This series of postings will discuss using communication methods to gain control of circumstances and reduce your chances of becoming a target. We will cover ten (10) chapters in the book "Comebacks at Work" over the next several weeks. I'll attempt to couple these when appropriate with other authors works such as Dale Carnegie.
Assessing Baseline Comeback Skill
You got to begin somewhere. We have established each of us are 75% responsible for how people treat us. So we need to establish how effective we are currently at coming up with what to say. In short, we will need to assess several things such as our ability to sense the circumstances, types of characters, and anticipate comments.
We want to monitor for our own reactions since they not effective responses. This begins with understanding our ability to sense the circumstances. There are two scales we need to consider when comments are made. There are more but this a start. The first is the intent scale that ranges from accidental to purposeful. The book uses intentional but I am going to change it to purposeful since the intention has a purpose. Purpose is the motivator that we will be concerned with. The second is the demeanor scale that ranges from slightly offensive to insulting. Both scales are much broader. We will be focused the portion of the scale that causes conflict, angst, and trouble for us.
When assessing a comments placement on these scales, your goals must be considered. The placement on the scales is subjective to the goals and the relationship with the person making the comment. Once you have gauged the placement on the scales then you can select the appropriate response.
Commentary: There are many possible responses the book offers. Remember in project management your goal is to move the project forward. The structure of a response that moves the project forward should frame the comment then recast it in a positive light then endear people to a higher motive, principle, or purpose.
You should practice responses by reflecting on actual comments, writing down several response variations and ranking them based on effectiveness. You want to avoid defensive comments, weak positions, insulting jabs, threats, or empowering responses. The use of "I" too many times is often an indicator of a defensive posture. The effort is to make the messenger stop and think about the remark. There are numerous methods of handling them some are:
Alteration: The spoiler will typically word things in a negative manner and not in your best interest. Alteration recasts the tone in a positive way and thanks the spoiler for the heads up. Alteration avoids disagreement.
Re-interpretation: This avoids disagreement and redirects efforts to place blame that the spoiler is seeking. Typically, disagreement and blame is side stepped by highlighting benefits and other more positive outcomes.
General Observations: Avoids disagreement and confrontation by offering a combined action of situational analysis and walking away. You would usually fall back on general life axioms and adages such as murphy's laws or other adages.
Contextual Alteration: This approach rejects negativity and defensive postures by weakening and/or recasting then comment based on missing information in the messengers remarks.
Intentional revision: This is diversionary, a dismissal, and places focus on the messenger. The comment tone can be adjusted by using sarcasm in order to deliver the level of discontent you desire.
Moving On: This is complete dismissal and outright ignores the messenger. It sends the signal that the messenger's comment has no impact, interest, or concern on your part. It causes them to reflect on their conduct.
Gratuitous Insults: This is an ambiguous comment delivered with a smile that if structured properly sends a alert message to the intended party and to others listening nearby an innocuous jocular message. It is effective when you need to appear polite while at the same time need to send a strong message. This is also misused by offending parties.
Involvement: This avoids confrontation by being agreeable bringing attention to a fault, problem, or issue addressed by the messenger then involving the messenger in the solution. In essence, gives the messenger work.
The character types one may encounter include:
THE SPOILER
The spoiler is inevitable in the workplace. They love a good argument, seek them deliberately, pick at your faults, place blame on you, and dangle you on a string. These people love to put you on the spot, demonstrate their superiority, and above all else win.
Being agreeable spoils the spoiler. Reflecting the spoilers own words in support of your ideas co-opts the intended effect for your benefit. This is accomplished parsing or through fractionation of the remarks then putting a twist on a relevant elements.
THE CRITIC
The critic's comments can range from sensitive to vulgar and often are directed maliciously towards the individual. The techniques for handling these comments also range from moving on to addressing the remark directly. You will need to assess the critics purpose and focus on moving forward. When the messenger exceeds your tolerance level it is appropriate to put the messenger on notice. This often done using a gratuitous insult while smiling. For example, "You have an interesting approach. Now, let's see your departure." Persistent critic conduct may result in a tag name like, "Battling Betsy".
THE BLAMER
This type of person is everywhere. Especially, in situation that are highly political or where promotions and jobs are scarce. The tendency is to appear as though they are not causing problems or failures. One way to achieve this end is to point fingers and blame others.
It is difficult to refrain from attacking when being attacked. Of course, there are times to take the wind out of someone's sails. However, we want to focus on positive approaches and move things forward. It is usually best to buy time using a method of 'Moving On' remarking something to the effect of: "There's plenty of blame to go around."; "We can spend time pointing fingers or we can turn this around."; or "We can make this personal, but then I do not see the point in that."
THE PUPPETEER
This type of character enjoys power over others. The puppeteer is good at discerning what matters to people then those same people permit the puppeteer to come between them and their goals or desires. Most people at some point in their live allow others to make them anxious and/or miserable because they do not strip them of their undeserved power.
In handling these puppeteer you should never let them see you sweat. In some cases, when someone is leveraging their positional authority in order to stir you up or place blocks in your path because they can, you should not address them directly unless you absolutely must. Instead, the path of least resistance is often better than confronting the puppeteer. By calling attention to the point made by a puppeteer and drawing them into the fix or solution can cause the puppeteer to back down. Thus, whenever confronted by someone who puts obstacles in your path out of habit or some need for power, try giving them work in order to resolve the issue they created.
THE COMPLAINER
Everyone gets a little down from time-to-time and we tend to complain. However, there are some people who are habitually negative. They make others around them feel bad or annoyed. You need to deal with these people constructively by first judging their character and then the circumstances. You must have situational awareness. Your responses should steer the individual away from the negative thoughts and towards constructive thoughts. If done properly, the complainer will begin to see his conduct is unbecoming.
THE DEFEATIST TYPE
These people are typically highly structured and often bureaucrats with a long list of policies and rules. They cannot see beyond the bureaucracy. Anything that you are attempting is somehow violating a policy or rule. Somehow you must pluck the human being from the bureaucrat. The trick is to appeal human sensibilities. If that does not work go to the next person, if possible, and avoid them. For example, hang up and call back for another customer service representative or wait for another counter clerk.
Summary
Assessing comebacks begins with gauging the comment's intent and demeanor. In most cases there are background forces at work. Until you gain situational awareness and understand these forces you are part of the problem if you argue. If you are alert and assess the environment then you can discern avenues for achieving what you need. These avenues begin with methods such as:
- Alteration
- Re-interpretation
- General Observations
- Contextual Alteration
- Intentional revision
- Moving On
- Gratuitous Insults
- Involvement
Part of situational awareness is understanding some of the character types and which methods to apply. These character types include:
- The Spoiler
- The Critic
- The Blamer
- The Puppeteer
- The Complainer
- The Defeatist
With practice assessing the situation and considering responses, you will become more deliberate in your responses. Whenever caught off guard it is best to stall for time rather than react and argue.
Scenario taken from LinkedIn: A Dr. Earl R. Smith posted in August 26, 2007 a request for comment.
//QUOTE//The Gratuitous Insult – How do you respond?
I have been asking a series of questions about self-sabotaging behaviors. The vast majority of the replies have been constructive and incredibly helpful. But there is one type of reply that is truly self-sabotaging and gives me pause – it involves a gratuitous insult of some kind. When I try to point out that the insult is counter to their interests the person tends to respond with more insults. In a recent exchange, when I asked for clarification of a response I received “If you don't understand what I mean, then that is probably your problem.” When I pointed out that I found his reply mildly insulting I received “you think you know me enough to think that I am insulting you, which I am not” – as if to say “you don’t get to decide when you feel insulted, I do”.
My research indicates that most of these people are white, males in their late thirties to early fifties and consultants in either a one man or small operations. I would like to find a way to respond that adds value to their lives but haven’t so far. It is quite frustrating and maybe there is no way or it is not worth the effort. What are your suggestions? //UNQUOTE//
Commentary/Suggestion: The Gratutious Insult is an ambiguous comment delivered with a smile that if structured properly sends a put down message to the intended party and to others listening nearby an innocuous message that is often jocular in nature. It is part of character types known as the Critic and the Puppeteer. The Critic continuously offers commentary that can range from sensitive to vulgar and is often are directed maliciously towards an individual. The Puppeteer enjoys power over others and is typical of the alpha male. The Dr.'s description indicates involvement with alpha males possibly in a mid life during their 40's who make these gratuitous insults most likely showing thier pearly whites. The Dr. is a leader and prime target for someone attempting to exert their need for power.
In the response, the Dr. does not want to engage them directly since the situation will most likely deteriorate into a combative exchange. Also the Dr. does not want to let them see him sweat. There is a need to establish positional authority, take the bite out of their comment, remove their undeserved power over the situation, and recast their remark involving them in a solution. For example,
The remark, "If do not understand what I mean, then that is your problem."
Your possible response, "Your commentary would be unnecessary if you communicate your message better."
This response is only one example and should be adjusted for your understanding of the situation.
Commentary: The book offers numerous examples and casts the details slightly different. I have attempted to focus on positive responses that move things forward. Although there are times when someone is out-of-line and may require a more militant response that diminishes, disrupts, defeats, deflects, and/or deters the persons conduct.
Reference
Reardon, K.K., (2010). Comebacks at work: using conversation to master confrontation. (1 ED.). Harper Collins publishers, New York
No comments:
Post a Comment