More on this book
Community
Kindle Notes & Highlights
First, opinions vary.
Second, stakes are high.
Third, emotions run strong.
If you fail to discuss issues you have with your boss, your life partner, your neighbor, or your peer, will those issues magically disappear?
No. Instead, they will become the lens you see the other person through. And how you see always shows up in how you act. Your resentment will show up in how you treat the other person.
Interesting. This is an insight as many of us are taught to just let go instead of discussing the issues
“How can I be 100 percent honest with Chris and at the same time be 100 percent respectful?”
we don’t share the same pool. Our opinions differ. I believe one thing; you another. I have one history; you another.
When people purposely withhold meaning from one another, individually smart people can do collectively stupid things.
“He that complies against his will is of his own opinion still.”
Content. The first time a problem comes up, talk about the content—the immediate pain.
happens, it’s an incident. The second time it might be coincidence. The third time, it’s a pattern.
With these doubts and questions at the forefront of our thinking, we begin to (subtly or overtly) relate to them differently. Sometimes a relationship issue can emerge fully formed in the first instance. For example, if you see a colleague put sensitive files onto a thumb drive and take the drive home, you may have an immediate trust issue.
Never allow the conversation to shift or the topic to change without acknowledging you’ve done it.
And maybe even more important, I want us to work together in a way where we’re up front with each other about our needs and concerns.”
“When I feel threatened, I pause, take a breath, and ask, ‘What do I really want?’”
Second, clarify what you really don’t want.
Third, present your brain with a more complex problem.
“How can we have a candid conversation and strengthen our relationships?”
Their faces become reflective, their eyes open wider, and they begin to think. With surprising regularity, when people are asked, “Is it possible that there’s a way to accomplish both?” they acknowledge that there very well may be:
“Is there a way to tell your peer your real concerns and not insult or offend him?”
The good news is we can tell different stories and break the loop. In fact, until we tell different stories, we cannot break the loop.
you want improved results from your Crucial Conversations, change the stories you tell yourself—even while you’re in the middle of the fray.
In order to act differently, she’ll need to feel differently.
(Act) Notice your behavior. Ask: “Am I acting out my concerns rather than talking them out?”
(Feel) Put your feelings into words. Ask: “What emotions are encouraging me to act this way?” • (Tell story) Analyze your stories. Ask: “What story is creating these emotions?” • (See/hear) Get back to the facts. Ask: “What have I seen or heard that supports this story? What have I seen or heard that conflicts with this story?”
more we accept responsibility for the stories we tell, the more nuanced and effective our emotional responses become.
However, the statement “He doesn’t trust me” is a conclusion. It explains what you think, not what the other person did. Conclusions are subjective.
Turn villains into humans. When you find yourself labeling or otherwise vilifying others, stop and ask: “Why would a reasonable, rational, and decent person do what this person is doing?” This particular question humanizes others. As we search for plausible answers to it, our emotions soften. Empathy often replaces judgment, and depending upon how we’ve treated others, personal accountability replaces self-justification.
This is a powerful insight. We are all heroes of our stories and it is easy to misunderstand the other person. So let’s remind ourselves to always ask why will a reasonable, rational and decent person do what this person is doing.
In fact, with experience and maturity, we learn to worry less about others’ intent and more about the effect others’ actions are having on us.
In a similar vein, as you anticipate entering a tough conversation, be aware of the fact that you’re about to enter the danger zone.
People who are gifted at dialogue keep a constant vigil on safety. They pay attention to the content, and they watch for signs that people are becoming fearful.
We’re suggesting that people rarely become defensive simply because of what you’re saying. They only become defensive when they no longer feel safe, or when they question why you’re saying the things you are. Specifically, they begin to speculate about either your respect (“Is this message a sign of disrespect?”), your intent (“Does this message tell me you have malicious motives toward me?”), or both.
Don’t let safety problems lead you astray. When others begin to feel unsafe, they start acting in annoying ways. They may make fun of you, insult you, or steamroll you with their arguments.
“Hey, they’re feeling unsafe. I need to do something—maybe make it safer.” Unfortunately, more often than not, instead of taking their attack as a sign that safety is at risk, you take it at its face—as an attack. “I’m under attack!” you think. Then the dumb part of your brain kicks in and you respond in kind. Or maybe you try to escape. Either way, you’re not dual-processing and trying to restore safety. Instead, you’re becoming part of the problem as you get pulled into the fight.
asking for more data. For example: • Email. “I haven’t heard back from you in a couple of days in response to the email I sent you. I am not sure how to interpret your silence. How are you feeling about the proposal?” • Telephone. “I wish I could see your face right now. I don’t know how you’re hearing my message, and I would hate for you to misinterpret it. Can you help me understand what you’re thinking right now?”
• Direct messaging. “When I read the comment that you posted on my social media account, I wasn’t sure how to take it. It seemed like you might be upset. Are you?”
While it’s true that there’s no reason to enter a Crucial Conversation if you don’t have Mutual Purpose, it’s equally true that you can’t stay in the conversation if you don’t maintain Mutual Respect. Mutual Respect is the continuance condition of dialogue.
However, we can stay in dialogue by finding a way to honor and regard another person’s basic humanity.
Oba: Mari, I was wondering if we could talk about what happened on Friday night. I love you, and I want to make sure we’re talking about things that impact our relationship, because our relationship is the most important thing in the world to me. I’m sure there are things you’d like me to change, and I want to understand those as well as share concerns I have. Could we talk?
When you’ve made a mistake that has hurt others, start with an apology. An apology is a statement that sincerely expresses your sorrow for your role in causing—or at least not preventing—pain or difficulty to others.
Now an apology isn’t really an apology unless you experience a change in heart. To offer a sincere apology, your motives have to change. You have to give up saving face, being right, or winning in order to focus on what you really want. You have to sacrifice a bit of your ego by admitting your error. But like many sacrifices, when you give up something you value, you’re rewarded with something even more valuable—healthy dialogue and better results.
In the “don’t” part of the statement, you explain what you don’t intend for the conversation. This addresses others’ concerns that you don’t respect them or that you have a malicious purpose. • In the “do” part of the statement, you clarify what your intention for the conversation really is. This confirms your respect or clarifies your real purpose.
Oba (using Contrasting to restore purpose): I don’t want to criticize you or get on your case. That wasn’t my intent, and I know you’re carrying a huge load. I do want us to be able to talk about our concerns with
each other so we can address them and build our relationship.
You (using Contrasting to restore respect): The last thing I wanted to do was communicate that I don’t value the work you put in or that I don’t want to share it with the VP. I think your work has been nothing short of amazing, and I am committed to making sure the VP knows that.
What you don’t believe: “Let me put this in perspective. I don’t want you to think I’m not satisfied with the quality of your work. I want us to continue working together. I really do think you’re doing a good job.” What you do believe: “This punctuality issue is important to me, and I’d just like you to work on that. If you will be more attentive to that, there are no other issues.”
“I’d like to talk to you about something that’s worrying me, and I’m honestly not sure how to handle this conversation. My fear is that I’ll draw down on our relationship, and that’s not my intent at all. It’s the opposite. My goal in bringing this up is to strengthen our relationship.”
“It seems like we’re both trying to force our view on each other. I commit to stay in this discussion until we have a solution that satisfies both of us.” Then
watch whether safety takes a turn for the better.
So here’s a tip for making sure you communicate intent when typing a crucial message to someone: Write it twice. First, write the message to get your content across. Once you have your content down, consider how your intent is coming across. Read the message slowly, imagining the other person’s face. How might the person feel at each point in your message? Then rewrite it with safety in mind. Notice places someone may misunderstand your
