As Tim listed the people who would be on the committee, Cora expected to hear her name. When she didn't, she was stunned. She somehow got through the rest of the meeting without revealing the storm brewing inside her, and lingered at the end to talk to Tim. "I noticed," she said.
"I thought you might. Let's walk back to my office."
Fortunately, it was a short walk. They entered Tim's office, he closed the door, and they sat.
"Part of the problem is that you give the impression that you think that Marigold will fail," he began.
"It will, if we don't replace Bellamy and…" He stopped her.
"Hear me out. There's more. I actually want that viewpoint represented, but I have concerns about how you would go about it. I'll include you on three conditions. First, that we don't go into it with an assumption of failure. Second, that our conversations are two-way with feedback possible on both sides. And finally, that all ideas are listened to and if an idea is deemed unworkable or unusable, that perspective is not a reflection on the person. We move on and get the job done without holding grudges, or clamming up."
Cora sat silently, stung.
Tim's three conditions subtly attacked Cora without directly confronting her with an issue. If she accepted the conditions, she might have seemed to be admitting fault. And if she confronted Tim, she might have seemed defensive, which would have strengthened the third implied accusation. Here are the three implied accusations.
- Cora believes that the project will fail.
- The word Defending against implied
accusations is a
losing strategy"two-way" suggests that there has been some "one-way" feedback. Tim is suggesting that Cora would insist on "one-way" feedback — presumably from Cora to Tim.
- Though Cora and Tim had had differences of opinion, there had been no grudges or "clamming up," no attacks or "reflections," but Tim was accusing Cora of all these things. This accusation protects the attack that lies within the message itself. By attacking Cora for attacking, Tim might be trying to constrain her not to expose his tactics.
Fortunately, Cora could choose not to participate. The next day, after much deep thought, she told Tim:
"I certainly don't believe that Marigold will fail. I don't know what I might have said that you might have used to conclude that, but I do not believe that it will fail. The committee has my full support. And given the obvious difficulty that we have communicating, I think it best that I not participate for the time being.
"I do hear you though, and I find your three requirements completely reasonable for anyone on any team. I'm open to finding whatever new is needed so that we might have more choices together in the future, and as time passes, I guess we'll see what happens."
Since full participation on the committee wasn't a real option, Cora reasoned that giving it up cost her nothing. By bowing out, she chose the high road. Within an hour Tim phoned her, seeking to work out their "communication problem" using a third party mediator.
Implied accusations make us defensive, which is almost always a bad place to be. Instead of defending, look for an unexpected response that puts you on the high ground — always a more comfortable place to be. And the view is better, too. Top Next Issue
Are you fed up with tense, explosive meetings? Are you or a colleague the target of a bully? Destructive conflict can ruin organizations. But if we believe that all conflict is destructive, and that we can somehow eliminate conflict, or that conflict is an enemy of productivity, then we're in conflict with Conflict itself. Read 101 Tips for Managing Conflict to learn how to make peace with conflict and make it an organizational asset. Order Now!
Implied accusations can also come in the form of questions. See "Nasty Questions: I," Point Lookout for November 8, 2006, for more.
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenHoWzUJVeioCfozEIner@ChacbnsTPttsdDaRAswloCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.
About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
More articles on Emotions at Work:
- Never, Ever, Kill the Messenger
- If you're a manager in a project-oriented organization, you need to know the full, unvarnished Truth.
When you kill a messenger, you deliver a message of your own: Tell me the Truth at your peril. Killing
messengers has such predictable results that you have to question any report you receive — good
news or bad.
- Coping with Problems
- How we cope with problems is a choice. When we choose our coping style, we help determine our ability
to address the problems we face. Of eight styles we can identify, only one is universally constructive,
and we rarely use it.
- Totally at Home
- Getting home from work is far more than a question of transportation. What can we do to come home totally
— to move not only our bodies, but our minds and our spirits from work to home?
- Self-Serving Bias in Organizations
- We all want to believe that we can rely on the good judgment of decision makers when they make decisions
that affect organizational performance. But they're human, and they are therefore subject to a cognitive
bias known as self-serving bias. Here's a look at what can happen.
- A Review of Performance Reviews: Blindsiding
- Ever learn of a complaint about you for the first time at your performance review? If so, you were blindsided.
Reviews can be painful. Here are some guidelines for making them a little fairer.
See also Emotions at Work and Rhetorical Fallacies for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming June 7: Toxic Disrupters: Tactics
- Some people tend to disrupt meetings. Their motives vary, but they use techniques drawn from a limited collection. Examples: they violate norms, demand attention, mess with the agenda, and sow distrust. Response begins with recognizing their tactics. Available here and by RSS on June 7.
- And on June 14: Pseudo-Collaborations
- Most workplace collaborations produce results of value. But some collaborations — pseudo-collaborations — are inherently incapable of producing value, due to performance management systems, or lack of authority, or lack of access to information. Available here and by RSS on June 14.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenHoWzUJVeioCfozEIner@ChacbnsTPttsdDaRAswloCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- Your stuff is brilliant! Thank you!
- You and Scott Adams both secretly work here, right?
- I really enjoy my weekly newsletters. I appreciate the quick read.
- A sort of Dr. Phil for Management!
- …extremely accurate, inspiring and applicable to day-to-day … invaluable.