Overseeing Observations
Crucial conversation occurs when three circumstances collide: high stakes, differing opinions and high emotions. All of this can often lead to stonewalling, silence, eruptions or verbal violence…but can it also lead to positive results? People getting what they want? Absolutely.
Two books offer advice for navigating emotional waters. Edwin Friedman’s A failure of nerve and Kenny Patterson’s Crucial conversations offer different yet complimentary viewpoints of what a leader can do in these situations.
The video on self-differentiated leaders (click here) states that the most important thing in leadership is the emotional process of regulating one’s own anxiety.
Knowing where one ends, and another begins. Refusing to let others put their anxiety on you or infect you with their fear or negativity. If the leader is healthy, he or she can form healthy relationships with others, recognizing that they themselves are separate and different from others… like healthy cells in the body.
Friedman’s theory of differentiated leadership is that we function like cells – we can connect with others without taking on their emotional baggage or their anxiety. They stay separate, yet connected, even when things go wrong or there is push-back. Another way to look at this is to view a person as having healthy personal boundaries.
To make it perfectly clear, Sabotage is a sign that the leader is doing the right thing. Also, by ignoring complaints of others and preventing oneself falling into a whirlwind of negative energy of others, taking the positive route is a common choice to deflect sabotage. Leaders do not give in, they stand alone against being stuck in other grassroots burdens. Think about it, they have a lot of people who are poorly differentiated. Such organizations find it threatening of a differentiated leader because some people within the organizations are chronically anxious.
Instead of standing on their own, not being afraid, and embrace being different, poorly differentiated individuals do the complete opposite. They rather pull you into a triangle in order to not feel alone. It can be viewed as misery loving company. As for self, I rather stay away from the triangles. Speaking from experience, it’s not worth going down that route. I’m very receptive of people’s energy rather I want to feel it or not. It can be quite annoying at times, but day by day, I’m learning to master this trait. Not coming off rude, but voicing my concerns in an appropriate manner is the way to go. If the common triangle arises, simply redirect the experience or simply remove oneself from the situation. More than likely, it will be felt by others.
When it’s time to put forth a path to action in a conversation we must remember the four parts. The four parts of a conversation are see/hear, tell story, feel, and act. It’s important for someone to take control of the story as well. When starting a conversation, we must see/hear (facts) what specific evidence do I have to support this story followed by telling the story- (analyze) what story is creating this emotion. As this occurs, noticing and feeling what emotions are encouraging this action ties in with the act. When we act, we must notice and pay attention to the behavior. I must be able to recognize if someone is angry, frustrated, sad, happy or enthusiastic. I will apply this concept towards my plan and conduct social experiments on everyone to test it out. Adjusting until it becomes natural is something we should do. Basically, practice, practice, and practice. If one would like to persuade others, don’t start with a story, start with the facts. Add the story at the end. Encourage others to tell their facts, then tell the story. Listen to what they have to say. Tell your story as a story rather than a fact.
For my change strategy, both differentiated leadership and crucial conversations are deemed necessary. I would ask, what do I really want for myself, what do I really want from others, what do I really want from the relationship? Then, how would I behave if I really wanted these results. Starting with crucial conversations that focus on high stakes, strong emotions, and opposing opinions are important. This would consist of performance appraisals, decision making, strategy or any key information that should be discussed up front. When I’m the facilitator in this approach, differentiated leadership shall arise. To me, both strategies complement one another if it’s done right by following the steps listed above.
References
Friedman, E. H., Treadwell, M. M., & Beal, E. W. (2017). A failure of nerve: leadership in the age of the quick fix. New York: Church Publishing.
Patterson, K., Grenny, J., McMillan, R., & Switzler, A. (2012). Crucial conversations: tools for talking when stakes are high. New York: McGraw-Hill.