Choosing What

You re Constantly Discussing the Same Issue

Before we deal with the aggressive mother, let s look at another problem. This time you re working with the owner of a real estate firm in a rural community.

The woman who works the front desk is constantly coming in to work late, the owner explains.

Have you talked to her? you ask.

Repeatedly.

And then what happens? you continue.

She s on time for a few days, maybe even a week, and then she starts coming in late again.

Then what do you say to her?

I tell her that she s late and that I don t like it.

This situation presents a terrific example of what separates the best problem solvers from everyone else. The owner has the courage to confront the desk clerk. That separates him from the worst. However, the fact that he returns to the same problem each time puts him far below the best. This is an indication that there is some other problem that needs to be discussed: The front desk clerk isn t living up to her commitments, she s disrespecting company policy, etc.

When people repeatedly make the same mistake, those who are the best at identifying and then confronting problems redefine each problem with each new infraction. They don t live the wretched life of Phil Conners, the weatherman in the movie Groundhog Day . Those who observe repeated failures and discuss each new instance as if it were the first one live the same problem (the same day) over and over, and nothing ever changes. Skilled problem solvers never live Groundhog Day. The first time a person is late, she s late; the second time, she s failed to live up to her promise; the third time she s starting down the road to discipline, etc.

In summary, if you find yourself having the same problem-solving discussion over and over again, it s likely there s another, more important problem you need to address.

You re Getting Increasingly Upset

As you continue your conversation with the realtor, you say, Obviously, the fact that your clerk comes in late is the behavior that catches your attention, and that s what you talk to her about. But what is the real problem here?

I m not exactly sure. I do know that it s starting to bug me a lot ”more than it probably should.

Are you becoming more upset because the problem s escalating?

Not really, the broker responds hesitantly.

Finally, you ask: When you re angry enough to complain to your wife, coworkers, or best friend about the problem, how do you describe it?

A light goes on in the broker s eyes as he excitedly states, It s killing me that she s taking advantage of our relationship. She s my neighbor, she s helped me out a lot, and now she doesn t do what I ask because she knows that I won t discipline her since we re good friends. At least that s how it feels to me.

That s the problem the broker needs to confront. He s becoming increasingly upset with each infraction because he s never dealt with the issue that is bothering him. Being late is the frozen tip floating above the chilly waters. Taking advantage of a friendship is the iceberg itself.

Confronting the Right Issue

As you can see from these examples, learning how to get at the gist of an infraction requires time and practice. Feeling pressured by time constraints and hyped up by emotions, most people miss the real deal. It takes grade-school assistant principals twenty minutes or more to discuss the assortment of challenges presented in the case of the aggressive mother. In fact, most never come to the realization that it s the lack of cooperation that they probably ought to discuss. Many can t get past their emotional reaction. They want to stick it to the feisty mother, and frankly, that s exactly what many would do.

Along a similar vein, most parents who pace the floor nervously as a teenage daughter breaks curfew can t see beyond the hands of the clock when in truth what really has them concerned is the fact that the girl didn t have the courtesy to call them, let them know she d be late, and bring a merciful end to their tortured worrying. Many don t even realize that this is what is troubling them.

The ability to reduce an infraction to its bare essence takes patience, a sense of proportion, and precision. First, you have to take the time to unbundle the problem. People are often in too much of a hurry to do this. Their emotions propel them to move quickly, and speed rarely leads to careful thought. Second, while sorting through the issues you have to decide what is bothering you the most. If you don t, you ll end up going after either the wrong target or too many targets. Third, you have to be concise .

You have to distill the issue to a single sentence. Lengthy problem descriptions only obscure the real issue. If you can t reduce a violation to a clear sentence before you talk, the issue almost never becomes more understandable and focused as a conversation unfolds.

Helpful Tools to Get to the Right Confrontation

Let s say that despite your best efforts you keep returning to the same problem. Your emotions are getting worse , not better, and in retrospect you believe that you re choosing to talk about what s easy, convenient , or obvious but not what s important. In short, you have every reason to believe that you re repeatedly dealing with the wrong problem. How do you turn this bad habit around? To hit the right target, use the following tools.

Think CPR

This acronym can help define a problem as well as eliminate Groundhog Day. The first time a problem comes up, talk about the C ontent, what just happened : You drank too much at the luncheon, became inebriated, started talking too loud, made fun of our clients , and embarrassed the company. The content of a problem typically deals with a single event ”the here and now.

The next time the problem occurs, talk P attern, what has been happening over time: This is the second time this has occurred. You agreed it wouldn t happen again, and I m concerned that I can t count on you to keep a promise. Pattern issues acknowledge that problems have histories and that histories make a difference. Frequent and continued violations affect the other person s predictability and eventually harm respect and trust.

Warning: It s easy to miss the pattern and get sucked into debating content. For instance, your boss repeatedly leaves your agenda items to the end of the meeting ”meaning that they typically get abbreviated or dropped altogether. You ve spoken with her about it before. This time when you bring it up, she explains how full the agenda was and how you need to be more flexible about urgent issues. If you give in to that explanation, you ve missed the point. Your concern is not today s meeting (the content issue), it s the long-standing pattern. Sometimes the pattern sneaks up on you and a new issue arises. You point out the problem, and the other person begins to either rant or pout, something that s starting to happen a lot in your conversations with him or her. It s becoming a pattern. Influential people notice this pattern of behavior and find ways to address it before moving back to the original topic.

As the problem continues, talk about R elationship, what s happening to us . Relationship concerns are far bigger than either the content or the pattern. The issue is not that other people have disappointed you repeatedly; it s that the string of disappointments has caused you to lose trust in them: You doubt their competency, you don t respect or trust their promises, and this is affecting the way you treat one another: This is starting to put a strain on how we work together. I feel like I have to nag you to keep you in line, and I don t like doing that. I guess my fear is that I can t trust you to keep the agreements you make.

If your real concern is around the relationship and you discuss only the pattern of behavior, you re likely to find yourself feeling dissatisfied with the outcome. Even worse, you re likely to experience Groundhog Day: You ll have the same conversation again later. To understand the various kinds of content, pattern, and relationship issues that routinely pop up during crucial confrontations , consider the following three dimensions: consequences, intents, and wants. Each provides a distinct method for first unbundling and then prioritizing complex problems.

Unbundling

Consequences

Problems are almost never contained in the behavior of the offender. They re much more likely to be contained in what happens afterward . The problem lies in the consequences. For example, a staff specialist who works for you is supposed to complete a financial analysis by noon. She miscalculates how long it will take and delivers the job to you three hours late.

The errant behavior, being late, is not the problem. What follows is. The fact that you might lose a client is what really bothers you. Or maybe it s the fact that this is the third time this person has let you down and you re beginning to wonder if you can count on her. Or perhaps it s the fact that you now may have to watch this person more closely, costing you precious time and making her feel micromanaged. Each of these things comes after the behavior, is a consequence of the original act, and helps unbundle the problem.

When you want to clarify the issue you need to confront, stop and ask yourself, What are the consequences of this problem to me? To our relationship? To the task? To other stakeholders? Analyzing the consequences helps you determine what is most important to discuss.

Intentions

Let s move the analysis in another direction. A fellow you work with is causing you a problem. He cheerfully agreed to format a report you created, and then, instead of giving it to you, he handed it directly to your boss. What was he thinking? Actually, you have a theory. You believe that his intentions were selfish (he was trying to take credit); at least, this is the conclusion you ve drawn.

Let s be clear about this. You ve drawn this conclusion not as a thoughtless knee-jerk reaction, as is often the case, but as the result of mounting evidence. You ve examined the problem, you ve weighed the particulars, and you are starting to believe the person s intentions are indeed bad. When this happens, the behavior isn t the problem, at least not the big one. What came before the person acted is the problem, at least in your mind. It s the issue you ought to discuss. You have to talk about intentions.

The good news is that we address intentions all the time. Consider the father who was upset with his daughter for coming in late because she was punishing him for having grounded her. It wasn t the fact that she had been late that made him upset ”at least not totally ”it was her perceived intention that was giving him fits: She s doing it on purpose just to make me sweat. The realtor believed that the front-desk clerk was intentionally playing on their friendship to get away with coming in late. Once again, it was her perceived intent that bothered him.

Whether the father and the realtor are correct in their assessments will remain unknown until they confront the offending parties with their suspicions. And of course, deciding how they ll confront such a delicate issue isn t easy. These are invisible motives we re talking about. We re drawing conclusions about another person s unseen intent. (We ll discuss methods for stories we tell ourselves in later chapters.) Nevertheless, the conclusions the two have drawn about others underlying intent has them bothered, and these are the issues they ll need to confront eventually.

Ask What You Do and Don t Want

As you begin to unravel a bundle of problems ”examining the precipitating intentions and the consequences ”the list of component parts can grow so large that you may not know where to begin. What s the real issue, or at least the most important one?

The best tool for choosing from the host of possible problems is to ask what you really want and don t want. And since you re talking to another person, you ought to ask what you want for yourself , for the other person , and for the relationship . If you don t think about all three of these essential aspects, one may take a backseat and you won t solve your most important problem.

Consider the case of the two second-grade girls. Most people struggle with what to say to Sarah s mother until someone asks: What do you want to have happen with Sarah? What don t you want to have happen? You do want Sarah to be disciplined. You don t want to start a battle with her mother and make choices that limit Sarah s educational options. You don t want to send her to a new school just to show her mother who s in charge.

As far as you yourself are concerned, you want to be able to hold Sarah accountable. Public policy demands that you take action, and even if you could look the other way, you d be giving tacit approval to a nasty behavior. You don t want that. When it comes to the relationship, you want to be able to collaborate with Sarah s mother to come up with the proper type of discipline. You don t want the daughter to receive mixed messages. So what do you say? What is the problem you want to discuss? I m afraid we re sending Sarah the wrong message when we argue over the form the discipline should take.

To decide what to confront:

• Think CPR ”Content, Pattern, and Relationship.

• Expand the list of possible issues by considering consequences and intent.

• Choose from the list by asking what you do and don t want: for yourself, others, and the relationship.