As Liz and Alex walked across the lawn toward the review meeting in Building J, Liz realized that she had a rare opportunity — Alex was able to speak freely, if he was inclined to, without the rest of Engineering listening in. So she decided to just ask him straight out. "Alex, you know we've been trying to find out what you all want Marigold to do about Phase II. Tell me."
Alex stopped walking. Liz did too, and as she turned toward him, he said, "Phase II. You mean with the Diamond Square fixes, or without?"
"Both," she replied.
Liz has just used a tactic I call "Seek all possible answers." When you ask a question, and the respondent offers you a choice of conditions, say "Both" or "All of the above." If you choose only one, respondents sometimes slant or spin their answers, possibly without realizing it. When you choose "all," the answers all have to be consistent, which makes spinning much more difficult.
Here are three more patterns that appear frequently in everyday conversation.Mastering the patterns
of our conversations
makes you a more
Compile a catalog.
- Find a neutral way out
- When you and your partner come to an impasse, find a neutral way out. But instead of offering it, let it be discovered. Usually only a little guidance is needed, since you're both searching for an exit. For instance, if you believe that you both agreed to be ready on the 14th, and your partner insists it was the 8th, suggest that you work out a new date together instead of figuring out who was right, or even worse, continuing to insist that you were right.
- Become a master of the interview
- When you sense that your partner is making it up on the fly, don't argue — it probably won't be necessary. Instead, switch to interview mode. Since your partner's argument is probably untested, ask for more detail and examples, watching closely for holes or inconsistencies. When you find one, ask about it. This is especially effective if you can loop back to contradict an initial assertion. On the other hand, if your conjecture about fabrication is incorrect, you will have actually helped to develop a stronger position. Either way, zero risk for you.
- Use the hypothetical to get around the obstacle
- If you meet an obstacle, ask the hypothetical question: "If we could do it, how would we do it?" Then apply the response to reality: "OK, well what if we do that?" If your partner wants to preserve the obstacle, he or she must find a difference between the hypothetical and the real — a difference so compelling that the hypothetical doesn't apply. If you constructed the hypothetical cleverly, finding that difference can be very difficult, and you'll often move closer to agreement.
Patterns are everywhere, but take care — they're often violated, and you can't always tell when they are. For instance, you've probably noticed that these little essays often end with a twist. This one doesn't. Or does it? Top Next Issue
Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenmhXARWRMUvVyOdHlner@ChacxgDmtwOKrxnripPCoCanyon.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.
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 Workplace Politics:
- Devious Political Tactics: Divide and Conquer, Part II
- While most leaders try to achieve organizational unity, some do use divisive tactics to maintain control,
or to elevate performance by fostering competition. Here's Part II of a series exploring the risks of
- Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True
- Maxims and rules make life simpler by eliminating decisions. And they have a price: they sometimes foreclose
options that would have worked better than anything else. Here are some things we believe in maybe a
little too much.
- I've Got Your Number, Pal
- Recent research has uncovered a human tendency — possibly universal — to believe that we
know others better than others know them, and that we know ourselves better than others know themselves.
These beliefs, rarely acknowledged and often wrong, are at the root of many a toxic conflict of long standing.
- Ground Level Sources of Scope Creep
- We usually think of scope creep as having been induced by managerial decisions. And most often, it probably
is. But most project team members — and others as well — can contribute to the problem.
- Impasses in Group Decision-Making: III
- In group decision-making, impasses can develop. Some are related to the substance of the issue at hand.
With some effort, we can usually resolve substantive impasses. But treating nonsubstantive impasses
in the same way doesn't work. Here's why.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming August 21: Perfectionism and Avoidance
- Avoiding tasks we regard as unpleasant, boring, or intimidating is a pattern known as procrastination. Perfectionism is another pattern. The interplay between the two makes intervention a bit tricky. Available here and by RSS on August 21.
- And on August 28: Playing at Work
- Eight hours a day — usually more — of meetings, phone calls, reading and writing email and text messages, briefing others or being briefed, is enough to drive anyone around the bend. To re-energize, to clarify one's perspective, and to restore creative capacity, play is essential. Play at work, I mean. Available here and by RSS on August 28.
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
- The Race to the South Pole: Lessons in Leadership
- On 14 December 1911, four men led by Roald Amundsen reached
the South Pole. Thirty-five days later, Robert F. Scott and four others followed. Amundsen had won the
race to the pole. Amundsen's party returned to base on 26 January 1912. Scott's party perished. As historical
drama, why this happened is interesting enough. But to organizational leaders, business analysts, project
sponsors, and project managers, the story is fascinating. We'll use the history of this event to explore
lessons in leadership and its application to organizational efforts. A fascinating and refreshing look
at leadership from the vantage point of history. Read
more about this program. Here's a date for this program:
- Baldwin-Wallace University, 275 Eastland Road, Berea, Ohio
44017: November 7,
Kerzner Lecture Series/International Project Management Day, sponsored by Baldwin Wallace University and the Northeast Ohio Chapter of the Project Management Institute.
- Baldwin-Wallace University, 275 Eastland Road, Berea, Ohio 44017: November 7, Kerzner Lecture Series/International Project Management Day, sponsored by Baldwin Wallace University and the Northeast Ohio Chapter of the Project Management Institute. Register now.
- 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.
Beware any resource that speaks of "winning" at workplace politics or "defeating" it. You can benefit or not, but there is no score-keeping, and it isn't a game.