Tag

Difficult Conversations Archives - Page 2 of 15 - How to be Awesome at Your Job

1079: The Brain Science Behind Successful Change with Dr. Britt Andreatta

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Dr. Britt Andreatta explains the neuroscience behind why we resist change and what all levels of the organization can do to handle it better.

You’ll Learn

  1. How and why our brains resist change
  2. How to actually get people on board with change
  3. How leaders unknowingly alienate people with change

About Britt

Dr. Britt Andreatta is an internationally recognized thought leader who uses her background in leadership, neuroscience, psychology, and education to create science-based solutions for today’s workplace challenges. Britt is the CEO of Brain Aware Training and former CLO for Lynda.com (now LinkedIn Learning). She has over 10 million views worldwide of her online courses and is the author of several best-selling books on the brain science of success including Wired to Grow, Wired to Resist, Wired to Connect, and Wired to Become. She recently won the 2024 Thought Leader of the Year by the Association for Talent Development. She is frequently named a “Top 10 Influencer” and regularly consults with organizations on leadership development and learning strategy.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Britt Andreatta Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Britt, welcome!

Britt Andreatta
Thanks, Pete. It’s great to be back and have a chance to connect with you.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, yes, it’s good to be chatting. It’s been 500+ episodes, so it’s about time, I’d say.

Britt Andreatta
Yes, you’d been busy. I love all the stuff you’re doing. You seem to talk to everyone.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, thank you. Yeah, well, it’s funny, our LinkedIn has so much overlap with folks.

Britt Andreatta
I know.

Pete Mockaitis
And you’re up to stuff, too. So, you’ve got a second edition of Wired to Resist that is fresh, and we talked about your other books but didn’t go into much detail about Wired to Resist in our previous conversation, so it seems like now is the time. So, can you tell us, what’s this one all about?

Britt Andreatta
Yeah, so Wired to Resist, the first edition is all about change and the brain science of change, and why humans are kind of biologically wired to resist it. But in this new edition, I’ve just updated a lot of the data, I’ve added a lot of new content. Change has really accelerated in the last five years since I wrote the first edition. And so, we know that people are experiencing change fatigue more than they ever have, and that’s driving burnout.

We know that technology is just flooding pretty much every part of our lives with massive upheaval. And, of course, you know, the world changes and the environment creates pressure. So, I really wanted to update it so that it was relevant for what we’re all kind of navigating on a daily basis these days.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, so change, it’s a juicy topic. Can you tell us, in your work and research here, what’s among the most surprising and fascinating discoveries you’ve made about us humans and brains and change?

Britt Andreatta
Yeah, so the research has shown that when we go through change, there’s kind of four key brain structures that can get activated. So, one is the amygdala, and we tend to respond to change as potential danger until we get more information. So, our body always is a survival mechanism, and it’s going to assume the worst unless it gets more information.

So, the amygdala can get kicked off. That can be made worse depending on how transparent the leaders are and if they leave room for the brain to fill in a story. Because when we fill in a story, we always fill in layoffs and, “Losing my job and it’s going to be awful.” So, the amygdala is one.

The basal ganglia is the second one that has to do with habits. And when we do a behavior over and over again, our basal ganglia, turns it into kind of a low-energy package where we can run that behavior without thinking about it.

An example most people might know is driving a car. You know, the first time you learned to drive a car, you had to think about it a lot and concentrate on the act of driving. But after you do it a few times, the basal ganglia is what turns it into something that you can do without thinking about the act of it anymore.

And this relates to change because most change is asking people to develop new habits of some kind, new ways of speaking or behaving, and that’s going to be awkward and uncomfortable at first until we get enough repetitions, magic number is around 40 to 50, for the basal ganglia to turn it into something that we don’t have to think about.

But even more important, change is often asking people to leave a habit that they already know, that’s well-grooved with hundreds, if not thousands of repetitions. And so, the reason why so many change initiatives fail is because people don’t actually make the shift in their behavior that has to go along with what that change is asking of them. They stay stuck in the old habits. So that’s important to pay attention to.

The third brain structure is the entorhinal cortex, and this is the part of the brain that acts as your GPS system, how you get home every day without having to plug it into a map. Your brain has built a map. And what we know is that if we do a change that requires people’s physical space, where they work, this part of the brain has to build new maps. It can and it will, but it requires some extra cognitive energy.

It also maps social space. So, the entorhinal cortex also is how we kind of pay attention to who has power, who we have affinity with. So, if you ever re-org a team or merge two departments together, you’re messing with people’s maps, mental, physical, and social maps. So, again, our brain is built to do this, but it can then contribute to the exhaustion or change fatigue that people feel.

And then the one that really blew my mind, Pete, and I kind of am always excited to share this because I was like, “No way.” We have a part of our brain, it’s called the habenula, whose job it is to prevent us from failing in the future. So, how it works is it uses chemical guardrails. And the example I usually give people is think back to our hunter-gatherer days. If I walked down a path and found food or water, my brain would reward me with serotonin and dopamine.

And if I went down another path and I didn’t find anything, the habenula would activate. And when it’s active, it cuts off, it restricts your serotonin and dopamine, meaning I don’t get the feel-good chemicals. And when I come to that fork in the road the next day, I just psychologically feel like I want to go down the first path.

What’s amazing is it can be so powerful as to suppress your motor neurons, meaning it’s hard to walk down the wrong path. So, what does that have to do with change? Well, change always has failure in it. Very rarely does change unfold on time, on budget, the way it’s supposed to. And so, leaders are accidentally coding change as failure, which is increasing people’s resistance to the next change that’s announced.

So, once we kind of understand these four brain structures, it really gives managers and leaders some real clear actions that helps them both design and announce change and support change in ways that are going to then increase adaptability and resilience of their people.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, that’s so much fascinating stuff. Thank you. So, this habenula, it’s designed to keep us from failing again, and it can sort of shut us down with less serotonin, less dopamine, and less sort of motor neuron stuff. So, then our motivation, and maybe our even ability to walk to a spot is hampered.

And I guess that’s intriguing because I think about a young Pete Mockaitis versus a current Pete Mockaitis, and I guess I had my share of disappointments, failures, rejections, traumas, bummers. And it’s interesting how I really do find, I don’t want to be a pessimistic negative Nellie, but I really am like a different person, especially entrepreneurially as opposed to opportunities.

Like, I used to think, “Oh, that’s so awesome. It’s totally going to work.” It’s like, “Well, I’ve seen enough things not work to think, ‘Hmm, it probably won’t work. Am I still interested, eyes wide open, knowing it’s more likely not to work than work?’” And so, it kind of takes a pretty huge upside. Like, “Well, it might not work, but if it does, it’ll be so huge. Yes, it’s still worth it.”

So, I’ve become, I guess, a shrewd, discerning, grumpier evaluator of opportunities of all sorts, not even business-y things, but just like a social opportunity, it’s like, “Ah, it’s probably going to be hot and crowded and loud and, aargh.” And so, I’m not just a grump. I’ve just learned some things.

Britt Andreatta
Yes. So, let me distinguish two things. One is there is such a thing as wisdom, right? Like, as we live life, our experience shapes our opinions and our beliefs, and we’re like, “Huh, you know, this hasn’t worked out the last three times. Maybe I should stop and pause and consider this.” Right? So, as we get on in life experience in years, I think there’s some natural wisdom that can sometimes also creep over into cynicism or skepticism.

But the other thing that’s in play, and I wrote a different book on this, Wired to Become, which is also about kind of our sense of finding purpose and meaningful work. During the pandemic, we all not only went into change fatigue, but we went well beyond that into diagnosable burnout. And the workforce, the global workforce is still showing really high numbers of burnout, even today.

And why I mentioned this is that burnout makes us, it kind of seeps joy away. So, things that used to make you excited, don’t make you excited anymore. It can make you apathetic and much more cautious and want to stay kind of home and in your safe space. So, then my challenge to you would be, “Are you being cautious about change? Or are you also experiencing some of the effects of burnout that many of us have not yet fully recovered from?”

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I love your pro tips here. If we find ourselves in the category of an overactive habenula, what is to be done?

Britt Andreatta
Yeah. So, from a leader perspective, let me first talk about change. The advice I give is that when we realize that, “Oh, this habenula is going to be paying attention to failure,” it really changes how we talk about change with our teams.

So, before I give this training, a lot of ways leaders approach it is if the change initiative is over budget or behind schedule, they come into the staff meeting and are like, “Oh, my gosh, you guys, we’re over budget. We’re behind schedule. What are we going to do?” And the habenula just hears failure, failure, failure.

Where, if instead that manager came into the meeting and said, “All right, you guys, high fives all around. Since our last meeting, you’ve done A, B and C,” and we acknowledge effort and progress. Now the brain gets the reward for having participated, leaned into change, done the things they were supposed to do. And then you can follow it up with, “But we’re over schedule and behind budget. What are we going to do about it?”

And so, we tend to kind of just focus on the negative and we’re accidentally making people more change-resistant by not first acknowledging effort and progress. You really want to do that, particularly around change, and then you can focus on “What do we need to fix?” So, in the work setting, I would suggest that.

In terms of burnout, really, the only recovery from burnout is two things: rest, making sure you’re getting enough rest; and playing more, because we’re like every other species. Species don’t play unless they feel safe. And we lost access to all of our forms of play for a good three years there. And many of us have not gotten back in the habit of going back and playing.

And what’s dangerous about burnout is, because it makes you so apathetic, you’ll be like, “Oh, yeah, I could go to that dinner out with friends and a movie. Eh, I don’t think I will.” Like the apathy keeps you from going, but, really, it’s playing and getting the reward of the fun with your friends and stuff that can pull you out of burnout.

So, rest and play are things that we all should dial up more in our lives. And then play gives you all kinds of other benefits. People who play frequently are much more innovative and creative. They’re generally happier. Play unlocks all kinds of good things about our sense of self.

Pete Mockaitis

Now you said we lost our access to play, and I guess I’m thinking there’s a universe of online entertainment, screen-related fun to be had from YouTube to TikTok, to video games and more, whatever your personal online entertainment poison of choice may be. When you say play does it exclude these? Or, is there optimal forms of play?

Britt Andreatta

No, it’s a great question. And my husband’s an avid gamer, so I appreciate gaming and online entertainment as definitely a legitimate form of play. However, during the pandemic, we were living in a heightened state of survival, right? We have a lot of amnesia about this, but we literally lived through a significant global trauma.

And we were so busy just trying to get through it. Many people overworked. They lost access to their normal ways of play. We couldn’t go on vacation. We couldn’t go to a water park. You couldn’t go to a movie theater. You didn’t go out to dinner with friends. And so, we all kind of pulled back and recreated lives that worked during that time. But for many folks, they haven’t re-fluffed back out to some of those activities.

So, that’s what I mean by play. Like, even though things are open now, there’s still a lot of people that don’t go do those things because they’ve just kind of gotten out of the habit of it or they’re biologically haven’t realized that they need to attend to the fact that this apathy is impacting them. But absolutely, online sources of entertainment can be great as long as you’re not doom-scrolling too much.

And if you’re using it to numb out feelings or avoid social connections, then maybe it’s not so healthy. But I think all of us kind of know when we’re using it to avoid life, versus we’re using it for enjoyment and entertainment. So, it’s something to pay attention to.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, that’s handy. Thank you. And so, onto change, you mentioned that when we have an ambiguous story, “It’s danger. It’s like guilty until proven innocent.” And so, I guess I just want to cover that in terms of change, like people say, “Oh, people don’t like change. Change is uncomfortable. Change is hard.” And I think there are there are times when, and maybe they’re rare, relatively speaking, but I want to get your hot take on when there’s a change that just feels clearly wonderful.

For example, someone says, “Hey, Britt, you know what, we realized there’s a couple key strategic roles where we are underpaying relative to the marketplace, you and others in similar roles are going to be receiving a 20% raise effective next pay period and ongoing.”

That just sounds clear and wonderful. Are our brains cool with that or do we still have a problem with that too?

Britt Andreatta
That’s a great question. I mean, that particular example is, really, you’re not changing my title, you’re not changing my job, you’re not changing who I’m reporting to, you’re just changing the amount of money that goes in my bank account at the end of the day for the work that I’ve done. So, I think most people would respond to that type of change with happiness.

We can really think about people’s motivation for change on kind of two axes. One is “Did we want the change? Yes, or no?” and “Did we choose the change? Yes, or no?” So, getting a raise without having to do more work, that’s a yes and yes. I will be running toward that and feeling good about it.

But if you also said to me, “Hey, Britt, we’ve identified that you’ve got some amazing talent. We’re going to give you a 20% raise, but you need to relocate to a different city or a different country and you got to take on 50% more work,” “Oh, I didn’t choose that. I’m not sure even I want that.” And, of course, then if it’s stuff, a no and a no, I’m going to resist and dig my heels in. So, we really have to look at people’s motivation for change.

There is some change that people love and run toward. And we also have to remember the more you move up in an organization, the more leaders tend to be entrepreneurial and tend to be more change-comfortable because they’re deciding and driving the change. But when you’re on the receiving end of change and you don’t have a lot of agency in that, that’s where you’re going to see more of the resistance.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, that’s good and clear. All right. Well, so then let’s run through it. If we want to have a change happen successfully, what are our top dos and don’ts?

Britt Andreatta
Okay. When we’re on the receiving end of change, there’s a few things that we can do that’s really about empowering ourselves. In an ideal world, the people above us would be designing great change and leading us with support and being transparent, but sometimes that’s not the case. So, part of it is like really just owning your own experience and asking questions.

We are more motivated for change if we can find a, “What’s in it for me? How can I make this valuable for me? How can I turn this into an opportunity to learn or grow or gain a new skill or work with a person that I like?” So, finding a sense of purpose in it.

If we can partner up with people that we like or care about and turn it into a team experience, so we’re not doing it alone, that can be helpful. Gamifying it, and this is why so many apps are valuable. I’m actually about to travel to Europe, so I hopped on Duolingo and I’m getting my little owl points every day as I complete my language lessons.

Pete Mockaitis
“You have to keep the streak or we will stop you, ceaselessly.”

Britt Andreatta
Right, I’m on my streak. But some of these things help us. Our brain loves a reward, but it almost doesn’t care what the reward is. So, that little “b-bing” that I hear when I complete some lessons and the little badge that I get, my brain is kind of happy with that. So, we can find ways to gamify stuff. And we can also lean into self-care.

Change is stressful, and so it’s important, when you’re going through a lot of change, to pay attention to, “Am I getting good quality sleep? Am I eating better? Am I, maybe, playing more to counterbalance the stress?” And then mindfulness, it turns out the brain is uniquely built for a mindfulness practice. It really just does amazing things. It can physically shrink the amygdala and make it less reactive in as little as a few weeks of five minutes a day. I mean, the studies on mindfulness are mind-blowing.

So, these are all the ways people who are on the receiving end of change can have agency, including saying, “No, I don’t want to go on this change. This is not something I want to be part of,” and acknowledging that you want to maybe find a different role or a different organization or whatever. So, those are kind of my hot tips for any of us who are on the receiving end of change.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that’s good. Thank you. And let’s talk about mindfulness. I tell you what, I have gone back and forth with mindfulness in terms of I’ll read a journal article about, oh, people used Headspace for 10 weeks or 10 days, I think, it was, and they saw an increase in their heart rate variability. It’s like, “Oh, I can measure my heart rate variability. I can get Headspace. Game on. Let’s do it.”

And so, then I do it and I don’t think, I’m not sure if I am getting the results or benefits or not, and then I’m not sure if something is wrong with me, or if I didn’t do it right, or what’s the deal. So, do you have any pro tips for folks who think, “You know, I’ve tried this mindfulness stuff, Britt, and I don’t know if it’s for me”?

Britt Andreatta
Yeah, absolutely. So, let’s define mindfulness. Mindfulness is any practice that allows you to stay present in the moment and not go in the past and worry about what happened yesterday, or what Bob said, or what Marie is doing, and keeps you from going into the future and worrying about what’s going to happen tomorrow, and what Bob might say, and what Maria might do, right? So, mindfulness is really the act of being present in the now.

And mindfulness can be meditation, but it can also be doing the dishes. It can be an adult coloring book. It can be fly fishing. It can be gardening. It’s something that kind of puts you in that relaxed state, that flow state, where you’re not really worried about time. and you’re just really present.

However, when most of us try mindfulness, we are, like, sitting down and we’re using an app or we’re listening to a guided meditation. And what’s going to happen is I start and I concentrate on my breathing, and then, “Oh, my gosh, I got to hit the grocery store, and I got to pick up that thing, and I’ve got to remember to call my dad.”

All mindfulness is, is going, “Oh, wait, I’m supposed to be present right now.” And then going back to focus on my breathing. And that might last 10 seconds before I go, “But I really need to call my dad and I got to get to the grocery store. Oh, wait, I’m supposed to be meditating.” So, really, mindfulness is knowing that your brain is going to spin off, and noticing that it has and bringing it back.

And the more you practice that, two magical things happen. One is the periods of being able to stay present get longer. But the most important part is you start to just observe yourself, “Oh, wait, I’ve started having thoughts again.”

And that ability to kind of take a third-person perspective becomes the magic sauce that allows, and this is why people who are long-time practitioners of mindfulness, they have just a calmer state, and when something comes and disrupts them, their reaction is lower than non-meditators or non-mindfulness people, and then they come back to stasis pretty fast.

And it’s because you can go, “Oh, instead of I’m freaking out right now,” you kind of watch yourself freaking out. So, it allows you to distance yourself from your emotional reactions to the world and that is truly the secret sauce of mindfulness.

However, you could meditate 10 minutes a day, and if the rest of the day you are doom-scrolling and putting your amygdala into high-alert mode, you’re not going to see as many benefits as someone who maybe isn’t doing that to themselves. So, it’s all in context. And I would say if you’re not seeing the benefits, play with different forms.

Some people love doing yoga. Some people love doing some kind of hands-on crafting. Some people love doing something really physical. Find your jam.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, yeah, that’s handy I guess it’s just not as, if we think of mindfulness as a practice, an exercise that strengthens a capability, it’s just a little fuzzier as compared to, say, strength training in the gym, in which I say, “Ah, I was unable to lift this 205-pound weight four times last time, but this time I did it six times. Incontrovertible evidence, strength has increased. Rejoice. Celebrate. It feels good.”

As opposed to, with the mindfulness stuff, it’s like, “I guess I’m kind of noticing me doing my thing more often, and that’s kind of handy. So, I guess it worked?” Question mark.

Britt Andreatta
Yeah, you know, it is a little more amorphous, particularly if you’re not measuring it in some kind of tangible way.

Pete Mockaitis

Ooh, can I measure it in a tangible way?

Britt Andreatta
Yes, you can measure it.

Pete Mockaitis
Tell me.

Britt Andreatta
Well, I mean, just kind of like you would pay attention to your weights and your reps, you could pay attention to how long you’re staying in that totally present zone. How many seconds was that? And how many times did you come back to it? Like, if you decided to note it down, you could pay attention to it and then measure your progress.

But oftentimes, with mindfulness, we don’t really track it. So, then the other way is to kind of take a little bit of a temperature of yourself, and then four weeks from now after you’ve significantly worked on this practice, see how you feel four weeks. But the day to day, it’s not going to always be noticeable, right? So, I do think it can be a little amorphous.

The other thing I think there’s been a disservice to is how we portray mindfulness and meditation in the media. I think a lot of people feel like, “Oh, I’ve got to sit cross-legged and burn some incense. And if I do this thing, I’m going to have some kind of spiritual awakening that will be mind-blowing.” That’s not what it looks like.

It’s just about, “Oh, I noticed that I’m having thoughts again. Come back to the moment. I noticed I’m having thoughts again. Come back to the moment.” And that’s all it is. And so, that really demystified it for me and made it feel a lot more accessible. And then I wasn’t holding myself to some standard, like, “Wow, nothing spiritual happened to me. I guess I failed,” right?

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Good. Thank you. All right. So, that’s at the individual contributor, perhaps, level. Let’s hear about it at the management and executive levels.

Britt Andreatta

Yeah, let me start with executives. Executives are always living in the future, right? Their job is to look down the road five, 10 years and think about what we need to do to keep this organization thriving and surviving into the future. And so, they spend time looking at the data and they work hard on coming up with decisions.

And I think one of the things that’s hard about being an executive is once you announce change, you kind of expect everyone to stand up and cheer, but that’s not what happens. Humans first go into this very grumbly state where we first worry about all the things that could go wrong and what we might not like. And there’s all these predictable kinds of grumbly emotions that happen. And many executives are really surprised by that.

And so, one of the things when I’m working with an executive team is I remind them that, “Hey, even if you’re a perfect change leader, the best you can do is kind of shorten the duration of the grumbly period and maybe lessen the amount of drama, but it’s never going to be zero because humans are going through a biological process. They’re not being difficult. They’re being human. And this is how humans deal with change.”

We first worry, assume the worst, kind of freak out. And then we work our way through those emotions. And then we can start to kind of come over this tipping point where we can look to the future, maybe what could be good about it, what I might gain from it. And so, part of being a good leader is planning for that.

And I think a lot of executives make the mistake of really focusing on the change, “It’s structural, it’s factual. We got a plan. We’re going to execute it.” But the people have to go through the change. And so, you’ve got to plan for this emotional upheaval, the amount of time it takes to form new habits, how you articulate this message. There are things you can do to make it easier, but on some level, you just have to go through this period of transition.

And I have found, when organizations spend more time focusing on the people side of it, “How are we going to get people through? How are we going to support them? Let’s be ready for the grumbling. How are we going to handle that?” then change goes much better.

The second thing that I talk to executives about is that, as an organization grows, it’s going to start to have more functions and heads of those functions, so facilities is doing its thing to maximize the business, and marketing is doing its thing, and HR is doing its thing, and IT. And pretty soon, all these really great changes are getting launched, but nobody is playing air traffic controller.

And so, there needs to be a position where someone’s looking at, “Okay, all of these are great, but what’s launching when?” Because oftentimes, change fails because a team just got inundated by six fantastic changes all in the same month, and they couldn’t participate. They couldn’t get on board with all of them.

And then they do the handoff to the managers. So, let’s talk about the managers. They’re responsible for taking their direct reports through change, but they very rarely get to decide the change or design the change, and so they’re kind of handed something and told, “Make it work.” And they may not have that skillset.

So, part of it is train your managers. Leading change is a skill. It can be learned and improved like any other skill. But also, you want to arm them with what they need to be successful. They need to know the why. They need to know what the milestones are. They need to know what to do if it goes off the rails. So, you need to make sure your managers are armed with the actual tools they need to make this change happen.

And, oftentimes, managers, they don’t know the why. They don’t know what is going to happen. And so, when they get questions from their employees, they don’t have the answers. They can’t participate in supporting the employees moving through the change. But that’s easily fixed.

So, with some good information and tools, the whole ecosystem is now working together. And, boy, it sure makes a difference in terms of changes going successfully, but also the workforce getting much more comfortable and capable and resilient with change.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, I like that. Thank you. Well, now I’m thinking about, I remember something that just really annoyed me, so maybe you could, geez, this was 20-ish years ago. But an organization I volunteered with, it was near and dear to my heart, we conducted youth leadership seminars for folks who were high school sophomores. And it was a lot of fun and kind of where I kind of grew up in the people development-y world, which has shaped much of my career sense.

And then there was a change, and it was a change that was more economically driven. They were short on their dough, and their fundraising wasn’t going as well. And so, they shifted the experience. Whereas, before it was free for the individual attendees in their schools. Then it shifted into a fee-for-service model, and basically everyone had to then pay.

Usually, the schools paid, or if you’re volunteer team on the ground, they had like dozens of affiliates. It was really sharp. They could get that fundraise to offset stuff. So, it was a big change and it really affected, really, the kind of core vibe of the organization, and large swaths of volunteers who’d poured their heart and soul into things for many years just quit, including some folks that I really admired.

And so, I was kind of torn. I didn’t like it, but I still thought, “Well, you know, it’s still, even at this fee, I think the school should pony it up because they’ll be enriched from their leader returning. And they might not see it that way, and it might change the composition, and it’s not as good. I don’t like it as much, but I’ll stick with it.” And so, I did.

But what really got me angry was, like, the leadership, whenever we raised these concerns and they were, like, the pitchforks were out with the volunteers saying, “Ah, this is terrible. This is not the spirit of this thing, dah, dah, dah.” I felt, I don’t know if the words gaslighting or patronizing, but I felt like the message for the executive was, “Hey, well, you know, we all know that change can be difficult.”

And I was like, “We’re not saying we’re annoyed that you’re changing the software program and we have to relearn a new thing with its quirks after years of knowing the old software program. We’re saying that, fundamentally, the heart of the thing is now different in a way that’s objectively worse.” So, that response, I found disgusting. I hate to be so judgmental. But I did. That’s how I felt at the time.

Britt Andreatta

But you’ve been thinking about this for 20 years, Pete. I can tell, yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
And it just seemed like, I don’t know what the optimal response is from the leadership of this volunteer organization, but it’s not that, “Hey, change is hard.” So, help us out, change expert. What should they have done?

Britt Andreatta
Right. Well, so first of all, what I’m hearing in this story is that they, and who knows, we weren’t in those rooms, right? It may have been that this organization would have had to shut their doors unless they went to this pay-to-play model, right?

Pete Mockaitis
Quite possible.

Britt Andreatta
But so, what I’m hearing is that they had a problem and they solved it kind of in closed doors. They didn’t involve some of the stakeholders and say, “Hey, what do you like most about this place? What should become the sacred piece that we don’t touch? What do you not care about?” They would have gotten better data if they had done that.

It sounds like they didn’t message this really well. So, they didn’t really take you guys through the why of it. And my guess is you would have felt differently if they had said, “Hey, we care about the spirit of this place, too. And this is the only option to even keep this spirit alive. Otherwise, we’re going to have to close the doors. Like, that’s where we’re at.”

So, there’s transparency and how you message things. But sometimes leaders do make those hard choices and they don’t really care if you get on board or not, take it or leave it, be on board or not. I think sometimes leaders, though, make a mistake and they don’t realize how bad that’s going to be. I think we’re kind of watching that with Southwest right now. The CEO made a big change in one of their core values, and the whole reasons why people chose that airline.

Pete Mockaitis
Is it the refunds or bags fly free?

Britt Andreatta
Bags fly free. Yeah, it was like a big thing that a lot of people were like, “Hey, this is the only reason I fly Southwest is because of these financial benefits,” right? And not only that, the policy was announced, none of the staff were giving any messaging. So, now they’re dealing with angry customers upset and they don’t have any messaging around it.

And then it went viral, so then the president, or the CEO made a video, but in his video, he only talked about the financial gains for the company and the shareholders. He didn’t talk about the travel experience. He didn’t talk about the values, the “What’s in it for me?” for the staff, for the travelers. And it was a real missed opportunity, but essentially the company violated a core value that was part of its value proposition. And they’ve lost lots of customers.

Target has done the same thing around the DEI initiatives, that by choosing to shutter that, there’s been several month-long boycotts of Target right now, and they’re just losing money, hand over fist, where Costco leaned into their DEI and they’ve gained a lot of those Target customers. So, part of it is, when you’re making change, you have to be savvy to the fact, “Is this change related to a core tenet of our identity or what people believe in about us?” Because if you’re bringing change there, you better tread very thoughtfully and very carefully.

And if you’re just going to push it through anyway, then expect to lose a lot of people. And only your analyses can let you know if you can survive that or not, right, and get to the other side of it.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Well, actually, you’re highlighting something for me in terms of, like, my complicated feelings about the private equity industry as a whole. Because, theoretically, you know, I’m a finance major. I worked at Bain & Company, not Bain Capital, but I’m into efficiencies.

And, theoretically, I think it makes sense. Oh, yeah, someone buys a company and they’ve got some great ideas and networks, economies of scale, smart ideas, winning systems and approaches, “And away we go. Make it better, better, better.”

And yet other times, it’s like there’s nothing innovative at all happening here. It’s just like, “I found a clever, legal, financial way to shift money from you to me, and I’m going to do that. And, oh, oopsie. Oh, you’re bankrupt now? Well, that’s too bad. I’ve already exited. So, on to the next.”

And so, I think that’s, and, hey, every firm is different. Every human is different. But I think that, if you’re hyper-focused on a narrow goal of, “Let’s get a huge financial return within a few years from the acquisition of this organization,” then the deck is a little stacked against you in terms of your probability of having a misstep and overlooking an important dimension of the heart, soul, vibe, values of what makes a place special, you might overlook that. You’re at high risk of doing so.

Britt Andreatta
Yeah, and I actually dedicate an entire chapter to one of the four drivers of change is human consciousness. And what I think some people are missing, but there’s massive evidence around us, is that human consciousness has been continuing to increase. We used to be very feudal and tribal and fighting against each other. And then we went to really strict hierarchies and stuff.

But where we are in this kind of evolution of human consciousness is really understanding the interconnectedness of everything, that you have to treat your employees well. You have to treat the planet well. That there’s a commitment to not just making money for money’s sake, but doing so in a way that keeps everyone whole.

And what’s really interesting is the younger generations are very committed to this. Millennials, Gen Z, Gen X, to some extent, even the youngest littles these days are really committed to people and planet. And they vote with their dollars, they vote with their voices, they are not willing to kind of listen to corporate BS.

So, there really is a call to action that leaders, particularly executives, need to find a way to build purpose-driven workplaces, that just focusing on profit for profit’s sake is not going to land well anymore. You won’t be able to attract and retain those employees. You won’t be able to attract and retain those customers.

So, there’s a shift happening and it got accelerated by the pandemic. People were already starting to think this way, but when we’re faced with our mortality and we lose people, it really clarifies your values, which is why we saw so many people change careers and really think about where they wanted to be.

So, I think we’re in a very messy state of human evolution right now, but I think it’s a really awesome one because we’re being called to develop practices and ways of doing things that are much more aligned with being connected, taking care of everyone.

That’s not to say you can’t make a pretty penny in there somewhere, but when you are sacrificing people’s wellbeing for the pretty penny without thinking about it, that way of leadership is not going to last long anymore.

And we’re seeing the last kind of breaths of that gasp around the world, but nothing goes off into the sweet good night without a little bit of a tussle. So, we’re seeing some tussling happening.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Thank you. Well, Britt, tell me, anything else you want to make sure to mention before we hear about some of your favorite things?

Britt Andreatta
The one thing I would say is change fatigue is real and to be mindful of how you’re feeling at, you know, if you feel overwhelmed with change, like it’s something to pay attention to. One study by Gartner found that, today, the average employee is experiencing 13 or more enterprise-wide changes per year compared to two in 2016.

Like, that’s how much it’s gone up is that, is that because every part of the business is driving change and now because of new technologies like AI, all of them are having to keep up with that. We literally just have change launching around us all the time.

And so, if you’re feeling like, “Oh, my God, it’s just so much change,” you’re normal. It is an appropriate perception that you’re having. There is a lot more change than there used to be. And if you have not yet recovered from the intensity of the pandemic and really kind of healed your burnout, you’re going to have less capacity.

And this is, honestly, the number one thing I’m working with executives right now. They’re trying to drive big change in their organizations and employees are just responding very slowly or with a lot of resistance, as are their customers. And so, this mismatch is causing a lot of difficulty in workplaces right now, but we will get to the other side of it. We just have to pay attention to it.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Now could you share a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Britt Andreatta
You know, I always love that Margaret Mead quote that I’m going to butcher it a little bit, but it basically says, “Never underestimate the power of a few people to make change. In fact, it’s the only thing that ever has.”

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite study or experiment or bit of research?

Britt Andreatta
You know, I talked about the habenula, that one blew my mind. The other one that really blew my mind, and I talk about this in my book on teams, Wired to Connect, is that the human brain experiences exclusion, is the same as physical pain. That excluding someone is registered in the body the same as hitting someone.

And to the point where the researchers were kind of blown away, so they did a whole bunch of other studies, like, “What happens if you are excluded by people you don’t like?” It didn’t matter. “What if we pay you to be excluded?” It didn’t matter. It just kept activating the pain centers. And so, then they thought, “Huh, I wonder if pain pills will make a difference?” And it did.

Taking a pain pill makes the feeling of exclusion go away, just like it makes the feeling of pain go away. And I think this is what’s contributed to the opioid epidemic is that people will go on pain pills for legitimate injuries, and they are getting a break from their social pain, but we’re not talking about it. So, when it’s time to come off that medicine, folks are now faced with a whole lot of feelings coming up and they’re not necessarily supported in that transition.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite tool?

Britt Andreatta
You know, I am a PowerPoint junkie, and I use PowerPoint for everything. I use PowerPoint to mood-board when I’m decorating a room. I use PowerPoint to, literally, that’s how I write a book is I PowerPoint it first, and then I write the chapters from the PowerPoint. It just gives me these tiles that I can move around and duplicate and organize in different ways. So, it’s my favorite way to organize my thinking and it has become, all of my books started as PowerPoints.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite habit?

Britt Andreatta
This came from some research, too, around kind of the neuroscience of insight and innovation. And it really comes from the synapses of the brain being able to connect in unexpected ways. And we cannot do that when we’re focused and thinking about something. It happens when we take the break. So, I have now learned that when I feel like, “Ugh, I can’t make progress anymore,” I used to feel bad taking a break, like, “Oh, I’m stepping away. I need to keep working at this.”

But now I know that break equals breakthrough. And so, when I step away from it, I fully enjoy the break and I know my brain is still working on it in the background. And now I’ve had enough experiences of that happening that I’m really confident that I can step away from something and it’ll have the breakthrough it’s supposed to have at some point.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And is there a key nugget you share that really seems to connect and resonate with folks, they quote it back to you often?

Britt Andreatta
We are wired for three things. We’re first wired to survive. So, big parts of our biology are dedicated to helping us live another day. And that’s food, water, shelter, the thing we think of.

But when things are fine, it really shows up in the workplace because it’s our paycheck that allows us to buy food, water, shelter. So, we can accidentally really activate survival stuff for people in the workplace if we’re not mindful.

Second thing is we’re wired to belong. Big parts of our biology are dedicated to helping us cooperate and read emotions in other people and be connected to folks and feel authentic.  And then perhaps our deepest hunger or need is we’re wired to become our best selves. We really hunger to live up to our potential. And that should change. As you achieve your potential for where you are now, then there’s a new potential for you to reach for.

But we really do want to learn and grow and become better. And so, if you remember nothing else about humans – survive, belong, become.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And if folks want to learn more or get in touch, where would you point them?

Britt Andreatta
Fantastic. You know, I’m on LinkedIn. So, it’s my name, Britt Andreatta. That’s also my website, BrittAndreatta.com. I have a podcast out now called The Brain Aware Podcast. My company is Brain Aware Training, and it also has its own website. So, any of those ways are good places for people to find me and see what I’m up to. And, yeah, I love connecting with people, so please reach out.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, thank you. And do you have a final challenge or call to action for folks looking to be awesome at their jobs?

Britt Andreatta
You know, as we talk about change, treat change like a skill. It’s a skill like anything else. Like using software, like time management, you can become really great at change. And I think it’s a skill that we all need to have because, as much as humans are resistant to change, change is the constant that we have to navigate over and over again. So, by becoming better at it, you’ll make your life so much easier for the rest of your life in all kinds of settings.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Britt, thank you.

Britt Andreatta
Thank you.

1069: Eight Steps for Excellent Listening with Emily Kasriel

By | Podcasts | One Comment

Emily Kasriel reveals how to build powerful connections with anyone through her eight-step listening process.

You’ll Learn

  1. Why every professional needs to master listening
  2. A demo of the listening approach
  3. How one question leads to deeper conversations

About Emily

Emily Kasriel has had a distinguished career at the BBC for over two decades including roles as an award-winning journalist, editor and media executive. She developed the Deep Listening approach as a Senior Visiting Research Fellow at King’s College Policy Institute in London, drawing on her experience as an accredited executive coach and workplace mediator.  Previously, she’s been a Visiting Fellow at Said Business School at Oxford University, and a Senior Advisor to the Skoll Foundation. An MA graduate of the University of Oxford and Syracuse University’s Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs (as a Rotary International Fellow), she lives in London. An academic paper demonstrating the impact of Kasriel’s Deep Listening approach has just been published (Feb 2025) by the Journal of Applied Social Psychology.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

  • Strawberry.me. Claim your $50 credit and build momentum in your career with Strawberry.me/Awesome
  • Quince. Get free shipping and 365-day returns on your order with Quince.com/Awesome
  • Plaud.AiUse the code AWESOME for a discount on your order

Emily Kasriel Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Emily, welcome!

Emily Kasriel
Thank you so much. Delighted to be here, Pete.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, I’m excited to talk about your book, Deep Listening, and the transformative power of listening. And I think we should kick it off with you telling us your Nelson Mandela story.

Emily Kasriel
Okay. So, this happened just after I started my work as the BBC Africa reporter in Johannesburg. And we were told that a story was unfolding in Pretoria. So, we got into the van and arrived in Pretoria, and there were hundreds of former uMkhonto weSizwe soldiers. These were members of the ANC’s Armed Wing before the new South Africa. They had been integrated into the South African Defense Force, but they were not happy. They demanded to see their leader.

So, they waited, and we all waited and we looked up in the skies to see if the new leader of South Africa would arrive. And, eventually, we had the swirl of the helicopter wings above us. And so, we went to look at the newly erected podium to see what the leader, Nelson Mandela, would have to say, but he wasn’t there.

So, instead, I found him walking amongst the crowds, walking amongst the soldiers, and asking them, “So, tell me, what’s your name? And where do you live? Oh, yes, I know that road. Alexandria Township. Is that right?” “Yes. And the corner of which street? Ah, I know. And tell me why are you here?” And the soldiers told tales of their bad food, of the fact they’d been downgraded their rank in the new South African Defense Force. And at their humiliation of having to serve these white officers who only, months before, had been their former enemy. And Mandela listened.

And only after he spent a whole hour walking along the throng, amongst the throng of these soldiers, did he get back on that podium and talk to them. And he said, “I have heard you. I’ve understood your grievances,” and he outlined them. And then he said, “And now is the time for discipline. You need to go back to your barracks because we need to build the new South Africa.” And the soldiers, quietly and peacefully, walked back to their barracks.

And it was such a profound moment because it subverted the sort of whole power hierarchy of who should talk and who should listen first. And that very respectful, deep listening that Mandela exhibited with his soldiers, with his comrades, really impacted on them because they had felt heard. They had felt truly listened to.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, it is so powerful. And what’s getting me here is he did not grant their requests, make their wishes come true. They were good and rankled up when he arrived. And so, the listening alone and acknowledging that they had been heard was sufficient for them to persist in some unpleasant conditions.

Emily Kasriel
Yeah, no, absolutely right. And the research really backs that out because we’re all so longing to be heard, and we’re heard so rarely in life. And when there is anybody who hears us, particularly if they are in a position of power, or we care about what they think and say, this really affirms our own dignity. It makes us feel respected and, therefore, we’re going to be in a far better place to listen to them.

Pete Mockaitis

That’s good. Okay. Well, tell us a little bit about this research about the rarity of being listened to and the impact of when we do receive that.

Emily Kasriel
So, in 2022, we conducted an experiment because, for the BBC’s 100th birthday and with the British Council, we recruited a thousand people in hundred countries in order for me to train them virtually over three weeks in deep listening. And this was a really diverse group of people. The countries most represented were Malaysia, UK, New Zealand, and Iran. Very diverse group of people, but all speaking English.

And so, I thought, “I’m not doing something that scale without seeing if it actually worked.” So, I reached out to some academics and we established a control group who had a very difficult conversation about a matter they disagreed with, with no training, and we compared their experience with the group who had been practicing deep listening and then had a similar difficult conversation. And the results have just been published in the Bedtime Reading, not Journal of Applied Social Psychology.

And it evidenced that, when people practice deep listening, they felt safer to express themselves and genuinely understood. And they felt a greater connection with their conversation partners, even though they came from such different countries. And this bit, the third bit is the most critical, they became more open to re-examine their own attitudes, which really is a bolster to what happened with Mandela.

Because once the soldiers felt heard, they then were able to see that bigger picture. They were able to understand that more than one perspective may be possible, and that is so exciting. Because I think one of the reasons that we really fear listening is that we think, if we listen, we’re going to have to do what people want and, therefore, we close them down. We fear that if we listen, we’ll be contaminated by ideas that we might find abhorrent. And so, we shut our ears and we close people down.

And once people realize that real listening doesn’t mean agreeing, doesn’t mean obeying, doesn’t mean that we get contaminated by ideas, somebody said to me in one of the trainings, they said, “You’ve given permission for me to listen to difficult ideas.” And I thought that was so interesting, like, “Who was I to give permission? Anybody can take that permission for themselves.” And it is so exciting once we realize this. It’s freedom.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, yeah, all that sounds really excellent. So, why don’t we all do it all the time?

Emily Kasriel
Well, there’s many traps that get us caught in deep listening, “I don’t have the time.” So, when I’m working with a business people, that’s the number one trap because we’re waging a campaign for completion. We don’t have time to hear all the details. That is the most cited obstacle. But cutting people off before they really have time to explore ideas, stops people from sharing critical information, stops them feeling heard, stops us understanding them.

So, let me give you a work example. Let’s say if your boss says to you, “Is it okay if you take on a piece of work?” And you say, “Sure, yeah.” And your mouth is smiling, but not your eyes. And you go, “Great. Fantastic. Two weeks, that will be fantastic.” How do you feel? Whereas, in fact, you could actually try and listen to what they’re really saying, and say, perhaps, “Ah, you’ve said yes, but, at the same time, I’m getting a sense that perhaps there’s too much on your plate and you already feel overloaded, and maybe you don’t feel comfortable saying no.”

Suddenly, you can have a real conversation, which enables you to either do the work or take off another task or, you know, it’s a genuine conversation. You’re going off script. So even though people say they don’t have the time, not having the time prevents people from expressing worries, prevents people from having real meaningful relationships.

And then there’s another thing that stops us from listening, because a lot of us feel a pressure, “I want to win. I need to win. I need to prove that I’m right.” We look out for any chink in our opponent’s armor, anything that can be exploited. And there’s another thing that a lot of us feel, which is that, “I am in charge.” We might see our role as the leader who instructs, who explains, who adds value, who provides a solution.

So often when we listen, and actually this is more men than women, we think that our role is to provide a solution so we cut people off and tell them how to sort their problem out, whether it’s our partner or our colleague. And, in fact, we’re depriving them of agency and stopping them coming up with their own solution, which they’re far more likely to implement.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Understood. Well, so, can you lay it out for us, how do we do this? You’ve got an eight-step approach. What are the steps?

Emily Kasriel
So, the first step is about creating a space. So, this is both a kind of metaphorical space, a space where you feel centered. I just took a little sip of tea there to center myself, but it’s also a space where the speaker feels a sense of psychological safety. So, if you’re in an open-plan office and you want to find out about why your team worker hasn’t completed their part of the task, not so good in the open-plan office, even if there’s a glass screen.

It also is about lighting. Harsh overhead blue white light, not so good, makes us feel stressed. Far better are side lights, especially with a longer spectrum, a sort of yellowy warm light makes us feel more relaxed.

And a bit of wood or a bit of material can absorb some of the sound waves so there’s less echoes so people can hear more clearly. Particularly important if one of the people who is speaking or listening is older or has a hearing impediment.

So, step two is about listening to yourself first, because you can’t really be open to listen to someone else until you’ve done some listening to yourself. Perhaps the person you’re speaking to, you’re not actually listening to them as an adult. Instead, you might feel five, age five, because they’re reminding you of a bullying older brother that you’ve had.

And so, until we do take that step, and figuring out our own skin in the game, what’s our real agenda, we can’t really be in a place to truly open ourselves up to the other person. And I would say that this isn’t for every conversation. I mean, if I were to ask you, if you wanted a cup of tea and you were to say to me, “Hmm,” and really listen, that would be totally weird, yeah? We’re talking about deep listening for the conversations that really matter.

So, step three is about being present, about taking the time, and it might be only one breath in and one breath out to center yourself. Because if you can be centered, the person speaking will feel far more open to be relaxed themselves and to be able to talk more authentically about what’s really going on for them.

And that’s why being centered, it’s so important to deal with the worst external distractions, our phone. Not just no notifications, not just with a black screen, even out of sight, because there’s research that evidences that even the sight of that screen will distract us because we feel pulled, the gravitational pull, all those brilliant, well-paid minds who learn to allure us away.

And then there’s internal distractions, like, “I really want to listen to you, but I’ve got to go home in time to pick the kids up,” or watch the game, or whatever. So, being aware when those distractions come up and becoming present, again, can be really effective. And then step four is curiosity. Be curious because so often, when we listen, we assume we already know what the person is going to say.

So, what we’re doing is preloading our verbal gun with ammunition, ready to fire about with our next question or our next comment, or we just go through the motions and listening is performative, “Yeah, yeah, I get you. Yeah, yeah, I understand.” And the person knows it.

And, instead, if we can assume that we don’t already know what they’re going to say, if we can be truly curious, that allows the speaker to share something, which makes us more curious and then even empathetic, like understand a bit more what it’s like to be them. And from there can grow respect. And what’s important is respect for the person, for the humanity of the person, not for what they’ve just shared and whether or not you agree with them.

And step five is the gaze. Now it’s quite hard on a Zoom call or a Riverside podcast chat like we’re having. So, I’m trying to look you in the eye at the camera, and I can’t quite see your body language. It’s difficult, although I have shrunk your image and put you directly under the camera to make it a little easier. But so much easier in person, if we can really maintain our gaze on the speaker.

And this gaze is not like a Foucault gaze, you know, Michel Foucault, the French philosopher who talked about prison wardens making prisoners feel perpetually enslaved because of a really horrific glare. This is a much warmer empathetic gaze, which the speaker will often go silent and look elsewhere. But the fact that you’re holding them, you’re looking at them as they continue the journey means they’ll have far, far richer thoughts.

And then step six is holding the silence. And when I train people in deep listening, silence is something that they, without exception, tell me how uncomfortable it is when they get to practice deep listening, because I invite them to use, you know, five, 10 seconds, even more of silence after the speaker has finished speaking.

And yet when I catch up with them later, a month or two down the line, they tell me this is the element of deep listening which has made the most difference to their lives because in silence, it allows so much to happen, not only for the blood pressure and the heart rate of both you and your speaker to kind of calm down, but also for your speaker to think new thoughts.

If you think of a companionable silence where you don’t have to fill in all the gaps, and I know this is can be hard. But it takes a little bit of practice. And to encourage you, there was a paper that came out in 2021 called “Silence is golden.” And it did experiments with two sides of a negotiation.

And it found that, when both parties were instructed to use 20 seconds of silence, number one, they never got to 20 seconds. They rarely got above 17 and a half seconds. We always overestimate silence, particularly the listener. But more significantly, they came out with many more win-win situations when both parties benefited rather than zero sum, “If I win, you lose.”

And then this also leads us, because silence has another factor, which is that it allows you, the listener, to make sense, not only with your mind, but with your heart of what you’ve just heard. Because step seven is reflecting back. And you may have been on active listening courses where you say, “Yeah, yeah,” you reflect back, you paraphrase, you go through the motions. It’s performative.

Deep listening reflection is much more authentic and it’s about using the whole of you to figure out the real meaning of what the whole of your speaker has shared. And so, you say, “Hmm, I think what you said…” and you must include not just the words, but the notes between the words and their emotions, whether or not they’ve expressed them in words.

The research shows that if I don’t include what you are feeling about what you’ve shared, you won’t feel heard. And it’s then the speaker’s opportunity to say, “Yeah, you know, you haven’t quite got it.” So, one question you can ask is, “Tell me more,” or they’ll say, “Yes, and…” and they’ll go deeper.

And this brings us to the final step of deep listening, the deeper narrative, step eight. Because this is really about the values and the motivations of your speaker. And, in my book, Deep Listening, I go through all sorts of clues you can use to really unpack what’s going on for your speaker.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, thank you. There’s so much I’d like to follow up on here. So, let’s just see, a couple of finer points. So, create space, listen to yourself, be present, be curious, hold the gaze, hold the silence, reflect back, go deeper. Now when it comes to listen to yourself, if you say, “Hey, this person is reminding me of a bully,” right? So, you’ve figured that out, which is great. You’ve identified a dynamic that’s present.

Well, then what? What do we do once we notice something within ourselves that we say, “Ah, this is probably not ideal to be in the mix for great listening”?

Emily Kasriel
That’s such a great question, Pete, because the very first step is noticing, because when we don’t notice, so we don’t think that we’re listening to our bullying older brother, we think we’re listening to that individual and he is evil.

And it’s when we don’t acknowledge them that they’re at their fiercest. I would say that if you’ve experienced trauma, starting to do this shadow work without support is perhaps not the best idea because it is difficult. It’s a life work of a lifetime for all of us to understand ourselves more clearly.

But, first of all, even identifying that that person reminds us, and it is possible to acknowledge that and then put it aside and recognize that the person opposite speaking is not our elder brother, can itself be very, very freeing. And it might be that we need to think of ways if, for example, during that conversation with that individual, we feel ourselves getting defensive and stressed out, then we can choose an anchor before we start the conversation. Something that makes us feel safe inside.

It might be the idea of a beautiful place in nature or somebody who really loves us or stroking a favorite pet. Having these little anchors to help ground us can be really important.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay, that’s great. Thank you. And so, when we hold the gaze, we do so in a way that’s friendly and not like a prison guard. Good to know. I mean, how long is too long?

Emily Kasriel
I think that, as long as it’s not rigid and like, you know, as long as it’s warm and you’re listening, and it does mean you can turn aside if you’ve got a crook in your neck, it’s all about being authentic. I think that the intention and authenticity is the most important thing, because what’s behind your work as a deep listener is what your speaker will sense.

So, rather than feeling you’re performing anything for any amount of time, it’s about being curious and empathetic and wanting to know more. And the gaze is important, but what’s more important about is what’s behind that.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And then with the silence, you did mention that folks were challenged to do 20 seconds of silence. Is that optimal in some sense?

Emily Kasriel
I think 20 seconds is an awful long time. If you were actually to time it, I think most people would find, and as I mentioned in that experiment, which they did with many, many people, almost no one held the full 20 seconds of silence because we always overestimate. You’ve got to figure out what works for you, and it does depend on your culture, on your relationship, on the other person.

And I do think, though, that you can get better at silence. So, at the beginning, I would just try three seconds, four seconds, and see how that feels. And you may choose to share with your speaker that you’re practicing a bit of silence or not. It’s all about being real and in the moment and being open in your heart.

Pete Mockaitis

Yes. And I suppose, if you’re going with a longer silence, you probably want to give them that kind of a signal in terms of, “Hmm, I’m thinking about what you’ve said there.”

Emily Kasriel
Yeah. You could well do that, yeah, you might do that. But often, what’s interesting, is when I train people, it’s often the listener who worries more about the silence than the speaker.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, I hear you. Okay. And then with reflecting, we’re reflecting both the words and the emotions. So, even if they didn’t say the emotions, you’re suggesting a best practice is to go ahead and venture out to infer what we think they were.

So, as I am reflecting the words and then also venturing to infer the emotions there, is it better to do this even if occasionally we get it wrong, and say, “No, no, I wouldn’t say I was frustrated so much as disappointed”? Like, if they give you that correction, are we still, I guess, net positive having ventured and gotten it wrong than to not have ventured at all?

Emily Kasriel
I’m so pleased that you asked that question because it’s really, really important. Of course, we can never really know about what’s going on in another person, particularly about, for example, an emotion that they haven’t expressed in words. And so, whenever we are offering something back in that case, we are venturing because it’s not just the emotions. It’s also about what’s really at the core of what they’ve said.

And it’s absolutely fine to get it wrong, as long as you realize that you’re reflecting back with humility. It’s like you’re borrowing some beautiful finery that’s not yours. You’re trying it on for the first time, and so you’re saying, “Well, I think that you said this and I’d sensed that you feel this,” because it’s through their correction that they can understand themselves better and also then share that with you.

It’s that process of getting to the deeper core of what they really mean. And they often do it through you getting it wrong as much as you getting it right. Because the whole idea is it’s in service of the other person, understanding and expressing themselves more clearly.

Pete Mockaitis
Understood. And I’m imagining, as we’re getting our first practice reps in of venturing to identify the emotion, it’s probably safer to go with not the most intense emotions, “So, it sounds as though you were enraged or flabbergasted or desolate.” Like, if they are enraged, you’ll know it.

Emily Kasriel
Well, I think what’s most important is that it doesn’t come with judgment. So, if you were to say to them, “Huh, it sounds like that you were pretty desperate,” they’ll feel that you’re making a judgment about them. I think what’s more important is to deliver these thoughts about what you think they’re feeling with humility and without judgment so that they don’t feel judged.

Because we know as soon as we feel judged, our defenses go up and we stop sharing openly and authentically, and stop being able to think new thoughts. And that’s one of the things that’s so exciting about deep listening. And I know that from my own work as an executive coach, that when you really listen to somebody else, they’re able to have thoughts that they didn’t ever imagine before. And I think that’s one of your ambitions as a deep listener, not just to provide a space for them to recite old ideas, but to create new ones.

Pete Mockaitis
And so, that non-judgmental piece, I think, plays through everything. And now I’m just thinking about our own tone of voice within which we say all things can suggest judgment in terms of, it’s like, so if I said, “So you were confused by the website,” which means, like, even that tone, that’s not too intense of a tone there, but it suggests judgment in terms of, like, “What kind of an idiot are you if you found this website confusing?” even though the tone can be subtle. Do you have any pro tips on that?

Emily Kasriel
Yeah, I think it’s such a good point. And tone of voice, actually, when you’re trying to understand more about what the speaker is saying, tone of voice is far more reliable than gestures or facial expressions, the research evidences. So, tone of voice is a very powerful way that we communicate. I think about, again, when we’re thinking about our tone of voice, it’s wise to think about our intentions. Are we feeling judgmental about the other person?

Because, actually, often, we get most irritated with people who remind us, in some way, of our own weakness. And once we can acknowledge that perhaps we feel embarrassed that we are confused about websites, that’s why we’re being so judgmental about the other person, we can let that go and then be able to say to them, “So I sense that you felt a little confused using this website. Is that right?”

And it’s the same words, but you aren’t judging them because you understand that their life experience is different to yours. And, therefore, you don’t really have a right to judge them on some level.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Thank you. Well, yes, let’s do a demonstration now.

Emily Kasriel
Okay. So, Pete, let me ask you, what food reminds you of home?

Pete Mockaitis
Well, what first comes to mind is a whole meal in terms of I’m thinking about childhood dinner at the round table. And we would have this plate, which had a big heart on it. It said something like, “Today is your special day,” which would be given to whoever’s special day it was, like, if it was a birthday or graduation or some sort of achievement or something. For one reason or another, it was your special day.

And then, you know, my sweet mother would ask what I would want to eat on this special day. And for a good while, I had a meal, which was fried chicken, mashed potatoes, broccoli, and cheese sauce. So, that meal in its entirety was, it’s my special day meal. That’s what I wanted, and it was perfection. And I was a pretty skinny kid. I wasn’t a big eater except when it was my special day and it was my meal, and I just went to town.

Emily Kasriel
So, I’m hearing you say, Pete, that that round table and that special round dish, your special day was that sense that your mother was creating this whole meal. It wasn’t individual. The whole point was that it was everything together that made you feel nurtured and loved and celebrated and able to just really tuck in, even though that’s not something you would normally do, because it was everything coming together.

You spoke about the wholeness of it and feeling whole, and that even now you were really there, I sensed, when you were talking about it. And it just gave you a really great grounding to feel in that space of love and safety. Is that right?

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, yeah.

Emily Kasriel
And tell me more.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s dead on, yeah.

Emily Kasriel
And so, I sense it’s a kind of longingness and yet also a joy when you’re able to go back there in your mind as a kid again.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Well, it is, it is nice. And it just makes me think about how I should probably be more proactive in asking my own children now about what would make their meal or day special because that was such a lovely time and experience and memory in my own childhood. And I don’t think that I’ve been very intentional in trying to provide that for my kids. And why the heck not? You know, we got to eat something. Let’s make it special.

Emily Kasriel
And so, it’s a realization now as an adult of that love and sense of recognition that your mother gave you of making that whole fried chicken, mash, broccoli, you know, everything and cheese sauce that you loved, and the sense that perhaps there’s a gap between you not quite fulfilling that, but still have the potential to give that to your children today.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Yeah, I think sometimes we’ve gotten into a little bit of a grazing groove in terms of whenever they’re hungry, they eat whatever’s there, as opposed to really stopping, pausing, and being deliberate about creating an experience.

Emily Kasriel
And so, this conversation, perhaps, is providing you with an opportunity to do more of that for your own children, something precious that you can gift them as a gift, the same way your mom gave you. I had a sense that it sort of nurtured you and given you a confidence, that feeling that you were special and unique.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, it totally did.

Emily Kasriel
So, roughly, how many questions did I ask you there?

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, I wasn’t counting. Maybe five-ish.

Emily Kasriel
Yeah. Actually, I just asked you one question, “What food reminds you of home?” Now, as a journalist, I had loads of questions. I wanted to know where you grew up, where your parents came from, what state, or do you have siblings? I could have asked you a billion questions, and had I done that, I would have gone down my avenue where I was interested.

And, although, I sensed you were a bit reluctant to tell me too much, there was a sort of privacy, a kind of, “I’m going this far and no further,” I did get a sense and I feel I know you more and I feel more connected to you because of what you did share on your own terms of where you wanted to go. What do you think, Pete?

Pete Mockaitis
Well, yeah, think that’s a fabulous illustration there in terms of “How many questions did I ask you?” I said five, you said one. And so, because, exactly the path of the follow-up questions is going deeper, yeah, I guess that’s the main insight for me is that you could very much have gone in any number of directions. And I think that’s often what we do. It’s like we are interested in what we’re interested in.

So, Emily, if you had a woodworking hobby, you’d be like, “Oh, round table, huh? Was that like an oak or a walnut or…?” Right? And so, it’s laughable because, like, “The point wasn’t the table.  That’s not what we are getting at.” And yet, I think we do that all the time in terms of, “Oh, your mom, huh? Okay, so was she a full-time homemaker? Did she work as well?” Because maybe that’s what you’re into is careers or women and empowerment and having it all.

Or, maybe you’re into cuisine, like, “Okay, so what kind of cheese sauce we’re going with? Is that more of a cheddar or a Velveeta?” And so, I think people do that all the time. But in contrast to what you’ve done in this context as we’re chatting, it feels like, obviously, night and day, the wrong way to talk to people so that they feel heard and connected with is the, “Huh, let me dig into the piece of what you said that I find most interesting,” as opposed to, “Let me dig into the piece of it that seemed most meaningful to you, speaker, as one who has said it.”

Emily Kasriel
Yeah, you’re absolutely right. And your illustrations are really fun of where we could have gone down. And especially as journalists, we love to think of ourselves as coming up with these great questions. Even as coaches, when I was delivering this training to a bunch of executive coaches, they said, “It’s so much of a relief because I feel like I’m not listening because I’m trying to come up with this brilliant killer question,” which will help the coach client unpack what they really mean. So, you’re absolutely right.

But I wouldn’t be too judgmental. I mean, it’s not that you can never ask interesting questions where you’re curious, because I think deep listening is something that you can sprinkle in conversations. You can try as you learn more about the steps to use more of them, but it’s not all or nothing. And the one question I did ask, actually, I did ask two questions, was, “Tell me more.”

Because I sensed you were being a little bit closed, you kind of didn’t want to go further. And what’s good about the “Tell me more” question is that the speaker can define what more is rather than you, the listener saying, “Tell me more about the wooden quality of the table,” or whatever.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that’s good. Thank you. Well, Emily, tell me, anything else you want to make sure to mention before we hear about your favorite things?

Emily Kasriel
I think that there’s so much loneliness in our society. So many people are not being heard. And if we can deeply listen to them, we can do something to make a dent in loneliness and also in polarization, which we know is tearing America apart because we can listen to people who think differently to us at work or at home.

And let me tell you a little quick story about loneliness, I think, really, which was a little while ago, I was visiting the pharmacy to collect drugs for my daughter. And there was a lady sitting on a plastic chair waiting for her own drugs. And the pharmacist asked me, what was the birth date of my daughter. So, I said, “Third of July 21.” And she looked at me, “Are you sure?” And then I thought for a moment, I said, “No, no, third of July, 2001.” And the lady on the chair started laughing at me.

And she said, “Wait a minute. How can you not know the birth date of your own daughter? What’s going on there?” And I said, “You know, you’re quite right. That’s pretty silly of me.” So, we started to have a chat, and she told me, we’re talking about birth dates, about her grandmother who’d recently, in her nineties, reached a milestone birthday and how proud she was. And she said, “Yeah, I’m really proud.” And I said to her, “I sense that you’re proud, but there’s also something else going on.”

And she said, “Yes, I think I’m going to die before my grandmother.” And then we talked more, and she shared about her condition and she started crying, and then she apologized for crying. And then we had a laugh and then I walked away. And I had a sense that she needed to be heard.

And it was only because I was mindful in that moment, which I’m certainly not always am, to be able to pick up on the sort of nuance in the word proud, and also maybe that I’d made myself a bit vulnerable by making that silly mistake about my daughter’s birthday and not being defensive and having a laugh about it, but she felt safe to be vulnerable too.

And if more of us can practice deep listening to those around us, to our kids, to our family, to our colleagues, and even to strangers, what a difference we can make to the world. And for me, that’s really inspiring. And I really hope that people feel inspired to practice and would love to know about their adventures in the wild.

Pete Mockaitis
Beautiful. Thank you. Well, now could you share a favorite study, or experiment, or bit of research?

Emily Kasriel
So there was one experiment which was measuring people’s attitude extremity, how fiercely they felt. And it came out that, when people felt truly heard, they dialed down their attitude extremity, where the people were talking about organ donation or Palestinian Israeli prisoners or really controversial topics.

And to me, that is so important in that way in terms of combating polarization, that when people feel heard, they’ll be more likely to be able to listen to other perspectives.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite book?

Emily Kasriel
I think this book, Carl Rogers, I’ve been so influenced by this psychologist, On Becoming A Person. But I also really enjoyed Stephen Grosz, who’s a psychoanalyst, The Examined Life, about listening in that way.

And then Daniel Kahneman, who I knew and very sad to have lost him, Thinking Fast and Slow.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite tool?

Emily Kasriel
I find the Waking Up app really great because I think to be able to practice mindfulness, not when you’re in the middle of a difficult conversation, but other moments, allows you to be more present in the moments when you are having a difficult conversation and when you really need to listen. And what’s so great about Waking Up is that there are so many different, brilliant thinkers on that app.

So, I’ve learned about so many people. So, for example, Loch Kelly, who I interviewed in my book, who’s a fantastic meditation teacher and psychotherapist. I learned about just from listening to him on the Waking Up app.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite habit?

Emily Kasriel
I like cold water swimming in Hampstead Ponds even when it’s cold. So, I do it throughout winter, which is kind of crazy. But for me, being able to get in the cold, even when it feels like crazy and frightening, kind of means that I can do anything for the rest of the day.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And folks want to learn more or get in touch, where would you point them?

Emily Kasriel

So, you can go to my website, which is EmilyKasriel.com – Kilo, Alpha, Sierra, Romeo, Italy, Echo, Lima – EmilyKasriel.com. You can follow me on LinkedIn, or you can buy the book where I’ve given an awful lot of myself in it. And I hope that you will enjoy it because it’s got some lovely stories and illustrations and a lot of ideas of how to practice deep listening.

Pete Mockaitis
And do you have a final challenge or call to action for folks looking to be awesome at their jobs?

Emily Kasriel
So, number one challenge is to find somebody you feel really relaxed with, you’ve got a great relationship with, and just try and practice some of these eight steps. And then, when you get a bit more confident, then choose somebody who you don’t agree with, then have a deep listening practice with them.

And I should say that when you reflect on these practices, even if you weren’t able to deeply listen, the very intention is a fantastic first step. So, don’t be too judgmental on yourself. Just ask yourself, “What have I learned for next time?” And you might even want to ask the speaker for feedback what did it feel like to be listened to by you?

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Emily, this is beautiful. Thank you.

Emily Kasriel
Thank you so much. It’s been a real pleasure to talk to you, Pete. Thank you.

1068: Finding the Courage to Say What Needs to be Said with Molly Tschang

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Molly Tschang shares how to turn difficult conversations into opportunities to build connections and relationships.

You’ll Learn

  1. The preamble that helps your feedback land well
  2. How to say no while still being a team player
  3. What to do when you disagree with the majority

About Molly

Molly Tschang, founder of Abella Consulting and Say It Skillfully® Inc., empowers senior management teams to Win as One. With expertise in over 80 mergers and acquisitions, she has guided executives through the intricate human dynamics of transformational change and growth. Molly helps leaders cultivate mutual commitment, enabling them to excel in complex, high-stakes environments. Through Say It Skillfully, she equips individuals at all levels with the skills to communicate effectively and authentically. Her mission: to empower everyone to be seen, heard, and understood—especially when tackling their most critical challenges.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

  • Strawberry.me. Claim your $50 credit and build momentum in your career with Strawberry.me/Awesome
  • Quince. Get free shipping and 365-day returns on your order with Quince.com/Awesome
  • Plaud.ai. Use the code AWESOME and get a discount on your order

Molly Tschang Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Molly, welcome!

Molly Tschang
Great to be with you, Pete.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m so excited to hear your insights about how we can Say It Skillfully. Could you kick us off with what are the most fascinating discoveries you’ve made about us and humans communicating over your years of coaching and teaching on this stuff?

Molly Tschang
I think, number one, is how much communication starts within. It’s so easy to say, “Pete doesn’t get it. They don’t want to hear it.” And when I realized this, this is so much of it is about our relationship with our own self and really be grounded within.

And it seems like sort of namby-pamby perhaps, but I have been with some of the most extraordinary communicators, and their ability to really be in service to others is because they really feel solid in themselves, and they’re not kind of worried about themselves. So, I think that’s really been first and foremost.

Pete Mockaitis
So, they’re solid in themselves and they’re not worried about themselves. What are the typical worries, concerns, hang ups that get in most people’s way here?

Molly Tschang
Yeah, the fears are real. And I want to caveat that I’m not about unicorns and rainbows, Pete. So, if you really are in an environment where it’s been shown that people don’t want to hear other people’s points of views, bad things really happen to you, Molly is not saying, “Skillfulness is really on your radar at all.” That would be a waste of time.

And my bigger question is, “Why are you there?” because I would really hope that you would be in a work environment where you could spread your wings and fly. So, first and foremost, we’re talking about places where people really do want to hear from people. They really want to get a sense of an accurate truth.

And the fears are real, and I say they’re threefold. One is just that fear of being wrong. And, of course, making mistakes is how we succeed. Like, conceptually, we all know that, but you go to school and you’re trying to get an A. And you don’t get an A by getting wrong answers. So, it’s been beat into us to get the right answer.

I’ve even heard senior people say to people on their team, “You need to be the smartest person in the room,” right? And when you’re in a room where everyone’s jockeying for a position like that, it’s intimidating. And so, if there’s a chance that you really may not be right, you’re inclined to be like, “Well, I better not say anything,” right? So that fear of being wrong.

The fear of not fitting in, which really gets to being perceived as not a team player. Let’s say everyone’s going one direction, you have a different point of view, but you’re a little bit hesitant to put it out because you don’t want to be like, “Eh, I don’t want to be like, I’m not, you know, all for the team,” and so we hold back, and that’s very real.

And the third one is, particularly, when we’re giving, I would say, constructive feedback that someone needs to hear. It’s this notion of, “I don’t want to offend them. I don’t want to offend Molly because she’s going to feel bad about herself.” And so, again, I would say that that’s about, “Hey, what’s your relationship about giving feedback to someone?” because that helps them to grow. That helps them to be a better person.

And so, that ability to have a mental shift on “Why are you speaking in the first place?” and to get whole with that, I really think can change the whole game for lots of folks.

Pete Mockaitis
And if we have these fears, what should we do?

Molly Tschang
Well, I think, first of all, it’s just really assessing, “Is it really there?” So, I hear this a lot, “Well, so and so doesn’t want to hear it.” I’m like, “Okay. So, if you have something that you see that the person is doing that maybe isn’t serving the team, right, and you don’t say something, how are they ever going to know?”

And so, what happens is people really are able to peel it back. Now, again, if someone has really shown they don’t want to hear it, again, I’m not saying stick your neck out, but I think a lot of folks will be like, “Well, wait a second.” And I say this, I mean, does your boss get out of bed, fly out of bed going, “I’m going to make it so scary no one tells me what I need to hear”? No, that’s not the output they do.

And so, I think if you take a little bit of lightness with it, people realize, “Hey, maybe there’s a little bit more fear in my own self.” So, I think it’s really determining if it’s valid or not. And I think the other thing to do is, “What is my intention?” Now, if you’re trying to speak up to make Molly look so amazing, like everyone else put down, okay, I would argue, I’m not sure about that intention.

If you’re there saying, “I want to say something because I think it’s going to help the team think more critically about this problem. I think if I say something, it’ll help people understand the customer’s experience,” then you’re really there serving the whole. And so, that intention, by the way, when you come across as really wanting to help others, that generally goes really well.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s good. Well, it’s funny, that phrase, “They don’t want to hear it,” it’s like there’s layers of truth to that. And I’m thinking about a tale of two landlords. One, I’m thinking about like, so if you own a building and you got tenants, and then there’s a problem.

On one sense, we don’t want to hear it because it’s like, “Oh, no, this means money and difficulty in hunting down a contractor or a handyman, someone to repair this thing. And this is a hassle, a headache, a thing I wish I didn’t have to deal with.” So, on the one sense, we don’t want to hear it.

But I’m thinking about my friend, Lisa, who had some tenants just completely ignore, like, a really nasty rat situation. It was in the corner of the basement they weren’t in all that often, it’s like, “Yeah, whatever, you know, it’s kind of a pain, but, you know, I don’t want to annoy Lisa. I don’t want to put her out,” and so they just didn’t tell her for years.

And it just, as you can imagine, multiplied into an epic horrifying problem. So, it’s like, that phrase, “They don’t want to hear it,” it’s really good to examine that in some detail because, on the one hand, it’s probably true. They would prefer they live a life, a day without this big unexpected problem plopping on their lap, and them having to now contend with it.

So, on the one hand, yes, they don’t want to hear it. But, on the other hand, it is so much better to address a couple rats than dozens after years of neglect.

Molly Tschang
Yeah, 100% on that. And I think that gets down to what is our intention in sharing and how do we say it. And so, “This might be tough to hear, but I’m saying it because, if I were in your shoes, I would really want to know. I’m saying this because I think this will help. We’ll put something out there that is addressable now that if I wait a little longer, I think it only gets worse. So, I appreciate you being open to this because I really think it’s going to help us, the team, you.”

And so, again, it’s thinking about “What is worrying me about saying it?” and getting whole with that. I don’t want to make people bad or wrong for having fears or worrying, but think about that and then take the high road, like, “What is my intention? Why am I saying something? And it’s to contribute and it’s to be helpful.”

And so, I think this is like, “Ah, this is sort of really disgusting, but I have to tell you. I think it’s better to know now.” So, you can kind of grease the skits for how someone receives something by the way you offer it up. That takes a little bit of planning, Pete, right? So, you can’t just be like blurting stuff randomly.

And that idea of really, as a little bit of structure, which is the framework that we teach in our book here, is just, “Hey, what’s going on for me? The me side, getting hold of myself, getting out of my own way, knowing what do I want to have happen? And knowing that that’s what I want to have happen, how do I show up? What’s my energy? Is it with heart? Is it with anger? How do I show up to set the stage?”

And then that you is, what’s it like for the other person, which is like, “Ugh, no one wants to hear they have to spend more money.” However, they’d much rather spend less money now than more money later. And at the top level, the we, who are we together, here we are in this relationship and we want to have a really open, communicative, transparent relationship where we’re trying to help each other.

And they don’t really want you to live with rats, frankly, and you don’t really want them to have a major rat problem, ideally.

Pete Mockaitis
Yes, certainly. Okay. Well, could you maybe share with us some beautiful, illustrative conversation examples from your work, either your own conversations or conversations you’ve helped sort of navigate, mediate, that bring some of this stuff to life?

Molly Tschang
Just yesterday, I was talking to someone who has been at our company a long time. They have a new manager. The manager has been promoted to a more senior level and the relationship with this person had been fabulous because they were not micromanaging and diving in when maybe they shouldn’t be now because they’re more senior.

And so, that idea of, “How do I give this senior person constructive feedback without risking my head being chopped off or them freaking out or being even more anxious than it’s already obvious to you that they are?”

And so, because this person happened to have a pretty good relationship, I mean, I said to this person, “You are not at risk of being fired, and you should know that you’re trying to really help this individual be the best leader they can be. And if they don’t know that what they’re doing demoralizes the team, the team feels dismissive,” they had a specific example of how something was said that the manager thought, “Oh, this is so fabulous.” And then her point of view was, “No, that was not fabulous.”

So, getting hold of that situation, and then it’s saying, “Hey, I want to this person aside,” saying, “Amy, we’ve worked a long time. I have a ton of respect for you and I’m really glad you got promoted. I want you to be able to look great for everybody. And in our last meeting, I’m wondering how you thought that went.” And so, you start to get an engagement of how the person, their reality of the situation.

So often we get into it and you want to blur it out, “This is what you need to do,” right, because you’re so worried about saying it, but that ability to kind of on-ramp with someone, create a conversation, and then kind of say that’s how that landed for you, “I can see what you were trying to do when you said that, but I want to share something because I think it may be a blind spot for you. We all have blind spots, Amy. And I think this could really help you be even more effective.”

And then you share that, and you go back and forth. It’s not a “My way or the highway.” Again, it is your reality. And I have this notion of shared reality. We want to get to an accurate shared reality. And Amy is only going to be able to lead to her full potential if she kind of appreciates, even though she might have meant something, it landed differently.

And so, I think the biggest part for any individual is just that courage. Because it does take courage. It is far easier to say, “She doesn’t want to hear it. It’s not going to go well. I’m not going to say anything.” And the thing is, if you do that, which is totally your right to do, you’re contributing to the problem. You’re not a bad person, but you are perpetuating the disconnects.

And that is what I’ve seen, Pete, I call them your A and B players, they’re like, “Wait a second. I didn’t work my butt off, whether it was community college or Harvard or Cambridge, to be beige or a wallflower. I want to be able to contribute.” And so, that’s the energy. You have to come with that. And if you are coming across in a way to be helpful, genuinely to be helpful, the person may not want to hear it – but you know what – they’re going to respect that, and deep down, they’re going to be grateful.

I have just seen this time and time and time again, because, even at the most senior levels, we’re all human. And, by the way, we all do stuff that we think is going well and it’s not landing that way. It doesn’t make us bad leaders. It means that people are different. We all respond differently. So, I mean, I think that one working, managing up, if you will, giving feedback up is a big one.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, we talked about the fear and the courage and the “They don’t want to hear it,” I mean, there is a segment of, you mentioned sometimes these fears are completely justified in terms of retribution or whatever. They will not receive it even if you say it as skillfully as Molly herself.

So, could you help us? If we’re gauging, doing like a risk assessment, what might be some indicators that this really is a danger zone to say this versus, “No, no, we’re just getting in our heads. We’re, like, we have nothing to fear, but the fear itself. Summon the courage and you’ll be glad you did”?

Molly Tschang
I think people are pretty apparent about that. And so, “Hey, I’ve noticed how that meeting went. How do you think the meeting went?” You just open up with an open-ended question, “You know, I’m really working on improvement. What are some areas you think I could be improving? Hey, I’m going to flip it a little. Where are some areas that you could be improving?”

You can see if someone’s going to go with you on that, or if they’re like, you know, stiff arm, like, “What are you talking about?”

Pete Mockaitis
“I discuss these matters with my coach, not my subordinates. Thank you very much.” “Oh, dang.”

Molly Tschang
Exactly. That’s like a clear indicator. Okay. That’s like get out the resume, freshen up the resume and let’s go, right? I do understand that it’s a big disconnect. It can be very hard to look for new roles. I really want people to value themselves, Pete, because you have to decide that you’re finding a place that deserves you.

I know so many people, super hard working. I mean, you’re going to go all out and you got to find a place that values you, and that’s on you. It’s not someone else’s job. And it’s a very personal decision. And I get, sometimes, things aren’t exactly perfect. That’s fine. You decide for whatever reason that’s the right situation for you at that moment. Totally respect that.

I don’t want to give people both sides. You can’t complain about it and not be willing to do something about it. That’s where I have to call a spade a spade.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, and I’m sure it varies quite a bit by industry and situation and dah, dah. dah. But if I could put you on the spot to very roughly hazard an estimated guess of what percent of people can handle getting some feedback versus what percent, I will say managers and up, versus what percent are just not worth it?

Molly Tschang
Yeah. So, this would be only Molly’s very limited experience. I have no data on this, but my very limited experience is, I think, there’s probably 15, 10, 15%, they’re not bad people. They cannot kind of get out of their own way, in certain situations, right? In certain situations. And in those cases, it’s far better to be at peace with that and figure out “How do we work it so that we can mitigate this?”

Seventy-nine percent of relationship issues, if you will, are perpetual. We don’t solve them. They are there. So, it’s, “How do we manage around those?” The more we have transparency about a tendency, let’s just say, as a leader, I have a tendency to jump the gun, shiny new object, right? And I know that. So, if I’m transparent, “Team, I know that I can be attracted by the shiny new object, and that can feel like I’m deprioritizing these other things.”

“I’m being open about this and I’m giving you full authority when I’m doing that, to do a Heisman, or whatever you need to do so that I can wake up and appreciate that I’m kind of going off a little bit.” So, I think the leaders who do that, I mean, are empowering their teams to be part of the solution, are owning, showing vulnerability in a good way because we all have stuff, right?

Pete, no one’s perfect here. We all have stuff. No one, for the leaders are out there, you’re the leader for a reason. People respect that. I think something has come up recently, where sometimes in decision-making, a leader wants to seem very inclusive, which is fantastic. However, if the decision has been made and, in your mind, you’re just going to do X, and by the way, you’re the leader, so it’s your prerogative to make the decision. Just let the team know.

“I took some feedback,” or, “I didn’t take feedback,” or, “It was a short amount of time. I’ve made this decision.” What people don’t want is to go into a meeting, you’re pretending to take all this input when you’ve already made up your mind, right? So, these are the things where I’d say, from a transparency standpoint, the leader knowing, “Okay, where am I on this? Hey, I’ve decided this is the call.” Awesome. Tell people.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, so you’ve got these specific scenarios where the fears pop up, and it could benefit a lot to say it skillfully. So, we talked a bit about giving that feedback. How about some additional magical words, phrases, scripts, pro tips for these other scenarios, like speaking up when you disagree, confronting a bully, sharing bad news or a mistake, setting boundaries, saying no? Give us some of your top scenarios and favorite ways to say it.

Molly Tschang
Well, I think the saying no when people are like, because the people who are the highest performers, right, they’re always getting more stuff because they get it done. And so, this is where I would say to people, you’re enabling people to give you the work at 5:00 o’clock and it’s due at 9:00 a.m. or what have you. And so, you have to draw the line.

And part of that is, “Oh, I said you’re being a great teammate and you are helping them to be more planful. You’re helping them to be a teammate.” And so, this is where lightness, I would say, I would offer folks, “Oh, my gosh, Pete, I love working with you. You’re so great. You’re driving me out of my mind. Okay? And so, I’m going to tell you right now, I’m not doing it.”

“I said, Pete, I’m not doing it. For the last 20 times you’ve come to me, I’ve done this and I can’t do these 11th-hour ditches, so I’m going to tell you no. And here’s why. Because I have these other priorities, people came to me, I’m accountable for this. I know you can appreciate that. Once in a blue moon, I’m happy to jump through hoops for you, but it can’t be a habit.” Right?

This being open-hearted about it and how it serves the whole, not, “I’m right and you’re wrong.” But, “I understand what situation you’re in. I’m explaining my situation so you get it, and I’m doing the best I can for what I believe serves the organization.” And that’s defensible. Again, people might not like it, but we don’t want to enable people to be going with behaviors that don’t serve them.

The same thing, I think, goes with boundaries. It’s just being clear, “Oh, Pete, but I don’t want to be a witch.” I said, “No one said you had to be a witch.” I said, “Hey, team, this is the deal.” Whatever you might have at whatever time, “I want people to understand, I am a thousand percent in.” Maybe you’re available later in the day or what have you, but you explain to people how you’re going to get your work done and you just let them know, “I will get it done. I need this amount of time because of…” whatever reason. And people will honor that.

I think people feel bad about asking for what they need. But I think if you’re delivering and you’re adding value to the team, you’ve earned the right to say, “Hey, I want to continue to perform at a very high level. And this is what it takes for me to perform at a high level.” For some folks who aren’t maybe getting as much feedback as they might like from their managers, and managers are busy. They’re running around. They’ve got stuff and they’re not trying not to. They maybe just haven’t had the time to think about it.

“Raymond, I would really appreciate a chance to sit down with you every month to get a quick rundown of what you think is going well and where I can improve. And the reason this is important is I’m going to feel more motivated because I’m getting specific input. And I feel like I’m going to be able to do a better job for you and for the team.”

Go in with a positive intent. It’s easy, “Well, they don’t value me. They don’t trust me.” Maybe they don’t, but that’s not going to set you up for success if you start that way. Show the positive intention that you would like someone to give you and reflect that back to them.

And then, I think, sometimes we get into the solving mode, and I understand this. “Get in. The project is late. What are we going to do?” That ability to acknowledge where the other person is, to be human. Let’s say someone you’re working with shows up and they’re just not quite themselves. You’re a little uncomfortable, frankly, with that emotion so you just want to jump to the work even faster.

But I would offer, “You know, Sandy, before we get into the project, you don’t quite seem like yourself. Is everything okay?” That’s it. That shows caring. Now people say, “I don’t want to pry.” I’m not asking you to pry. Sandy may say, “Oh, I appreciate that,” or, “No, I’m fine. I just didn’t get a lot of sleep,” or what have you.

But that moment is for you to connect because effective communication starts when you actually connect with the other human being. So don’t feel that that’s a waste of time. That’s helping someone feel they’re seen, they can feel heard. I think for some folks who tend to want to solve a lot, the last thing I’ll say is this, my favorite is say more, right?

We have two ears. We have one mouth. Then give the other person a chance to fully share what’s going on for them without you feeling like, “I have to construct some brilliant response,” but rather just hear it for what it is.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, you know, it’s funny when you talk about just acknowledging that there’s a human and their emotions and what’s up, I recently had a conversation where someone said, “Oh, how are you doing?” I said, “Oh, hanging in there.” And he said, “Yes, so what does that mean because…” and he figured it out. Like, that’s my code phrase for “I’m not doing great, but I don’t feel like really getting into it so I’m going to say I’m hanging in there,” which is accurate. Whereas, to say fine is to lie.

Now you could say, “Well, hey, it’s a social norm, so it doesn’t count as a lie.” So, okay, that’s another conversation. But so that’s my little personal code but he saw right through it, he’s like, “Wait, but so, like, what does that mean?” And I thought that was so good because we were able to talk about the things, and it was very helpful.

Molly Tschang
That’s good. That’s really good.

Pete Mockaitis
Because you’re right, it’s delicate because you don’t want to pry, but you really do care and you really are conveying, “No, seriously, I’m offering you the permission to tell me what’s actually happening in your life, in your current mood, state, vibe. There’s an open floor invitation for that conversation right now, even though you might not be accustomed to that in many work contexts.” So, yeah, you don’t want to put them on the spot, but you do care. What do you recommend?

Molly Tschang
So, I think this is realizing that we can be skillful and show that we care and do everything that we can. And that’s what we can do. We can’t make the person feel comfortable sharing something. Some people, they’ve never shared at work. And I understand, I have done workshops with people, and I had one person say, “I’ve been at this company 17 years. I have never had a conversation like this.”

The ability to be real and to share who you are and what’s going on, particularly your struggles, that’s not the norm. I think, to the extent that you can create that space where people can show up, not to bog down work with all the personal problems. That is not the point, but that people appreciate that we’re not pretending you’re some perfect robot that just marches along and everything is, like, fine.

So, I think the individual may say, “Well, you know, I’m fine.” “Okay. Well, I just want to make sure. I care about you. And I just want you to know, if there’s any time that I can be helpful to talk about something off the record, I’m here for you.” That’s it. That’s it. You’re extending an opening and an olive branch, sharing that you care. You’re showing that you care.

And I can assure you that, even if they don’t respond to it, deep down, that lands well, right, because we’re human beings, at the end of the day. We’re not project manager or tech lead to, right? There’s a human being with a lot of life experiences.

And I think one of the things that, I think the social media is not so great for that, but, you know, we learn the most from the things we mess up and the struggles and stuff that’s hard. And it’s not really necessarily fun to share. You don’t want me to brag about how weak I was or how I screwed something up but I think creating space for people on that front is really important.

In fact, there’s one situation where this person talked about this conversation. It turns out this person, essentially, cannot see out of one eye, but had never shared this disability with people because he just didn’t feel comfortable doing that. And, of course, we’re in awe of him to be able to function the way he did.

So, I want folks to own your own sense of courage, and that when you share and are open of yourself, that’s an invitation to let other people know that they can do the same. And you have the saying, “I can see you because I’ve gotten to know you.” And to get to know someone, it’s about hearing their story and being open to hearing it without judgment.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, now let’s hear about the scenario in which there’s a group meeting situation, folks generally seem like, “Okay, yeah, yeah, this is the thing we’re going to do.” You think it’s a terrible idea. You’ve got the minority opinion of disagreement. Any pro tips on going there?

Molly Tschang
This is where you have to get deep down and say, “You know, I’m saying this not because I want to be right and make everyone wrong. I’m saying it’s because I think that there’s an angle here that we would want to explore. And I think weighing in that way can help. So, I am observing,” so you’re noticing, “I’m noticing everybody’s on the same page with this, which is great for you, folks. I have to share that I do see it a little differently or a lot differently.”

But what you’re not saying is, “You guys are all wrong and I’m super right.” Okay, that’s not the insertion. “I see it differently. I’d like to share this to spur the discussion. And I’m sharing it because, obviously, I want us to get to the best answer for us, for the customer, for whatever, so,” and then you share it.

I think, lots of times, people feel like they’re trying to one up, they’re trying to like go through all the details that you may not know. Realize you’re only seeing it from your angle and you can share, “I’m in customer service. I know all you folks are in engineering and in marketing. I see perhaps something different and I want to give you the benefit of what I see because I think it could inform the best decision.”

It takes being grounded in myself to be able to offer that in a way with that language. So, that’s where I would say getting clear on, “Hey, why am I here? I’m not here to make everybody else look stupid and I’m the smartest one in the room. That’s not why I’m here. I’m here because I do legitimately see something different.”

And it can also be, “You know, I’m really tracking that everyone is seeing this the same way. I’m missing a few pieces. Could you help me understand X?” Rather than say, “It’s not going to work when you do it that way. When this happens, help me understand how that’s going to move.” You’re being curious without judging, without expecting an answer.

So, I think that just giving folks different ways to insert so that you’re best serving the whole. That’s my main message here is that we’re here because we really want to help everyone get to the right state. Okay, sometimes people have to make their own mistakes. You’ve done what you can. If they’re like, “Hey, we hear you, Molly. I think that…”

And the leaders can say this, “You know, given what I know, I’m going to go with this. I might be wrong, but we’ll go with it. And if we need to change course, we will.” You’re like, “Okay, great.  You go with it.” You did what you could to the best of your ability. You sleep well at night.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. I’d also like to hear your perspective on what are some things you recommend we don’t say, like common missteps, like, “Uh-oh,” you’re better off maybe purging any key words or phrases from our vocabulary?

Molly Tschang
So, two come to mind. So, one is if you’re a more senior person, really not, it could just be anyone, but someone comes to you with bad news or tough news, something you may not be so thrilled to hear. I have heard senior people, the first thing out of their mouth when a more junior person tells them something that’s not easy to say, “Who said that?” Just like, “Did you just blurt that out in a very aggressive declarative tone to someone who was trembling because they wanted to tell you something that they thought you needed to know?”

So, I get that you might be outraged. I get that you’re trying to connect all the dots. The number one thing, when someone comes to you with stuff that might be tough, is to say, “Gosh, before I say anything, thank you. I appreciate that may not have been so easy to say. And I want everyone else who is here to know that I need you and want you to be able to come forth with things that maybe you don’t think I want to hear.”

So, the leaders who do that, you have to reinforce it every day. What happens is the leader is like, “Well, I told them that they should be able to say anything that they want.” And you said it once, you know, in January 15th of 2025. Like, it doesn’t work. It has to be reinforced and it has to be backed up with how you respond when someone gives you the bad news or something that they don’t want to hear, okay?

And that doesn’t mean you’re happy about it. I’m not trying to conflate that. Saying, “Hey, I really respect that you shared that with me. I’m going to push back a little, but I want you to continue to do that.” You can be upfront about that. I’m not saying you have to be namby-pamby about it, but you have to realize that, as a senior person, it’s just inherently scary. It just is.

Even if you are saying, “I’m not scary and I want to hear it.” From a power authority level, it’s hard for people. And appreciating that, I think, is super important. Now, I know other folks on the other side where people are so comfortable with them, they’re coming to them all the time and telling them whatever, and then they have a different problem, they’re like, “Wait a second. What do I really need to know here, right?” And so, I mean, you got both sides of that coin.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Anything else?

Molly Tschang
Well, I think there’s a lot of feedback scenarios, and this is the one I alluded to earlier that I just want people to realize, like, “Molly doesn’t get better unless people feel comfortable helping me get better.” Someone else doesn’t get better unless we help them. So, we need each other on the team to be able to grow and to get better. So that’s normal.

And I want people to feel good about the fact that someone cares enough to say, “Hey. I see what you were trying to do there. I’d like to offer something that I think could be more effective. Are you open to it?” And so, I think this back and forth in a conversation is what I want to help people think about. So often, they get in and they have this piece of feedback and it’s, I’ve seen people go four minutes.

And the poor person is like, just from a fire hose, getting all this deluge of words. They don’t really even know what you’re saying. So, that ability to just take the time, to set the stage, “I’m speaking up because I think it’s something that can be helpful. I may not be 100% right, but I want to share it for your consideration.” So, you’re giving them optionality, and then roll into why you think it could be helpful.

Now, if someone, you’re in a situation where you really think they did something that didn’t work, you have to say, “Hey, you’re the boss person. I have to say, I’m calling it like I see it. I don’t think that really worked, and here’s why.” “I could be wrong about that but this is my decision.” Or, “Since I’m the leader, I can make that call.” And that’s fair.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, tell me, Molly, anything else you want to make sure to mention before we hear about your favorite things?

Molly Tschang
Well, there’s three things, I think, that differentiate the approach that Marshall and I took to this book we wrote. And I think the first thing is we really wanted to confront a very widespread workplace blind spot. And that is that people are, in fact, not speaking up, even in the highest performing places. They have these fears or they lack the skill.

And the disconnect is the leaders actually think they’re super accessible and the employees think otherwise. And so, the ability to bubble that up is like, “Hey, folks, that is going on.” For the leaders who are like, “Oh, my people love me.” Those are like, “No, I’m not really sure that’s going on.” So, I think just being upfront that people are not speaking up as much as they could be, that’s an opportunity for everyone.

And so, the idea of this effective communication is it is a life-changing skill. Learning how and when best to use your voice benefits your relationships, your career, and every single thing that you do. Yet, of all the things we’re trained in and all this corporate training I had for three decades, it’s not something that we learned. So, I just want to encourage folks that, because it is a very personalized, individualized skill, we come from different backgrounds, different experiences, it’s really on you to figure out what words work for you.

Certain words work for Pete. He can use them. Certain words work for Molly. But for each of us, I want to encourage you to really find what works for you because, fundamentally, your communication is how other people experience you. It is you, right? So, people are, “Well, how come she doesn’t think I’m confident?” I’m like, “Well, maybe she doesn’t think you’re confident because you’re not communicating very confidently, right?” Newsflash.

And then I think the third thing I would offer is that I think a lot of personal development, the communication space is you have a certain, like, “How do you play the game? And how do I win?” And there’s nothing wrong about figuring out how you win the game. I would offer that what we’re trying to come forth with in the Say It Skillfully way is that we’re trying to help people learn how to actually change the game, Pete, so that everyone wins.

And I think when you’re actually giving people the space to be who they are, to say what they think needs to be said, and really bubble up all the different viewpoints, you have the best shot of aligning, really, on what’s real, what’s the accurate shared reality. And from that we can do our best work together.

And I really want that. I really truly want that for everyone because I didn’t speak English until I was five. I was painfully shy. Super, super unskillful. So, it’s a hundred percent a learned skill.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, now let’s hear a bit about your favorite things. Could you share a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Molly Tschang
Well, “To serve is to live,” Frances Hesselbein, passed at 107, says it all.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite study?

Molly Tschang
I like Marcus Aurelius. So, his book of little genius wisdoms. I can’t pick one, but I think he’s amazing.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite book?

Molly Tschang
So, my friends wrote this great book on meditations, and I can’t believe I’m just spacing out. It’s by Bruce Kazanoff, and, gosh, I can’t remember the name of it. I’ll have to come back and put it up there. But it’s this tiny book of meditations.

And the reason I love it so much is the short meditations were a collaboration. And they collaborated, and they just wrote it organically, and they would send something back and forth and the whole process of that. And I did learn to meditate later in life and it has just made a huge, huge difference for me.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite tool, something you use to be honest about your job?

Molly Tschang
I have to just say that this little Yeti Nano microphone so that I can be heard more clearly has been a game changer.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And is there a key nugget you share that really seems to connect and resonate with clients, they quote it back to you often?

Molly Tschang
“Transparency is your friend.”

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And if folks want to learn more or get in touch, where would you point them?

Molly Tschang
SayItSkillfully.com.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay.

Molly Tschang
And one resource I want to gift to all of your subscribers, Pete, is my mini audio book The Me-You-We Framework. And this is the way to skillful conversation that anyone can apply regardless of your level, industry, job. So we’ll give the download link in the podcast, but I really encourage folks to check it out, to start your journey, and encourage others to do the same because when you say it skillfully, performance improves, and everybody wins.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Thank you. And do you have a final challenge or call to action for folks looking to be awesome at their jobs?

Molly Tschang
Learning how and when best to use your voice is the number one thing you can do to succeed in life and, really, I think, bring you happiness. And so, I would encourage folks to check out all the resources and learn to speak up in a way that’s really true to yourself.

And it’s going to help you in working together, but I think really more importantly, for me, is it helps you with your most cherished relationships at home. And to feel like you’re living a life of no regrets because you’re able to put forth and say what you think serves the whole.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Molly, thank you.

Molly Tschang
Thank you, Pete. That was super fun.

1057: How to Improve Your Next Conversation with Jefferson Fisher

By | Podcasts | 2 Comments

Jefferson Fisher shares his three-part communication system for handling difficult conversations with ease.

You’ll Learn

  1. The best first word to use
  2. How to set boundaries people will respect
  3. Two tricks for handling disagreements

About Jefferson

Jefferson Fisher is a trial lawyer, writer, and speaker whose work to help people communicate during life’s everyday arguments and conversations, with his practical videos and authentic presence, has gained millions of followers around the world, including celebrities and global leaders. He is a sought-after speaker on communication at Fortune 500 companies and governmental agencies, and hundreds of thousands of people subscribe to his actionable email newsletter and podcast. 

Fisher is a Texas board-certified personal injury attorney and the founder of Fisher Firm, where he helps people all over the United States connect to trusted legal services. He lives with his wife and two children near Beaumont, Texas.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Jefferson Fisher Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Jefferson, welcome!

Jefferson Fisher
What’s going on, Pete? Great to meet you, man.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, you too. I’m excited to be chatting. And I want to kick it off with just a little softball opener question. Jefferson, tell me, what’s the most surprising and fascinating thing you’ve ever discovered about humans and communication in the course of your career?

Jefferson Fisher
Oh, just a nice little softball. Thank you. That was great. Like, how much we struggle at it and, at the same time, how much we need it. One of my comfort shows is a show called “Alone” on Netflix.

And have these survivalists that are all amazing, and they go out maybe in somewhere in the Alaska wilderness. And it’s a very slow-paced show, and they’re supposed to survive, really, for however long that they can or sometimes they put a deadline on it.

But a lot of the times, I’ve seen that the number one reason they tap out, in other words, they call and say, “Take me home,” is just because they miss people. They miss the sound of their loved one’s voice, or we’re just not meant to be alone. And that’s what I find so interesting. It’s not that they couldn’t keep up with the skill. It’s not that they couldn’t survive. It’s that they miss other humans.

Pete Mockaitis
So, we need it, it’s in us, it’s part of our very human design. So, when we’re not out in the remote Alaskan wilderness, are there ways that our communication needs are regularly being unmet?

Jefferson Fisher
Every day, our interactions are littered with miscommunication, where what we say does not match what was heard. And you can take that from the living room to the boardroom to wherever you are. And so, we find that the communication struggles are not uncommon, really, with anybody in any situation that we’re in.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. So, misheard intentions not translating into what’s received. Understood. You’ve got some wisdom for us in your book, “The Next Conversation: Argue Less, Talk More.” Tell us, what’s sort of the big idea of this book?

Jefferson Fisher
The big idea of the book is that some people teach you how to play an instrument. I teach you what chords to play. I give you the sheet music in terms of communication. And so, I am telling you how to use phrases that are going to improve your next conversation, from how to say things with control, meaning, instead of controlling them, you’re going to learn to control yourself and regulate yourself to where you stay calm and composed.

Two, we’re going to say it with confidence, meaning you’re going to use your assertive voice. You’re going to say things that don’t sound like you’re hesitant, or you’re unwavering, and you’re going to say things that are direct, but at the same time kind and respectful. And three, we’re going to say it to connect, meaning you’re going to have that difficult conversation go much better than it ever would if you had not read the book.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, so that sounds handy. Could you share with us an inspiring story of someone who started doing some of this stuff, a little bit of the before and what they did, and what happened afterwards?

Jefferson Fisher
We have tons of examples. Really, in our membership is a wonderful example of that. So, have an online membership where people are able to practice a lot of the tools that we teach. One of the persons who comes to mind, her name is Michelle. Michelle’s a single mother of two kids, and she was going through a really bad divorce.

And when she picked up the book, this is really what she was looking for, and they’re kind of on the tail end of all their legal proceedings. And she was really trying to find ways to not only speak to her new ex-husband, but also how to speak to her children about it. And the biggest takeaway that she said was that she really took control of her emotions by regulating her breath.

So, rule number one in the book is let your breath be the first word that you say. And so, by really leaning into that principle to regulate yourself and not get so wrapped up into the emotion, she says she’s been a much better communicator with her entire family. She’s feeling like it’s a much better impact in a positive way for her.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, Jefferson, that’s very Tweetable, “Let your breath be the first word that you say.” And so, zooming way in, practically speaking, that means, in most conversations, I will, literally, before uttering a word, have a breath?

Jefferson Fisher
No, I wouldn’t take it that extreme. So, mostly in your difficult conversations, your heated conversations, they’re going to have some friction in it. When somebody is saying something to you, we get into the habit of getting wrapped up and having to have an immediate response.

Somebody sends you a text you don’t like, somebody says something to you and you kind of get caught off guard and your whole body wants to fight or flight. You either want to say a hurtful word to eliminate the threat or you want to run from it. You want to hang up the phone. You want to slam the door.

And so, what I encourage people to do is to simply take a breath before you say anything. And often that is exactly, it’s all that you need to make sure that you keep your emotions in check, and your logical and analytical side of your brain at the forefront, so not every conversation, no. But you take it, for example, like in the business context.

If you’re getting interviewed, the person who, if you’re asking me a question and I take a breath and I’m thinking about it, and then I respond, it sends a different message that I really listened, I acknowledged, I thought about it. I’m not being flippant about it. So, what I’m about to say is going to mean more.

Pete Mockaitis
And it also, just on the receiving end of that, just comes across better than, if we were to replace the breath with, “Oh, well, you know, I would say…” that whole phrase, that it also is more powerful and polished and makes you seem more knowledgeable and authoritative.

Jefferson Fisher
Yeah, even if you were to say, “Hey, Jefferson, how are you? How was your day?” and I immediately said, “Oh, it was good. I mean, yeah, it was fine. It was good,” versus you asking me and I just took a breath, “You know, Pete, it was good. It was a good day.” Like, you can tell which one you’re going to believe more, the one who sounds a little bit more intentional, the one who sounds a little bit more in control.

And so, that’s what the pause, the breath does, is it gives you time to choose. Time to choose whether or not you want to say that, whether or not this person is worth your time, whether or not this person is worth your response, and to be able to make sure that what you’re going to say is intentional.

Pete Mockaitis
And I think that’s just, that question right there, “How are you doing? How’s your day?” is often among the very first of questions when meeting somebody or starting a conversation. It’s real nice to kick it off with a tone of trust and believability, like, “Right from the get go, I think Jefferson is being honest with me about his day,” as opposed to the flippant automatic robot response, “Fine.”

Jefferson Fisher
Exactly, yeah. And it helps release the tension in your body. When somebody is saying something that catches you off guard in particular or something that might be a little bit more offensive, our body tenses up and we tend to hold our breath because we’re readying to either say something hurtful or leave.

And when you use your breath, it’s telling your body, “What’s happening to me is not threatening. This person is not a threat. Their words are not a threat.” And so, that’s what the whole part of saying it with control is about. It’s not looking for what’s going to control them. You’re, first, looking at the conversation of what’s going to control you, and your breath is what’s going to help regulate and calm your body down.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, in your section on “Say It with Control,” we’ve got a chapter, control yourself, control the moment, control the pace. Can you speak a bit more on controlling the moment and controlling the pace?

Jefferson Fisher
Yeah, both of those kind of hint at the same concept. And that is the person who’s able to slow down their words is the person who’s always going to be more in control. People who speak very fast, it’s like listening to music that’s very fast. You kind of get, in some sense, it is very low-grade anxiety trying to make sure you can really listen to this person. You don’t want to miss anything and it rushes you.

Sometimes you’re around somebody and just their mere presence makes you anxious because they need to go, “We got this. I got this.” And they just can’t slow down. You compare that with somebody who is, let’s say, your grandfather or your grandmother.

And you go to their house and I’d say, mine is I have a papal. I’d say, “Papal, do you have a screwdriver?” And he’d go, “Yeah.” I mean, like just that right there. There’s something about the calm energy that we’re drawn towards like a moth to a flame, that we really, really want that secure presence.

And so, when you can be around the people who have calm energy and, in fact, if you can be the person who radiates that calm energy, controlling the moment means, instead of just spurting out words or putting your foot in your mouth, you’re taking time, you’re thinking, and you’re slowing it down. There’s a difference, Pete, between me saying, “I already told you. I’m not going to say that,” versus, “I already told you. I’m not going to say that.”

Now it’s the same exact words. All I did was I lowered my tone and I slowed down my words. Now which one of those sounds like someone who’s more grounded, more centered, more in control of themselves to say, “No, I’m not being moved by what you say. Your raised voice, your yelling, that doesn’t threaten me”?

So, you use just simply what’s already in your body to help control yourself, and you do that by controlling the pace and the moment by slowing it down.

Pete Mockaitis
That really rings true. And I’m curious, I suppose as you’re saying this, this strikes me as a great way to be most of the time. Occasionally, are we better off picking up the pace if our other party would prefer quicker responses? Or is it still more often the winning move to keep it slow?

Jefferson Fisher
I think, on average, people speak much faster than we need to. You think you’re talking slow, you’re really not. Most of the time we’re still rushing our words. We live in a very fast-paced life here in the United States of America. We rush everything. We can’t even watch a TikTok or a video for more than two seconds. And that’s maximum time.

So, I find that, yes, there are times when not rushing your words, but picking up the pace is not a bad thing. There’s such thing in music of just having dynamics, meaning your highs are going to be high and your lows are going to be low. So, if I were going to talk to you, and maybe I’m trying to be persuasive, maybe I’m trying to make my point and maybe you don’t believe it and I believe it and sometimes nobody believes it.

You hear that kind of dynamic in my voice that sometimes I’m going to rush little bit on the points that I’m really wanting to draw attention to, and I’m going to slow down on the parts I really want people to listen to every detail, because when you slow it down people will listen to a pin drop. So, that’s the power of just using that pause to hang on to every word. It makes a big difference.

Pete Mockaitis
It does. Folks tend to lean in and wonder, “Well, what’s coming next?” It works on me.

Jefferson Fisher
It works on everybody. I mean, we love stories. Humans love stories. We love to hear what’s going to happen around the corner. That curiosity is always in us.

Pete Mockaitis
So, rule one, say it with control. We talked about that. Before we move on, I’d love to hear, in addition to breath, are there any winning moves for regaining control of ourselves?

Jefferson Fisher
Yeah, it’s funny you used the word winning. So then in the book, probably the most quotable line that I have is “Never win an argument.” And it is very counterculture, I suppose, in a world where all we want to do is win, particularly arguments. You see it in so many books and blogs.

And what I teach is that when you set out to win an argument, you often will lose the relationship. Meaning, all you’ve won is really their contempt. You’ve won to be the first to apologize when you set out to try and win an argument, because you’ll say things that you don’t mean, and they’ll trust you less, they’ll respect you less, and, really, you’ve lost that connection.

And so, I teach that, instead of seeing arguments as something to win, see them as something to unravel, where there’s knots in the conversation, knots in the communication. And when you can have the discipline to try and see where the other person is coming from, but not in just the metaphorical sense, but meaning you’re actually asking, “Help me understand. Help me see the knot. What am I missing?”

Things that you, instead of just tugging and pulling to say, “No, you have to see it my way. No, you have to get my point,” and you just ask the question of what they see from their end instead of, “That’s not what I said,” you’re asking the question, “What did you hear?” You’re always going to find a much better conversation at the end of that.

Pete Mockaitis
And the visual of knots is, I think, very useful, because when we encounter knots in life, like literally in a rope, in a shoelace, etc., our reaction is not – N-O-T – so much to slice through it with a sword or a knife, but rather it’s like, “Okay, we’re going to have to take a closer look at this, maybe literally have a breath and see. Okay, how did this knot come to be? What’s stuck in what? And what needs to be backed up a little bit in order to get this smoothed out here?”

Jefferson Fisher
Yeah, it’s a mindset. A mindset that says, instead of “How dare they talk to me like this? How dare they, I mean, challenge me. They don’t believe me?” instead of having this, “I need to remind them who they’re talking to” kind of aggressive mentality, a much more winning mindset is asking yourself, “Huh, I wonder where this is coming from? I wonder what’s driving them to say that? I wonder what’s happening in their day? I wonder what they’re dealing with?

You start to look at it from the flip side and that often leads to a much better conversation at the end of the day. The knot is something that the harder you pull on it, the harder it is to loosen, the harder it is to undo. And you know people and I know people that have pulled on the knot for so long that they can’t undo it. Not for a long time.

We have people that haven’t spoken to their adult children in years, or they’ve lost that best friend because of one issue, then they never want to bring it up because they know that the knot is just too tight. It would be too painful. It’s like getting a backlash when you’re fishing. I mean, sometimes you just have to cut the whole thing out. It can become a very, very draining process if you don’t address it early.

Pete Mockaitis
I guess, to that point, I would love your perspective on, if we think that a knot is just too big, how often is that an accurate assessment versus just us rationalizing an internal fear situation?

Jefferson Fisher
Problems happen when you think one conversation is going to be the cure-all for everything. Like, one conversation is going to, all of sudden go, “You know what, you’re so right. I was so wrong all these years.” I mean, that never is going to happen. So, let’s say, you and I have had bad beef over time, and we have a knot.

Pete Mockaitis
“Yeah, you pulled some stuff, Jefferson.”

Jefferson Fisher
“Right. Of course I did.” And we have a conversation. You see how it would be much harder if I say, “Okay, let’s get one thing straight, Pete. You’re the one…” and, all of a sudden, you’re back to ground zero as soon as you utter that kind of stuff.

Instead, if you have the mentality of, “I’d like to talk with you, and this is a conversation that can last as many days and many months as it needs to about healing our relationship because I want a friendship with you again, Pete.” You hear how that is saying, “Look, I don’t know the rules. I don’t know how this is going to go, but I’m willing to tell you what my goal is.”

“And my goal is for us to have a new friendship. And what I’m saying is this is not a conversation that’s finished in a day. This is not a conversation that’s happening tomorrow.” So, if I’m telling you my conversation is over several days or weeks or a month or whatever, it’s very helpful to the other person to almost have a release of, “Okay, we can actually work through these things,” and not squish it all within this timeframe.

It happens very well, too, in the business context, that if you need to tell someone, “All right, I need to have a conversation with you over the next few days. And this is a conversation that’s going to last about a week,” you hear how all of a sudden there’s not pressure to solve it right then and there. You’re letting it organically involve in the way that it needs to happen, that people pulling out each little thread at a time.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s really good. And I think it’s telling. I’m thinking about it, if I read news articles about diplomatic relations between countries, it’s interesting because sometimes your secretary of state or the equivalents of other nations will say that they had very productive conversations. You’re like, “Well, what does that mean? Is the war over?” Well, no, it’s not. And yet they viewed it as very productive conversations.

And it’s just a little reminder, whenever you read such news articles, that some issues very, very much require numerous conversations, bit by bit, thread by thread to be smoothed out.

Jefferson Fisher
Yeah, it’s part of acknowledging to the other person that the issue they raised is a true issue. It is real issue. It helps to not keep people getting defensive. When you can tell them, “I agree,” and not in the sense that you agree with them. What you’re saying is you can’t think micro, you have to go macro. It’s this idea of, “I agree that’s worth talking about. I agree that’s an issue. I agree this is a topic that we should discuss.”

Simple as that, all of a sudden, their defenses are going to be lowered. Or you tell them that you’ve learned something or what’s been helpful, “That’s helpful for me to know. Thank you.” Or, “You know what, after listening, I can tell this is a really important issue to you.” All of a sudden, their defenses just go down, and now you can actually start addressing the knot that’s right in front of you.

Pete Mockaitis
I love it. Thank you. Well, let’s talk a little bit about saying it with confidence. Tell us a bit about establishing boundaries.

Jefferson Fisher
Boundaries are something that a lot of people struggle with, and for good reason. They’re hard to raise around people that, I’d say, take advantage of you not having the boundary. Like, the person who always gets to cut in line in front of everybody and, all of a sudden, they realize they’re not able to do that. That’s the person who’s most upset because they’ve taken advantage of you not having that boundary for so long.

I teach that just, because someone doesn’t agree with your boundary, doesn’t make it wrong. It means that it’s working. And we find in our culture today boundaries are a whole big thing. Everybody seems to be talking about boundaries and they’re not hard to say. They’re much harder to enforce. You could say a lot of platitudes or things of, “No is a complete sentence. You don’t need to justify yourself.”

Boundaries are really, to me, three simple components. That is, one, you’re telling them what the boundary is and it’s beginning with the I, “I am not going to be treated that way.” Two, you’re adding in the condition, “If you continue to treat me this way, if you continue to speak to me this way…”

Three is the consequence, and that’s the biggest part because you have to be able to actually own it and be willing to do what you say you’re going to do. So, the consequence could be, “If you continue to talk to me this way, then this is the end of the conversation.” That’s probably the most common one that I use in communication.

Let’s say I have an opposing counsel that’s just gone off the rails talking about their case. I might say, “Look, I’m not going to be spoken to like that. If you continue to speak to me like that, this is going to be end of the conversation.” I have a really quick way of being able to redirect their energy because you have two sides of the coin.

It’s either I can give you a remote control, Pete, and you can press my buttons, and for me to say, “You can’t talk to me like that. Don’t yell at me,” and you’re just pressing my buttons and you’re have complete control over my emotions. Or, what I teach in my membership is how to have your manual.

So, in other words, if somebody speaks to you in a way that they should not, or that you don’t like, it’s this mindset of, “Hey, if you turn to page 82, you’ll see on paragraph D, line A, yeah, I don’t respond to that volume. So, it’s this set of parameters, say, “If you want to communicate with me, this is how we’re going to do it. And if you don’t like it, then it’s the breaks. That’s how we’re going to have a conversation or not.”

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Thank you. Well, I’m curious, Jefferson, we’ve covered some good pieces here, any top tips, do’s or don’ts you really want to make sure that come across?

Jefferson Fisher
Probably one of the most common ones I get, particularly with somebody like in your audience in the workplace, is how to effectively disagree, how to disagree with someone you don’t want to sound disagreeable. So, instead of saying, “I disagree. No, I don’t like that,” which they’re going to take that personally.

They’re going to start defending their position against yours. So, meaning, as soon as you say, “No, I don’t like that,” or, “I disagree,” what I think is whatever you’re about to come out, they’re not going to accept it. Why? Because you just shut down theirs and it just becomes a battle of ideas.

Instead, what I want you to say is, “I see things differently. I see things differently.” And because it works, and not getting them defensive because you’re not arguing their point. You’re talking about their perspective. So, when I say, “I see things differently,” the key phrase is I see, “I see things differently,” or, “I view it differently,” or, “I take another approach,” or, “I tend to lean the opposite.”

I’m not saying anything they’re saying is wrong. I’m just saying, “I see it from a different side. That’s all.” And people don’t get defensive over that. Another tip that I like to give, particularly in the workplace, is if you find that your ideas are getting shut down in the board meeting, in front of other people, instead of getting frustrated that they didn’t accept your idea, because, really, all it is, is just an idea contest of people aren’t going to like your idea. Why? Because it’s not theirs.

Use percentages to your advantage. So, I would encourage you to say, “All right, I have about 20% of an idea here. I need your help with the other 80%.” And now, all of a sudden, they don’t see it as a competition. They don’t see you as a threat. They see it now as a collaboration to help get you to the 100%. Now they want to join in on it. Now they want to help. So, percentages is a quick little trick to help get conversation moving in the right direction.

Pete Mockaitis
I like that a lot. In your book, you’ve got a section called “The 47-Second Version.” Can you lay it on us?

Jefferson Fisher
Yeah, rule number one, any time that you begin to try to control the other person in the conversation, you’ve lost. Instead of focusing on them, look for what’s going to control you. And you do that by regulating your emotions. The key to that is your breath. Let your breath be the first word that you say.

Two, the rule is how to say things with confidence, meaning you’re going to use your assertive voice. If you want to be more confident, then you have to sound more assertive. Confidence is as assertive does. So, you’re going to say things that’s not littered with adverbs, like literally, obviously, basically. You’re going to not over apologize or undercut your words. You’re going to sound more assertive and, therefore, feel more confident.

Three, when it comes to saying things to connect, it’s all about making sure that, when you have that difficult conversation, you’re upfront instead of going, “Hey, so how are you and your kids? You good? Okay. Hey, listen…” Instead of that typical horrible beginning to difficult conversation, just tell it to them.

It’s going to sound like, “This is going to be hard to hear,” or, “This is going to be tough for us to talk about,” or simply, “This is going to be a hard conversation.” Anytime you can lead with the honesty and directness, it’s going to always end in a much better outcome.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, now could you share a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Jefferson Fisher
My grandfather has this line that he laid on me when I was a teenager. I was telling him about something I had done, and I was kind of frustrated about it and I didn’t feel good about it. And as soon as I told him, he looked at me, and he said, “Well, son, you can’t look back and hoe a straight row.” That was his line.

Meaning, anybody who gardens, if you’re hoeing the ground, if you look back, it’s going to be zigzag. You can’t be able to do a straight line. You always have to look forward. And that’s been a philosophy that stuck with me.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite study or experiment or bit of research?

Jefferson Fisher
One of my very good friends is Vanessa Van Edwards. She also does a lot of communication. She does like body cues and stuff. And her, I forget the exact number on it, but how quickly we can make our opinions about someone in a first impression.

And so, that to me is just you treasure the time that you first meet someone because you never get that chance again. After you met them, you’ve already met them. And so, I just love the idea of you have a chance to really cultivate something cool with the first person that you meet for the first time.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite book?

Jefferson Fisher
Right now, well, it has been for a long time, “Team of Rivals.” It’s a book on Abraham Lincoln. And Doris Goodwin, she’s just fantastic.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m an Illinois boy, so we love our Lincoln. And a favorite tool?

Jefferson Fisher
I have this thing called Tonal. I’m not sponsored by them in any way, but it’s a workout machine.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, yeah, a workout thing.

Jefferson Fisher
Yeah, it’s a workout machine. It’s fantastic. Fantastic. I use it every day, and I’m in better shape than I was when I played in college, so it’s awesome.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I was about to ask about a favorite habit. Is it using the Tonal or something else?

Jefferson Fisher
Yeah, I do really like Tonal. My favorite hobby is finding new music. I love finding new music. In a different life, I would have loved to have been the person who goes to, like, little dive bar concerts and finds this, you know, new talent. I love new music. I love music festivals. I play several instruments. So, I love that world. So, I’m always looking for new artists on Spotify.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And is there a key nugget you share that gets quoted back to you often and retweeted and Kindle book highlighted?

Jefferson Fisher
It’d probably be that “Never win an argument” line. Here’s one that I would leave with for anybody who finds themselves to be a people pleaser, and it would be this. It’s okay to be a people pleaser as long as you’re one of them. That’s what I like.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, I’m going to chew you on that already. So, you can please other people, but you got to make sure you are also one of the people being pleased, as opposed to a sacrificial martyr who becomes bitter.

Jefferson Fisher
Exactly. Yeah, exactly. It’s okay to be a people pleaser. Just make sure you’re one of them.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And if folks would like to learn more or get in touch, where would you point them?

Jefferson Fisher
So, they can go anywhere on social media. My Instagram is my favorite on Jefferson Fisher. You can find my accounts there at JeffersonFisher.com. You can get “The Next Conversation” wherever you like to get books – Amazon, they’re in stores now, airports. It’s been a whole lot of fun, so, yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
And do you have a final challenge or call to action for someone looking to be awesome at their job?

Jefferson Fisher
Believe in the power of your next conversation. It doesn’t matter if you and another person haven’t always hit it off. You can change everything with simply what you decide to say next. It really does make a difference.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Jefferson, thank you.

Jefferson Fisher
Thanks, man. Thanks for having me.

1035: How to Create Stronger Connections by Disagreeing Better with Bob Bordone

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Bob Bordone discusses the importance of building conflict resilience and how it can help you navigate the tough conversations.

You’ll Learn

  1. How conflict resilience brings people together  
  2. The key to raising your conflict tolerance 
  3. How to face any conflict head-on in three easy steps 

About Bob 

Robert Bordone is a Senior Fellow at Harvard Law School, founder and former director of the Harvard Negotiation and Mediation Clinical Program, former Thaddeus R. Beal Clinical Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, and founder of The Cambridge Negotiation Institute. He is co-author of Designing Systems and Processes for Managing Disputes, and co-editor of The Handbook of Dispute Resolution. 

Resources Mentioned

Thank You, Sponsors!

Bob Bordone Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Bob, welcome.

Bob Bordone
Pete, great to be here. Thanks for having me.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, I’m so excited to talk about conflict resilience, how to negotiate without giving up or giving in. Could you kick us off with a riveting tale, no pressure, but extremely exciting, high-stakes negotiation that you were in the midst of? And tell us what went down.

Bob Bordone
Oh, man. You know, there are many, and I think one thing I want to say also is that anyone who’s in a negotiation, for them, it is high stakes and riveting. But the one that immediately comes to my mind is actually one that I mediated, and it was a family of means that had lots and lots of property to be divided between them, and went on for many months.

I mean, there are so many fascinating aspects to this, but, for me, what was most interesting was folks were, and I think this actually comes up a lot in conflict, folks who are fighting over things, but the truth of the matter is that most of the actual fight was about feelings and emotions and stories that people told about each other.

And so, a lot of the work, this may or may not surprise your listeners, was getting folks to actually put aside the fight around the things, to talk about what was actually going on. And once we were able to do that, it didn’t make the fight about every single property easy, but it made it much easier and helped us to bring it to an end that not only resolved it, but also actually helped this family stay together.

Pete Mockaitis
Yes. Well, Bob, you’re giving me a flashback. Wow, this was a weird day. But, one time, I remember I did a Myers-Briggs workshop for a group, and then someone said, “That was awesome. You should come do that for me and my co-authors because we’re kind of working on a book together, and this would be really great for our team dynamic.” But as I got into it, what became clear was, “Oh, your conflicts are way deeper than just these personality difference stuff.”

Bob Bordone
Oh, wow.

Pete Mockaitis
“And, like, I don’t even know if I’m the man for this.” But, yeah, there was some family and some history and some emotions and about being appreciated or taken advantage of, or, like, historically, and it’s, like, wow. And just talking about who’s going to write what chapters and how their personality will help or hinder certain sections of who’s writing what isn’t going to cut it.

So, tell me, how do you make that that pivot, that transition, because in their mind, it’s like, “Okay, this the personality guy that’s going to help us write our book.” In their mind, “Okay, you’re the mediator guy helping us divide the property.” And then I say, “Well, no, actually, let’s talk about how you feel your sibling treated you as a teenager.” It’s like, “What?”

Bob Bordone
Yeah, Pete, this is a great question. It sounds like you’re not a therapist. I’m also not a therapist, and also this isn’t therapy. At the same time, I will say that one of the things that I have come to really appreciate, you know, my background is in law. People do not come to lawyers for therapy, but it is often the case that what’s most convenient to talk about is who’s right and who’s wrong, and who gets the thing and what the legal rules are.

But so much of, I think, the work of really being good at conflict to ourself and also being good as a mediator, a facilitator of conflict is getting people to do some of their own work first. And we imagine, my co-author and I in writing our book, that people will come to it, and in their mind, they’ll be thinking about, like, “How do I deal with this unhinged person at work?” or, “Like, my mother-in-law or someone on I’m in conflict with a, whatever, at the local church?”

But the first step, I think, is always doing like an internal audit, because I think, often, part of what makes conflict hard, like, across a proverbial table is that we also often have lots of internal conflicts and ambivalence in ourself. And when we’re triggered in a particular conflict, it’s kind of bringing up what’s happening in that moment. And then a big narrative and our history and our family background, and “Do we need to unpack all of that, like, to figure out who gets what?” No, I don’t think so.

It’s also the case that, I think, the more self-aware we are of those dynamics, the quicker we can move from that, what we call kind of period of limbic irritability, where we’re kind of being emotional or maybe irrational or running.

Pete Mockaitis
Limbic irritability, I can go into that.

Bob Bordone
Yeah, I love that. I would like to take credit for limbic irritability, but that is very much my co-author, who brings a brain science piece to this book. And it’s really just this moment, or actually more than a moment, when someone says or does something in a conflict and the frontal lobe, like the rational part of our brain that makes good decisions, is overridden, it’s irritable, if you will, by chemicals that are coming from the amygdala.

And we know that it’s like the adrenaline and the cortisol, and that’s kind of making it harder to make really good decisions at the negotiation table. And so, the quicker we can name what’s going on to ourselves, and there’s actually research about this, we’re looking at fMRIs, the quicker people are able to kind of name it to tame it, naming those emotions and feelings and those stories, the quicker the limbic irritability actually goes down, and allows us to be more constructive.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, now this is sparking some remembrance of a nonviolent communication. Is that Marshall Rosenberg?

Bob Bordone
Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
In which he nails it, like, to be able to say, “I’m feeling angry because my need for respect doesn’t seem to be being met in this situation.” It does worlds for like, “Oh, okay. It’s no mystery, that’s what’s going on here.”

Bob Bordone
“That’s what’s going on.”

Pete Mockaitis
“I felt like when he said that, that was disrespectful to me, and so I got angry about it. But, I guess, I don’t need to let that impact my thousands of dollars of whatever negotiation here. I can just kind of let go of that,” or maybe say, “No, actually, that’s pretty important, given brand, or reputation, or whatever. That’s got to get addressed here. Let’s do it.”

Bob Bordone
What you just did there, Pete, is, I mean, so critical because it’s, first of all, it’s being able to name yourself, the feeling and the need of what’s not being met, and that is important. I mean, I don’t know any relationship, whether it’s a boss, supervisor, colleagues, parent, friend, you name it, that works well in the long term where one person isn’t feeling respected.

So, the real difficult conversation is “What does respect look like? And how can we change the dynamic?” So, to be able to name that and say, “That is important. What might be less important is whether I’m getting paid $3,000,” or you’ve moved your fence six feet to the right, or whatever it may be. That might be one way of conveying respect, and there might be 22 other ways. But until we actually get at what’s really the real rub, which is, “I feel disrespected here,” it’s going to be actually hard to even have a conversation about the right thing.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that’s dead on. And I’ve heard that there is some research, and, Bob, maybe you have it top of mind. When it comes to medical malpractice type situations, one of the biggest drivers is the extent to which the physician is being caring and honest and helpful as they go and say, “Hey, so this is what happened, and we’re so sorry. Humans make mistakes, and we made a mistake, and here’s what we’re going to do to fix it,” as opposed to silence, lawyer up, be difficult. It’s, like, that actually is a worse approach for mitigating liabilities and losses.

Bob Bordone
Amen, yeah. And this research you’re talking about is really kind of fascinating because what it shows is that people are more likely to want to sue in a situation where they don’t feel that the doctor has been willing to kind of has actually met those interests in listening and sharing their contribution, where they’re just in a defensive stance, than if actually there is that listening and that kind of meeting the interests of feeling hurt, and even apology.

And I think where it’s really interesting from a conflict perspective, and someone who is also trained in law, is there’s this interesting sweet spot of, if people can just actually be honest, like doctors make mistakes, that causes damages for sure that need to be compensated. But the moment of acknowledging that goes a long way to me not wanting to destroy you.

I might need another surgery, and, yeah, I kind of expect the hospital to pay for that. But, like, I don’t need to destroy you. But that defensiveness, and what’s weird is law would come in and say, “Don’t say anything because if you say anything, that will be used against you and then we’re doomed.” And so, what ends up happening is we miss an opportunity there. We miss an opportunity that I think is unfortunate from a conflict perspective.

And, I mean, here we’re obviously talking about medical error, but on a day-to-day basis in, like, relationships, I think similar dynamics come up where the act of apology or the act of sharing some vulnerability doesn’t happen because we’re afraid that the other person is going to take advantage of us. Both sides fearing that do the kind of least good thing, the thing that’s like least in their actual character, and then they tell a story about how terrible the other person is.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Well, so coming back to your situation with the wealthy family, you noticed, “Hey, there’s some emotional history stuff going on here,” what happened next?

Bob Bordone
And so, just a piece of that, it is not to relitigate that, for sure, and one of the, I think, core things we talk about in our book, it’s not even to get people on the same page. But the process, I think, of just effectively listening to each other’s stories and experiences, having it validated as, “This is how you experienced,” just can go a long way in, I think, changing the narrative and, particularly, like changing the idea of what might be possible.

Like, another domain of work where I’ve done this is working across lines of difference with, like, Israeli and Palestinian young people. It’s not typically the case that ongoing dialogue across a line of difference changes people’s view on the substantive issue, but it powerfully changes their view on the way they tell the story about the other person, and that’s really valuable for what they might be able to do going forward.

And even if they can’t do all that much, being able to say that, “This is a three-dimensional complicated, interesting person that I can identify with,” is better than “They’re the enemy/subhuman/fill-in-the-blank,” right?

Pete Mockaitis
Understood. Okay, so with your book, it’s called Conflict Resilience, what does that mean?

Bob Bordone
Yeah, so what we want to make really clear that it’s not a fancy word or a catchy word for conflict resolution, but it’s actually quite different. Conflict resilience is really the kind of capacity to sit with the discomfort of disagreement, meaning that it’s both this ability to listen very well and effectively and generously, and also assert your own viewpoint authentically, non-avoidantly, but in a way that increases the chances that the other side could hear you. And it’s independent of whether or not we might be able to actually problem-solve, agree, or find common ground.

So, in a sense, it’s a little bit like emotional intelligence. It’s a set of skills, but it’s like a capacity or a quality that, I think, in this case, is prerequisite to being able to do conflict resolution or negotiate or mediate. Because if you can’t stand the heat of the fire of the conflict, then you really can’t resolve it. You can run away from it but you can’t resolve it.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Well, it’s funny, you’re sparking some memories for me. I remember I was dealing with an issue and I was chatting with a lawyer, and he said, very matter of fact, “Well, either they give that money back or you sue them.” I was like, “Oh, just like that, huh?”

And then someone else was talking about the same issues, like, “You know, unfortunately, it sounds like, I know it’s a huge pain, but if they don’t play ball, I think you’re going to have to actually, you know, contact a lawyer and do that whole thing, file a complaint with the county, all that stuff.” And it was so noticing how that juxtaposition there, two people talking about the same thing, one just like, “Hey, whatever, sue. No big deal.” And the other one is like, “Oh, yeah, it’s got to be a real big thing.”

And I think that that is reflective of personality or emotional capacity or something, because to one person, it’s no big deal, and to the other, it’s, “Oh, man,” a huge ordeal is about to unfold.

Bob Bordone
Absolutely. One of the things we talk about in our book is kind of these five Fs: fight, flight, freeze, fawn, or fester. I know I said that very fast. Fight, flight, freeze, fawn, or fester. But they’re kind of like our, as you were saying, Pete, like default tendencies that we have in that moment when we’re feeling conflict. And the brain, the way it’s kind of set up is, in the moment it feels this discomfort, it will go to the thing that relieves it most quickly.

And for some of us, it might be fighting. It feels like we’re doing something. And others, it might be fawning, which is like, “Oh, my gosh, I’m so sorry. I didn’t mean to. Oh, please forgive me,” or fester, I kind of just kind of sit there and stew quietly, or flee. And the truth of the matter is, though, I think that if we can become more aware of that default, and it does differ, as you say, for different people, it gives us this moment of opportunity to choose something that might be more purposeful, that might actually advance our goal. And it might be very different from you either sue them or avoid it.

I think the other thing, Pete, that you’re bringing up, and tell me if this seems right to you, is that just our individual experience of what might register as conflict just varies. So, just an example with my co-author, since you were asking about co-authors earlier, right? I’m somebody, I’m trained in law, I love to get into a policy discussion, right? We can, you know, whatever. You pick something, Pete, I’ll, like, get into it with you, and it’ll be super fun.

I’ll be like, “I had so much fun, it was great.” My co-author might be like, “Oh, my gosh, Bob’s really upset.” Like, sleepless nights. Like, “Is our friendship in danger?” And I’m thinking that was fun. And so, there’s just a way in which what each of us registers as conflict, so we call this conflict tolerance, in our book, varies.

But the problem is if we if we’re not able to even have the conversation about “How do we handle that difference?” I will come away thinking “This person just caves in all the time. They’re obviously not that smart. They clearly agree with me.” And the other person comes away thinking I’m aggressive, a bully, you know, fill in the blank.

And so, part of it is how do we identify these differences? How do we find ways to talk about how to handle even the difference in which we experience conflict?

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Well, lay it on us. How do we do that?

Bob Bordone
Okay. Yeah. I mean, I think, so part of it is doing some work around your own, understanding your own defaults. So, with around the idea of conflict tolerance, we actually break it into two pieces, what we call conflict recognition and conflict holding. So, recognition is, “What is the moment at which I would describe our interaction as conflict?” Holding is, “Once I feel like I’m in a conflict, what is my ability to stay with it versus going into one of the defaults?”

So, doing some self-assessment, I think, is really important. I think the second piece is if I’m in kind of an ongoing interaction with, whatever, a sibling, where I continue to see, like, a shutdown around an issue. Instead of bringing the issue back up, there’s an interesting conversation to say, “Can we talk about what is happening for each of us when this issue pops up? Like, how do you experience a conversation? How do I experience a conversation?”

In other words, we’re going meta on the dynamic. And that may sound, I mean, to some listeners like, “Oh, my gosh, who’s going to do this? And are you going to do this every day, all the time?” No. But if it’s the kind of conflict issue that keeps you up at night, that’s tearing at a relationship that matters to you, that kind of you’re spending a lot of time around a proverbial water cooler or on a Slack channel, going on and on about how horrible they are, yeah, well that’s the time to actually engage this.

And that’s what people tend to avoid, and that’s what we hope our book can really be helpful with because that’s the productive thing we need to do better.

Pete Mockaitis
Certainly. And I’m thinking that, for any naysayers out there, I think that this is a tremendously valuable activity. Yes, not every day, and with not every issue. But because it really can be quite illuminating in terms of it registers for one person, it’s like, “Oh, my gosh, you’re enraged. You think I’m a terrible husband.” Like, whatever.

It’s like, “Oh, no, no, no, no, not at all. I just kind of preferred that we do it this way. I just kind of like it a little better. That’s all I was asking.” It was like, “Oh, really? Because it felt like judgy or whatever,” fill the blank. And so, I think those conversations are valuable. I think maybe some level of avoidance, resistance that we feel towards that is just straight up fear. Like, we’re worried the other person’s going to be like, “Oh, you softy. Come on. You always make me the bad guy.” Like, whatever.

It’s like there are, it feels as though that conversation could go very wrong. So, Bob, tell us what’s our risk prognosis and how do we do it well?

Bob Bordone
Yeah, I love that you’re bringing this up, right? So, I feel like there’s some good news and bad news in what I’m going to say here. The good news is that my own experience is, often the fear of what might go wrong in one of these conversations is like way more destabilizing, exhausting, and tiring than the actual conversation itself. I mean, it just is.

So frequently, I’ll work with somebody or coach somebody and they’ve practiced and they’re worried, and then after they do it, they’re like, “You know, I mean, it wasn’t perfect, but, like, I’m so glad I did it. Or it helped advance the ball. We didn’t get to Z. We got to F. But since we were at A, getting to F was like progress.”

But the other thing, here’s the bad news, because, I mean, I think there is bad news, and I think this does have people hold back. There is a chance, it’s like whenever you change the script and do something different, there is a chance you’ll get the worst possible answer. There is a chance that if you put yourself out there in a somewhat more vulnerable way to engage something that matters to you, in a way that’s really inviting to the other side, that they might be like, “Meh, I don’t really care.” “Meh, sounds like it’s your problem.” And, therefore, we avoid it.

We avoid it in service of the relationship, but the reality is that, if they really were to do that, in most cases, I’d rather know that now than engage in some kind of farce with you or wait for the slow kill on the relationship. And so, does that makes sense? Or what do you think about that?

Pete Mockaitis
No, that’s resonating. And, I mean, you might give him a second chance.

Bob Bordone
You might give him a second chance, oh, for sure.

Pete Mockaitis
Like, if they give you blowoff, it’s like, “Hey, you know, last week, I brought up this and you said that, but this is actually pretty important to me so I’d love to schedule time to dig into it.” And you might get a second blowoff, like, “No, I don’t think this is worth a second of our company time to dig into.” Well, you’re right, I think you know, it’s like, “Okay, this relationship will never be great. We may be able to endure to put our heads down and get something done, but we’re never going to have a trusting, excellent, world-class collaboration, so long as they are this way.”

And, it is, it’s good to know that earlier, rather than to be blindsided six years down the road, it’s like, “Oh, I thought we were really simpatico, but, no, we’re not at all.”

Bob Bordone
Yeah. Amen to that, right? And one of the things that I really do think, I mean, you touched on something when you said, “Give it a second chance,” right? For sure. And also, later in our book, we kind of offer some of our, hopefully, useful advice on kind of “How do you make this decision to have the conversation and when to not have the conversation, when it’s time to, like, exit in some way?”

And our overriding argument is that we tend to exit too quickly. We tend to go to that convenient, “Let’s just tell a negative story about them, we’re just the best it could be.” But there are some times when either it’s time to exit, or like, I mean, if it’s your boss and you like, you otherwise like the job, you’re going to have to figure out how to manage that relationship.

But, one, I think, important diagnostic part of that, it can’t be whether the other person in the conversation is going to be skillful, because people, as they don’t have some training in it, maybe they’re just not that skillful for whatever set of reasons. But I think you can say, “Can the person at least come to this with a degree of goodwill? Like, do I have to 100% trust them?” I don’t think so. But do you have to feel like they can enter into this with at least some good faith? That’s probably enough, at least to try. At least to try a few times.

And one of the things I always say is, I can’t ultimately change them, but before I make that decision of “This is not going to be the world-class collaboration that I hope for,” I want to have done all that’s in my power. I want to be as effectively assertive and as curious as I could have been. I want to make the conversation as inviting and as kind, but also as authentic as I could have been.

Then, you make your decision based on, after that. I mean, if it’s your sister, you’re probably going to have to have some relationship with your sister. If it’s your boss, well, for the time being, you might, but you might decide it’s time to look for a new work, right? If it’s like your golfing buddy and it’s so bad, you might be like, “Yeah, I’m going to find a new golfing buddy.” You make that decision depending on also what’s in your power to influence.

Pete Mockaitis
Understood. Now you’ve got a three-step framework: name, explore, commit. Can you walk us through this?

Bob Bordone
Sure. So, the name piece is, broadly speaking, what we would say is the internal work, meaning understanding what are the different internal kind of conflicts or stories that are perhaps making it hard for you to engage the conflict or making you tend to be very argumentative or fighting. So, name is, at both a kind of emotional level, a substantive level, and relational level, what are your interests? What are the kinds of default patterns you have? It’s a lot of self-work.

And we kind of break that into, we call mirror work, which is doing some of the self-examination of your own kind of history and story in this particular conflict. And then the next piece is the chair work, what we really call bringing into some integration, even internal stories or conflicts, and kind of naming them, giving them some voice.

So, just to give you an example, I think, that’d probably be most helpful. If there’s something you want to raise with, let’s just say, your boss, it’s kind of like, “Well, what are the reasons why it’s important to raise this? And what are the reasons why I’d rather not?” And, actually, like giving, naming all of those reasons.

And the reason why that’s worth doing is it’s often, and then practicing giving them voice, is because, often, once we get into the room, we tend to only have one or two of the sides actually get voiced. And the next piece, which is what we call the table work, is actually representing all of the sides in the conversation. So, that’s name.

Explore, I would say, is probably the most at-the-table pieces. So, what does it look like to actually open up and understand, like, “What are the interests of the other side? What is the story they’re telling?” So, a lot of listening, “How am I assertive about my views or needs?” And then the third piece, is commit. And with commit, there’s kind of two pieces in there.

One, we’ve kind of referenced this already, Pete, which is “How do I decide whether, if it’s a negotiation, like, is what’s being offered just something I want to say yes to?” If it’s an ongoing, let’s just say, conversation about, I don’t know, a political difference or a strategic difference, like, I don’t know, “How are we going to agree on an advertising budget for the next quarter?” do I want to kind of continue to engage on this, or do I just think it’s not worth it anymore?

And then, lastly, just from a relational interest, kind of as we were saying, is this a relationship that I might say, “I want to continue in this relationship, but it can only go so deep”? Or, “Gosh, we did something here, we did some work here that was pretty transformational, and we’re actually closer.” Or, like, “Now that I’ve learned what I’ve learned, it’s time to kind of move on.” So, there’s that piece.

But the other piece we really talk about in the commit is, “How can we try to build organizational structures in place?” Like, if we’re a leader, “How do I commit to building an environment that actually encourages people to be conflict resilient, meaning that encourages people to kind of come forward with their different viewpoints, that isn’t a cancel culture, that isn’t a, ‘If you disagree with us or me, you’re a troublemaker’?” So, we kind of offer some advice on how to build a greenhouse that helps people be more conflict resilient.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Understood. So, I’d love to hear, let’s talk about the internal stuff, mirror work, in terms of, if we’re generally averse to conflict, it makes our necks feel uncomfortable, and there’s a lot of fear, trepidation, whatever, like, across the board, numerous relationships, numerous issues, any pro tips for how we can, generally, get better at this stuff?

Bob Bordone
Yes. So, part of in a situation where someone finds themselves more avoidant than engaging, my coaching on this would be like, “Okay, so let’s make a list of maybe what are the fears you have about engaging this?” and they’ll come up with whatever the reasons are, “It’ll go poorly, the person will get hurt, I’ll get hurt, it’s not worth it. Nothing will change. It’s not that important to me anyway,” blah blah blah. I always love that last one, “It’s not that important to me anyway.”

It’s like, “Okay, you’re paying me to spend time on this, but it’s not that important. I don’t even believe it, but, okay, let’s make that list.” But then, and this is the real coaching piece, “Why is it important? Why might you want to actually raise this?” And they’ll say, “Well, maybe something will change.” “Well, if we don’t, the relationship’s going to end up in the trash, anyway.” “Well, it’ll be hard to work with them,” “Well, it brings morale down,” “Well, how can they get better if I haven’t told them?” They make a list of all those things.

That work, just having them look at those two things, and then be persuaded, not that the first piece is not possible, but that the second piece is as legitimate and important as the first. And so, the kind of work there is embracing, this is the kind of mirror work, both of these are true. And if your tendency is that you tend to let all the fear side win the day, the side of you you’re letting down is all of the reasons why it’s really important to have a conversation, and you can’t do that consistently over time and actually be authentic and connected in relationship with anybody because they’re only seeing one piece of you.

They’re not seeing you. You’re letting something down here. So, if you’re worried about disappointing them, you’re actually disappointing a part of yourself. So, it’s interesting, some of this, I don’t know if any of your listeners, or you, Pete, have any interest in internal family systems, but some of this actually draws on internal family systems work, identifying, “What are the parts of us? Then how do we find ways to not evaluate or silence or overvalue certain parts and undervalue others? But each of these is useful and has served us.”

But when we consistently silence one because of fear, we are losing something, and I think the most important thing is we’re losing the possibility for connection. The possibility for actually a better working relationship. So, we think we’re doing something in service of preserving something, but we’re just setting up the slow kill.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, you know, maybe I’m a dork who majored in finance, and I am. But that makes me think about risk and money. It’s like you could take zero risk and have your money hang out in a checking account. But then there’s the slow kill of its value from inflation. Or you can take some risk, put it in the stock market. Like, it could go down. It absolutely could. But over the long term, historically, things work out a lot better for you if you park it there as opposed to a checking account.

And I think about that, similarly with these conversations, it’s like, you could play it safe and never raise it, and it’s true, you won’t be rocking the boat. You will not cause the potential damage that conversation could cause, but you will also not unlock the greatness that could be possible within this relationship.

And I have been delighted by how, like, sometimes relationships can go into amazing places when you say exactly what’s up. I remember my friend, Anne, in college, and I was maybe a little bit less guarded and flippant, say whatever was on my mind at the time before being chastened by things that went wrong, conversationally.

But I remember she said she was dating this guy, and I said, “Oh, yeah, I know him. You know, he’s funny. He’s funny, but sometimes I wonder, does he ever kind of occasionally strike you as maybe a little bit of an asshole?” And she laughed, and said, “Yes, he does! We’ve been trying to work on that, and we’re probably breaking up soon.”

Bob Bordone
Oh, my gosh!

Pete Mockaitis
And so, like, I had just met her, like, “Oh, I haven’t seen you around,” but then that immediately catapulted to, like, “This guy, Pete, like, he’ll share what he thinks, and so I trust him.” And then I went to great places and, likewise, I’ve heard of therapists who challenge powerful executives in their sessions, it’s like, “Nobody else talks to me this way,” and because of that, there’s just tremendous trust.

Bob Bordone
Tremendous trust, yeah. You know, one of the things I like to do, Pete, I used to not do this. I’m somebody who kind of came to this work largely because I think I was really bad and conflict-averse and wanted to learn more. But one of the things I do now, I think people will find this surprising, it’s I’m supposed to be a mediator, right, but people will be in a room and someone’s saying X and someone’s saying Y and someone’s saying Z and then someone’s like, “Oh, I’m really glad we’re aligned,” or like, “I hear you saying this.”

And I’m listening, I’m thinking, like, “There’s literally no alignment here. What are these people talking about?” And the convenient thing to do would be like to nod my head and say, “Oh, I’m so delighted we’re all in agreement,” and, like, walk out. But I tend to do now, and I used to not do this, I used to be a head-nodder.

But I actually think it’s so much more valuable to be like, “You know, I don’t want to be troublesome, but I actually don’t think you’re all saying the same thing. I think you’re saying really different things. And I think should dig in on that because, otherwise, we’re missing something important here.” And they’d be like, “Oh, I guess you’re right.”

But it goes back to that, like, yeah, as soon as you do something like that with somebody, I just think there’s a level of realness, and it can be done in a way that’s not mean-spirited, that’s not cruel, and it should be done assertively, like, “From what I’m observing, you know, whatever, from what I’m observing, like, this guy sometimes seems like a little bit of an asshole to me. I’m surprised and interested what you like about him,” or whatever, you know. “I’m glad you like him. I don’t want to take that away. I just don’t see it.”

I mean, you know, am I going to do that? Does it make sense to do that with someone’s spouse of 50 years? No. But I think here’s the other thing, Pete, because, one of the things, like, sometimes I worry that our message is that “You should be doing this always and everywhere all the time,” and that’s just not what we’re saying. What we are saying is this skill, this conflict resilience skill, if you want to be a successful leader, if you want to grow professionally and earn people’s respect, it has to be in your toolkit to be deployed at the right times and in the right space.

But to somehow think, “I am going to make it by avoiding everything, or taking out my sword and lopping everyone’s heads off in my path,” I mean, you could get so far, but at some point, that only works for people who don’t care at all about relationships.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, and soon you run out of heads. It’s like, “I’ve lopped off all the heads.” Because like fill in the blank in terms of like if you’re looking within any community, right, you know, people talk. And so, it’s like if we’re talking about real estate agents in the Nashville area, it’s like, “Okay, lop off all the heads. None of them want to work for you anymore.” Or, top engineering talent in Silicon Valley. It’s like, “All right, I’ve lopped them all off.”

Bob Bordone
Yeah, that’s right, and, like, no one wants to work with you, you have no trust. And then, what ends up happening, now we’re kind of in just plain negotiation land. It’s like somebody who, let’s just say, there’s 10 points of value to be divided, they’re consistently getting seven, and they’re going around, saying “I won, I won. Look how good.” And, like, they are except for the fact that, with some more skill and an ability to actually handle conflict better, that 10-point pie could be 20 points or 100 points or 200 points.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, totally.

Bob Bordone
And if it’s 20 and you’re getting 10 out of 20, you ain’t beating them. It’s just a 10 is greater than seven.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, I’m right with you there, in terms of the creative, collaborative, win-wins. That’s just like my default. And it’s funny, like, you cannot even begin to play that game until the emotions, the limbic irritability, is soothed in terms of like, “All right, let’s see what we can figure out together.” It’s just impossible, in my opinion, to get there when they’re like, “Bob is a jerk. I hate him, and I’m going to make him pay. And also, we’re going to find a creative, collaborative solution together.”

Bob Bordone
Right. Right.

Pete Mockaitis
No. No.

Bob Bordone
It just won’t work, right? And the other interesting thing about just the brain science aspect of that is when you are in that emotional refractory period, that limbic irritability time, your ability to actually, at a cognitive level, identify the interests of the other party goes down. When people are made to feel anxious, they think, “Oh, let’s make them feel anxious and then we’ll get more concessions,” it leads to quicker exit, lower trust, lower joint gains, lower interest in working together again.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, and your reputation takes a hit too.

Bob Bordone
Yeah, and your reputation.

Pete Mockaitis
Your counterparties talking smack about you.

Bob Bordone
Yeah. So, it’s incredibly short-term thinking. But again, like thinking about that kind of existential brain of ours, that’s like going back to whatever thousands of years when you bang into me on a dark path and you’ve got to make a quick decision of whether I meant it or not. And if you decide I meant it and you’re wrong, you still take your club out and beat me and you’re alive and I’m dead. If you decide I didn’t mean it and you’re wrong, I take my club out and beat you and you’re dead, I’m alive right.

I mean, there’s a way in which the brain is, like, it’s not all washed up. It’s just that most of the things, like, this is we’re talking about conflict resilience. We’re not talking about existential. This is like your boss again, this your direct report, or your sister, or your brother, or like someone, or the real estate agent also goes to the Chamber of Commerce, and has to have a series of ongoing relationships.

So, you have to have a better command of yourself and a set of skills that are not going to put you into this, again, the 5Fs that are going to just make things worse for you, maybe in the short term, but certainly in the long term.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, Bob, tell me, anything else you want to make sure to mention before we hear about some of your favorite things?

Bob Bordone
No, except this has been fun. I love it, I love it. So, thank you, yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Me, too. Let’s hear about a favorite quote.

Bob Bordone
So, my favorite quote is a scriptural quote, actually, from Micah, and it is, “This and only this does the LORD require of you, to act justly, to love tenderly, and to walk humbly with your God.”

Pete Mockaitis
That’s pretty good and that’ll do it.

Bob Bordone
I hope that some of the principles in the book honor that.

Pete Mockaitis
Cool. And a favorite study or experiment or bit of research?

Bob Bordone
For me, I mean, I’m a big fan of all of, like, Daniel Kahneman’s stuff. I particularly love some of the research on self-serving biases, and also on fundamental attribution error. It’s like a fancy word, but fundamental attribution error, basically, the idea that, “If something goes well, it’s because I’m obviously brilliant. And if something goes poorly, it’s because they’re jerks in any way Mercury was in retrograde.”

And so, that tendency to not have a learning loop, I think, if more of us were aware of that, I think it would probably lead to a better conflict handling.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite book?

Bob Bordone
My favorite book is actually a fiction book. I mean, there’s lots of negotiations in it. It’s just really fun. I love “The Count of Monte Cristo.”

Pete Mockaitis
You know, Bob, this might blow your mind, it did me. Did you know that the story of “The Count of Monte Cristo” is based on a real human’s life?

Bob Bordone
I did not know that.

Pete Mockaitis
I was like, “That’s too crazy. That’s too crazy. No way, it’s a real human.” And, of course, there’s embellishments and literary, you know, whatever. But like, there was a dude who was in prison who escaped and exacted vengeance.

Bob Bordone
I did not know that. I like books that really make you feel like you’re transported to a different time. But another one that I really like is The Age of Innocence by Edith Wharton because it’s another book that makes you feel like, in that case, that you’re like in high society, at this particular period in New York City. Anyway, so those are the books that really kind of draw me in.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite tool, something you use to be awesome at your job?

Bob Bordone
Ah, favorite tool, which is actually in our book, it’s called The Ladder of Inference, developed by Chris Argyris and Don Schoen, who are of Harvard Business School. It’s a wonderful tool for all sorts of things, but particularly if you’re in a conflict situation, when somebody says something like, for example, “You really messed up here.”

That, we would say that the top of the ladder, it is a conclusion. It is drawn by, at the bottom of the ladder, an ocean of information or data that we don’t all have access to, we only have some access to some. And then each of us picks some piece of information from that ocean, that’s a piece of data in an ocean, and then we put a story on it, our reasoning and inferences, and that’s how we reach the conclusion.

What the ladder enables you to do is have a much more productive conversation where instead of me saying “You messed up,” and you saying “No, I didn’t,” we can walk down each other’s ladders, talk about data, talk about reasoning. Sometimes it shifts opinions. Even if it doesn’t, it’s just a much more edifying conversation.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite habit?

Bob Bordone
You know what? What I’m going to do when I get off this call, a daily 45-minute walk with my golden retriever, Rosie.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And is there a key nugget you share that really seems to connect and resonate with folks; they quote back to you often?

Bob Bordone
So, not to be redundant, but I will be, which is that just the power of the first no makes all of the other yeses actually meaningful. So, to the degree you are in a conflict and you’re avoiding and you’re trying to be nice-y-nice, etc., and you think you’re serving the relationship, finding a way to kind of say, “You know, I pretty much don’t agree with this part, or I have concerns about this,” that is deeply connecting because it, first of all, makes all the yeses seem sincere and it’s an opportunity for connection.

Pete Mockaitis
And if folks want to learn more or get in touch, where would you point them?

Bob Bordone
Yeah, so you could learn more about our book and, hopefully, buy it at our website, which is ConflictResilienceBook.com. That’s ConflictResilienceBook.com. You could also learn more about me and my website, which is BobBordone.com.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And do you have a final challenge or call to action for folks looking to be awesome at their jobs?

Bob Bordone
Yeah, I would just say, if you have any kind of difficult conversation or conflict that keeps you up at night, that’s worth engaging and not avoiding. And if do it well, no matter how it ultimately turns out, I think you’ll feel better about yourself.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Bob, thank you.

Bob Bordone
Pete, thanks for having me. This was really fun.