Vedere Consulting

When I was growing up, my mother was the only woman in our neighborhood who worked. And I resented it. I wanted her to be like all the other mothers who stayed home. She didn’t have to work, my father made enough money to support us. She did it because she wanted to. In 1950’s suburbia, that was almost unheard of.

My mother did what many people fail to do. When it was important, she put herself first. I have worked with hundreds of people over the years as an executive coach and workshop facilitator, and many of those people find it very difficult to put themselves first even when they need to. It may be the unreasonable demands of a difficult boss, it may be failing to find time to renew oneself when faced with the multiple responsibilities of work and family, it may be limiting oneself to a job that is unsatisfying and boring, it may be avoiding an employee whose personal problems have affected their work performance. I see this behavior in successful executives as well as first line supervisors. I see it in men as well as women.

In our culture, despite the “me” generation labels, there is still a strong undercurrent of belief that it is selfish and egotistical to consider our own needs, to be clear about what we want and to make requests of others that would enrich our lives. And so we don’t. But when we consistently fail to put ourselves first, the unmet need manifests itself in dysfunctional ways. We may become resentful or angry, we may put unreasonable expectations on others that we’ve sacrificed for, we may become depressed or unproductive, or we may become sick.

So how do we buck this current? And how do we balance our needs with the legitimate needs of others? There are a number of books that have tackled this subject. I highly recommend Marshall Rosenberg’s Non-Violent Communication: a Language of Life, Patterson, Grenny, McMillan and Switzler’s Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking When the Stakes Are High, William Ury’s The Power of a Positive No, and Ron Short’s Learning in Relationships.

Each of these books tells us that a primary task is to become observers of ourselves. To pay attention to our feelings, to name them without explaining why or judging whether they are right or wrong, acceptable or unacceptable. And then to identify what we want and need. To accept that want or need as legitimate. This is easily said, but very hard to do. I met with a group of trainers and coaches recently and we acknowledged we still struggle with naming needs and accepting them as legitimate. It requires conscious effort and acceptance.

It also means that our needs are as important as other’s needs. Not more important. Not less important. Equally important. That means that we may have to negotiate with someone else to get a need met. We may have to help them identify what their need is. We may have to resist their demands. And we have to resist making demands on others.

We can put ourselves first. We need to.

Plum Cluverius is an executive and leadership coaching practicing in Richmond, Virginia.

Labels: Crucial Conversations

Click for more information on executive coaching with Vedere Consulting. You can also follow Plum on Twitter.

Many of the executives I work with are terrific problem solvers. They are inventive, determined, intelligent. It’s one of the main reasons they got to where they are today. But what happens when the problem isn’t one that can be solved—like death or a terminal illness? Or someone doesn’t want you to solve the problem for them? Or you don’t have the experience or skills or resources and don’t know where to turn? How can an inveterate problem solver be effective?

The answer is simple, really. Stop talking. Give the person your full attention. Listen with all your heart. Tell the truth about your experience. Trust that resolution will come without you and that your caring and presence is enough. Lao Tsu called this experience “non-doing.” Non-doing doesn’t mean doing nothing, it means paying attention to your experience and to what another person is experiencing without doing anything to “fix” it. It is also recognizing that paying attention is often enough.

All of us have heard the jokes about married couples experiencing the frustration of problem solving gone wrong when one of them (often the woman) discusses a problem she’s having. Her husband, with a sincere desire to help, gets out the proverbial toolkit and starts troubleshooting. “Did you try x,” he’ll say. She, a little frustrated because of course she tried x, will continue on but with an edge to her voice. “How about y,” her husband says. Now his wife is getting really frustrated and maybe a bit insulted. Because she doesn’t want his advice. She just wants him to listen. If he listens she can figure out the problem herself. Or she just needs to know someone cares and understands.

The same thing happens between parents and children or bosses and subordinates. It happens sometimes in really difficult situations when we want to help someone we love through all illness or the death of a loved one. We give advice, or we try to problem solve. And sometimes that’s the worst thing we can do.

Experts, as well as people who have experienced great tragedy, tell us that the people who were most helpful were the people who gave support through being there to listen when the sufferer wanted to talk. It is non-doing. It is not interfering with the flow of life but supporting it.

This is a tough stance for a chronic doer. I recommend acquiring the gift of non-doing in small steps. First, simply pay attention to your reactions to problems. What does your body do? Does your heart rate increase? Do you feel tension or release anywhere in your body? What are your thoughts? What emotions are you experiencing? By observing yourself, you delay doing. You have some time to think. Second, ask yourself if the person wants—or needs-- your help. Is non-doing going to be more productive than doing? Third, breathe deeply and into your belly. It will relax you and help you respond more slowly. Fourth, lean back and down (you are probably leaning forward and up—that’s a common problem solving stance). Allow yourself to relax into the conversation. Notice when your mind starts to wander and repeat the steps.

When you practice non-doing you are giving the other person a tremendous gift. And perhaps you’ll find that you’re giving one to yourself as well.

Plum Cluverius is a leadership and executive coach practicing in Richmond, Virginia.

Labels: Crucial Conversations

Click for more information on executive coaching with Vedere Consulting. You can also follow Plum on Twitter.

“You are a complete idiot.” “How could you make such a stupid mistake.” “You’re always messing up!” You probably wouldn’t say any of these things—at least out loud—to someone else, but how many times have you said them to yourself? This type of language is violent and damaging, yet when we do something that causes us to feel guilty, ashamed or embarrassed, this is often the language we turn to. We don’t even think about it, it’s automatic.

Why do we do it? Because we’ve been conditioned to believe that guilt and shame provide the impetus for learning and positive behavior. Parents often use this tactic as a learning tool. I know I did. But shame and guilt often produce the opposite result. Instead of prompting action, they prompt resistance. How many people have you heard say, “I really should start working out” or “I really should lose weight” or “I really should control my temper better,” and then nothing ever happens.

I agree with Marshall Rosenberg, who in his book Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life (Puddledancer Press, 2003) says that when we use the word “should” with ourselves, we resist learning because “should” implies we don’t have a choice. He goes on to say that human beings have a strong need to control their own destiny, to freely choose, so we resist attempts, even internal ones, to force us to change against our wills.

What can we do differently? Rosenberg says that a more productive response is to ask ourselves what unmet need is behind our punishing language. For example, I often get angry with myself when I wait until the last minute to get something done. I’m feeling a lot of pressure and I keep asking myself, “when will you ever learn to plan ahead!” In this instance, my unmet need is for calm and composure.

After identifying the unmet need, the next step is to examine the needs we were trying to address with the actions that produced our guilt or self-punishment. If we also identify our unmet needs there, we can see that there was a positive intent for those actions. Then it’s easier for us to truly forgive ourselves for that mistake and to examine how we can better meet our needs the next time.

When I’m doing something at the last minute, I’m usually doing it because I’ve made too many commitments and I’m running behind. I made those commitments because I wanted to help someone or get something done that was important to me or I wanted to be seen as a competent professional or I wanted to continue building my practice. All those things are important to me. When I remember why I made those commitments, I understand how I got into such a bind and I lose my anger.

Interestingly, forgiving myself this way frees up energy for rebalancing priorities or using the time management techniques I know so well. Perhaps I think of someone to delegate to or I decide something can wait or I renegotiate with a client. Punishing myself just makes me feel guilty. Nothing changes.

I firmly believe that if we are ever to build organizations that are truly respectful and affirming, we must begin with ourselves. By learning to change the way we talk to ourselves, by turning violent language into the language of learning, we can see ourselves and consequently everything else in new and more productive ways.

Plum Cluverius is an executive and leadership coach in Richmond, Virginia. Contact her at plum@vedereconsulting.com for a free half hour consultation.

Labels: Crucial Conversations

Click for more information on executive coaching with Vedere Consulting. You can also follow Plum on Twitter.

Not long ago a client was struggling with a tough conversation she wanted to have with a new associate in her law firm. She believed he was having a difficult time hearing the clients’ concerns and it was impacting his ability to build relationships with them. She wanted to send him to a training program but didn’t know how to tell him in a way that wouldn’t be insulting. Many of the executives and managers I’ve worked with have faced a similar dilemma.

The problem with my client’s approach is she was focused on the solution to the problem. What she wasn’t focusing on was the conversation itself—how to send a clear message, how to ask good questions, how to involve her sales rep in the exploration of and solution to the problem.

What is interesting about this dilemma is that coming into a conversation with the solution already figured out makes having the conversation so much harder. Your subordinate is more likely to feel threatened and resentful. You have something—your solution—to sell now, and the stakes are a bit higher.

My client saw this immediately. She, like many of her peers, focused on the solution because that’s her comfort zone. She’s a problem solver and when faced with a problem she automatically does what she does best. The more effective alternative is to focus on the conversation. The question becomes, “how can I approach this person in a way that allows both of us to analyze and resolve the situation?” It’s a whole new problem to solve!

I love the way my client solved it. Here are several of her solutions:
· Find a casual time to have the conversation when she and the associate could be alone
· Offer her insights as a hypothesis, focusing on the facts first and then her analysis
· Ask the associate to offer other hypotheses and insights
· Support his insights when she can honestly do so
· Listen completely to what the associate has to say
· Brainstorm solutions together. Make her solution only one in the mix

You might find another approach more useful. The point is that my client turned her attention to the conversation and thought carefully about the impact of her words and actions, what could be effective and what would work for her, given her skills and comfort zone. I have a lot of faith that this conversation will go much better than it would have. I believe yours can too.
There are a number of great resources that can help you prepare for tough conversations. Several of my current favorites are:

Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life, by Marshall Rosenberg, Puddledancer Press.
Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking When the Stakes Are High, by Kerry Patterson, Joseph Grenny, Ron McMillan, and Al Switzler, McGraw-Hill.
Fierce Conversations: Achieving Success at Work and in Life, One Conversation at a Time, by Susan Scott, Viking Press.
Quiet Leadership: Six Steps to Transforming Performance at Work, by David Rock, Harper-Collins.

Feel free to explore the “Tools and Resources” page of my website to link to these and other helpful resources.

Labels: Crucial Conversations

Click for more information on executive coaching with Vedere Consulting. You can also follow Plum on Twitter.

One of my clients, a regional marketing vice president for a mid-sized insurance company, has been negotiating a difficult agreement between her division and the underwriting department concerning concessions for an important client. It was a particularly tough negotiation because the SVP of underwriting and her boss in marketing see each other as rivals within the senior leadership group. Both men are also known for their large egos and arrogant behavior.

Despite these difficulties, my client was feeling pretty good about the results of the negotiations. Then she got a call from the underwriting SVP. Though he wouldn’t have engaged in such behavior with her boss directly, while on the phone with her, he lambasted her boss, he made additional demands, he screamed at her about how incompetent her boss was. She saw the agreement she worked so hard for going down the drain. What was worse, she said, was that he couldn’t see how unreasonable his demands and accusations were, no matter what she tried.

Does this sound familiar to you? It does to me. It reminded me immediately of the times my then 2- year-old sons would have a temper tantrum over something they wanted. They usually picked a very public place, say the grocery store. They would scream, cry, yell at me, “I hate you, Mommy!” because they wanted something I wouldn’t let them have. The choices parents believe they have to counter such behavior are pretty limited and mostly ineffective. Do you placate the child by letting them have what they want? Do you threaten them with a spanking if they don’t behave? Do you try to reason with them, (i.e. “But Bobby, that candy will ruin your supper.”)?

None of these strategies work. Yet it’s these same strategies dressed up in more sophisticated clothes that people in organizations use to manage powerful people who explode or scream to get what they want. I’ve even encountered bosses who try them with demanding (or brazen) employees. Like my client, we are thrown by the unreasonableness of the demands and the behavior. What can we do?

I did many things wrong as a parent, but one thing I learned to do right was managing my children’s temper tantrums. I didn’t do any of the strategies most parents use. When my children were screaming at me, crying and kicking, I simply said in a calm voice, “I’m sorry you feel that way.” I then walked away, leaving them without their favorite audience. Within seconds the tantrum stopped. After a couple of times, my kids never had a tantrum again.

This strategy worked because all tantrums are about power. If I refuse to get in a power struggle—to acquiesce or resist—then the tantrum goes away because it isn’t working. The principle is calm non-responsiveness. One need do nothing but remain calm and remove oneself from the tantrum as quickly and gracefully as possible. How one does that in an organization is different for each situation. The key is to not take the tantrum seriously and to stay calm and uninvolved.

My client’s new strategy for dealing with the SVP’s tantrums is to simply listen for a few moments, thank the person for calling, say “I think _____is the best person to discuss that issue with” and find an excuse to get off the line or change the subject. She feels that if the SVP is forced to confront whoever is offending him directly, he will be more restrained since he won’t have the third-party “audience” for his tirade. I like her plan. Do you? I invite you to tell us your strategy for coping with office tantrums.

Labels: Crucial Conversations

Click for more information on executive coaching with Vedere Consulting. You can also follow Plum on Twitter.

I want to share a small triumph with you. I want to share it because it happened when my husband, Mike, and I were fighting. We don’t fight often, but when we do, old patterns from 32 years of marriage and 36 years of knowing each other still can kick in. And they aren’t pretty. We are both oldest children. We know how to manipulate others to get our way. Put us together in that frame of mind—it becomes a contest of wills.

Perhaps you may know what I’m talking about. Perhaps you can imagine yourself in such an exchange. This one started out innocently enough. I had come home around 6:30 from a late meeting. I was tired and hungry. Mike greeted me at the door, “Let’s go out to the Quadrangle for dinner.” Immediately I pictured smoky room, long wait for service, loud music and football on TV. Ugh.

“I don’t want to go out for dinner,” I said. “We have lots of food here. I can fix something.” Mike puts on his most convincing smile. “It’ll be great. No preparation, no clean-up.” I counter, whining, with, “We’ll have to wait for hours to be served. I don’t want to be out late.”

OK. I’m going to stop the action here for a minute. Maybe you can see the spiral and maybe not. But the conversation’s rapidly going down hill. Each of us is trying to convince the other why our solution is the right one. We are getting nowhere. In this scenario, whoever is the most persistent wins. The other person will end up going along resentfully—and neither of us will have a good time.

This conflict spiral is never fun, no matter how much you love each other. But it doesn’t have to be this way. My triumph (and I treasure it) is that the spiral stopped. It stopped because this time I was conscious. By conscious I mean that I started paying attention to the way we were talking, not what we were saying. What I saw then was the spiral, the fact that we would never get anywhere as long as we focused on trying to convince each other our way was the right way.

What I did differently was to start paying attention to what we both needed. I asked Mike what made going out so attractive. He said he really wanted to get out of the house and he really wanted to get some exercise and we could walk to a restaurant. Okay, that made sense. The most important thing for me was to avoid a long wait to be served in a restaurant. I was ready to relax at home.

We now both knew what was important to both of us. That meant we were able to start thinking of solutions that let both of us get what we most wanted. For us, this turned out to be simple. We ordered food from a favorite carry out place, walked there, and came back home to have dinner. We both were happy and we had a great meal. It was a win-win.

Win-win solutions don’t just happen. They happen because someone in the conflict becomes conscious. S/he starts paying attention to the conversation’s process, and then deliberately asks a question or makes a comment that allows the partners to focus on what each of them really wants instead of why their “solutions” make sense. Then, instead of two solutions with a win-lose outcome, it’s possible to generate multiple solutions. The more solutions you generate, the greater the possibility that one of them will satisfy you both.

Let me tell you, it feels awesome when you find a solution that makes both of you happy. You’re connected again, in a little deeper way. You’ve taken care of each other.

Thankfully, we’re not married to the people we work with, but the process is the same. Good solutions to conflicts require that someone pays attention to the process, that someone steers the conversation toward what’s needed by each party, and that someone uses those needs to craft solutions that satisfy you both.

Labels: Crucial Conversations

Click for more information on executive coaching with Vedere Consulting. You can also follow Plum on Twitter.