But I Don’t Think Like That – Don't Project Your Style Onto My Communication!

I’d like to share a story that has helped many of my training participants get past their natural judgments about the seemingly strange/mean/frustrating things other people do at work. I was an HR director at the time and was working in my office, when a peer walked in and asked if I had a few moments. I will call her Sally. Sally closed the door and vented for a good ten minutes about how cold and mean our boss – the CEO – was to her. I listened, allowed her to vent, and then asked her for specifics. How did the conversation begin? What was the CEO’s response? How did she respond back? As Sally recapped the conversation, she shared how the CEO made her feel unvalued and small. Part of the conversation took place over email and I asked her to show me those emails so that I could get a better feel for what she was describing.

Was Sally’s pain real? Yes. Was it appropriate? Who can say. What is necessary? Not at all.

Here is what happened. Sally poured her heart into pitching an idea to the CEO. Her email laid out the reasons why she proposed an expansion of programs in her department. Her passion and commitment oozed from her words. She worked hard on her pitch and she was hoping for a strong and positive response topped off with a warm "atta-girl." But because Sally has always felt intimidated by the CEO, she pitched her idea by email - a long email. The CEO sent a three-line response  - he would not consider a program expansion without a full financial analysis on the program’s potential revenues and costs. Analysis was not Sally’s strong suit and she took the request for more detail as a personal affront and that the CEO did not trust her judgment.

Sally projected her communication style and decision-making preferences onto the CEO and interpreted the CEO’s staccato informational response and need for analysis as an indication that he did not care. I see this type of meaning-making all the time and it is not helpful. Could the CEO have been more sensitive to Sally’s need for reinforcement? Sure. But Sally made assumptions about the CEO’s response that was neither accurate nor helpful. We all have a filter through which we make sense of the world. Our filter is not the correct one, or only one, it is just ours.

To be optimally successful, we need to see other people's filters and communicate with this knowledge in mind.

Sally took a risk by sending her idea by email - a risk that did not pay off. Her fear of in-person criticism lead to a disappointment of another kind. Having worked for this CEO for three years, Sally should have also known that he would need a full analysis (most bosses would want this).

What at first looked like an insensitive response from the CEO was actually an insensitive response from Sally. She was insensitive - and even irresponsible - because she did not communicate in a way that would move her idea forward and she blamed the CEO for not thinking like her.

What do you think? Am I being too hard on Sally?

As an aside - the CEO drove me a bit bonkers, too. WE ALL DRIVE EACH OTHER BONKERS. As managers, our success depends on us separating the daily drama that comes from our clashing communication styles and preferences from the need to convey our ideas in ways that others can effectively hear them.

Comments

[Cheryl Bruemmer]

Good Post. I do not think you were too hard on Sally. I think email is great to communicate facts. For ideas, touchy situations or a high stakes idea like Sally's, in person or by phone is far better. Emails that seem like novels definitely get moved to the bottom of my "to read" list and I usually answer with a brief global response. Or i pick up the phone and call the person.

As a business person the boss made a reasonable request for further information. Business people always want numbers.

To paraphrase a great quote: Take criticism or feedback seriously, but not personally. Myabe that is what Sally needed to do.

[Rob Brooks]

I've worked with people who churn out multi-page emails spelling out all their reasoning, and I've never seen it be more effective than a couple of lines and a brief discussion.

This is an excellent example of making the effort to understand both both sides of the story, something I've been trying to improve in myself. Often in the past I've been guilty of taking sides rather than making the right choice based on the true situation. Changing that doesn't mean being insensitive to people, but it does require a more considered approach.

The internet as a whole is good practice for this, as there is no shortage of strongly held opposing opinions, and it's good mental exercise trying to understand why the opposing viewpoints are seen as correct by their proponents.

[lisa haneberg]

Thanks for your comments Cheryl and Rob. I would agree that what's important is to determine the best way to have a good conversation. Interestingly, Sally was not someone who gravitated to technology for most situations - but it was her fear of the CEO that drove her choice this day.

[Mark]

Excellent as always Lisa and a story that likely offers lessons both inside and outside the office for us all. Thanks.

[Project Management Software]

Here is what happened. Sally poured her heart into pitching an idea to the CEO. Her email laid out the reasons why she proposed an expansion of programs in her department.