As We Speak

by Peter Meyers

  Want to talk to your boss about bringing in a new training program? Avoid: “Can we talk about why we don’t have any training here?” Instead, try, “I’d like to talk with you about how we could raise the skill level of the team. Is that all right?” If you’re talking to your teenager about drugs, don’t say, “I want to talk about making sure you’re not hanging out with those losers from down the street.” Try this instead: “I’d like to talk to you about how we’re going to help you succeed in school next year. Is that all right with you?” Of course it’s all right! What else can he say? Enter with a focus on the desired outcome. Look for questions they can answer with “Yes.”

  “Anthony, I’d like to talk to you about our meetings. Is that all right?”

  Presumably, Anthony says yes.

  Saying yes is a concession. You’ve got your first agreement! Acknowledge it. It gets you into the dialogue right away.

  “That’s great. Thank you.”

  Then you proceed to clarify your point in small sections. End each section with a question, which circles back to the listener. This removes the temptation to launch into a monologue, keeps the other person engaged, and keeps you in the driver’s seat of the conversation. In the meantime, you’re rewarding every concession you get. This builds a staircase of small successful interaction agreements. This process builds a bond—which is what you’re after.

  DEMONSTRATE COMMITMENT. “I’m committed to finding a solution to this and doing whatever we need to do. How about you?”

  CHANGE THE CLIMATE. If you get stuck, try these questions:

  1. “What do you understand my point to be?”

  2. “Is there a seed of truth in what I’m saying?”

  3. “What is it that you’re committed to doing?”

  USE THE SILENCE. Rushing to fill a pause indicates insecurity; leaving a silence signals authority. The change that you want to achieve happens in the silence. Simply wait and allow the silence to be there—get comfortable being uncomfortable in those moments when no one is saying anything at all.

  Dealing with Anger

  Often in a courageous conversation, one of the parties may be angry. This is a difficult thing to face, because once again, your amygdalae will kick in and try to protect you. You may begin to lose your own temper, as your brain prepares you for a fight. A cautionary note on violence—if the angry person in front of you shows any signs of moving toward physical violence, pick up the signs and get out of the situation immediately.

  But if you feel that it’s physically safe to do so, the solution to the problem, just as in hostage negotiation, is to create a bond with the other person.

  Sounds odd, right? When you’re facing someone who is angry, the last thing in the world that you may feel like doing is connecting with that person. But in fact, that’s the only way that you’re going to cope with him successfully. You’re not going to be able to talk him out of his feelings, or explain why it is that he shouldn’t be feeling as he does. You’re going to have to defuse him. And to do that, you’re going to have to listen.

  Think of it as lancing a boil, and then leaping out of the way as all of the stored-up puss comes pouring out. Listen carefully to what he’s saying, without trying to block or stop him. Ask questions that help you understand the problem fully, and demonstrate genuine empathy. Name and identify what he’s going through, without trying to fix it—yet—and without trying to minimize it. If you minimize, dismiss, or negate the problem, it will only add fuel to the fire. Note: when you acknowledge the problem, you’re not admitting fault or taking responsibility. You’re simply demonstrating that you heard what he said, accurately and with compassion.

  Once you have heard what he said, and understand how he feels, you have a platform from which you can rebuild the relationship. That platform is based on a common understanding—a bond—based on a commitment to do what you can to help. You can’t help him if you haven’t accepted what he said.

  If you’re a problem solver, a fixer, or a consultant by trade, you will automatically try to fix the problem before you’ve listened to the whole thing. No sooner will he begin to state the problem than you will have a solution. And your solution will be so good that you can’t wait to talk about it. This is where the conversation starts to go wrong. Before you get to the solution (no matter how good it is!) the other person needs to vent. You need to let him vent, and demonstrate that you heard him accurately, and with concern. This is a necessary stage of the process. To do this, you listen, ask questions, and paraphrase. We don’t mean parrot phrase : you don’t repeat his exact words back to him. This is obvious and obnoxious, and will only infuriate him further.

  To paraphrase, you summarize what you’ve just heard in a some kind of brief, clear statement that demonstrates understanding: “Okay, let me see if I understand what you’re saying. The shipment arrived two weeks late, you’re behind on your own orders, and now it sounds like you’re in trouble with your boss. Is that right?” When you paraphrase, listen to the modality that he’s in: visual, auditory, feeling/sensing, or numbers/logic. (For more on modalities, see p. 98.) Listen and match his modality. If he’s in feeling/sensing mode, he might say, “I’m uncomfortable with this; we felt that we could trust you.” Your response might be, “I understand that you’re angry and confused. We need to figure out how to get back on track.”

  He’ll tell you how he likes to talk. Listen. Be careful to name and identify his anger at the correct pitch of intensity. If he’s furious, and you say, “It sounds like you’re feeling a little annoyed,” you will make the problem even worse. “Annoyed?!” he’ll say. “Annoyed?! I’m not annoyed—I’m absolutely outraged!” And you’ll have to start all over again.

  The moment that you’re looking for here is when the angry person in front of you sighs with relief, and says, “Yes. That’s right.” NOW you can begin to solve the problem. Your attentive, nonintrusive listening has created a bond between you and the angry person in front of you. He feels heard, and understood. And although you have not yet dealt with the technical aspects of his problem, you have accomplished your major objective—to defuse his anger, and form a bond. Now you can have a meaningful, solution-seeking conversation.

  It’s not easy to hold your ground in the face of a furious torrent of words. Nothing in our biochemistry teaches us to take anger, listen to it, and work with it. In fact, our very biology dictates against it. Once again, you will start to feel the warnings signs of your amygdalae starting to take over. You will feel the irresistible impulse to say, “Hang on, that’s not right. That’s not accurate. We never promised that . ” Remember that you are teaching yourself a new skill, one you didn’t have before. If it was easy, everyone would do it. No matter how crazy his words, how unjust or how inaccurate, there is absolutely no point in objecting until he has finished having his say.

  * * *

  MASTER TIP: Don’t offer a solution until he’s completely finished venting about the problem.

  * * *

  11

  CRISIS COMMUNICATION

  CRISES HAPPEN.

  When things fall apart, you find out what people are made of. It’s a chance for leaders to step forward and become a secure base to the people around them. When it’s done well, heroes are made. When it’s done poorly, organizations collapse.

  You don’t have to be under siege in a muddy trench to provide insight where there’s confusion, offer security where there’s fear, or demonstrate honesty in the face of suspicion. That opportunity has a way of knocking on your door almost every day.

  We were in the middle of a training with the CEO and top executives of a Fortune 500 financial company when they took a brief break and returned, white-faced.

  They had just been informed that the share prices of their company had plummeted. Most of the people in that room had just seen their personal net worth cut in half. When these men left the training room, they were going to be pounded not only with questions from the press, but anxi
ous queries from employees, wanting to know if their jobs were safe. The temptation each of them faced when they returned was simply to lock his office door, and refuse to comment. We encouraged them to communicate instead.

  When in doubt, always overcommunicate. In the absence of any information, people will jump to the most negative conclusion. Your silence is a blank screen onto which they will project their worst fears. To ensure that their message would be effective, we gave them a crisis communication formula. This formula is effective because it is loosely based on the pyramid of human needs, as laid out by Abraham Maslow, the founder of humanistic psychology. Maslow’s idea was that you must fill people’s most basic level of need before you can move on to satisfying more complex needs. Sure, people want to learn, grow, and make a contribution to society; but if they’re hungry, they need to eat before they can think about anything else. During a time of crisis or great change, people’s fears rush to the surface. That’s the time when their needs are most acute. So in this formula you meet the listener’s needs for security, connection, and contribution—in that order.

  A side note: if you are a senior executive or anybody who has responsibility for a large organization, don’t relegate this job entirely to your PR department or to the person who handled your executive communication. It’s important for you to be in there with your sleeves rolled up, involved with the development of the message itself. Don’t wait around for the speech to hit your desk, only to find yourself disappointed that it’s inadequate—and there’s no time left to fix it before the press come pounding at your door. After all, you’re the one who has to deliver the message—you should be involved in its creation. Earlier, we said that there’s nothing like the ring of authenticity. It starts right here.

  Here is the formula we taught them that day. We heard from some of them later that it was the most valuable tool they had to take them through that difficult time. Put it in your pocket, against the day that you might need it.

  1. HERE’S WHAT WE KNOW FOR SURE. The first thing that people need, at the base level, is certainty. You can’t move on to the higher-level needs until you deal with this one. Be honest with them about the things of which you are absolutely sure. Even if all you know for sure is that the sun will come up tomorrow, the certainty will calm hysteria. This process roots us back in the things we can count on. Because our survival-primed brains have a naturally negative orientation, we tend to stack. What else could go wrong? And what else? And what else? This is how panic and hysteria spreads. For example, you might say: “Here’s what we know for sure. Our stock has taken a hit. We have seen this kind of dip many times before, and we have always rebounded. Our assets are solid. We have cash in the bank, unwavering commitments from our clients, and the pipeline is still robust.” If they’re wondering about a main issue and you don’t address it, the wondering will only get louder.

  Don’t fudge this section, or make claims that you can’t back up! Everyone will be watching you with the sharpened eyes of fear, and they will catch any glimmer of uncertainty or falseness. Only say the things you know to be absolutely true, or your credibility will be destroyed.

  2. HERE’S WHAT WE DON’T KNOW. “We don’t know how long this crisis is going to last.” Again, be honest. Hearing you speak with authenticity will calm them down. If you insist that everything is just fine, without acknowledging the reality, everyone will dismiss you as a liar, and your credibility will be permanently damaged. Think of yourself as a doctor. You don’t have to make a list of all the terrifying possibilities; that’s not helpful to the patient. Simply draw a ring around one or two of the main concerns in the situation, admitting that there’s no way to be sure of them.

  3. HERE’S WHAT I THINK. This is the section in which you have a real opportunity to step up as a leader. You are in a privileged position; you have insider knowledge that others don’t have. Presumably, you have insight, or you wouldn’t be in a leadership position. This is where you can move forward into the vacuum that is created in any crisis, and hold the space. You’re allowed to tell us your opinion. People want to know what you believe. “My gut reaction is that things will get better, and that it will take about nine months.”

  4. HERE’S WHAT YOU CAN DO. People need to contribute; they need to feel that they’re making a difference. There’s nothing worse, in a dangerous situation, than having to sit by and be idle. Nobody wants to be passive; the act of having a job makes you feel instrumental in your own destiny and helps to quell panic. The future is based on the actions of the present; what happens will be dependent on how well everyone pulls together. “I need you to work harder and faster than you’ve ever worked before. We need to show that when things get tough, this team responds by raising our performance.”

  5. HERE’S WHAT YOU CAN COUNT ON FROM ME. Make a commitment. Be sure that it’s one on which you can follow through. “I’ll continue to meet with you every week, and give you updates on plans as they evolve. I will continue to lobby the board. I will push hard, and support every single one of you.” Ensure that you become a secure base for the people who look up to you. Making and keeping commitments is one of the main functions of a leader—it creates an environment of trust.

  6. HERE’S WHY IT’S WORTHWHILE. People need hope. It’s your job as a leader to create meaning out of the facts, and communicate that meaning to the people who are looking to you for guidance. What’s the reason for the suffering? How will the struggle make you stronger in the long run? What are the potential benefits of winning this battle? Note that this is very different from telling them that there’s light at the end of the tunnel. Avoid at all costs shellacking a tough situation with false optimism. People want the truth; they want authenticity. Remember the example of the speech Winston Churchill gave in 1940 when he became prime minister? He began, “I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat.” 1 No false optimism there! But he ended on this note: “At this time I feel entitled to claim the aid of all, and I say, ‘come then, let us go forward together with our united strength.’” People want to feel part of something bigger than themselves. Give them a sense of greater purpose.

  * * *

  TWO CASE STUDIES IN CRISIS COMMUNICATION

  In April 2010, an oil rig contracted by British Petroleum (BP) exploded off the Louisiana coast, killing eleven workers, injuring seventeen others, and starting a massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. BP’s handling of the crisis was a case study in poor communication. Instead of immediate transparency and full disclosure, BP downplayed the extent of the damage—the company’s first statements about the amount of oil leaking from the well were substantially lower than other experts’ measurements, and BP initially refused to let independent scientists measure the spill rate. And instead of accepting full responsibility for the disaster, BP sought to cast blame on its subcontractors.

  The company’s CEO at the time, Tony Hayward, did little to bolster its image. He wore pin-striped suits, offering a vivid contrast with the grimy coveralls of the Gulf workers whose lives had been affected by the spill, and he took time off in the middle of the crisis to attend a yacht race in England. When he told a reporter he was eager to get through the crisis because “I’d like my life back,” his self-focused comment quickly eclipsed his formal statements of apology.

  By contrast, juice maker Odwalla’s handling of a crisis in 1996 revealed the value of swift action, transparency, and clear communication. After a link was discovered between several cases of the E. coli bacteria and Odwalla’s fresh apple juice, the company acted immediately and was able to convey an image of honesty, sympathy, and responsibility. CEO Stephen Williamson ordered an immediate recall of products from 4,600 retail outlets and placed ads in local papers to share information about the recall with consumers. Within forty-eight hours, the company had set up a crisis-related Web site to give reporters and consumers access to information (even though, in those early days of the Web, Odwalla did not have a corporate or promotional Web site).
/>
  The company offered to pay medical expenses for anyone affected by the contamination and, within five weeks of the recall, Odwalla had implemented a new pasteurization process to avoid future disasters.

  “We had no crisis-management procedure in place, so I followed our vision statement and our core values of honesty, integrity, and sustainability,” Williamson said in a 2001 interview with Fast Company. “Odwalla has been scarred forever by the mistake that we made in 1996. We don’t try to hide that scar. We don’t cover it up. We keep it in plain sight to remind us of the tragedy that we must avoid at all costs.”

  * * *

  12

  USING TECHNOLOGY

  IN A HIGH-STAKES situation, you need everyone to stand together. You cannot afford to be boring when buy-in counts. And yet so many of our communication technologies create environments in which it is difficult to keep people engaged! Take the audio conference, for example: how many times have you suffered through an audio conference so boring that you put yourself on mute and started your e-mail?

  You’re not alone!

  We’re surrounded by a mind-boggling array of recently developed communication technologies: e-mail, instant messaging, audio conference. We’ve all struggled through poorly conducted examples of these media, and we’ve all paid the price.

  So, how can we use these new technologies in ways that are more successful, engaging, and productive? Which medium should you choose for any given situation, and how can you use it to your advantage as a better substitute for face-to-face communication?

  When you are communicating using technology, just as in any other form of communication, the human connection is the only thing that really matters. Without human connection, there is no bond, no engagement, no moving of the listener from point A to point B.