Dangerous Phrases

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

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.

Related articles

More articles on Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness:

Abraham, Mark, and Henny

Our plans, products, and processes are often awkward, bulky, and complex. They lack a certain spiritual quality that some might call elegance. Yet we all recognize elegance when we see it. Why do we make things so complicated?

Four Popular Ways to Mismanage Layoffs: II

Staff reduction is needed when expenses overtake revenue. But when layoffs are misused, or used too late, they can harm the organization more than they help. Here's Part II of an exploration of four common patterns of mismanagement, and some suggestions for those managers and other employees who recognize the patterns in their own companies.

The Myth of Difficult People

Many books and Web sites offer advice for dealing with difficult people. There are indeed some difficult people, but are they as numerous as these books and Web sites would have us believe? I think not.

Ethical Debate at Work: II

Outcomes of debates at work sometimes favor one party, not only at the expense of the other or others, but also at the expense of the organization. Here's Part II of a set of guidelines for steering debates toward wise outcomes.

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.

See also Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness and Effective Communication at Work for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming June 26: Appearance Antipatterns: I

Appearances can be deceiving. Just as we can misinterpret the actions and motivations of others, others can misinterpret our own actions and motivations. But we can take steps to limit these effects. Available here and by RSS on June 26.

And on July 3: Appearance Antipatterns: II

When we make decisions based on appearance we risk making errors. We create hostile work environments, disappoint our customers, and create inefficient processes. Maintaining congruence between the appearance and the substance of things can help. Available here and by RSS on July 3.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenmhXARWRMUvVyOdHlner@ChacxgDmtwOKrxnripPCoCanyon.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, USD 11.95)
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)

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 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info

Public seminars

The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power

Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.

• A recording of a program presented 6:00 PM June 29 (Eastern Time), Monthly Webinar, Technobility Webinar Series. You can earn 1.0 Category 'A' PDU by viewing this program. View this program now.