Changing the Subject: II

Subject changing is a conversational technique for guiding shared thought in a mutually agreed direction. And like all tools, it has multiple purposes, some of which can be corrosive to collaboration. Understanding subject-changing helps us identify these sometimes-corrosive maneuvers, and helps us refrain from using them. Here's Part II of a catalog of techniques for changing the subject. See "Changing the Subject: I," Point Lookout for February 21, 2007, for more.

Whac-a-mole

Sometimes interviewers try to "pin" their interviewees. With each attack successfully evaded, the interviewer raises yet another issue, never acknowledging an escape. The interviewer's goal is to engender a feeling of frustrating impotence in the interviewee.

This tactic is used in interrogation, cross-examination, and other hostile interviewing. It sometimes appears in performance reviews, when the determined supervisor tries to justify a negative review. Upon noticing the tactic, even if you're taken aback, do what you can to slow the pace and break the interviewer's rhythm.

Un-self-conscious blurting

This pattern appears in problem-solving sessions, when someone excitedly offers a fresh insight, and especially when the blurter has been lost in thought. It's best to forgive these blurts, because they're often treasures of great value.

But the Subject changing, like all tools,
has multiple purposes, some of
which can be corrosive
to collaborationtactic also appears in intense arguments, when the blurter has lost self-control, and in other uncomfortable situations when the blurter is extremely stressed. Take these blurts as indicators of the need for a break.

Focal carom

In this tactic, the subject-changer offers a contiguous comment, but then shifts the focus in a slightly different direction. Done artfully, other participants might not even notice the carom.

The true artist changes the subject by posing a seemingly related question, the main purpose of which is to enroll the other participants in the shift. By answering, they implicitly agree to the new subject.

Asking a clarifying question

This is a variant of the focal carom that incorporates an interruption. While these questions are often genuine, they can be used to simultaneously seize the floor and shift focus. For instance, "I think I understand. Do you mean X?" More about clarifying questions

Here X is the goal of the focal shift. The purpose of the question can be to draw the others into a discussion of X.

Hijacking

Here the subject-changer might open with a contiguous "sealer" comment, and then suddenly shift to a new subject. A sealer comment is a final summary or assessment, such as, "We don't know enough to decide that now, so let's take it up tomorrow."

The subsequent hijack often begins with "Moving on…" or "On a more urgent matter, …" That's probably your last opportunity to call attention to the tactic, or to steer back to the thread.

Sometimes, even when there's more to say, it's best to let the subject change. It depends on who's in the conversation, and whether the time is right — even when the subject-changer is out of line.  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.

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:

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.

The Deck Chairs of the Titanic: Strategy

Much of what we call work is about as effective and relevant as rearranging the deck chairs of the Titanic. We continue our exploration of futile and irrelevant work, this time emphasizing behaviors related to strategy.

Top 30 Indicators That You Might Be Bored at Work

Most of the time, when we're bored at work, we know we are. But sometimes, we're bored and we just don't realize it. Here are some indicators of boredom that might escape some people's notice.

Deciding to Change: Trusting

When organizations change by choice, people who are included in the decision process understand the issues. Whether they agree with the decision or not, they participate in the decision in some way. But not everyone is included in the process. What about those who are excluded?

Workplace Memes

Some patterns of workplace society reduce organizational effectiveness in ways that often escape our notice. Here are four examples.

See also Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness and Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming December 11: White Water Rafting as a Metaphor for Group Development

Tuckman's model of small group development, best known as "Forming-Storming-Norming-Performing," applies better to development of some groups than to others. We can use a metaphor to explore how the model applies to Storming in task-oriented work groups. Available here and by RSS on December 11.

And on December 18: Subgrouping and Conway's Law

When task-oriented work groups address complex tasks, they might form subgroups to address subtasks. The structure of the subgroups and the order in which they form depend on the structure of the group's task and the sequencing of the subtasks. Available here and by RSS on December 18.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.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