to our strongest views, passion can be our enemy.

Back off your harsh and conclusive language. But don’t back off your belief. Hold to your belief; merely soften your approach.

The main nugget of this chapter

Should you do something given that you’re not the one going to silence or violence? When others do damage to the pool of meaning by clamming

up (refusing to speak their minds) or blowing up (communicating in a way that is abusive and insulting), is there something you can do to get them back to dialogue?

The answer is a resounding “I...

Somehow they believe that if they engage in real conversation with you, bad things will happen to them.

People who routinely seek to find out why others are feeling unsafe do so because they have learned that getting at the source of fear and discomfort is the best way to return to dialogue.

This calls for genuine curiosity—at a time when you’re likely to be feeling frustrated or angry.

When others are in either silence or violence, we’re actually joining their Path to Action already in progress. Consequently, we’ve already missed the foundation of the story and we’re confused. If we’re not careful, we can become defensive. After all, not only are we joining late, but we’re also joining at a time when the other person is starting to act offensively.

At their encouragement, the other person moves from his or her emotions, to what he or she concluded, to what he or she observed.

The easiest and most straightforward way to encourage others to share their Path to Action is simply to invite them to express themselves.

If you’re willing to stop filling the pool with your meaning and step back and invite the other person to talk about his or her view, it can go a long way toward breaking the downward spiral and getting to the source of the problem.

We create safety when our tone of voice says we’re okay with them feeling the way they’re feeling. If we do this well, they may conclude that rather than acting out their emotions, they can confidently talk them out with us instead.

So as we describe what we see, we have to do so calmly. If we act upset or as if we’re not going to like what others say, we don’t build safety. We confirm their suspicions that they need to remain silent.

The key to paraphrasing, as with mirroring, is to remain calm and collected. Our goal is to make it safe, not to act horrified and suggest that the conversation is about to turn ugly.

Simply rephrase what the person has said, and do it in a way that suggests that it’s okay, you’re trying to understand, and

it’s safe for him or her to talk candidly.

We’ve asked, mirrored, and paraphrased. The person is still upset, but isn’t explaining his or her stories or facts.

Now what? At this point, we may want to back off. After a while, our attempts to make it safe for others can start feeling as if we’re pestering or prying. If we push too hard, we violate both purpose and respect.

Asking people what they want helps them engage their brains in a way that moves to problem solving and away from either attacking or avoiding. It also helps reveal what they think the cause of the problem is.

If people don't respond to ask mirror and paraphrase you can simply ask them what they want.

Now, this is not the kind of thing you would do unless nothing else has worked. You really want to hear from others, and you have a very strong idea of what they’re probably thinking. Priming is an act of good faith, taking risks, becoming vulnerable, and building safety in hopes that others will share their meaning.

Understanding doesn’t equate with agreement. Sensitivity does equate to acquiescence.

I think the second sentence is supposed to say does not.

So here’s the take-away. If you completely agree with the other person’s path, say so and move on. Agree when you agree. Don’t turn an agreement into an argument.

Actually, some of us learn to look for minor errors from an early age. For instance, you might conclude in kindergarten that while having the right answer is good, having it first is even better. And of course, having it first after others are wrong endows you with an even greater glory! Over time you find that finding even the tiniest of errors in others’ facts,

thinking, or logic reinforces your supreme place in the spotlight of teacher and peer admiration. So you point out their errors. Being right at the expense of others becomes skillful sport.