I recently upgraded my email program to a new version that "monitors messages for offensive text." I wasn't sure how this would help, because I already know how to feel offended. It hasn't worked out well.
Corresponding with a colleague, I asked, "What's the X Foundation?" He told me some, and added, "Please excuse my ignorance, I don't know much." So I started typing, "Your ignorance is exceeded by my own."
At this point, my email program had had enough. Just as I typed the period, it bolded "Your ignorance" and colored it red. I tried to get rid of the bold-red, but I couldn't, so I sent the message anyway, hoping that the bold-red would somehow rub off en route.
The documentation for my email program told me that I had transgressed. To check this, I sent myself some deliberately offensive material. Sure enough, even though I wasn't offended at all, my email program became quite alarmed. I immediately unchecked the appropriate option, which is how you tell programs to buzz off. Now that it's gagged, I feel much better.
But the whole affair got me to think about everyday phrases that do tend to set people off. Here's a little catalog.
- Blaming
- Starting sentences with "You…", risks sounding like blaming or attacking. To really increase the chances, say, "You always…", "You never…", or "You're constantly…". To be clever, you might try "I think you're always…" but most people see right through that. The general rule is that if you try to tell people something unpleasant about themselves, and they haven't directly asked you for the information, you risk the appearance of attack or blame. If you must, ask for permission first.
- Minimizing
- When we use certain
trigger phrases, people
can feel blamed, minimized
or interrogated, and we
undercut the very goals
of our communications - Beginning with "Oh, that's easy…", "I don't see that as a problem, …", "Just make it happen," or "Let me explain it to you," risks being heard as minimizing another person's concerns, which can feel like minimizing the other person. Other ways to achieve the same explosive results: "Don't worry," "Calm down," "Relax," or "Trust me." Instead, give information about yourself, and then check it out: "Hmm, I wasn't worried about that, but perhaps I should I be?"
- Interrogating
- Starting a sentence with question words, such as who, what, where, or how much can be OK. Do it twice in a row, though, and you might come across as an interrogator. Try stating your conjecture as a guess, and asking for a comment about it. "It looks like you're pretty close to on budget," probably will elicit what you want much more effectively than "How much over budget are you?"
There are dozens more ways to set people off. You probably have a few of your own, so far undocumented by any expert. When it comes to conversational danger, we're all inventive. 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!
For a more complete catalog of dangerous constructions, see Robert Bolton's People Skills: How to assert yourself, listen to others, and resolve conflicts Touchstone Books, 1986. Order from Amazon.com
Your comments are welcome
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenaXXxGCwVgbgLZDuRner@ChacDjdMAATPdDNJnrSwoCanyon.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.
This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.
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.
Related articles
More articles on Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness:
Virtual Clutter: I
- With some Web searching, you can find abundant advice for decluttering your home or office. And people
are even thinking about decluttering email inboxes. But the problem of clutter is far more widespread.
Just-In-Time Hoop-Jumping
- Securing approvals for projects, proposals, or other efforts is often called "jumping through hoops."
Hoop-jumping can be time-consuming and frustrating. Here are some suggestions for jumping through hoops
efficiently.
How to Waste Time in Virtual Meetings
- Nearly everyone hates meetings, and virtual meetings are at the top of most people's lists. Here's a
catalog of some of the worst practices.
Mismanaging Project Managers: Leadership
- Most organizations hold project managers accountable for project performance. But they don't hold Project
Sponsors or other Senior Managers accountable for the consequences of their actions when they interfere
with the project manager's ability to lead the project team.
White-Collar Contractor Sabotage
- Modern firms in competitive, dynamic markets draw on many types of employer/employee relationships,
including contractors. By providing privileges and perks preferentially among these different types,
they risk creating a caldron of resentments that can reduce organizational effectiveness.
See also Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
Coming September 24: Time Is Not a Resource
- In the project management community, it's often said that time is the most precious resource. Although time is indeed precious, to regard it as a resource — like finance, equipment, or people — can be a dangerous mistake. Time is not a resource. Available here and by RSS on September 24.
And on October 1: On the Risks of Obscuring Ignorance
- A common dilemma in knowledge-based organizations: ask for an explanation, or "fake it" until you can somehow figure it out. The choice between admitting your own ignorance or obscuring it can be a difficult one. It has consequences for both the choice-maker and the organization. Available here and by RSS on October 1.
Coaching services
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenaXXxGCwVgbgLZDuRner@ChacDjdMAATPdDNJnrSwoCanyon.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
Follow Rick
Recommend this issue to a friend
Send an email message to a friend
rbrenaXXxGCwVgbgLZDuRner@ChacDjdMAATPdDNJnrSwoCanyon.comSend a message to Rick
A Tip A Day feed
Point Lookout weekly feed

- 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.
- More