Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
If you've ever had a difficult conversation you'll know that a natural reaction is to
want to find fault in what the other person did or said. You'll also know what it feels
like when someone else apportions blame onto you for what you did or said. Finding someone
to blame is a dangerous game, in this video I'll explain why and how to avoid it. I'll
also propose an alternative way of thinking that will reduce the emotional temperature
of your conversation, make it easier for you to solve the problems created and increase
your credibility in the process. It's our natural inclination, when we're confronted
with a conflict, confrontation or difficult conversation, to put the defences up and protect
ourselves. Part of the process of defending ourselves is sometimes to attack the other
person's position - which leads to us attributing blame on our opponent.
There's also another reason why we get caught up in blaming others, and in the field of
psychology they call it projection. If ever we feel bad, guilty or some other unpleasant
feeling and maybe these feelings don't quite sit comfortably with us or fit with our sense
of identity, it's normal for us to want to get rid of them. This phenomenon is called
projection. In simple terms, we project those unwanted feelings onto others, so that we
get rid of them and don't have to drag them around with us.
So imagine, you're having a difficult conversation with a colleague who didn't submit a project
update report on time, despite your expectations that they would. You're having to raise this
issue with them in a one-to-one meeting because as a result of them not meeting your expectations,
you're made to look bad in front of your peers at your senior manager meeting. You chose
not to come clean with your peers, because you were unsure of what reaction you'd get
so you kept quiet and rolled your eyes as if to say 'I know I'll have a word with them'.
You're basically colluding and this is where the blame game begins.
You're frustrated , embarrassed and uncomfortable at having to raise the issue with your colleague.
You suspect that you weren't entirely clear or timely in expressing your expectations
with them which in effect makes you complicit. But in your senior manager meeting you didn't
declare this and let the blame fall onto your colleague, and now you're left with feelings
of guilt, shame and incompetence. I'm not saying this is true, I'm saying this is a
possibility. So in your difficult conversation you unconsciously
project these unwanted feelings onto the other person, who naturally gets defensive, because
from where their sitting - you've contributed to the problem by not being clear or timely
in your request. You're having none of it, because by this point you're sucked into the
vortex of conflict and it becomes increasingly difficult and counterintuitive to backtrack
and be accountable. What are the consequences of this?
First, You lose the trust and credibility of your colleague.
Second, You're also saying that it's ok not to be transparent and accountable and place
more value on 'saving face' than being accountable. Third You make a vital withdrawal from the
emotional bank account. Let's look at the alternative.
At the senior management meeting, when the problem comes up on the agenda you suggest
you may have contributed to the delay in the submission of the report and will address
the issue with your colleague. What's the worst that could happen?
I'd suggest it's unlikely that your peers will berate you for your incompetence. I'm
more inclined to think and, I have evidence to support this, that you peers will be thinking
to themselves, 'yes that's frustrating, I think I'm guilty of doing that sometimes'
and 'wow that was brave coming out and saying that in front of everyone - I respect that'.
Which one do you think is more likely? More importantly and here's the bigger question...
Do you care what you're peers think and would you prefer to be seen as someone that acts
in a way that is consistent with values of transparency and accountability.
Every time I ask this question, the response is a no-brainer!
How does this change your perspective on your difficult conversation?
It no longer becomes a difficult conversation, right? You sit down with your direct report
to discuss the delay in the submission of your project update report. The conversation
starts with you sharing how you think you may have contributed to the problem in the
first place, you might also have a view that your colleague has also contributed in some
way and so the two of you come up with a solution that in future improves the quality of your
communication and reduces the chances of receiving delayed information in future.
You model transparency and accountability to you colleague who will, without a shred
of doubt, respect you for that. I've said it before, we overestimate the risk
of not being transparent and accountable and underestimate the problems we create from
not thinking consistent with values of transparency and accountability.
Shifting your thinking from a blame mindset to a contribution mindset is about taking
accountability seriously.