Avoiding Speed Bumps: II

When we work in groups, either in collaborations or merely cooperating, we occasionally encounter minor difficulties of our own making — call them speed bumps. For example, asking a question phrased one way can produce a helpful reply. But phrase it only slightly differently, and it becomes a speed bump — the response can be hostile and defensive, if you get a response at all. When working with others, seemingly minor differences in approach can create enormous savings by smoothing the way to the outcomes we seek.

This is Part II of a little catalog of tactics for avoiding speed bumps in everyday workplace situations. Have a look at Part I for more.

Instead of what?

If you're an Ace — very good at what you do — you're probably maxed out. People want an Ace to handle the issue they care about because they know it will get done right. And since you're maxed out, when a seeker (your boss, say) wants you to handle one more thing, X, two ways to find time to do X come to mind most readily. Choice A is to take time from something you're already doing. You reject A immediately, because you're an Ace and you don't want to do anything halfway. Choice B is to take time out of your personal account — your non-work life. If you're like most Aces, you often choose B.

If you habitually choose B — taking time out of your personal account — and if you're still single, or single again, or stressed to the point of sleep disturbance, or overdue for a vacation, or if you haven't seen a dentist in a while, habitually choosing B might be an explanation for your condition.

There is a choice C.

You can ask the seeker, "Instead of what?" In other words, you can ask the seeker to choose which of the things you're now doing needs to be set aside for now while you deal with X. Try this approach. But find some words to say that are less harsh than, "Instead of what?" Maybe something along the lines of, "Sure, I can do that, if we can work out what to say about whatever it is I have to set aside to get time to do that. Help me with that?"

When do you want it?

When a task or assignment (call it X) lands in your hands, you'll likely need to set a priority for it. And you might have a fairly clear idea what X's priority should be. Even so, you might have a priority in mind that differs from the priority the seeker has in mind.

The delivery When working with others, seemingly
minor differences in approach can
create enormous savings by smoothing
the way to the outcomes we seekdate isn't directly what you want to know. The delivery date is just one measure of the priority the requestor has in mind for X. Asking for a statement of the delivery date can help you determine how well your sense of X's priority matches the requestor's sense of X's priority.

Frequently, the seeker's response to your query will be, "As soon as possible." That isn't much help. To smoke out a little more truth, your response to that could be, "OK, I'll get started on X right after I wrap up task Y." In other words, you're saying that X is a lower priority than Y. If the requestor agrees, you have a deal. If not, then you can negotiate relative priorities, which is what you wanted from the outset.

When do you want need it

Needs and wants are different. A need is an input that causes major disruptions rippling through the organization if it isn't available. In the project context, most people prefer to reveal their wants rather than their needs.

Even if you can steer the conversation away from wants toward needs, some people "pad" their needs so as to manage the risk of not receiving what they truly need.

Still, you have a slightly better chance of learning their true needs if you ask them to tell you what they need instead of what they want.

In a crazy system, you might need to break the rules

Some human systems are inherently broken. In a broken system, there is just no way to get the job done if you follow the rules. Obviously, unless you have the power to change the rules, you have three options: (a) you can exit the system, or (b) you can satisfy yourself with low (or zero!) performance, or (c) you can break the rules.

Exiting the system could involve voluntary termination or internal transfer. Those options can take time, assuming they are available. Until then, you must live with low or zero performance, unless you're willing to break the rules.

Breaking the rules isn't an option we like to consider. But it is an option to consider.

When you need time off, ask for it

On rare occasions, you need time off on a particular day or dates, and you know about it in advance. A birth, a family reunion out of town, a court date, surgery, whatever. Among the most common mistakes people make about asking for time off for these constrained situations is procrastination. Avoid that mistake. Let people know about your need well in advance. When they know early enough it's easier for them to accommodate your need.

Be prepared to answer a question about why you need the time. They have a right to ask, and you have a right not to be very specific. "Personal reasons" is a reason. And be prepared for questions about whether you can adjust the date. If you can adjust it, do so. If you can't, say so.

Last words

Collect these tactics, and others. Add to your collection any techniques you see others use effectively to avoid the speed bumps in their paths. The techniques of special interest are those that you believe might help you avoid speed bumps you've encountered in your experience.   First issue in this series   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 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 Effective Communication at Work:

Interviewing the Willing: Strategy

At times, we need information from each other. For example, we want to learn about how someone approached a similar problem, or we must interview someone about system requirements. Yet, even when the source is willing, we sometimes fail to expose critical facts. How can we elicit information from the willing more effectively?

Dismissive Gestures: I

Humans are nothing if not inventive. In the modern organization, where verbal insults are deprecated, we've developed hundreds of ways to insult each other silently (or nearly so). Here's part one of a catalog of nonverbal insults.

Embolalia and Stuff Like That: II

Continuing our exploration of embolalia — filler syllables, filler words, and filler phrases — let us examine the more complex forms. Some of them are so complex that they appear to be actual content, even when what they contain is little more than "um."

Interrupting Others in Meetings Safely: I

In meetings we sometimes feel the need to interrupt others to offer a view or information, or to suggest adjusting the process. But such interruptions carry risk of offense. How can we interrupt others safely?

Unintended Condescension: II

Intentionally making condescending remarks is something most of us do only when we lose control. But anyone at any time can inadvertently make a remark that someone else experiences as condescending. We explored two patterns to avoid last time. Here are two more.

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

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming May 14: Working with the Overconfident

A cognitive bias known as the Overconfidence Effect causes us to overestimate the reliability of our judgments. Decisions we make based on those judgments are therefore suspect. But there are steps we can take to make our confidence levels more realistic, and thus make our decisions more reliable. Available here and by RSS on May 14.

And on May 21: Mismanaging Project Managers

Most organizations hold project managers accountable for project performance. But they don't grant those project managers control of needed resources. Nor do they hold project sponsors or other senior managers accountable for the consequences of their actions when they interfere with project work. Here's a catalog of behaviors worth looking at. Available here and by RSS on May 21.

Coaching services

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