|
|
Post by saraconrad on Oct 31, 2019 17:17:35 GMT
Hello, Everyone! Here are my reflections on the first two chapters!
1. I opened up to a colleague about some negative parts of my job. I was feeling uncomfortable with some of the attitudes I was perceiving in a certain setting. I arranged a meeting to discuss these concerns with someone who had authority to make things better, knowing I had already exhausted my other options. I was clear about my concerns, or at least I thought so!
2. I had decent behavior when approaching this problem, but I think some desperation soaked through. I was feeling very belittled and had probably waited too long to bring this to my colleague's attention. The big thing that didn't go well is that when the colleague responded in a defensive way, I got frustrated. When I got frustrated, I shut down. I ended up avoiding the main problem. We did make some progress but not nearly as much as I had hoped. I left the meeting feeling even more discouraged. I was not able to hold my ground, see the other side, and persevere with different techniques for communication. I'm very hopeful that learning through this reading and community will help prepare me better for the sometimes surprisingly negative/defensive reactions I receive in these crucial conversations.
3. This is such a difficult thing. I wonder if in some situations it is better to stop the meeting, take a breather, and then return together. Sometimes people (myself included!) need a little time to formulate opinions that can be shared freely and openly. We often have such tight schedules and deadlines that this becomes a challenge, but sometimes we are more effective and therefore more efficient if we take the time to think before we have dialogue.
4. I participated in some crucial conversations about employee engagement. I noticed that the person leading a particular meeting did an excellent job of facilitating a crucial conversation. There was a lot of emotion, varying ideas, and potential to impact all of our work cultures. This colleague was prepared. She remained calm, was sure to hear all opinions and ideas, and kept us on track. She let everyone share honestly but did not let things stray to gossip or unhelpful/hurtful conversations. Instead, she helped us get to the heart of each issue. She guided us to that shared meaning. While I don't know that the outcome of our discussion had enough support to be fully implemented, we at least all felt our voices were heard, accepted, and validated. That was a big part of what we all needed, perhaps something more important than the full outcome.
|
|
|
|
Post by saraconrad on Oct 31, 2019 17:21:23 GMT
"The conversations take time and communication between me and my partner prior to actually engaging in the conversation with my in-laws. The relationship is very different than that i experience with my own parents so i can get frustrated easily. its taken time and work to try to understand how their family works and communicates and instead of rushing in there it works better for me to support my partner in handling difficult conversations. Over time and discussion about which conversations went well and which didn't we've started to learn how to approach them without making them defensive or hurting their feelings." Katie, I like how you articulated the importance of your crucial conversation with your partner first before the crucial conversation with your in-laws. I think especially in partner relationships, it is important to develop your shared meaning before entering into the conversation with another group. Sometimes our crucial conversations have different parts, and I appreciate your example of this! |
|
|
|
Post by saraconrad on Oct 31, 2019 17:26:04 GMT
"Looking back to evaluate my handling of the situation I know I let my emotions get the best of me. One thing I know about me is that I manage anger better than I manage having my feelings hurt, and instead of seeing this as a situation where I recognized "it's just business" I had invested emotionally because I had to go back to a group of people that had worked with me on the project and try to explain why it was just discarded." Jes, I really struggle with this, too. I also struggle when I hear more experienced leaders tell me that they no longer take things personally, implying that I'm somehow less of a leader for having certain emotions. I've done a lot of study about feelings and believe that we cannot control the feelings we have. We seriously cannot. But we can control the reaction. Emotions come and go quite quickly. I'm hoping to learn through this book and interactions here how to better regulate emotions in difficult communications. Thanks for sharing your experience! |
|
|
|
Post by kmvanhoof on Oct 31, 2019 17:30:42 GMT
I like that you were prepared with positive feedback. That old teacher saying of Sandwich bad news can work in a lot of situations. sometimes when people hear the negative it can be hard to think of solutions so helping get that conversation started is great. I think we could also go too far with being prepared and maybe limit ourselves to the ideas we came with as opposed to being flexible to the situation? I think this speaks to that each person can have their own perception of the experience of the 'same' situation as another person. This is where coming from a place of not knowing or seeking to understand is important. We, as human beings, do not know what each person has experienced on any given day, or the trials and tribulations experienced throughout our lives thus far. Often times I have learned that the reactions or emotions of another person, related to a conversation or interaction that we shared, is primarily rooted in that persons own struggles, resulting from a trigger or something else. I think that crucial conversations that are successful have an empathetic tone and come from a genuine place. Word choice matters. Rachele, I definitely can relate to being at your best or at your worst. I definitely feel like keeping an open mind and getting solicitation from everyone is very helpful. Shared pool of meaning if so helpful to move the conversation forward. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 31, 2019 17:32:16 GMT
Jes Moss, bridget, amya, justineg, lindajI found the discussion about shared pool of meaning interesting in the book and from reviewing your posts it seems you feel this is a really critical piece of a crucial conversation. But we don't often take enough time to create that shared pool of meaning or in some circumstances, we don't feel comfortable engaging in discussion to create that shared pool of meaning. This seems to happen when people don't feel heard or feel safe or as lindaj stated, its important to let the others in the conversation know how you feel and why. Even if it is a dichotomous position. So for me.... I find my ability to engage in discussions to create that shared pool of meaning vary from person to person and size of group. In groups or with individuals I feel can really hear me, and even if they disagree with me, are willing to consider my thoughts, I am ready to delve deeper and create that dialogue. There are some situations though where I just hold my tongue. It stands to reason that when I have a poorly led crucial conversation, I might not be creating the right environment for a shared pool of meaning... I am excited to get to chapters 3 & 4 where we talk about "silence." A strategy I find myself unintentionally using that is not the most productive in these situations of shared meaning. * Also, for those of you with the usernames I have tagged such as: lindaj, if you set your notification preferences to receive an email when you are tagged, quoted and when there is a new post- you will be able to see when someone is talking directly to you.
|
|
april
New Member
Posts: 5
|
Post by april on Oct 31, 2019 17:35:30 GMT
1. Hello a crucial conversation I had was with a former supervisor that I felt was not sharing Department procedures equally among staff. I felt she had a friendlier relationship with some of my other colleagues and that they knew and were benefiting from important information that wasn't shared openly with everyone. I felt that if I had a friendlier relationship with her I would also know all the inside information and benefit from it as well. 2. I thought about what made me feel strongly and emotional about this and I carefully thought out the points that I wanted to make before I decided to go speak to her. I was on my best behavior because I had time to process my thoughts and my emotions. It went really well because I was open and honest about how I was feeling and I didn't come off defensively. 4.The qualities of this conversation was that it was an open and honest conversations. It was an emotional one for me because I am not as social as some of my other colleagues are. I am an SC in the DISC assessment. My supervisor understood that about me as well. She was very attentive to my concerns and considerate of my feelings. She provided feedback and it was a really great conversation that I was initially very worried and anxious about having. 3. I think we can create a shared pool of meaning by being open and receptive and seeking to understand the other person instead of making assumptions or going in with preconceived notions. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 31, 2019 17:46:19 GMT
1. Hello a crucial conversation I had was with a former supervisor that I felt was not sharing Department procedures equally among staff. I felt she had a friendlier relationship with some of my other colleagues and that they knew and were benefiting from important information that wasn't shared openly with everyone. I felt that if I had a friendlier relationship with her I would also know all the inside information and benefit from it as well. 2. I thought about what made me feel strongly and emotional about this and I carefully thought out the points that I wanted to make before I decided to go speak to her. I was on my best behavior because I had time to process my thoughts and my emotions. It went really well because I was open and honest about how I was feeling and I didn't come off defensively. 4.The qualities of this conversation was that it was an open and honest conversations. It was an emotional one for me because I am not as social as some of my other colleagues are. I am an SC in the DISC assessment. My supervisor understood that about me as well. She was very attentive to my concerns and considerate of my feelings. She provided feedback and it was a really great conversation that I was initially very worried and anxious about having. 3. I think we can create a shared pool of meaning by being open and receptive and seeking to understand the other person instead of making assumptions or going in with preconceived notions. Hi April, I am impressed by how you handled what is a very difficult conversation, one where you were emotionally charged but the stakes were pretty high (making sure you had all the right information to do your work) and to be an equal player on your team. Its not easy to give feedback to a supervisor, so the fact that you didn't shy away from this but rather found a way to discuss this with her so that she could hear you and not feel defensive is great. I also really like how you know your communication style and how that is a factor in how you interact with your team and supervisor. It shows a lot of insight that you thought about this as you approached the conversation.
|
|
|
|
Post by chelseythill on Oct 31, 2019 17:46:39 GMT
1. I needed to talk with a provider about a complaint I had investigated, where I had substantiated a violation of rule that I knew would lead to the revocation of her license.
2. I was definitely on my best behavior- second-thinking everything I wanted to say and third-thinking about my second thoughts! I practiced the conversation I wanted to have in the bathroom mirror while brushing my teeth, during my commute, and in my bed waiting for sleep to hit me. What made it challenging for me was that while I knew my evidence was sound and the provider was violating the rule and putting children's safety in danger, the reason she was violating the rule was based on her own health needs. I felt sympathy for her, but I also had a lot of fear about how the conversation was going to go- she had expressed a lot of fear and anger during the investigation. I think it went OK because I reminded myself over and over that difficult conversations need to happen, and that just being a part of the conversation was really my only role. It was up to her to fix the error, and my response was already set in stone based on the rules and guidelines of my position. My job was to make sure she was well informed of her choices moving forward. I spent a significant portion of our time during the conversation listening to her fears and discussing the needs of children frankly, and allowing her to vent anger and fear into the conversation without taking it personally. I had to remind myself several times to take a deep breath and relax my posture from defensive to engaged.
3. I think we create shared pools of meaning by making sure everyone has a voice at the table and making sure no one is overlooked because they've learned it's better not to speak up. For the purposes of our book study, it's absolutely crucial that everyone on this board have someone comment on their posts so they know someone cares and they know their voices are valued, important, and sought after, in this safe space. As to why, I loved the Butler quote: "He that complies against his will is of his own opinion still," and I've seen this play out over and over again in my life. In my current role, to give a specific example, centers do better- follow more rules more faithfully with less direct oversight or Department action- when they understand the rules and buy in to the reasoning behind the rules. Center staff take shortcuts or blatantly set out to violate rules when they think their opinion is more informed and valid than the regulations. I get fewer repeat violations when I explain the reasoning behind the rule and work with providers to address the intent of the rule in a way that respects the needs and desires of their staff.
4. I have been lucky over the years to work for terrific administrators, men and women who had really difficult discussions with me, but who, during the discussion, listened to me and helped me to see that I wanted what they wanted, but I was going to have to change something I was doing to meet our shared expectation for what we ultimately wanted. In those conversations, the other person always listened to me first, listened to my decision making and my reasoning, and then talked about the consequences of what I had done in terms of what I had intended and what had actually happened instead. The assumption that they made, going into the conversation, was one that I try to keep in mind at all times now: First, presume positive intent. My first principal had that on a plaque near his desk and I remember staring at it as I sat, hunched and miserable, for our first chat, sure that I was going to get raked over the coals when I hadn't meant to do anything wrong. By opening up the conversation to being a dialogue where we dissected what happened and planned for the future instead of a dressing-down, he put me squarely on his side and aimed me at a better future.
|
|
april
New Member
Posts: 5
|
Post by april on Oct 31, 2019 17:52:32 GMT
I recently had a conversation with a past colleague when we discussed a policy that had been implemented at my previous employee. As the colleague critiqued the policy that I had agreed with, I could feel my own emotions rising. I was able to recognize my own internal cues which helped me to think through my response, which was to listen and simply acknowledge the thoughts of the other person. I had a lot to say but had to think about the intent and purpose of the conversation. After quickly thinking this through, I went ahead and thanked the person for their perspective and shared mine by continuing to acknowledge the importance of multiple perspectives. I also added that I didn't think we had to necessarily agree, and was glad to be able to hear her views. When the author talks about a shared pool of meaning, I understand this as important because it allows us to get at the genuine feelings and ideas others have, which can make the work we do much richer and productive. When there are several people within the work space who are working to create those safe spaces for thoughtful conversation to occur, the work gets better and people feel valued. When I think of the people who have these conversations and they go really well, I see/hear active listening, acknowledgement, and genuine interest in the topic and perspective. Hi Amya, I like how you took a moment before you responded to think about the intent & purpose of the conversation regardless of the physiological response of your emotions rising. I also like how you let her know how you felt, that you felt you could a agree to disagree and thanked her for her perspective. This conversation could have quickly gone South but you took time to think before you spoke.
|
|
|
|
Post by chelseythill on Oct 31, 2019 17:58:07 GMT
4. I participated in some crucial conversations about employee engagement. I noticed that the person leading a particular meeting did an excellent job of facilitating a crucial conversation. There was a lot of emotion, varying ideas, and potential to impact all of our work cultures. This colleague was prepared. She remained calm, was sure to hear all opinions and ideas, and kept us on track. She let everyone share honestly but did not let things stray to gossip or unhelpful/hurtful conversations. Instead, she helped us get to the heart of each issue. She guided us to that shared meaning. While I don't know that the outcome of our discussion had enough support to be fully implemented, we at least all felt our voices were heard, accepted, and validated. That was a big part of what we all needed, perhaps something more important than the full outcome. I feel that REMAINING CALM is the number 1 thing in having a crucial conversation. I know I expend a lot of effort to try to remain calm by practicing my "lines" for a crucial conversation an embarrassing amount of times, but after reading this I'm thinking maybe I should look into actual techniques for remaining calm. I'm almost 100% positive I never end up using those "lines" and talking points when I actually get to the conversation with another human being, so it's not like it's effort that pays off for me, in the end. |
|
april
New Member
Posts: 5
|
Post by april on Oct 31, 2019 17:59:28 GMT
Hello all,
I am Rachele and am interning with DCF BRO NERO at the Green Bay location.
1. Briefly provide an example of a crucial conversation you have had. (Remember, no identifying or confidential information should be posted!). A brief example would be “I needed to provide a critique of a colleague’s work.”
• I needed to discuss a relationship issue with a family member.
2. Talk about how you handled that type of conversation. Were you on your worst behavior, your best- what made it challenging and why do you think it did or didn’t go well?
• I think I vacillated between my worst and best behavior, depending on the emotions that I was feeling at each moment during the conversation. It was challenging to try and begin the conversation because I was prepared and expecting that my family member would be defensive and shut down, not participate in the conversation at all. I think, in hindsight, that my expectation contributed to the way I engaged in the conversation. I feel like it went well, in that I was able to speak openly and directly, identify the problem and invite the family member to discuss the difficult topic of conversation. In my mind, my intent was to work through any barriers and struggles with in the relationship and overall communication with this person.
3. The author’s talk about dialogue and defines it as the free flow of meaning between two or more people. How can we create a shared pool of meaning? Why is it important to a crucial conversation?
• The primary focus and contributor to creating a shared pool of meaning is that it is necessary for everyone to participate in the conversation to share their meaning. The more “meanings” or perspectives that are openly shared, the deeper the pool of meaning, thus the better equipped the group is at making the best choice moving forward. I believe this is important to the idea of crucial conversations as there is a higher likelihood of engaging in the crucial conversation from a place of understanding of the other participants perspective on the issue of discussion.
4. Tell the group about one person you have met or witnessed have a crucial conversation that went well. What were the qualities of the conversation and person that made this go well?
• One crucial conversation comes to mind. It was a critical conversation regarding a person who was going through the dying process. The medical team engaged in this crucial conversation with the family in efforts to prepare them for the passing and loss. They were direct and informative, yet full of empathy and understanding for the difficulty that the family was experiencing. Equally, the conversation had components that met each family member where they were at in the acceptance of that their family member was in the process of dying. There were not efforts to convince family members of the close proximity of the death, but rather they used information to help with understanding the process. This allowed each family member their own timing and acceptance of the impending loss of their loved one.
Hi Rachele, I like how you realized in hindsight that your expectation of how the conversation would go contributed to the way you engaged in the conversation. Sometimes we go in with preconceived notions about the conversation which can ultimately affect our delivery and the way the other person receives the message. Thanks for pointing that out, that is something I will keep in mind. #4..Wow. If that isn't a crucial conversation I don't know what is. I can't imagine having to have those conversations with people on a daily basis for those working in that industry. Bless their hearts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 31, 2019 18:03:05 GMT
1 & 2. A crucial conversation I had recently was with a school around an issue with my youngest child. I received information about something that happened at school to my child that was very upsetting. I really needed to take a breath and step back to ask myself what was it that I wanted to get out of this conversation. What was THE most important thing. In this situation, jumping to anger would have been very easy, but my biggest need was around concern for my child and movement forward with a school that we would continue to work with as a family. Overall, I handled the conversation pretty well, I was calm, we communicated on a variety of topics. The principal handled it well and it was a vulnerable conversation for him. The downfall... the conversation isn't over, there were elements we couldn't discuss that still need to be discussed and I need to follow up. I will need to work really hard not to be "silent" which is my typical go to when I am angry...doing so won't get us any closer to resolution.
3. Continuing with my example, I think that shared pool of meaning concept can become misguided by people's internal thoughts about what another person's "end game" really is. How many times do we have conversations where the other person isn't really listening but is thinking about how they are going to answer or refute or argue their point? Far too many. So I think that creating a free flow of meaning really requires us to be blatant sometimes and spell it out. Or at the very least we need to be willing to put it all aside and really start with an open mind. The authors call this starting with HEART.
4.I work with someone who I continually watch have crucial conversations successfully. The person is in one word "Open." In all ways, the person may have a thought or goal entering a conversation, but I have seen them shift course many times. They do that because they are really listening and recognizing viewpoints and their value. They are also respectful and thoughtful in their choice of words in conversation, very non threatening. "ie...lets back up and talk about that for a minute... what is your thinking around this?" It creates a really open dialogue.
|
|
|
|
Post by chelseythill on Oct 31, 2019 18:03:23 GMT
I had a visit with a person recently and thought things went well only to get back to my office and receive a long email about all the ways this person had thought I had “done them wrong”. It made me re think the conversation and when I talked to them again I attempted to be sure I was stating things in a way so they would not be miss construed. The second visit went ok I thought. Then again I received an e-mail with concerns. Although I realize this can happen, it is not something I typically experience. The level of bitterness in the e-mail was a shock and it made me question my techniques. I am hoping this book can give me some insight into ways I can do a better job of communicating with this person. I need to find a way to a shared pool of meaning for my next conversations with her. I hate it when I think the conversation has gone well and I find out later NOPE, it did not. It makes me wonder how often people walk away from a conversation where I decided to silence my concerns thinking everything is okay, only to find out later that I had issues with what was planned. I'm definitely re-thinking my "Wisconsin polite" policy of "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything" after these chapters. Maybe I need to do more talking out so that I'm not leaving people thinking everything is okay when it's not? |
|
april
New Member
Posts: 5
|
Post by april on Oct 31, 2019 18:11:33 GMT
1. I needed to talk with a provider about a complaint I had investigated, where I had substantiated a violation of rule that I knew would lead to the revocation of her license. 2. I was definitely on my best behavior- second-thinking everything I wanted to say and third-thinking about my second thoughts! I practiced the conversation I wanted to have in the bathroom mirror while brushing my teeth, during my commute, and in my bed waiting for sleep to hit me. What made it challenging for me was that while I knew my evidence was sound and the provider was violating the rule and putting children's safety in danger, the reason she was violating the rule was based on her own health needs. I felt sympathy for her, but I also had a lot of fear about how the conversation was going to go- she had expressed a lot of fear and anger during the investigation. I think it went OK because I reminded myself over and over that difficult conversations need to happen, and that just being a part of the conversation was really my only role. It was up to her to fix the error, and my response was already set in stone based on the rules and guidelines of my position. My job was to make sure she was well informed of her choices moving forward. I spent a significant portion of our time during the conversation listening to her fears and discussing the needs of children frankly, and allowing her to vent anger and fear into the conversation without taking it personally. I had to remind myself several times to take a deep breath and relax my posture from defensive to engaged. 3. I think we create shared pools of meaning by making sure everyone has a voice at the table and making sure no one is overlooked because they've learned it's better not to speak up. For the purposes of our book study, it's absolutely crucial that everyone on this board have someone comment on their posts so they know someone cares and they know their voices are valued, important, and sought after, in this safe space. As to why, I loved the Butler quote: "He that complies against his will is of his own opinion still," and I've seen this play out over and over again in my life. In my current role, to give a specific example, centers do better- follow more rules more faithfully with less direct oversight or Department action- when they understand the rules and buy in to the reasoning behind the rules. Center staff take shortcuts or blatantly set out to violate rules when they think their opinion is more informed and valid than the regulations. I get fewer repeat violations when I explain the reasoning behind the rule and work with providers to address the intent of the rule in a way that respects the needs and desires of their staff. 4. I have been lucky over the years to work for terrific administrators, men and women who had really difficult discussions with me, but who, during the discussion, listened to me and helped me to see that I wanted what they wanted, but I was going to have to change something I was doing to meet our shared expectation for what we ultimately wanted. In those conversations, the other person always listened to me first, listened to my decision making and my reasoning, and then talked about the consequences of what I had done in terms of what I had intended and what had actually happened instead. The assumption that they made, going into the conversation, was one that I try to keep in mind at all times now: First, presume positive intent. My first principal had that on a plaque near his desk and I remember staring at it as I sat, hunched and miserable, for our first chat, sure that I was going to get raked over the coals when I hadn't meant to do anything wrong. By opening up the conversation to being a dialogue where we dissected what happened and planned for the future instead of a dressing-down, he put me squarely on his side and aimed me at a better future. Hi Chelsey, I think you made a very important point when you say that we create shared pools of meaning by making sure everyone has a voice at the table and making sure no one is overlooked. I think that is really important. I also appreciate how although you are an enforcer of regulations in your position you still treat the provider as an individual rather than just a case on your caseload and still acknowledge your human feelings such as sympathy towards them but understand how to balance those feelings with your due diligence. Some times government regulators after being in their positions for so long can get caught up in the mundane and can forget that their caseloads are not just cases but consist of people and their livelihood.
|
|
amya
New Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by amya on Oct 31, 2019 19:16:21 GMT
Linda - you highlight the fact that these conversations require an investment of time. It's pretty tough to jump immediately into a conversation if you haven't had time to assess the other persons mood... in the moment. If the other person is not ready to hear or have the conversation it can make for a rocky start and finish. Time is critical!
|
|
