The Cost of Meanness

“It’s nothing personal; it’s just business” is something most of us have heard at work. It reflects the way degeneracy has crept into organizations.  It’s evidence of the mean streak I wrote about today at Huffington Post.  And we don’t have to go to work to find it.

Layers of organizations protect callous and corrupt individuals from accountability.  What has been called the “collective mask” of complex organizations makes it difficult, often impossible, to learn who is responsible for despicable actions.

To make matters worse, guilt has taken a hit over the past several decades – and not just at work.  “We have been so indoctrinated into believing guilt a negative thing that to feel guilt is often equated with a mild type of mental deficiency,” argues ethicist Kimlyn Bender of Jamestown College.  For all its faults, fear of guilt – of the doubt, shame and self-punishment that guilt entails — served as an obstacle to despicable and antisocial actions.  With guilt demeaned, is it any wonder we celebrate self-serving goals and rampant greed?  What is there to stop them?

Ninety percent of the U.S. work force has been subjected to abusive behavior at some time, estimates Harvey Hornstein, Ph.D., author of Brutal Bosses and Their Prey.  And much of this is because a comprehensive ethics that guided all aspects of our lives has given way to distinctive ethics for various aspects of our lives.  In other words, there is an ethics for work, for marriage, for children, and so on.  This fractioning has costs – one of them is greater acceptance of meanness toward those not sharing our particular set of ethics.

Another cost of a meaner world for most of us is increased stress.  At home or at work, we feel it.  Unless we are lucky enough to work in one of those increasingly rare workplaces that are only minimally or moderately political, every day can become a series of efforts to dodge attacks or to respond effectively to them so we can survive.

In a culture of such facile meanness, it’s important, crucial really, to know how deal with it — to know what to say or when to say nothing at all.

Posted in Bullying, Comebacks | 3 Comments

One Mind “Moonshot” Conference in Boston

Patrick Kennedy has gathered together many of the best and brightest scientists and advocates for mental health in Boston.  I’m sitting in the One Mind conference and with my own research and personal connections to this field, I’m still amazed at how much is possible — how close we are to helping so many.  It isn’t our knowledge limitations that stand in our way, but politics.  It isn’t our lack of desire, but the blindness of those who cannot see that they too will be touched by cognitive disorders even even if they and their families haven’t been as yet.  This is a time for coming together, Kennedy says.  And he and those working with him are putting their hearts and minds to the task. They go into it with their eyes open.  It will not be easy. Hopefully, though, they are launching a revolution just as healthcare and research in health are threatened from so many sides.  It’s bold and it’s important beyond measure.

Posted in Politics | 3 Comments

Taunting and Verbal Sparring — Are They Not Your Style?

Perhaps you listened to Here & Now on PBS today.  Professor Gary King of Harvard University was interviewed.  In a study involving 64,000 congressional press releases, he and his team discovered that our representatives taunt 27% of the time.  He observed that more taunting appears to come from representatives voted in by homogeneous constituents.  So, if you win by a large margin due to one party backing you, you’re more inclined to taunt.  It amuses your followers.

Taunting is a verbal jab of sorts about the other person or group.  And there are useful examples at the PBS site.

In my books, I’ve written also about verbal sparring.  These involve slight to nasty insults bandied back and forth.  At the lower end, verbal spars can be quite humorous.  If you and your verbal sparring partner are proficient at this, enjoyment obtains even as somewhat offensive comments are conveyed.  Less skilled people spar to the death. They metaphorically draw blood because they don’t know where to draw the line.

While taunting and verbal sparring may seem a waste of time and certainly can be when taken to extreme, they can also serve a purpose.  Admiration comes to those who deliver a verbal jab, make a point, and make even the target smile. Admiration comes also to those who take a verbal jab well or counter with one equally or more proficient.

Comebacks at Work provides a host of taunt replies.  Without them the person taunted, if present, instantly loses credibility.  He or she is at a loss for words.

There are some general taunt comebacks.  For example, “Now that we appear to know so much about me, let’s talk about you,” delivered with a slight smile at the end could prove valuable in response to a gentle or moderate put-down.  “You’re funny sometimes, Al.  Just not this time” is another useful one.  Of course, it too must be delivered in a somewhat jovial yet slightly perturbed manner.

Being able to take what’s dished out and dish out your own comebacks is a good part of demonstrating one’s leadership competence.  Maybe it shouldn’t be.  But it is.  So, if taunting and verbal sparring are frequent where you work, there’s no time like the present to start learning how to hold your own when the offenses start flying.

Posted in Comebacks, Confrontation, Gotcha! | 1 Comment

Short-Cut Method To Long-Term Influence

In my persuasion writing, I introduced a method of formulating persuasive responses called The ACE Model.  Persuasion research indicates that most rational attempts to influence appeal to appropriateness, consistency or effectiveness of an action.  Appropriateness appeals focus on whether what was said or done is right or wrong in a particular group, organization or society.  “That just isn’t done here” is an appropriateness response.  So is “Allan and Phil won’t like hearing that you think that way.”  Consistency appeals focus on how one behavior fits with prior ones.  “It just isn’t like you to say something like that” and “Given what you said earlier, what you’re doing now is a complete contradiction” are consistency appeals.  Effectiveness appeals refer to whether something works.  “That will never get you where you want to go” and “Around here if you want to be respected, you think before you speak.”

Try using the ACE model as a shortcut way to think of responses to conflict.

Appropriateness“Around here Ed, we don’t shoot from the hip with insults to make a point.”

Consistency“You’re not quite yourself today, Ed.”

Effectiveness“That comment might get some misplaced anger off of your chest but it doesn’t move us along on this project.”

Appropriateness:  “As a rule, Ed, we try to make constructive comments at these meetings.”

Consistency“You weren’t thinking that way before the meeting when I ran this idea by you.”

Effectiveness“You have my attention but what you really want is my cooperation, so let’s focus on that.”

The beauty of the ACE approach is that it’s easy to remember and so can be implemented quickly.

Posted in Comebacks, Confrontation, Dust Ups | Leave a comment

So Many Liars, So Little Time

I hate to be the one to say it but there are too many liars out there.  It comes so easily to so many and is celebrated so long as it leads to a win.  I’ve been writing about increasing meanness.  And along with that comes increasing comfort with dissembling. Today I heard the new Prudential ad.  They’re going to be there in the “tough times.”  I can tell you from first hand experience that isn’t the case.  When I was diagnosed with Parkinson’s and Prudential had an agreement with my employer to not charge for life insurance after disability, they decided not to honor their pledge. What do you say to people like that?  I decided to challenge them.  Forget it.  They weren’t about to rise to the occasion in my family’s tough times.  But they’ll tell you to your face now that they’ll be there for you.  My comeback to that:  “Sure you will.”

You have to wonder why so many organizations will tell you whatever sounds good. Are we abdicating our responsibility to insist that they demonstrate what they promise? Do we let them into our homes via technology whether they are honest or not?  Why don’t we ask:  Where’s the proof?  Why are we so easily convinced?  If you read Paul Krugman’s article “Civility is the Last Refuge of Scoundrels,” you know why it’s important to ask “What’s in it for them?” The nicer they seem, the more we should distrust.  Behind seeming generosity and civility often lurks greed and contempt.

There are very good people in this world, but there are many willing to do whatever it takes to make a profit.  They are the ones to whom we must repeatedly ask:  “What’s in it for you?”  Otherwise they can promise us anything.  They are the ones we should teach our children to challenge.

In an article, “Courage at Work,” just reprinted in this Spring’s Harvard Business Review – On Point, I wrote of what it takes to stand up to people and organizations engaging in unethical conduct.  Without this courage we invite into our lives people who don’t deserve our trust.  It’s so much easier to just let them say what they want without challenge, to allow politicians to lie because that’s just politics.  If you know what to say, how to challenge, then they don’t win as often.  And maybe that’s enough.

Posted in Bullying, Comebacks, Dust Ups, Uncool | Leave a comment

More on “Mean Girls”

Over at Huffington I’ve posted a blog on the “mean girls” obsession on the 100 anniversary of International Women’s Day.  While there are many serious issues affecting women around the world, when it comes to communication the use of demeaning labels continues to be a problematic one.  Women and girls are no meaner than men and boys.  And yet, it’s appealing to the media to run with the “mean girls” label.  When such labels catch on, women pay a price.

As I wrote about in They Don’t Get It, Do They some years ago, there is a language of exclusion in many businesses that keep women out of high-level jobs.  It includes scripts known better to the men than women and the use of stereotypes to keep those in the out-group out.  Savvy women observe and learn these scripts.  They develop a repertoire of comebacks that deny the effective use of stereotypes.  They learn to how to respond effectively to dismissive, patronizing, and retaliatory dysfunctional communication patterns (DCPs).  They know, for example, how to nip such DCPs in the bud by using comebacks that disallow the dismissal of their ideas, bring covert patronizing out in the open and deny mean and manipulative people the chance to do them harm.

Labels like “mean girls” just make matters worse for women.  They aren’t the worst problem we have, but they cause more harm than most women notice.  So, I thought it important on this anniversary to keep us, women and men alike, alert to the influence of language on how we think — specifically that of labels.

In They Don’t Get It, Do They I mentioned that as women you’ll be labeled whether you like it or not.  There’s no getting around it.  So, you might as well have some input.  That may come in the form of rejecting a label politely (“Let me put what you just said another way”), indirectly (“I am adamant about what matters”) or directly (“You’re looking at a bitch.  Now that that’s been established, let’s get back to work.”).

That’s the beauty of a repertoire of comebacks.  You can choose to tread lightly or not. It sure beats driving home wishing you hadn’t let another label put you in a place you don’t belong.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Ending Those Maddening “If Only I’d Said” Moments

This post is also on Huffington Post today.  And you’ll find more suggestions for dealing with “If only I’d said” moments throughout this site.

No doubt you’ve been put on the spot, cornered in conversation or didn’t quite feel you could say what you wanted to say.  Maybe this happened with your spouse, friend, doctor, colleague, son or daughter.  There just didn’t seem to be a good way to tell him or her what you were thinking.  Then, to make matters worse, you wasted hours— maybe even days—dwelling on the event and rolling it over and over in your mind. Then, suddenly in it came to you.  “I should have said….”

This happens to all of us sometimes, and to a good many of us quite often.  We experience a kind of “brainfreeze.”  It’s when the words just don’t come to mind, which can wreak havoc with our relationships and careers.

I’ve been teaching, researching and consulting in the field of communication for over two decades and have spent a lot of time helping people learn what to say in a variety of difficult situations.  One important ingredient is a repertoire of comebacks that allows us to respond effectively.  No one is born a comeback expert.  It takes trial and error, adherence to a set of principles about communication, and practice of an array of options.  What it doesn’t do is require you to be someone other than yourself—just a more astute version. And you don’t have to turn into a communication pro overnight. The most expert among us, even those people who seem to know what to say under any and all circumstances, have their “If only I’d said” moments.

At the outset of improving your communication, it’s important to realize that each of us is at least75% responsible for how people treat us.  If someone says to you, “That idea is stupid,” you’re at a choice point.  You can lash back at the person or you can decide that advancing the idea is more important or that despite what he said, you’d like to maintain this relationship.  One possible response:  “I thought so too at first.  But a lot of new ideas seem that way” and then go on to explain your idea as if this person didn’t insult you at all.  In Comebacks at Work we call this strategy “giving the other person a chance to do the right thing.”

If your boss doesn’t seem to understand you, it could be that you’re not communicating clearly.  It could also be that he or she is not hearing what you think is important for other reasons.  Maybe you don’t want to upset or annoy your boss or you’re insecure about what to say, so you say nothing.  Instead you might try a lead-in phrase like:  “It seems that what you heard is not what I intended” or “Usually we’re in sync, but today we’re not quite connecting.  Let me try again.”

Communication happens so fast that people say things before they’ve thought them through.  If you don’t give them the chance to reflect on their error or misjudgment and instead attack or say nothing, then a mistake on their part may lead to a permanent ending to what might otherwise be a good relationship.

Maybe you deal often with someone who is insulting.  These situations usually call for more direct comebacks such as, “I’m wondering if what I heard was what you meant to say?” or “If I reply in kind, we’ll both be out of line.” In order to make him or her think twice next time, you might want to say, “You’re my boss (friend), but that doesn’t mean anything goes.” If that’s too strong, there are many milder ways to make a person think twice before continuing in a negative pattern with you.  There are comebacks that buy time like, “That’s an interesting twist,” “Hmmm, I hadn’t thought of it that way,” “You may want to say that again – you know, differently.”

I’ve developed a short-cut method for remembering comeback types.  It’s called the R-list and includes ways to revise what others say, reframe, revisit, restate, rebuke, and retaliate.  For example, skilled negotiators use revisit-comebacks to reverse downhill spirals.  They might remind the other person that until the moment at hand, things were going quite well.  For example:  “Excuse me, but are you the same person who had me practically eating out of your hand three minutes ago?  Let’s get back to that.”  When the tone of a conversation goes awry, you can also revisit a moment when things were going better and put the discussion back on track.

Slightly revising what was said is often effective too.  If someone says, “You’re stubborn.” Instead of getting angry you could simply say, “You’re right.  I am persistent.” Stubborn and persistent describe similar ways of being, but persistent is respected more.  It’s a tweaking of words.  Sometimes that’s all it takes to turn a really bad day into a good one.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

How Women Undermine Their Credibility

How Women Undermine Their Credibility

You may have seen Secretary of State Hillary Clinton respond on Meet The Press Sunday to David Gregory’s insistent attempts to pin her down to support for Egypt’s President Mubarak.  When he said, “But you’d like to see him stay in power,” Clinton replied with conviction:  “David, you cannot keep trying to put words in my mouth. I’ve never said that.  I don’t intend to say that.  I want the Egyptian people to have the chance to chart a new future.”

If you heard her reply, you know there was no equivocation.  She conveyed her thoughts clearly and left no room for Gregory to try to put words into her mouth again.  That’s how conversation is managed.

Compare this and Clinton’s entire interview to the tendency many women have to smile even when the subject at hand is serious, to laugh slightly after making a statement, to nod when men speak as if to say “go on” though it’s taken as “I agree,” and to answer questions merely because they’ve been asked

Disclaimers are another way that we women undermine our credibility.  “I hope this doesn’t bother anyone, but…” or “This may sound stupid, but…” are the types of phrases women often use to introduce ideas.  Then there is “I think,” which women use far too often.  If you think it, say it!  An occasional “I think” is fine, especially if used to purposefully nullify defensiveness on the part of the other person, but not as a steady diet.  Women are not the only ones who fall into this pattern, but they are the ones who tend to feel the need to align a strong view with a negating action.  If you do this, it’s time to take notice and to do far less of it.  When a man says, “I think” it’s because he’s thinking; when a woman says the same thing it often taken to mean she’s unsure.

When responding to people, it’s important to know how you’re expressions are being received.  Not everyone has the experience or comfort zone of Hillary Clinton, and certainly she smiles at times to offset what might otherwise come across as aggressive.

When you’re serious, you should look and sound serious.  If you’re insulted, a pleasant smile is the wrong response.  A pensive or firm look is a better comeback to practice for such occasions.

“Why aren’t they listening to me?” women often ask when I’m coaching them.  The answer is usually in the messages being inadvertently conveyed.  If you want to be leadership material, to have people pay attention and for your ideas to remain your own, it’s important to know how you’re expressing yourself and to develop a toolbox of communication mannerisms and comebacks that convey what you intend.  That’s how credibility is insured.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Comebacks Up Close — How to not be Predictable

This recent interview conducted by Jean Stafford describes a number of concepts in Comebacks at Work.  Much of what you’ll hear involves doing the unexpected rather than being predictable.  We are creatures of pattern and often react rather than respond.  Before we know it, we’re in an unwanted repetitive episode — AGAIN!  Why not start tomorrow to be less predictable so people can’t manage you?  Besides, people who are predictable tend not to be interesting.  If you have a repertoire of comebacks and practice using them and then also develop and learn new ones, that problem goes away.

Hope you enjoy listening to the interview.

Posted in Comebacks | 1 Comment

What are Comebacks? Why do You Need To Have a Repertoire?

I’ve wondered at times lately whether the title of our new book throws people off. Comebacks are viewed by some as quips rather than what to say in difficult situations. The broader definition of comebacks includes long and short ways to respond.  We focus for most of the book on ways to move forward without confrontation and to achieve your goals in the process.

Research on verbal and nonverbal communication has shown how quickly people formulate impressions, especially in American culture.  Most of us don’t take long enough to truly understand other people.  We think we’re too busy.  It would be wonderful to change this.  And, we can do so by teaching children and even adults to be more observant and slower to formulate assumptions.  This ability is, in large part, what separates effective from ineffective communicators.  It is also what enables the civility that has been discussed in the media and by the president in response to the tragic events in Tucson, Arizona.  When you know how to respond to both accidental offense and purposeful insult, anger is less likely.  This is not to say that anger is always an inappropriate or nonproductive response, but more often than not it’s an unnecessary one.

There are times when even incivility is best responded to with civility.  One of those times is when you think someone spoke before giving adequate thought to a response. Why not give that person a chance to do the right thing?  “That’s a stupid idea” might well seem to merit the reaction, “Not as stupid as you,” but giving the other person the chance to reconsider his comment often affords the relationship an opportunity to survive, elicits reciprocal civility from the person who went too far, and allows you to achieve your goals without being derailed by a poorly considered comment.  Instead, you might reply with “New ideas often seem stupid, so I’m not surprised at your reaction.  Just hear me out and we’ll see.”

Knowing that this tendency to quick assumptions exists, you have to know how to respond on your feet even if it is just to buy yourself some time.

Gender bias issues are often exacerbated by people formulating quick assumptions that go unchallenged.  If you don’t want to be accused, for example, of not having leadership potential or not having what it takes, you have to be prepared to challenge these and other perceptions and labels.  And, if you are told you don’t have leadership potential, consider responding with a question.  “Are you referring to commanding, motivational or some other style of leadership?” is one option.  This should get the person talking about specifics to which you might respond with examples of the many times you have demonstrated leadership ability.

Just because someone imposes a label or assumption on you doesn’t mean you need to accept it.  Even if the person is your boss, responding with a question that requires him or her to explain an offensive view or define his choice of words buys you some time to consider how to counter it.

That’s to a large extent what Comebacks at Work provides.  It’s about revising assumptions so that interactions proceed more constructively.  It’s also about knowing how to recognize choice points in conversation where redirection can take place. Without these skills most of us end up accepting perceptions and labels that don’t accurately reflect our abilities.  Why do that?  Why let anyone take away your options because he or she didn’t take the time to know what you know about yourself?

Posted in Choice Points, Confrontation, Leadership | Leave a comment