Corrosive Buts

When they decided to take a break, Yvonne had been relieved at first. Heated meetings made her uncomfortable. But now the break was ending, and she worried that they'd just pick up where they left off. She was right to worry. Harvey began the festivities.

"But" is so common
that it carries with it
the baggage of abuse"I've given this some thought, and I still think that an investigation would be worth the risk. We should understand the problem before we try Jean's idea."

"But then we'll be three weeks in the hole," Jean replied, "and I could have used that time."

Harvey's turn: "True, but we're not sure your scheme will work. We don't know what the problem is."

Yvonne's hopes collapsed. They were back where they started, with Harvey and Jean endlessly batting the same objections back and forth.

The energy for repetitive debate has many sources. One source can be the participants' word choices. And one word that tends to set people off is "but." It seems tiny, neutral, and harmless. It isn't.

Probably "but" is the most popular form of issue raising. Because it's so common, it carries with it the baggage of abuse. It's often used as a tool for excessive discounting of counterbalancing issues. For instance, "Global warming would be bad, but so far, we still have winters." In this instance, the "but" elides the fact that the presence of winter doesn't contradict the global warming hypothesis.

In the workplace, we use "but" to refute or devalue the positions of others. A common form is "<Statement1> but <Statement2> and <Bad-Implication>". Even if our intention is to acknowledge Statement1, and then add Statement2, and possibly the Implication, the receiver might hear us as rejecting Statement1.

For example: "I really like the feature that turns lead into gold, but we can't afford the additional delay." The receiver of this statement can hear that alchemy is being excluded from the product, and might even feel personally devalued.

We do have alternatives to but.

Replace "but" with "and"

Although this often works, use it with care. It sometimes sounds forced, and it can be a transparent cloak for but:

A: "If you had listened to me, we wouldn't be in this fix now."

B: "Yes, and we'd be in a much worse place."

Use other conjunctions

"But" has many lower-risk siblings: although, yet, all the same, be that as it may, still, nevertheless, even so, however, that said, having said that, despite that. Because they are less used, their effects can be more benign.

Raise questions

Express your concerns directly: "I like the feature that turns lead into gold. I wonder, though — can we afford the additional delay?" Now you've nudged the group toward problem solving and away from oppositional debate.

Controlling corrosive buts is one step in keeping conflict constructive. Taking that step helps you see the next one.  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!

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 Conflict Management:

Recalcitrant Collaborators

Much of the work we do happens outside the context of a team. We collaborate with people in other departments, other divisions, and other companies. When these collaborators are reluctant, resistive, or recalcitrant, what can we do?

The True Costs of Indirectness

Indirect communications are veiled, ambiguous, excessively diplomatic, or conveyed to people other than the actual target. We often use indirectness to avoid confrontation or to avoid dealing with conflict. It can be an expensive practice.

Virtual Conflict

Conflict, both constructive and destructive, is part of teamwork. As virtual teams become more common, we're seeing more virtual conflict — conflict that crosses site boundaries. Dealing with destructive conflict is difficult enough face-to-face, but in virtual teams, it's especially tricky.

What Do You Need?

When working issues jointly with others, especially with one other, we sometimes hear, "What do you need to make this work?" Your answers can doom your effort — or make it a smashing success.

They Just Don't Understand

When we cannot resolve an issue in open debate, we sometimes try to explain the obstinacy of others. The explanations we favor can tell us more about ourselves than they do about others.

See also Conflict Management and Effective Communication at Work for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming August 19: Motivated Reasoning

When we prefer a certain outcome of a decision process, we risk falling into a pattern of motivated reasoning. That can cause us to gather data and construct arguments that lead to the outcome we prefer, often outside our awareness. And it can happen even when the outcome we prefer is known to threaten our safety and security. Available here and by RSS on August 19.

And on August 26: Motivated Reasoning and the Pseudocertainty Effect

When we have a preconceived notion of what conclusion a decision process should produce, we sometimes engage in "motivated reasoning" to ensure that we get the result we want. But when we do this in relation to a chain of decisions in the context of uncertainty, trouble looms. Available here and by RSS on August 26.

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, )
• 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 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 June 29, 2017, Monthly Webinar, sponsored by Technobility Webinar Series. PMI members can earn 1.0 Category 'A' PDU by viewing this program. View this program now.
   
• A recording of a program presented June 29, 2017, Monthly Webinar, sponsored by Technobility Webinar Series. PMI members can earn 1.0 Category 'A' PDU by viewing this program. View this program now.
   

Bullet Points: Mastery or Madness?

Decision-makers in modern organizations commonly demand briefings in the form of bullet points or a series of series of bullet points. But this form of presentation has limited value for complex decisions. We need something more. We actually need to think. Briefers who combine the bullet-point format with a variety of persuasion techniques can mislead decision-makers, guiding them into making poor decisions. Read more about this program.

• A recording of a program presented June 24, Monthly Webinar, sponsored by Technobility Webinar Series. PMI members can earn 1.0 Category 'A' PDU by viewing this program. View this program now.
   
• A recording of a program presented June 24, Monthly Webinar, sponsored by Technobility Webinar Series. PMI members can earn 1.0 Category 'A' PDU by viewing this program. View this program now.