That evening, he enters their home, smells garlic, and asks, “What’s for dinner?” No response. He walks halfway to the kitchen and in the same voice asks again: “What’s for dinner?” No response. Finally, he stands right behind his wife and in the same voice asks one more time: “What’s for dinner?” His wife looks back at him in exasperation. “For the third time,” she says, “chicken.”

The man in the joke isn’t just a victim of his poor hearing, he’s a victim of his misguided perceptions. And while biology plays a role in what we see and hear, what we perceive — what we pay attention to and focus on — is a function of our psychology.

Like the husband in the joke, we pay attention to what we believe matters and make decisions and judgments based on that filtered information. And like the husband in the joke, our filters don’t always work to our advantage.

Many misunderstandings in relationships have their basis in the fact that our personalities predispose us to filter information in different ways, each person potentially believing their perceptions are correct and that others are wrong.

By becoming aware of our filters, we can take steps to improve the accuracy of our perceptions. Knowing that our perceptual filters are working constantly should make us curious about what we could have missed — or misconstrued. When we catch ourselves thinking or saying, “I didn’t see that” or “I didn’t hear that,” what we should consider saying is “I didn’t notice that” or “I must have filtered that out” or “That’s not how I perceived it.”

Personality can act as filter because we focus on things that support our desire to feel good about ourselves — those things that fulfill our motives.

To understand why motives (as described by the Strength Deployment Inventory (SDI)) are such a powerful filter, we need to understand how memory works. Our memory selectively retains information we believe will be useful in the future. And motives can be fulfilled in the future. What this means is that if you have a lot of Blue motive directed at helping other people, you are more likely to notice when people are in need and will remember exactly what they need. That prepares you to help them in the future.

Similarly, if there is a lot of Red motive in your personality, you will probably notice opportunities that others miss because you are driven to accomplish things in the future. If there is a lot of Green motive in your personality, you may pay attention to underlying patterns or principles because they help you build effective processes that you can use predictably in the future. And if all three motives blend about equally in your Hub personality, you are likely to pay attention to the various options, alternatives, and perspectives in any given situation, because that will help you maintain your future flexibility.

If you want to know how people remember a shared experience differently, such as a planning meeting, then pay attention to filters. Everyone hears the same words but filters them differently. Everyone takes mental notes about the things they think are important. And when you compare notes, you could all have totally different ideas about what’s been decided and what action is required, because each of you filters based on different motives related to people, process, and performance. Motives act as filters that influence our decisions about what to pursue and what actions to take.

Motives also act as a filter by which we judge things as good or bad. If something fulfills your motives, you are likely to judge it as good, because fulfilling your motives makes you feel good about yourself. So if you have a lot of Blue helping motive, you are more likely to favorably judge people who are trying to help others. In general, we tend to judge people with similar personalities to our own as “good” people, and we may experience conflict when we assume that people with different personalities are actively working against our primary motives.

When you observe other people’s behavior, your filters influence how you interpret it. If someone is being supportive of others and you agree that others need support, you will probably see that support as a great thing and it will be easy to have positive regard for the support-giver. But if you think the others don’t need support, then you might see that helpfulness as overdone or misplaced, which may make the person look self-sacrificing or intrusive in your eyes.

One of the main causes of interpersonal conflict is our perception of strengths overdone. These conflicts are largely preventable. They are triggered when one person judges that another has used a strength in an unproductive or harmful manner. But these judgements can reveal as much about the observer as they do about the other person. This is because people tend to overreact to behaviors in others that they deem inappropriate for themselves. And the overdone strengths we tend to overreact to are those found at the bottom of our Overdone Strengths Portrait in the SDI results.

For example, a person who has Indecisive (overdone counterpart of Option-Oriented) at the bottom of their Overdone Strengths Portrait will probably be keenly sensitive to that behavior in others. Having indecisive at the bottom suggests that the person would never want to be so option-oriented that they come across as indecisive.

Therefore, when this person perceives indecisiveness in others, they think “I would never do that.” The filter, then, is that indecisiveness is bad. If the judgment is acted on or expressed, it can trigger conflict in the relationship. Statements such as “You can never make up your mind” or sarcastic questions such as “Can you just pick something? Anything?” generate defensiveness in others, especially if they believe they are effectively keeping their options open.

Filters in conflict can be a particularly powerful (and potentially misleading) force.

In one experiment, managers were monitored using a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) machine, which measures brain activity by detecting changes in blood flow. When the managers told stories about productive interactions with their leaders, the machine “lit up” regions in the brain associated with a high degree of social, cognitive, and perceptual openness. When they told stories about conflict with their leaders, however, a different part of the brain was active, one that is associated with less overall attention, a more inward focus of attention, less compassion, and less liking of others.^[1] In other words, the experience of conflict, as well as recalling our episodic memories of it, fires up parts of our brains that cause us to perceive things differently than when things are going well.

As we enter conflict, our motives also change, and there is a change of personality-based filters that comes along for the ride. For example, if you are the type of person who wants to accommodate and keep the peace when conflict starts, you will probably view other’s peace-keeping efforts as positive. But you may view other’s assertive responses as aggressive, since they don’t align with your motives. And you may view other’s analytical responses to conflict as somewhat distant, non-communicative, or unsupportive.

Similarly, people who assert themselves (Red) in conflict may have a filter that causes them to judge other Reds positively, but to see Blue’s accommodation as weakness and the Green’s analysis as a lack of interest. The Green’s (analytical) conflict filter may make other Greens appear reasonable, while making Blue responses to conflict appear emotional and Red (assertive) responses seem impetuous.

When these filtered judgements run unchecked, conflict can escalate to a second or even third stage, where the accusations can run wild. But taking a moment to check your filters, clean your lenses, or look at things through a different lens can pay big dividends, even in relationships where you might think progress is unlikely.

^[1] Boyatzis, R. E., Passarelli, A. M., Koenig, K., Lowe, M., Mathew, B., Stoller, J. K., & Phillips, M. (2012). Examination of the neural substrates activated in memories of experiences with resonant and dissonant leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(12), 259-272.

*This article was adapted from a chapter in Relationship Intelligence, an unpublished manuscript authored by Tim Scudder, Gil Brady, and Steve Wood.

The post How Personality Influences Perception appeared first on Crucial Learning.

When an employee has a lot going on personally, it often shows up at work. These past few years have been tough on everyone, and I feel both empathy and a determination to hold clear boundaries. I want to extend grace to my employees, and I want them to meet their job duties and performance measures. How can I extend my sympathies and maintain clear professional boundaries? When I’ve asked before, people often cross professional boundaries and overshare inappropriate or personal information. Please help.

Dear Sympathetic,

Your question resonates with me and highlights a common challenge for people leaders. It’s relatable because we’re doing just that—leading people, not robots. Despite one’s best attempts to suppress personal challenges and stress, there will be times when life simply wins—when whatever is going on outside of work begins to impact the employee’s work and performance.

For me, that time was 15 years ago when I was going through in vitro fertilization. For those who’ve experienced IVF, it’s an all-encompassing physical, emotional, and financial rollercoaster. You have very little control over countless doctor appointments, when to administer medications, what you can expect from the weeks ahead, and how you’re feeling from day-to-day. I was a young, eager, and committed employee. Nothing mortified me more than giving less than my best effort. But from time to time, the stress of IVF caught up to me. When my first and second IVF cycles failed, I was emotionally drained, and my work suffered. And yet, it was in this moment of vulnerability that those I worked with rallied around me, especially my manager. They supported me both with encouragement and understanding. They gave me the grace and time I needed to get through that experience. And if there’s a reason I have been with Crucial Learning for nearly 20 years, it’s because the people I work with have supported me in my most difficult moments.

So, I applaud your desire and ability to support your employees through tough times. As someone who has been on the receiving end of workplace empathy, I guarantee that your ability to be understanding and vulnerable with a struggling direct report will build deep trust, rapport, and loyalty. It’s the kind of connection people seek and are deserving of—even at work. Again, we work with people, not robots.

But it doesn’t always turn out like this. Sometimes we open ourselves up to other’s struggles and immediately wish we could throttle back our empathy. What we thought would be a simple invitation to better understand someone’s struggles can quickly become an intense therapy session, one in which you are not qualified to offer the level of emotional help or support the other person might need. And then, holding a boundary with someone who has just born their soul to you can feel impossible. Any attempts to draw a line may seem uncaring, unkind, and judgmental. All this when your initial motivation was just the opposite—to be helpful.

So, what can you do when you find that your offer to be sympathetic opened a floodgate of emotional baggage? Here are a few ideas.

1) Never pick up someone’s victim card. This advice was given to me by my colleague and fellow newsletter author Scott Robley. When Scott first taught me this principle, I told him I wish I had learned it on my first day as a people leader. It would have saved me and those I manage a lot of stress and heartache.

When someone plays the victim card, don’t pick it up. The moment you metaphorically pick up someone’s victim card, you assume some level of responsibility for their victimhood. You have acknowledged that what they have experienced or are currently enduring is too hard for them to handle and they are indeed the victim. Then you are responsible to solve their problem or perpetually acknowledge and accept their shortcomings as a victim. It’s an unproductive and exhausting role and it will only lead to resentment.

Instead of picking up their victim card, acknowledge it and then give it right back to them—with the added expectation that they rise above their challenge, and an expression of confidence that they can. Let’s play this out with an example.

I’m managing Carolyn and lately I notice that Carolyn has withdrawn from the team and her work is suffering. I reach out to ask Carolyn how she’s doing. Carolyn unloads difficult details about her past and her upbringing. She shares that recent events at work have triggered some of these feelings and it’s impacting her relationships and work. You may be tempted to delve into the details of her past, share your own experiences, and let her know you’re there for her. But instead of picking up the victim card she has played, say something like, “Wow, thank you for sharing that with me. That sounds really hard and I’m so sorry that you’ve experienced those things. But I also know that you have risen above those challenges in the past and I want to know what you need to be able to do that again.”

Encourage Carolyn to see herself as more than a victim and to find solutions to her performance issues.

2) Create Boundaries by clarifying your intent. When you feel that your employee is sharing too much or taking advantage of your empathy, you can respectfully set a boundary by clarifying what you don’t intend followed by what you do intend. More specifically, let the employee know that your intent is not to dismiss their struggle, but rather figure out how to help them navigate those challenges at work.

It might sound something like this: “Thank you for sharing that with me. That sounds really challenging and I can see why it could affect your work. I’d like to discuss how I can help you navigate these challenges while also getting your work done. I don’t want to come across as uncaring, but if I don’t spend much time talking about your challenges it’s because I want to keep the conversation focused on what we can do here to help you return to the level of great work that I know you can deliver.”

3) Escalate to HR. This final tip is most applicable when the employee’s challenges are health-related—either their own or those of a family member. It’s difficult to not be sympathetic and flexible to employees who have health challenges. But that doesn’t mean that you or the organization must bear the burden. If an employee’s health challenges are taking a toll on them or the team, there are FMLA laws that allow them to take a medical leave of absence to deal with their challenges and return to work healthy. Perhaps this is a step you’ll want or need to take to ensure that you and the employee can move forward healthy and effectively.

These are just three ideas, and I’m sure there are others our readers can share to help you navigate this tricky leadership challenge. Please share your own ideas and experiences in the comments below.

Balancing my role as a friend and confidant with that of a manager is difficult. Personally, I find that when I have a friendship with the people I manage, the work flows smoothly and quickly, communication is natural and productive, and there is mutual trust. My team knows that I care about them, and I feel their care and concern in return. And most importantly, it simply makes work more enjoyable and fun. Who doesn’t want to work alongside their friends?

But there is nothing more draining than an employee who, if given an inch, will take a mile. When you find yourself in this predicament, resist the urge to pick up their victim card. If you have already, lay it back down; communicate your boundaries and good intent; and escalate to HR if the situation warrants doing so.

Best of luck. Your teammates are lucky to have you.

Brittney

Update: This article was edited 8/14/24 to include an example for tip #1.

The post How to Balance Compassion and Boundaries at Work appeared first on Crucial Learning.

My 27-year-old son moved in with me and my husband before the pandemic and planned to buy a house last spring. He has since enrolled in grad school and it’s now a seller’s market, so he is still here. The problem is that we have a four-bedroom house, and we want it all to ourselves. My son is now needing more space and using the two empty rooms for photo shoots and storage. I had planned to use those rooms as a meditation/prayer room and entertainment room. He is such an amazing son, and I am told that I judge strongly and don’t say things the right way. How should I approach this?

Signed,
Struggling to Start

Dear Struggling to Start,

As a parent of four sons, three of whom are in their twenties, I can relate to having your children return home to live with you and the challenges that brings. More importantly, I can relate to navigating the nuances of raising adult children. What worked when they were little, doesn’t seem to work any longer. Parenting at this stage of life becomes more about influence. Knowing how to leverage the levers of influence can be your strongest ally.

Imagine that holding conversations is like flying a plane. The goal of flight is to safely get where you are going. There’s a lot that goes into that process, but passengers rightfully place emphasis on the landing. A poor landing can ruin the best of experiences. When stepping up to difficult converations we worry over how the message will “land.” How will they receive it? What will the impact be on our relationship? And so on.

You may have heard that a good landing starts with a good approach. That’s not only a good buzz phrase for aviation safety, but also for Crucial Conversations. Every runway (situation) is unique and uncontrollable conditions can impact a safe and smooth landing. It’s vital that pilots have a solid procedural sequence as they enter the airport traffic. The same goes for these types of conversations. When building a framework for your conversation sequence, consider the following.

WHAT YOU WANT

Safe landings begin with managing the aircraft’s speed and altitude. It’s important that as you approach the conversation with your son to slow down and manage your altitude. I’ve heard it said, “Attitude determines altitude.” When confronted with difficult situations, our motives (attitude) can quickly deteriorate and then our behaviors morph to match. Be clear with yourself and your son about what you really want. Begin by asking yourself, “What do I really want…”

• For myself?
• For my son?
• For our relationship?

Notice the distinction between “for” and “from.” Often when we answer the question “What do I really want?” we answer with, “I want them to change.” In this case the answer may be that you want him to move out or that you want your rooms back. Those may be true, but they can be unhelpful if you are looking for a safe landing. Look beyond the short and one-sided motives. Focus more on long-term results and the relationship with your son. Managing your altitude by managing your motives can help secure a safe landing even amidst the toughest of elements.

It won’t be enough for you to know your intentions. Once your intent is right, begin the conversation by sharing your intent with your son. Not only will it calm any potential emotions on your end, but it will help create safety for your son to join you in the conversation.

WHAT YOU SAY

The success of your conversation landing will largely depend on how you begin the conversation. Knowing your intentions and sharing them with your son will certainly help. But you need to make sure you share your views in a way that invites dialogue.

Begin by describing the gap between what you were expecting and what is actually happening. Let your son know that when you originally agreed for him to move back in you thought it would be temporary. Share what you have planned for the spare bedrooms. Then invite him into the dialogue by asking him to share his perspective. Ask him about his plans and hopes as he’s adjusting to a different life journey amidst the pandemic.

WHAT YOU HEAR

Pilots have gauges to provide valuable information that assist in not only flying the plane, but also in making safe landings. When approaching your son, gauge the situation by listening to him and letting his answers guide your landing.

Our tendency when listening is not to really listen at all. We often listen with the intent to respond. While others are speaking, we are crafting our next clever comment. Challenge yourself to carry on the conversation without input, anecdotes, correction, criticism, or counsel. Just keep asking clarifying questions. Just learn. One question may open the floodgates, but it may take several questions. As he shares, continue the journey by responding to his answers with questions that begin with: How will that…? What will that…? Or why will that…?

We achieve a conversational “safe landing” when all parties are engaged in dialogue. Dialogue is the key to finding solutions and getting results. And, with the right approach, you can strengthen your relationship in the process. Happy landing.

Scott

The post How to Start a Crucial Conversation with Your Adult Children appeared first on Crucial Learning.

I mentioned my frustration with graduation speeches to a former university president and he explained that speakers who are brought in from the outside are rarely selected for their elocution chops. “It’s political,” he explained—plus there’re always the “intangibles.” (What?) Apparently, speaking ability doesn’t count for much when it comes to selecting . . . speakers. I, for one, would like to see this change.

In addition to finding more engaging speakers, commencement organizers may want to redouble their efforts to select orators who offer helpful advice. Speakers, of course, try to be helpful, but most aren’t career experts and end up stringing together a list of feel-good homilies that warm the heart but inform no real action. Graduates, be warned. Right now someone is standing at a podium and saying: “Find a job you enjoy doing, and you will never have to work a day in your life.” This old saw sounds clever enough, but it’s really nothing more than a useless tautology. It simply suggests that job-searching graduates need to find a job they like doing and then, when they actually do the job, they’ll like doing it. A fat lot of good that does anyone.

According to recent surveys, seventy percent of American employees don’t secure a job they like. In fact, they find a job they dislike. Plus, if graduates happen to land a job they enjoy, it needs to pay a livable wage. A lot don’t.

The most common advice speakers give on how to actually find an enjoyable and well-paying job is contained in the oft-spoken expression, “Relentlessly pursue your passion.” This maxim suggests that in order to succeed in your quest for a dream job, you need to throw yourself completely into your vocational passion, stop worrying about the job market, work hard, become the best in your field, and take comfort in knowing that a job will be waiting for you. People believe this because it happens. My neighbor, pursued his passion—oil painting. He became a master, loves what he does, and now lives in the nicest house on the block. He would be the first to tell you to pursue your passion.

Following this same advice, a different neighbor spent five years pursuing his PhD passion. When he finally graduated, he learned that there were only two tenure-track jobs available in his particular field—in the world. Worse still, dozens of scholars were gunning for those two positions and they all secretively believed that they would be among the two who would grab a brass ring. All but two were wrong.

In the end, tens of thousands of individuals who relentlessly pursue their passion don’t secure a paying job in their chosen field. In some cases, their passion becomes a lifelong hobby. That’s nice. As the years pass, others find a way to tolerate their job, so not all is lost. Plus, joy can come from a host of sources outside of work. However, in the spirit of full disclosure, most dreamers end up making a living by joining the unfulfilled seventy-percent. If you catch them during a truthful moment, many lament that they haven’t been able to become the marine biologist or the art critic they spent so many years preparing to become.

Fortunately, there are steps you can take that increase your chances of securing a job you enjoy. Allow me to share seven research-based tips that I’ve prepared for recent college grads.

First, it’s okay to relentlessly pursue your passion. However, as you chase your dream, keep an eye on the job market. Check job statistics on the internet and regularly talk to seniors in your major (who are either finding or not finding jobs.)

Second, learn to enjoy performing a host of different tasks. Take your cue from college administrators who require students to take a wide range of courses during their first two years. As you sample classes from a vocational pu pu platter, stacked high with degrees and specialties, study each topic with an open mind. Don’t confuse uninspired teaching with a subject being boring. Most importantly, don’t dismiss all of the arts or all of the sciences with a single wave of your hand. Instead, work at shaping yourself into a Renaissance person. Become an individual who loves and masters several fields of study. Remember, the more activities you enjoy (at both work and at play), the easier it will be for you to find enjoyment.

Third, prepare yourself for the fact that all jobs—no matter how cool sounding—require you to perform some tasks that aren’t exactly enjoyable. Be satisfied with being mostly satisfied. Rock stars sleep in buses. Park rangers deal with drunk tourists. You get the point.

Fourth, search for a job where you can relate to the organization’s mission. You may find little enjoyment in laying bricks all day long, but if the crew you work with is building an architectural masterpiece, you can find joy in your combined results.

Fifth, find satisfaction in your work by doing it well. From repeated and well-guided practice comes proficiency. From proficiency comes enjoyment. One day you’ll look down at what you just produced and think to yourself, “Look what I did!” Pride in one’s work inevitably ripens into joy.

Sixth, land a position where you relish working with the people around you. The vast majority of the thirty-percent who say they like their work, when asked to be more specific, explain that they like the people they work with. Don’t be afraid to switch jobs if members of the team you hire into don’t get along. Don’t consider camaraderie a luxury—make it a necessity.

Seventh, since camaraderie matters, be a good teammate. Make decisions with others’ best interest in mind. Carry your fair share of the work load. Pitch in when others fall behind. Stand up for your colleagues. Speak kindly to others. Willingly do tough jobs. Give others the benefit of the doubt. Deliver on your promises. Master your craft. Be the person you’d like others to be.

Here’s my wish to the graduated. May your commencement exercises be both exciting and informative. For those of you who desire to land an enjoyable job, search for recommendations that you can easily put into actions, and then take action. If you really want to boost your chances of landing work you enjoy, be a genuine teammate. That is, be the person who makes everyone else’s job more enjoyable. In this you’ll find true joy.

The post Rock Stars Still Sleep in Buses—and Other Graduation Thoughts appeared first on Crucial Learning.

As AI becomes a part of everyday work, the challenge for many organizations is not just the technology. It’s whether people can talk about it clearly and openly, make sound decisions about its use, and integrate it into their daily work in ways that actually improve results. Teams are being asked to move faster, experiment more, manage new risks, and rethink established workflows, often before norms, expectations, and confidence have caught up. In that environment, the biggest barriers are often human. People hesitate to raise concerns, disagree about what responsible use should look like, avoid hard conversations about quality and trust or stay silent when something feels off.

On the other hand, our research confirms that the speed with which employees adopt new norms and technology, like AI, is profoundly related to their willingness and ability to hold Crucial Conversations. Specifically, we surveyed 1,700 professionals across every industry and found that when compared with organizations that struggle to be agile, organizations where people speak up and engage in dialogue are:

• 12 times faster at adopting new ideas
• 6 times more likely to succeed in the full adoption of breakthrough ideas
• 2 times more likely to make a habit of looking for ways to improve results

To support you and your learners in building behaviorally agile cultures that accelerate AI adoption, we have created a new exercises and practices supplement for Crucial Conversations for Mastering Dialogue. This resource provides foundational examples to help tailor Crucial Conversations to, and support productive dialogue around, common AI-related issues. This supplement helps trainers connect the skills of Mastering Dialogue to real workplace moments so learners can practice the conversations that make AI adoption more thoughtful, effective, and sustainable.

The supplement is available to Crucial Conversations for Mastering Dialogue trainers as a free PDF download from Certification Zone > Mastering Dialogue > Learner Materials.

The content in the supplement replaces selected standard practices with AI-related scenarios and exercises. Like our other supplements, it is intended to be used alongside the standard Learner Guide and presentation, with replacement activities that match the existing page flow.

We hope you find this to be a helpful resource. We are developing a similar supplement for Crucial Conversations for Accountability. Stay tuned for the release of that later this summer.

It is especially useful when learners are working through AI-related change in their organization—for example, when new AI tools are being introduced, expectations for AI use are increasing, teams disagree about how AI should be used, or leaders need to talk through the risks, responsibilities, and opportunities that come with adoption.

A Harvard Business Review analysis found that up to 95% of AI initiatives fail to deliver intended value—not because of the tools, but because organizations fail to address the human behaviors required for adoption. Our goal is to help you avoid becoming one of these statistics by supporting the human system that can accelerate and ensure adoption.

The organizations that succeed with AI won’t just deploy smarter tools. They’ll build cultures where people can adapt, speak up, and innovate.

The post Supporting Your AI Strategy: Introducing Course Supplements for AI Adoption appeared first on Crucial Learning.

My manager is a bully, and everybody talks about it but not to her! She has regular outbursts at whoever is closest, sends a tirade of emails, on and on it goes. Her employees are on antidepressants, unable to manage the feelings with being treated that way on a regular basis. I am removed from the firing line, so I can see this from a clearer perspective. Is the answer for staff to leave or medicate to manage???

Signed,
Eggshells

Dear Eggshells,

Nobody should have to medicate to manage a relationship or quit their job because of another’s behavior. Crucial Conversations resonates because in crucial moments it offers people a more reasonable and hopeful path towards resolution: dialogue.

At the same time, we’re not so naïve as to assume that every problem can be solved with a conversation; or that if facing harmful abuse or danger you should try to talk it out. There are times when it’s prudent and necessary to remove yourself from a threatening situation. But we can assume that at the root of most every problem you face is a Crucial Conversation you’re not holding or holding poorly.

So, assuming no one is in life-threatening danger, let’s apply the Crucial Conversations principles and skills to help address bullying behavior.

Years ago, we surveyed more than 2,200 professionals to better understand the impact of workplace bullying. The sad reality is you’re not alone – 96% of respondents reported they’d seen bullying at work. While some reported physical bullying, the majority reported observing emotional bullying. Specifically:

• 51% said they worked with someone who is overly controlling or autocratic.
• 46% worked with someone who is sarcastic, cutting, demeaning, or offensive.
• 45% worked with someone who gives people the silent treatment, excludes people, or gives people the cold shoulder.
• 41% worked with someone who spreads gossip, negative rumors, or other misinformation to hurt others.

We continued our survey by gauging the costs of emotional bullying and found 1 in 5 respondents said that coping with a bully costs them 7 or more hours per week in extra work. And the average bully disrupts the work of 5 or more people. Bullying doesn’t just hurt people; it also impacts the bottom line.

Why would we put up with such behavior? Why are the people on your team medicating rather than confronting unacceptable behavior?

The reason bullying persists is because we’re more skilled at avoiding bullies than confronting them. Avoidance is the least risky course of action. However, silence equals permission. Staying silent signals that the bullying is acceptable and permitted.

So what can you do? How can you use dialogue skills to address a bully – even one that is your manager?

Document the Facts

Before even engaging in dialogue, keep a record of bullying incidents. Note the times, places, circumstances, and witnesses of the bully’s actions. Also note the impacts of these actions. Avoid generalizations like, “She was insulting and abusive,” Instead, be clear: “She called me an idiot.”

Ensure Your Safety

Speaking up always involves some risk, but don’t ever put yourself in danger. At the same time, don’t let your fears prevent you from acting. Ask, “What’s likely to happen if I don’t speak up?” Make a realistic assessment of the worst-case scenarios if you do speak up and if you don’t speak up.

Depending on your assessment, you may decide to speak directly to the bully, talk to a manager or HR professional, or talk to the bully with a third party present.

Decide What You Really Want

Ask yourself what success would look like. What do you want long term for yourself, for the team, and for the organization? The answer to these questions guides your conversation.

Have the Right Conversation

The term “bullying” implies a pattern of abuse, not a single incident, so talk about the pattern. The manager is likely to only see “incidents” rather than the pattern and will try to justify her behavior in each incident. Make sure you have the facts related to enough incidents to make the pattern clear.

Start with Facts

Begin by describing two or three incidents you’ve documented: select incidents that illustrate the pattern and use verbatim quotes where possible. Avoid inflammatory words, labels, or accusations. For example, don’t describe her as mean, vindictive, or even as a bully. Instead, stick closely to the facts which have more credibility than your opinions.

Explain the Consequences

Describe the impact of the bullying behavior on the team’s performance. Again, be as specific as possible. Rather than saying, “People feel they have to walk on eggshells,” say, “People have stopped asking for your help with customer complaints because they think you dismiss their concerns.” Emphasize business impacts.

Get a Commitment

If she is open to the feedback and interested in changing, then get a specific commitment from her. This commitment should include what she will stop doing or start doing, and how you will follow up. Patterns of bad behavior are difficult to change so talk about the likelihood of slip-ups and discuss how to deal with them when they happen. For example, a physician who had a history of intimidating nurses asked them to remind him if he slipped up. He said, “I’d like you to use my first name. But, if you see me slipping up, call me Dr. Smith. That will be our signal.”

Be Optimistic

The term “bully” has become so pejorative that few imagine it could apply to them. While the existence of extreme bullying is real, most bullying is likely the result of short tempers, short deadlines, and people who are short on skills.

Realizing that your manager isn’t always intending to be a bully or that she may not understand the impact of her behavior will humanize her. And seeing others as humans is the first step to helping them change.

Best of luck in your Crucial Conversation.

Brittney

The post Why Do We Put Up with Bullies? From Avoidance to Accountability appeared first on Crucial Learning.

My introverted daughter tends to avoid social interactions by giving people the silent treatment. Recently she’s been doing this with our housemate. How can I help her develop healthier ways of managing social relations?

Signed,
Worried

Dear Worried,

First, let me touch on the label you used to describe your daughter: introverted. I would caution you against pigeon-holing her into such a label. When we give someone a label, we often also assign corollary traits to them as well (e.g. awkward, unfriendly) many of which can be incorrect. In addition, if your daughter is told she’s introverted, she may begin to believe those traits are true, too.

Besides, introversion is not the issue here. Needing to be alone sometimes, preferring smaller social circles, or processing emotions internally is often perfectly healthy.

The concern here is not that your daughter is reserved—it’s that she withdraws from communication when it feels uncomfortable. In Crucial Conversations, we teach that when conversations stop feeling safe, dialogue breaks down and relationships suffer. Now, if your daughter has a history of trauma from interacting with one or more persons, other remedies such as therapy will often be needed. But for those children who just need a little more help feeling comfortable talking to others, here are a few suggestions:

Be Curious

Imagine your daughter feels hurt because your housemate—or perhaps a friend, cousin, or classmate—didn’t include her in a game, borrowed something without asking, or made a comment that embarrassed her. She may not yet have the emotional skills or confidence to say: “That hurt my feelings.”

So instead, she avoids eye contact, gives one-word answers, hides in her room, or refuses to engage altogether. To adults, this can look stubborn or rude. In reality, it’s a rare child (or adult for that matter) who knows how to navigate their emotions. Silence seems safer.

One of the most helpful things you can do is approach your daughter with curiosity rather than correction. If you come across as annoyed or angry and simply demand that she speak up, she may feel judged or misunderstood and retreat even further.

You might say, “What feels hard about talking to our housemate right now?” or “Is there something you don’t like when she tries to talk to you?” Your daughter probably isn’t avoiding dialogue because she is rude. More likely, she’s avoiding conversations because she cares deeply about what will happen if she does. She doesn’t want to invite conflict, rejection, or embarrassment. As you get curious about the motives behind her actions, you can help her overcome her concerns and feel safe.

Help Separate Facts from Stories

Another important principle you can help you daughter with is separating facts from stories. Assumption has damaged many a good conversation—and relationship. More than once I’ve assumed my wife is mad at me after a day where we barely talk, she didn’t respond to the funny meme I texted her, and the idea of giving her a hug feels the same as embracing a porcupine. So then to cope, I start emphasizing her faults, defending myself, and withdraw physically and emotionally from her. Now she’s wondering what’s the matter with me!

In reality, she wasn’t mad at me in the first place—she misplaced her wedding ring, the three-year-old was a demon, she didn’t sleep well, and we have a track meet, a dance practice and a baseball game all at the same time tonight.

Similarly, your daughter may be telling herself stories like:

• “She doesn’t like me.”
• “If I say something wrong, she’ll think I’m dumb.”
• “She’s an adult. I’m not old enough to know how to talk to her.”

Help her instead to return to observable facts. For example, instead of thinking: “She doesn’t like me,” you could help your daughter look at the facts and realize there are other possible reasons behind someone’s actions: “She didn’t smile at me when she walked by. Maybe she didn’t notice me or was worried about something else.”

Facts invite dialogue and provide a way forward.

It’s also important to remember that children learn relationship patterns by watching the adults around them. If they see us avoid difficult conversations, become defensive, or withdraw, they often adopt those same habits. How are you doing with your conversations?

On the other hand, when they see adults calmly address misunderstandings, apologize sincerely, and talk through tension respectfully, they learn that conflict is survivable.

And that’s really the goal—not raising a child who never feels hurt or uncomfortable, or even one that is friendly and talks to everyone—but raising one who feels she can master her stories, work through her feelings, and have successful conversations.

Sincerely,

Jordan

The post Helping Kids Feel Safe to Have Conversations appeared first on Crucial Learning.

How can I respond when staff bring me a “Crucial Conversation” that turns into unproductive venting about work issues—some of which are within my control, and others that are not? Is there a way to redirect those conversations so they’re more constructive?

Signed,
Dumped On

Dear Dumped On,

We call these drive-bys—those moments when people swing by a boss’s office or a teammate’s desk and vent their frustrations about someone else. Instead of talking to the person they have a concern with, they do these drive-by venting sessions.

Drive-bys can be incredibly damaging. They reinforce people’s negative stories. As they vent, they rehearse their frustrations, which makes them feel more justified and more locked into their point of view. And because they’ve “let off steam,” they often feel like they’ve done something productive. In reality, they’ve just complained to a third party. The real conversation never happens. The problem doesn’t get addressed. And over time, the complaint often becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

So the first idea is this: you want to discourage drive-bys. They rarely solve the problem, and they never involve the person who needs to be part of the conversation.

And the second idea is equally important: you want to encourage talk-throughs. When someone comes to you with a concern and starts venting, instead of shutting them down, redirect them.

Start by asking, “Have you had the conversation with ____?” If the answer is yes, get curious. “How did it go? What didn’t work? Why do you think it didn’t land well?” At that point, you can begin to help facilitate the next conversation.

Most of the time, the answer to “Have you talked about it” is going to be no. When that happens, simply ask, “What’s holding you back?” And I know this might sound a little cheesy or awkward, but it’s exactly what leaders should do in this moment. Say something like, “If you’re open to it, let’s role-play this for a few minutes. Tell me what you want to say, and I’ll pretend to be the other person.”

Then coach. Help your team member think through how to approach the conversation. You might point out what they’re doing well and where they can try something different. Most leaders don’t do this. Instead, they lecture—“You should say this, this, and this. Good luck.” Or they don’t provide aid—“If you haven’t had the conversation, go have it,”—and leave it at that.

It’s good to set that expectation, but if you don’t provide coaching or support it can be deflating rather than productive.

The next idea is about control. As you pointed out, some of the things people vent about are within your/their control, and some aren’t.

I’ve always loved what Stephen R. Covey said. “Proactive people […] work on the things they can do something about. The nature of their energy is positive, enlarging and magnifying […] Reactive people, on the other hand, focus on […] the weakness of other people, the problems in the environment, and circumstances over which they have no control. Their focus results in blaming and accusing attitudes, reactive language, and increased feelings of victimization.”

As a leader, it can be incredibly helpful to coach people through that distinction. Often, the only thing they truly control is their own response.

What we teach in Crucial Conversations is that our emotions are less about what other people are doing and more about the story we’re telling ourselves about what they’re doing. That story drives our emotion. So your job as the boss is to set the example. When things go wrong, don’t perpetuate negative stories. Help people consider a different story.

You might ask questions like:

• “If we assume this person is reasonable and rational, why might they be doing what they’re doing?”
• “What part of this situation do you actually have influence or control over?”
• “What could you do differently next time to improve the outcome?”

Ultimately, as a leader, it’s not if you’ll face these moments—it’s when. And when you do, you have to set clear expectations.

You can say, “I’m not going to play along with venting—not because I don’t care, but because it’s not actually helpful. Me joining in would do more harm than good.” Then redirect, reframe, and coach.

When you do this consistently, you’ll probably see fewer drive-bys—and more people coming back to you saying, “I actually had that conversation… and it went a lot better than I thought.”

Warmly,
Justin

The post How to Turn Workplace Gossip into Constructive Conversation appeared first on Crucial Learning.

I was unexpectedly called into a meeting with senior leaders and colleagues who criticized a new process I had introduced. The conversation became heated, and I felt unprepared, cornered, and reactive, especially as they challenged the process without notice or supporting facts. Feeling overwhelmed, I agreed to their request despite believing the approach was inappropriate. Although they later apologized, I’m still upset and unsure how to move forward, given that they ultimately got what they wanted. How should I handle this now?

Signed,
Mistreated

Dear Mistreated,

Workplace interactions can be tough, and this situation is no exception. I’m sorry you’re feeling mistreated, and I respect you for reaching out for help in a tricky situation. I’ll be candid, though—what follows may not be exactly what you’re hoping for, because it will ask you to look at your own role, not just theirs.

As I consider your situation, I see two things happening that lead to an outcome. First, senior leaders and colleagues didn’t behave as well as they could have. Second: you didn’t behave as well as you could have. The outcome was that a decision was made that presumably sits well with them but not with you. Since the outcome derived from the intersection of their behavior and your behavior, let’s consider both of those inputs.

Their Behavior

First, others didn’t behave well. They didn’t give you notice or time to prep. They challenged the process without supporting facts. We can all agree this is suboptimal. And it seems like even they would agree… since, as you say, they apologized. They have done what they can to repair the breach, especially if, as we can hope, their apology included a commitment to behave better going forward.

So now it is up to you. When someone behaves badly and then apologizes for it, we have a choice to make: will we accept the apology and move forward, or not. It seems to me that you aren’t yet ready to fully accept their apology because you are, as you say, upset and unsure of how to move forward. Your comment that “they ultimately got what they wanted” suggests that you won’t be fully satisfied unless they change their minds, reverse course on their decision, and (to be blunt) do it your way.

It can be natural when we’ve been harmed to want not only an apology and a commitment of future good behavior, but recompense for the previous bad behavior. However, I’d like to suggest two things. One, if this is the first time that these colleagues have behaved in this way, you should accept that apology and move on. Not every decision goes our way. Accepting their apology with commitment to change lays a solid foundation for future interactions and decisions. However, if this has happened before and you have legitimate reasons not to trust their good intent or the sincerity of their apology and likelihood of change, it is fair to address the trust issue with a conversation. You can simultaneously acknowledge the validity of this current apology and also place it in the context of the previous pattern of bad behavior –> apology –> no change. Make it clear it is this pattern that is impacting your faith in their current apology.

Your Behavior

The second and perhaps more salient issue is that you didn’t behave as well as you could have in that interaction. You acknowledged that you felt unprepared, cornered, and reactive; that because you felt overwhelmed you agreed to their request despite believing that the approach was inappropriate. Said another way, you violated your integrity. You agreed to something that you didn’t feel good about. My guess is that even more than their behavior, it’s your own sense that you didn’t show up the way you wanted that is contributing to your feeling stuck.

Feeling stuck is a cue to reflect: how do you want to show up in moments like this going forward? Because there will be moments like this again. It’s easy to behave well when others behave well. The true measure of our ability to handle such moments is reflected in  how well we show up even when others behave poorly.

As you reflect, consider: What skills would help you when you’re caught off guard? When someone behaves poorly? When things start unfolding in a way you don’t want? How do you pause, breathe, gather yourself, and respond in a way that aligns with your values, even under pressure?

An easy place to begin would be to develop a script you can use to pause or exit a conversation when you realize you need time to prepare. It might sound like, “Because this is important, I’d like some time to think about what you are suggesting.” Or, “Because I see this differently, I want to take some time to consider your viewpoint and also better share my own. Could we come back to this tomorrow after I have some time to reflect?”

Your script will likely vary from these as it needs to be authentic to you. But having a script ready to go when you need space in a conversation can help you respond when you feel caught off guard.

It’s easy to focus on how others should change. But it’s often more productive to focus on how we can show up differently ourselves. That doesn’t mean letting others off the hook. It means holding both: expecting better from others and also taking responsibility for our own contribution.

Respectfully,
Emily

The post Caught Off Guard, and Trying to Recover appeared first on Crucial Learning.

I’ve been living with cancer for 28 years and, over that time, lost contact with much of my family and my husband’s family—not by choice, but because of prolonged illness. I’ve endured extensive treatment, including many surgeries, procedures, nursing homes, hospice, and years of palliative care, which left us isolated and lonely. I believe some family members withdrew because they didn’t know how to handle my illness. Now that I want to reconnect, how can I rebuild relationships and regain respect after so many years of disconnection?

Signed,
Feeling Disconnected

Dear Feeling Disconnected,

Surviving cancer for nearly three decades speaks to your strength and resilience. You’ve endured not only treatments and uncertainty, but also the quiet losses that come when connections fade and life narrows. The isolation you describe is common in long-term illness, and it can be painful and confusing when relationships change at the time you need them most.

It’s important to consider that withdrawal is often less about a lack of care and more about a lack of capacity. As you noted, people may not know what to say, feel helpless, or become overwhelmed. This suggests what happened in your relationships may be more than simple neglect or rejection.

The encouraging part is that relationships are not fixed. They are shaped over time through shared experience and interaction, which means they can be revisited and rebuilt. The question is not just what happened then, but what might be possible now.

It may help to hold two truths at once: you did not choose the illness or its impact, and even when circumstances are outside our control, we still have some choice in how we respond and move forward.

Over time, we naturally create stories to explain others’ behavior. These stories help us make sense of things, but they are often built on incomplete information. As you think about reconnecting, it may help to explore:

• What was truly outside my control?
• What, especially now, is still within my influence?

This isn’t about blame or rewriting the past. It’s about regaining a sense of control and expanding what’s possible. When we say, “I believe they withdrew because…,” we’re often drawing conclusions without the full picture. Our memories are shaped by emotion and limited perspective.

It may also help to gently examine the story you’re telling yourself about how others see you. After a long illness, it’s common to wonder if you’ve been a burden or to feel a loss of independence or dignity. These feelings can shape how we interpret others’ actions and how we show up. Without assuming they’re true, you might ask:

• What meaning have I made about myself during this time?
• How might that be influencing what feels like a loss of respect?

This is where recasting the past becomes useful. It doesn’t change what happened, but invites curiosity and allows us to fill gaps, test assumptions, and broaden understanding. When our view of the past is incomplete, the future we imagine can be limited as well.

As you consider reconnecting, ask:

• What might I not know about how others experienced that time?
• What assumptions have I been carrying?
• What new understanding might be possible through conversation?

The goal isn’t to feel better about the past, but to understand it more accurately so you can build a better future. That begins with curiosity—but curiosity alone isn’t enough. Rebuilding relationships requires moving from private interpretations to shared understanding through conversation.

This can be the hardest part. It may help to approach these conversations not as something you must get “perfect,” but with a simple structure.

Any meaningful dialogue begins with clarity of intention. This is a new moment. You get to decide. Start with heart by asking:

• What do I really want for myself?
• What do I really want for the other person?
• What do I really want for the relationship?

Focusing on what you want for others and the relationship, rather than from them, keeps the emphasis on values and allows you to show up with generosity. It’s also important to share your intentions with them.

Next, acknowledge the gap openly, without blame. Share your experience while inviting theirs:

• “Here’s what that time was like for me…”
• “I’ve often wondered how it felt on your side…”

As the conversation unfolds, stay present rather than trying to control the outcome. Notice emotional reactions and work to keep the dialogue safe. If misunderstandings arise, reconnect with your intention and make clear that your goal is understanding, not blame.

Rather than trying to recreate what once was, focus on building something that works now. Start small and allow the relationship to grow over time. Consider asking:

• “What kind of relationship would feel good for us going forward?”
• “What would staying connected look like for you?”

Rebuilding connection after years of distance isn’t about erasing the past. It’s about choosing the future you want to create. Some relationships may rekindle, others may take new shapes, and some may not return. What matters most is approaching each conversation with clarity, curiosity, and compassion.

When you lead with genuine intention and a willingness to understand, you open the door to connection again, one moment at a time. It is never too late to begin building something meaningful.

The post Reconnecting After Long Illness: How to Rebuild Relationships appeared first on Crucial Learning.

I had an appointment with a senior training officer at a large corporation. She had completed the paper version of the SDI in advance (this was the era of mailing paper assessments and using pencils—how did we survive?). Since I hadn’t seen her results yet, she read her six numbers over the phone, and I plotted them on a laminated SDI triangle on my desk.

She had a Red-Blue MVS with a R-G-B Conflict Sequence. Easy, I thought. I’ve got this.

Everything we talked about regarding her MVS—her drive to find potential in others and challenge them to grow—was spot on. We had great momentum. So, I decided to launch into “expert mode” and describe her Conflict Sequence. Starting with Stage 1 Red, I said things like:

• “You get agitated and confront people.”
• “You attack problems assertively.”
• “You push to get your way.”

There was a long silence. Then she said, “You’ve lost me. I don’t do that at all.”

What Went Wrong?

I had committed the classic rookie error of SDI facilitation. I made behavioral statements. I jumped straight to what I thought she did rather than ask about her motives. Although I didn’t realize it at the time, I also projected my own Stage 3 Red experience onto her Stage 1 Red type, but that’s a topic for another day.

When I asked what she actually did in conflict, she explained that she had worked on herself for years. She had learned to listen carefully, clarify issues, and keep her composure.

That’s when the lightbulb finally went on for me. I said, “Wait. I made a mistake. I told you what you do. I should have asked what you want.” So I asked: “When conflict starts, do you feel a sense of urgency and want immediate action?” She replied, “Yes! But I stop myself because that doesn’t work well with my team.”

As the conversation progressed, we discovered that she was choosing behaviors that looked Blue (accommodating) or Green (analytical) to serve a Red (assertive) motive. She listened to her team because she had found it was the fastest way to resolve the issue. She was still experiencing Stage 1 Red; she was just being relationally intelligent. She was intentionally choosing to deploy strengths during conflict that looked a different “color” than those typically associated with her Red motive—yet they still fulfilled her Red motive.

The Core Principles

This brings us to a couple foundational premises of Relationship Awareness Theory: motives drive behavior, and motives change in conflict. Elias Porter, the original author of the SDI, essentially argued that when we experience conflict (a threat to our sense of self-worth), our motives become defensive. We aren’t just reacting; we are protecting our sense of self-worth. As conflict continues, our defensiveness increases but narrows in scope, triggering changes in motives that result in still different behaviors.

But here is the opportunity for increased effectiveness: The motive is the “why,” and the behavior is the “how.” Although the “why” remains consistent to your personality type, you can change the “how” through self-awareness and practice.

The Three Stages of Conflict Motives

Every Conflict Sequence type describes a series of changes in motives, with the focus narrowing or concentrating in deeper stages. Think of deeper stages of conflict as a heightened defensiveness in response to perceived threats. Don’t make the rookie mistakes of labeling them with behavioral terms, or calling them ulterior motives, or saying that people’s motives degrade or degenerate from one stage to another, or that we get more selfish in deeper stages. Those concepts have nothing to do with the personality types described by the SDI and Relationship Awareness Theory. What happens is a concentration of focus and energy.

Stage 1

At the initial stage of conflict, we focus on the problem, ourselves, and the other person.

• Blue (Accommodate): the motive is to keep the peace and restore harmony.
• Red (Assert): the motive is to rise to the challenge and take immediate action.
• Green (Analyze): the motive is to be prudently cautious and gather information.

Stage 2

If Stage 1 doesn’t work, we shift to the second stage where we focus mostly on ourselves and the problem.

• Blue: reluctantly willing to give in with conditions.
• Red: reluctantly willing to move quickly and forcefully.
• Green: reluctantly willing to independently reconsider the issue.

Stage 3

By Stage 3, which is quite rare for most people, the focus is predominantly on oneself. We are defending our dignity or doing whatever it takes to put the issue behind us and move on with the rest of our lives.

• Blue: feeling compelled to surrender or give up.
• Red: feeling compelled to take control or confront.
• Green: feeling compelled to retreat or isolate yourself.

Why This Matters

My learning opportunity with that training officer reminded me that we should never assume we know what a person will do just by looking at their SDI results. The results tell us what they want to do, but they still have choice and agency. A person who is experiencing a Red motive during their conflict sequence might look perfectly calm on the outside while their internal engine is red-lining at 8,500 RPM.

As facilitators, leaders, or just people in any relationship, we should validate the motive, not predict or label the behavior. When you ask someone, “What is your intention?” or “What do you really want?” rather than saying “You are being typical Stage 1 Red aggressive,” you open the door to a productive conversation to resolve the current conflict instead of meandering down the dimly lit hall that leads to a deeper stage of conflict.

Once we understand the motives—the “Why”—we gain the ability to see any number of “Hows.” We become more open to a range of possible behaviors that can express and satisfy the underlying motives. In short, understanding the connection between motives and behavior helps us be more agile in the deployment of our strengths, to develop our relationship intelligence.

The post Why We Do What We Do in Conflict, and How We Can Be Better appeared first on Crucial Learning.

I received a job offer from a company that recruited me, but compensation wasn’t discussed until the offer arrived—and it matched my current salary, despite the new role being in a much higher-cost city. When I asked HR about it, the response was aggressive (“If you don’t want it, we’ll bring someone else”). I ended the conversation by saying I’d think about it, but I’m unhappy with both the compensation and how HR handled the discussion. I still want the job and see it as a smart career move. Should I raise this with the hiring manager, and how should I approach that conversation, given that I’ve been told HR controls the budget?

Signed,
Underwhelmed

Dear Underwhelmed,

Buckle up. You’ve made a couple of crucial mistakes here that you can learn from. First, your expectations were violated because you never communicated them. And second, you’re taking offense when none is necessary. 

As you’re painfully aware, hiring discussions are always negotiations. Your potential employer would love to pay you as little as necessary to get the best you have to offer. And, if you’re like most people, you would love to get as much as you can and have the best work/life balance you can gain. So, deal with it! Any upset you feel at a low-ball offer is self-inflicted pain. If you chose not to disclose your expectations earlier in the process, it’s not reasonable to be upset with them for failing to acknowledge them.

Similarly, your decision to admonish them for how they handled the discussion was unwise and unnecessary. They’re simply doing their job. This isn’t personal. Yes, they might be a better HR department if they’re more diplomatic in dealing with candidates, but is fixing them your goal here? Telling them how unhappy you are with how they handled it is not likely to generate goodwill for your case should there be another round of offers. 

Your best move is to accept the hiring process as it is and move to the next round of the negotiation—not with HR but with the hiring manager. HR is doing their job. It appears they see their job as enforcing bands, minimizing salary spend, and closing a deal efficiently. Your best advocate is not them, but the hiring manager. That’s the person who does care deeply about your success, credibility, and long-term contribution. And while HR may “control the budget” on paper, hiring managers routinely influence outcomes—especially when they like a candidate.

Don’t dump on the manager about HR’s tone or behavior—that will make you sound whiney and entitled before you’ve even started. 

Instead, anchor the conversation in shared interests:

• Your enthusiasm for the role
• Your desire to contribute at a high level
• Your need to make a decision that works for you

You might say the following—if it is true for you:

“I’m genuinely excited about the company, the role and the team. And I believe I’d enjoy working with you. I see this as a strong career move. I do want to be transparent about one concern that’s making it hard for me to decide. The compensation doesn’t reflect the cost-of-living difference, and I want to make sure I’m not setting myself up for financial strain that could distract from my performance.”

Acknowledge constraints without surrendering agency.

You’ve been told HR controls the budget. That may be true—and incomplete.

A useful way to address this is to name the constraint without letting it end the conversation:

“I understand there may be band or budget constraints. I’m not asking you to break rules. I am asking for your perspective on whether there’s flexibility—now or over time—so that expectations and realities are aligned.”

This invites the hiring manager to become an advocate rather than a referee.

Pay attention to the response.

How the hiring manager responds will tell you more than any compensation spreadsheet ever could.

• If they listen, engage, and explore options—even limited ones—you’re likely entering a healthy system.
• If they deflect, minimize, or mirror HR’s aggression, you’ve just learned something important about the culture you’re considering joining.

Either way, you’ll have clarity. From there, you have a decision to make. If you choose to take the offer in spite of disappointment, you surrender the right to blame HR or the hiring manager for failing to satisfy your wishes. Satisfying your wishes is your job, not theirs.

I wish you the best in this important decision—and in all your future endeavors.

Warmly,
Joseph

The post Switching Jobs: How to Communicate with Hiring Managers and HR appeared first on Crucial Learning.

It’s not about perfect practice, but instead deliberate practice. At its core, deliberate practice is about intentionally rehearsing key skills in realistic situations with feedback, reflection, and coaching along the way. The goal isn’t just to understand the skill, but to use it consistently in real-world moments. In other words, deliberate practice is what bridges the gap between knowing something and actually doing it when it counts.

A key ingredient in Crucial Learning’s instructional design is that it’s rooted in deliberate practice—or practicing with purpose. We’re not going through the motions or just putting in reps. We’re zeroing in on specific behaviors, applying them in real-life situations, and paying close attention to how we’re doing. What worked? What didn’t? What do I need to do differently next time? That’s what turns practice into real improvement.

Here are some ideas to help you be more purposeful with your deliberate practice.

If You Can’t Practice It, Don’t Teach It

Time is often the biggest constraint when delivering Crucial Learning content. You may not have the full day or two, and something has to give. When that happens, it can be tempting to cut the practice. Don’t. It’s far better to cut a concept than to cover everything without giving learners the chance to practice. If they don’t practice it, they won’t use it. If they don’t use it, it won’t stick.

Eliminate “Role Play”

The moment learners hear “role play,” you can feel the energy drop. People cringe, or mentally check out, and in some instances bail from the training. Instead, call it what it really is: a rehearsal.

We all understand the value of rehearsing. Athletes rehearse before the game. Musicians rehearse before a performance. Even weddings have rehearsals. The goal is to get it right when it counts. The same is true here. No one wants the first time they try a new skill to be in a high-stakes, crucial moment. Rehearsal gives learners a chance to try, adjust, and improve before it really matters.

Follow the Script

During practice in a Crucial Learning course, there are three roles: the Initiator, the Respondent, and the Coach. The Initiator is practicing the skill. The Coach supports and offers feedback. And the Respondent? Their job is simple: follow the script and engage in the dialogue as designed.

I like to ask learners which role is most important for a successful rehearsal. Most say the Initiator or the Coach. But in reality, it’s the Respondent.

Why? Because most rehearsals don’t fall apart due to lack of effort. They fall apart because the Respondent goes off script. They add complexity, improvise, or try to make it “more real.” And in doing so, they unintentionally make it harder for the Initiator to practice the skill.

The goal of rehearsal isn’t to make it harder. It’s to make it effective. So, keep it simple. Follow the script. Create the right conditions for the Initiator to succeed, build confidence, and improve.

Avoid Keeping It Too Real

It’s natural to want to customize scenarios so they match learners’ real-world situations. And there’s definitely a place for that. But during deliberate practice, “too real” can actually get in the way.

When the scenario feels real, learners often shift their focus to the outcome instead of focusing on the process, which is practicing the skill.

Deliberate practice is about building capability, not solving the problem in front of you. That’s why the designed scenarios matter. They keep the focus on the skill itself.

There’s absolutely value in tailoring scenarios to real situations, but save that for after the training, once the skill is more solid. First, help learners get the reps. Then help them apply it in their world.

Remember, the goal of deliberate practice is to help learners turn skills into habits they can use when it matters most. It’s about building capability and confidence through purposeful repetition.

When you’re deliberate, you create the conditions for real learning to stick. You help learners focus on the right behaviors, practice them the right way, and improve with each attempt. And that’s how you train on purpose with purpose.

The post Making Deliberate Practice More Deliberate appeared first on Crucial Learning.

My boss talks a lot about creating psychological safety, but honestly, I feel uncomfortable in a lot of our conversations. They feel awkward, sometimes tense, and not very safe. How do I deal with what feels like hypocrisy from her?

Signed,
Feeling Uncomfortable

Dear Feeling Uncomfortable,

First, I want to acknowledge something upfront—I’m somewhat limited here. I’m not in the room. I can’t access facial expressions, tone, or context. And I don’t know what you’re bringing to those conversations either.

But here’s what I will say: Most people misunderstand psychological safety. We tend to think psychological safety means feeling comfortable, affirmed, or good in conversations.

Amy Edmondson, a Harvard Business School professor who’s done a lot of the foundational work on this topic, defines psychological safety as a belief that you won’t be punished or humiliated for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns, or mistakes. In other words, the team is a safe place for interpersonal risk-taking.

Notice what’s NOT in her definition: comfort.

Psychological safety doesn’t remove discomfort. It removes defensiveness. You can be in a conversation that feels awkward, tense, even a little uncomfortable and still be psychologically safe. I’ve had plenty of those—when asking for a raise or hearing some hard feedback from colleagues, for example. The difference between safety and comfort often depends on whether I trust the other person’s intent.

That’s the key idea here: Psychological safety is about intent, not content. People rarely get defensive because of what you’re saying. They get defensive because of why they think you’re saying it.

If I believe your intent is to punish me or make yourself look good at my expense—I’m going to shut down or get defensive. But if I believe your intent is to learn, get results, or help me succeed, I’ll stay in the conversation, even if it’s uncomfortable.

So back to your situation. It’s possible you’re not just feeling discomfort—you may actually be experiencing a lack of safety. If your boss hasn’t done enough through her words and deeds to help you believe her intent is good, then yes, that can feel hypocritical.

But it’s also possible this isn’t a safety issue—it’s a comfort issue. If you fundamentally believe your boss wants good outcomes, wants you to succeed, and is trying (possibly imperfectly), then the discomfort you’re feeling may simply be the realities that come from raw, honest conversations. And that’s not something you can always eliminate, nor should you want to. There’s a decent chance she has good intent—she may just be struggling to make it clear. And she wouldn’t be the only one. Most of us struggle with that.

So what if you’re realizing the issue isn’t safety—it’s that the conversation just feels uncomfortable? Part of the answer is simple, but not easy: you build your capacity for it.

Anything worth building—whether it’s a muscle, skill, or a relationship—requires some level of discomfort if it’s going to last. I’m reminded of a line from A League of Their Own. When Dottie says playing baseball had gotten too hard, Jimmy Dugan responds, “It’s supposed to be hard. If it wasn’t hard, everyone would do it. The hard…is what makes it great.”

Hard conversations work the same way. The discomfort isn’t a sign something’s wrong—it’s often a sign something important is happening. Let the discomfort play out. Sit back thoughtfully. Don’t react. Just ask yourself, “What can I learn from this?” and “How am I going to get better because of this moment?”

So when you think about psychological safety, remember: the goal isn’t comfort. If you feel uncomfortable but see no signs of disrespect or mal-intent, remember that honest dialogue is often uncomfortable. As I said at the start, I’m not in these conversations with you and your boss—so you make the call. Perhaps your boss could learn to better clarify good intent, and perhaps you could improve your capacity to have conversations that feel uncomfortable. Imagine what you could talk about then. 🙂

Justin

The post Safety Schmafety. My Boss Says One Thing, and Does Another appeared first on Crucial Learning.