I have been with my husband for twenty-five years and I am fed up with his gaslighting! I don’t think he knows he does it, but when I try to talk about it, he gets defensive. Whenever we disagree about something, he walks off muttering to himself. When I ask, “What did you say?” he says, “Oh, nothing.” Or he makes something up. I feel he thinks I’m stupid. How can I address this?

Signed,
Gaslighted

Dear Gaslighted,

I’m sorry.

I’m in my twenty-fourth year of marriage and I know how hurtful even the slightest of slights can be (as does my wife). The roll of the eyes, the muttered dismissal, the silent withdrawal and similar behaviors can feel manipulative and almost intolerable in our close relationships.

I will share a few ideas to help you address this longstanding pattern in your relationship, but let me begin with a couple of disclaimers. I want to ensure my response is appropriate to your challenge and that you’re in a space to receive it.

First, if you’re enduring emotional abuse, skip my advice and seek professional help. Emotional abuse looks like your partner calling you names, demeaning you, controlling you, invading your privacy, or manipulating you with lies and threats.

Second, although I believe your spouse could benefit from learning to communicate better, I don’t believe there is much I can say that would help you make him a better communicator. Therefore, my suggestions will be directed to you. Not to correct you, but hopefully to empower you.

If you’re good with all that, let’s proceed.

Embrace the Call to Grow

The first thing I want to say is what you’re experiencing is common. Given the time you’ve been married, I’ll assume you’re in midlife, which is known to correspond with personal growth and less tolerance for unhealthy behaviors, attitudes, and relationships. So, it’s quite normal to feel fed up with a partner’s behavior after twenty-five years. You recognize it’s time for a healthy shift.

Let Go of Labels

Please know that this suggestion is not meant to excuse your husband’s behavior, nor is it meant to dismiss your hurt.

Terms like “gaslighting” and “narcissism”—which have become increasingly popular in recent years—may have value in clinical settings, but outside of that they seem to have equal chance of being harmful as helpful.

Labels often contain a story that suggests those we have labeled are calculating villains or irreversibly toxic. When we label others in our anger or frustration, we relinquish our responsibility, and that’s unproductive.

Try to see the situation more broadly. Ask yourself what could be contributing to it, and why someone might behave like this.

“Is there something contributing to my husband’s tendencies I’m overlooking (stress, personal history, other influences)?”

“How am I contributing to our patterns of interacting?”

Asking ourselves questions like these is not about denying the truth—a person’s behavior may indeed be harmful or hurtful. They’re about restoring humility and our sense of agency. They help us identify what we can do about a situation aside from blame it on somebody else.

Take Responsibility for Your Needs and Feelings

It’s clear in your question that you feel disrespected. While the disrespect isn’t your fault, you won’t resolve this unless you take responsibility for feeling respected.

One way you can begin to do that is to openly communicate when you feel disrespected, while taking ownership for how you feel.

For example, “When you walk off muttering, I feel you don’t respect me. I’m not saying you don’t; it’s just how it feels. Can you understand that?”

Share your perspective in a way that increases your spouse’s awareness of what’s happening with you, not in a way that suggests he is responsible for how you feel.

“When you do X, I feel Y. I’m not blaming you; I’m being open with you.”

Focus on Relationship

There’s a heuristic we teach in Crucial Conversations called CPR, and it helps us identify the problem to address.

CPR stands for Content, Pattern, Relationship. Content refers to an instance or event—a problem to be discussed. Pattern refers to a recurring problem, in which case the recurrence becomes the subject of conversation. And Relationship refers to the health of the relationship, which suffers any time recurring problems are allowed to fester.

The behavior you describe might have been the problem twenty-five years ago, but now you have a bona fide relationship problem, and that’s what you need to address. That might sound like this:

“I feel like we’ve lost respect for each other. I know we haven’t meant to, but maybe we could discuss what we both need to feel respected and appreciated.”

Or, “I feel our relationship has gotten way off track. If we want it to survive, we need to find a way to improve our understanding of each other and how we interact.”

Make It Safe

We often say “the truth hurts.”

Although sometimes uncomfortable, it’s usually not the truth that hurts; it’s the mode of delivery.

People can hear the truth as long as they feel it’s nonthreatening, and they can usually tell the truth nonthreateningly if they don’t fear retaliation or shame. Your task is to tell your truth in a way that doesn’t hurt, and hear his truth without taking it personally.

To make it safe for him to hear, establish and convey good intent. That means ensuring your motives are positive—whether to improve the relationship and increase respect (not change him)—and then sharing that.

“I want us to have a better relationship so we can connect and enjoy each other’s company again. I’m not mad or upset. But I do have concerns, and I want to share them because I believe sharing our concerns openly will help us improve.”

To make it safe for him to share, make it clear you can handle his perspective. If this is something you struggle with, you may need work on developing the inner confidence that his perspectives do not reflect your worth.

“I’m sorry, can we try again? If I’m saying or doing something that makes you not want to talk, please tell me. I promise to listen and not react. What is it you’re thinking?”

(This does not mean accepting putdowns, name-calling, or the like. While your question didn’t mention that, if that’s occurring, find professional help.)

Seek Mutual Purpose

If your goal is to change your husband, that’s probably not a goal he shares. Try to find something you both want.

Maybe it’s more respect and appreciation. Maybe it’s connection like you had in the early years of marriage. Maybe it’s simply less tension and conflict. Identify a common desire, then make that a shared goal.

“Ok, I hear you—you want to feel more respected and appreciated. Can we make it a goal to work on that together? I also want to feel respected and appreciated. We could start by sharing with each other what we need for that.”

Work on Yourself

In addition to working on the behaviors I’ve outlined, find ways to work on your own emotional growth.

While good communication skills are crucial to healthy and productive relationships, they don’t necessarily resolve our immature tendencies and emotional triggers, which are significant contributors to conflict.

Emotional maturity includes the ability to stay present when we feel dismissed, not retaliate when we feel criticized, take ownership for our needs and perspectives, and work with our strengths and limitations—which is improved by a deeper and more honest understanding of ourselves.

Combining personal psychological insights with learnable behaviors makes the behaviors more durable, and vice versa. Apply effort in both domains.

In most cases, these behaviors and shifts have a reciprocal and ripple effect. Work on yourself, and you’re almost guaranteed to see a change in him and your relationship.

Respectfully,
Ryan

The post Breaking Patterns of Withdrawal and Defensiveness in Marriage appeared first on Crucial Learning.

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.

How do you start over with a colleague who does not like you, does not want to talk with you or work with you, and has gone out of their way to try to make you look bad on several occasions? I stopped speaking to this person six months ago, but I’d like to try to rebuild trust with this person. How do I even begin?

Signed,
Fresh Start

Dear Fresh Start,

Unfortunately, you can’t start over. There is no way to erase hurts and wrongs of the past—those done by the other person or by you. And nothing you can do will guarantee warmth and friendship with your colleague. In fact, if what you’re looking for is a way of getting them to treat you better, I’ve got nothing. This may be more than you were asking for, but I don’t think I’d be a true friend if I didn’t offer my best to you. So here you go…

I believe it is impossible to separate character from connection. The quality of my relationships with the most imperfect people in my life are the best measure of my own development. In other words, personal development is the foundation of all interpersonal success. I apologize if I’m being too autobiographical here, but so much of your question makes me wince as I recall times in my life when I’ve framed my problems the same way. I hear my own impatience, self-pity, resentment, withdrawal, and fragility. The path forward for me has not been an interpersonal tip or two. It has been a set of intrapersonal calisthenics that are helping me become the kind of person who can connect with other flawed people.

If this sounds useful to you, I’ll suggest three practices that create a possibility of improvement in the relationship, and a certainty of self-improvement that enhance every relationship in your life. These practices are more a way of being than a plan of action. They’re enormously challenging but inevitably rewarding. I can personally attest that most every improvement in the quality of my dearest relationships in past decades has come from sincere (albeit imperfect) effort in these three practices. They’ve helped me cultivate peace even when conditions in relationships were contentious. And they’ve given me a path to create trust and intimacy with those who want it with me.

Confront Your Story

We don’t see the world as it is, we see it as we are. Our internal narrative about our conflict with others is steeped in self-serving bias. Your description of “a colleague who does not like you, does not want to talk with you or work with you, and has gone out of their way to try to make you look bad” has that patina. I invite you to interrogate your story in a couple of ways. First, how has your behavior played a role in the conflict? And second, are there more generous ways of characterizing your colleague’s verbal and nonverbal behavior than what you have chosen. For example, could your hurt feelings have colored your behavior towards them? Where have you been less than helpful? And is it possible that their behavior has been less about surliness and malice and more about hurt or fear? Small generosity in adjectives can produce major returns in empathy. This kind of narrative introspection is the calisthenics of both humility and compassion. The more you practice it, the likelier you are to behave in ways that create opportunities for connection.

Practice Vulnerability

You asked about rebuilding trust. Trust cannot be built without risk. I’m told that the shaking of hands emerged in some ancient cultures as a trust-building ritual, as it involved emptying the dominant right hand of its weapon. Extending it openly to a stranger involved risk.

Fortunately, most relationship risk is self-generated. Approaching others with an open hand requires only laying down unconscious subterfuge. Much of what we do in relationships with others is manipulative. We say “good morning” and then watch carefully for reciprocal greeting. We quickly respond to an email and then note whether the other responds in kind. We invite a colleague to lunch, then chafe that they don’t match our generosity. It wasn’t generosity if it was freighted with expectation. Vulnerability means stripping action of expectation. It means doing the right thing because of who you are, not because of what you get. Say “I love you” to your partner because you want to express love, not because you’re hoping for payback. Your feeling of risk diminishes when you are liberated from expectations.

Have you been vulnerable in the past with your colleague? Or have you ignored generous impressions you’ve had because you were fearful your colleague wouldn’t respond in kind? If so, start honoring those impressions. Be vulnerable. Be gracious. Be kind. Be patient. Be forgiving. Do so without checking your watch to see how long it takes before you’re compensated. Spot and surrender expectations when you find them creeping into your motives. When you do, you trade the hidden hope of public payback for the honest certainty of personal growth.

Surrender Certainty

Will any of this “work?” Absolutely! If by working you mean growing. It will make you into a person who is more capable of the patience, humility, and kindness required to connect deeply with imperfect people. You’ll still be disappointed when you can’t find the friendship you hoped for with others. But you’ll have the peace and satisfaction of showing up in ways you prize. You’ll stand confidently even during long periods when others aren’t ready for healthy connection because your focus is not on getting what you want, but on being who you want to be.

We develop the strength we need to endure the uncertainty of relationships by cultivating internal sources of worth and security. Next only to my spiritual convictions about human identity, I know of no more stable source of worth than living with integrity to my deepest values. Every time you take pleasure in choosing a hard right over an easy wrong, you make yourself more independent of the approval of others.

I know I’ve given you few actionable tips. But I’m confident that if you ponder these principles, you’ll know the best path forward.

With every best wish,
Joseph

The post How to Start Over with a Coworker appeared first on Crucial Learning.

I’m not sure how the Crucial Conversations skills apply to team-building, and I’m struggling to see how to use these strategies in that context. How can I effectively apply them to build stronger teams?

Signed,
Team Builder

Dear Team Builder,

Your question touches on a common misconception: the idea that team-building is an isolated event that takes place during an annual offsite retreat, a ropes course, or an escape room. While shared experiences in novel settings can offer value, sustainable team-development happens in the flow of everyday work.

To see how dialogue skills apply, it helps to first define what a team actually is. In our forthcoming book Relationship Intelligence*, my coauthors and I define a team as a relationship between two or more people who have an interest in the results of their combined efforts. It’s a simple, objective definition, free of value-judgments or aspirational advice such as “team members hold each other accountable for shared goals.” This definition allows us to acknowledge that people can work as a team even if they are not good at holding each other accountable.

Because a team is a relationship with a past, present, and future, developing a team means clarifying understanding of shared experiences, improving the quality of ongoing interactions, and co-creating attractive and aligned expectations. All of these activities benefit from mastering dialogue skills, with three examples to follow.

Team Philosophy and Cadence

High-performing teams have a clear team philosophy that includes a purpose, practical values that are essential to that purpose, an understanding of stakeholders who are not team members, and a clear definition of results.

However, a team philosophy is most useful within a regular meeting rhythm, or cadence. Whether meetings occur daily, weekly, or monthly, an effective meeting architecture provides the environment needed for dialogue: sensemaking (a retrospective process), decision-making (in the present moment), and alignment (about a desirable future).

It is precisely during these regular meetings that Crucial Conversations skills shine. Dialogue is not an interruption of the team’s work; skillful dialogue is the work that makes the team work.

Applying Dialogue Skills in Team Interactions

Integrating specific dialogue skills into regular meetings can transform routine agenda items into opportunities for meaning-making conversations that also improve the quality of relationships between team members.

Contrasting (Preventing Misinterpretations)

Contrasting uses a Don’t/Do statement to address potential misunderstandings before psychological safety is compromised. For example, when offering feedback on a proposal, you can state:

“I don’t want to imply that this proposal lacks merit. I do want us to consider how allocating resources to it right now aligns with our short- and long-term goals.”

Contrasting maintains safety, inviting team members to collaborate and add their meanings to the pool.

Start with Heart (Navigating Values Tension)

The skill of Start with Heart encourages individuals to stay focused on what is wanted for oneself, for others, and for the relationship.

In team settings, disagreements often stem from a healthy values tension. Imagine a weekly operational review where team members experience a collision between two practical values: Speed/Agility (a belief in the importance of getting a product to market quickly) and Quality/Precision (a belief in the importance of creating an error- or bug-free product). When discussions intensify, team members can label one another as either reckless (too much speed) or obstructionist (too much precision required before launch).

By applying Start with Heart, with a touch of contrasting, you can frame the crucial team conversation around shared intent:

“My goal today isn’t to skip the quality assurance step. My primary concern is that our shared purpose requires both a rapid response to the opportunity and absolute credibility and reliability. How can we integrate the tension between our need for speed and our standards of quality?”

This approach reduces the risks of polarization and interpersonal conflict by focusing on healthy opposition during the pursuit of shared goals.

Fact-Story-Ask (Managing Overdone Strengths)

The sequence of Fact-Story-Ask (from State My Path) provides a structured way to address potentially overdone strengths that are getting in the way of effective interactions.

For example, a colleague might overdo their methodical strength, resulting in rigid adherence to a process, with the side-effect of delaying customer service. During a meeting, rather than stating a filtered judgment (“You are so focused on useless box-checking that you’ve lost sight of the customer,”) you can use the Fact-Story-Ask skill:

• Fact: “We started talking about the process roughly 10 minutes ago.”
• Story: “I am concerned that our focus on internal processes is taking attention away from the customer’s stated needs.”
• Ask: “Help me understand your perspective. How does our process ultimately serve the customer?”

Describing observable actions without negative value-judgment (even if that’s how you truly feel) creates space to address the issue constructively. And it opens you up to hear a new perspective that you may have overlooked.

Amplifying Dialogue with Relationship Intelligence

While Crucial Conversations skills offer reliable templates for high-stakes team dialogue, integrating Relationship Intelligence and the Strength Deployment Inventory amplifies their effectiveness. Crucial Conversations skills provide the how of effective dialogue, and Relationship Intelligence provides the why; it focuses on the intrinsic motives and perceptual filters that influence how communication is received.

When team members understand intrinsic motives and personality types, they can tailor their dialogue skills with precision. For example:

• When Contrasting with a Green (process-oriented) person: Explicitly affirming respect for logical principles avoids unnecessary conflict triggers.
• When using Fact-Story-Ask with a Red (performance-oriented) person: Emphasizing impacts on goals and results helps to get their attention.
• When Starting with Heart with a Blue (people-oriented) person: Highlighting other’s needs and how to meet them can increase perceived psychological safety.

Moving Forward

By practicing dialogue skills within the predictable cadence of team meetings, and augmenting those skills with the interpersonal insights of Relationship Intelligence, team-building becomes a human process rather than a contrived event. It provides a continuous, embedded discipline that builds trust, generates commitment, and improves results.

* Relationship Intelligence: The Power of Human Connection by Tim Scudder, Gil Brady, and Steve Wood will be available summer of 2027. SUBSCRIBE to be notified of launch.

The post Developing Stronger Teams with Dialogue Skills and Relationship Intelligence appeared first on Crucial Learning.

Our only child, a son, died more than five years ago, and we brought a wrongful death lawsuit to support his daughter—our only grandchild—and to hold those responsible accountable. The court awarded over $1 million to our eight-year-old granddaughter and appointed my husband the executor over the trust. Since then, our granddaughter’s mother has accused us of taking money from her child, threatened legal action, and implied we could lose our relationship with our granddaughter. We never pursued this for personal gain and are devastated by the possibility of being cut off from her. We would appreciate advice on how to handle this situation.

Signed,
Grieving Family 

Dear Grieving Family,

To wrongfully lose a child is crushing. But to have your grief freighted with family animus must feel overwhelming. And, as a grandfather, I feel faint even imagining a world without my beloved grandchildren. I’m so sorry. 

Given that our sole connection is the few words we’ll exchange in this blog, I’m nervous about offering anything other than love and empathy. But given that some of your present pain might be eased, I’ll steel myself against the ache I feel for you and take some risk to offer possible help.

You offer some hints about a complicated history with your “granddaughter’s mother.” The first is that technical rather than familial reference. The second is that you don’t name the interest of the mother as one of your motivations in the wrongful death suit. And finally, that your husband was appointed sole executor of the trust—in other words, mom was excluded from control.

Given that I know nothing of the particulars here, I’ll simply offer two principles that may merit reflection if the goal is a cooperative relationship with the mother.

Own Your Part of the History

Conduct a rigorous mental review of your history with her. If there is anything in the past that you have done—no matter how justifiable—that could have given her cause to mistrust you, own it. Apologize for it.

Most people offer “contingent apologies”—apologizing an inch at a time as the other demonstrates a willingness to do the same. This approach to restoring integrity prizes ego over character. You cannot claim that your granddaughter’s interests are your primary value if you’re unwilling to subordinate ego to integrity.

If, for example, you have a history with the mother of coldness or exclusion, own it. Apologize for it. Not for holding boundaries, but for using boundaries as cover for incivility. Cooperation won’t happen without warmth. And warmth can accelerate through sincere demonstrations of surprising generosity. 

Engage Her in Revising Her Own Story

She is asserting that you have misappropriated money from your granddaughter’s trust. Once again, if your goal is to restore a modicum of trust and warmth, you’re going to have to decide if your top priority is nursing the injustice or nurturing trust. If the latter is the goal, invite her to dictate the terms of restoring her own trust.

Do it as non-defensively as you can muster. Provided the following is precisely true, you might say: “I assure you that every penny of the trust is accounted for and has been managed for her benefit alone. However, I can understand from our past struggles that you might wonder. We are willing to be as accountable and transparent as you need in order to know that your daughter and our granddaughter is being well-served. What do we need to do so you can satisfy your concerns?”

People who are afraid often assume the worst. You can’t control whether her mother believes you—but you can remove fuel from her fears by responding to any reasonable interrogation she craves. Paradoxically, the more open you are, the less you need to argue your innocence. Deeds restore trust far faster than words. Integrity speaks louder when it doesn’t insist on being believed.

Keep Your Eye on the Prize

Assuming your history has been complicated, expect the future to be as well. If you or she have a track record of interpersonal provocation, your access to your granddaughter depends on scrupulous attention to your motives. In every interpersonal exchange, prep yourself by meditating on the question, “What do I really want? For me? For my granddaughter? For the relationship with her mother?” When you’ve settled on your highest value, then ask, “How will I act if that’s what I really want?” Sometimes the best way to change your motive is to “act as if” your healthiest motive is what you really want. These effortful episodes are how you deepen your character and refine your soul.

The work I’m describing is never easy. And it’s all the more difficult under your present circumstances. You have my prayers and best wishes as you engage in this next chapter of your life. 

Sincerely,
Joseph

The post In-Laws Are Threatening Our Family Relationships. What Can We Do? appeared first on Crucial Learning.

You can spend an entire day standing in front of a room full of people, asking questions, leading conversations, meeting participants, and genuinely enjoying it. Then, when the day is over, you may want absolutely nothing to do with another human being for a while.

If you’re one of the introverts in Crucial Learning’s certified community, you probably know exactly what I mean.

I was reminded of this recently during Crucial Learning’s employee conference in Utah. It was one of those weeks filled with people from morning until night. Meetings, meals, conversations, presentations, activities, old friends and colleagues, and new ones, too. One afternoon, a group of us even tubed down the Provo River.

It was a great week. And I was exhausted.

That’s the strange push and pull I’ve experienced most of my life. I enjoy presenting and facilitating. I like good conversations and meeting interesting people. I especially enjoyed reconnecting that week with colleagues I hadn’t seen in a long time.

But eventually another voice shows up.

Do I really need to go to dinner tonight? Would anyone notice if I slipped away? How good would it feel to go back to my hotel room, close the door, turn on a ballgame, and not talk to anyone until morning?

For trainers, that negotiation happens often. You may love being in front of a group but still need quiet afterward. You can walk out of a session energized by what happened in the room and completely drained by how much energy it took to create it. Those things aren’t contradictory.

The easy advice is to protect your energy. Set boundaries. Take breaks. Recharge. Know when you’ve had enough. I believe all of that. But that week reminded me of another side of protecting our energy that we don’t talk about enough:

Some things are worth being tired for.

Looking back, I’m not thinking much about the meetings or agenda. I’m thinking about people. Seeing someone across the room I hadn’t seen in a while. Picking up a conversation that somehow felt like we’d talked yesterday. Learning something new about someone I’ve known professionally for years. Laughing over dinner. Floating down a river with people I normally see sitting in meetings or on a screen.

None of those moments happen if we’re always optimizing for comfort and energy conservation.

The same can be true when we train. Sometimes one of the most meaningful moments of a course happens when the lesson is technically over. Someone stays behind during a break. A participant asks a question they weren’t willing to ask in front of the group. A learner tells you something you taught helped them see a conversation, relationship, or problem differently.

Those moments require attention, presence, patience, and yes, energy.

That’s where things get tricky. There were moments during that week in Utah when I genuinely needed a break. There were probably others when “I need to recharge” really meant “I don’t feel like making the effort.”

Those two things can look and feel remarkably similar. I don’t think another rule or tip solves that problem. Clarity does.

Instead of asking myself, “Do I have the energy for this?”

I now ask a different question: “Is this worth my energy?”

That creates a different decision.

Sometimes the answer is no. Go back to the room. Order dinner. Read. Sleep. Take the quiet lunch. Find ten minutes between sessions when nobody needs anything from you. There’s no prize for arriving at tomorrow’s session depleted.

But sometimes the answer is yes. Stay for the conversation. Go to dinner. Sit with the participants at lunch. Talk with the trainer you’ve seen at events for years but never really gotten to know.

Spend the energy.

Protecting your energy isn’t the same as hoarding it. The point of having energy is being able to spend it on people, experiences, work, and moments that matter to you.

That may be especially worth remembering in a community of trainers. Training is a very visible profession. We stand in front of rooms. We ask people to participate. We create conversations. We connect with strangers. It can be easy to assume the people who are good at that must naturally want more interaction.

Nope. Or rather, not necessarily.

Some of the most engaging trainers I know also value solitude, quiet, reflection, and time away from the group. Those qualities may even contribute to what makes them good trainers. They listen. They observe. They notice what’s happening in the room. They think before responding. They create space for other people instead of needing to fill it themselves.

So, a small nod to all the introverted trainers out there: You don’t have to become more extroverted to be good at this work. But occasionally, you may need to spend a little more of your energy than you planned. The challenge is knowing when.

The next time you’re debating whether to stay for the conversation, join the dinner, talk with a participant during the break, or quietly make your escape, try changing the question.

Not simply, “Do I have the energy?”

Ask, “Is this worth my energy?”

Sometimes it won’t be. And sometimes it absolutely will.

Joe

The post The Push and Pull of Peopling appeared first on Crucial Learning.

I have someone in my life whose behavior is confusing, inconsistent, and honestly, kind of emotionally charged. How do you figure out what’s actually driving someone like that instead of just reacting to whatever they did five minutes ago?

Signed,
Reacting Anyway

Dear Reacting,

One way to find out is to ask them. But before we get to that I want to challenge you a bit. The thing driving you crazy isn’t their behavior. It’s the story you told yourself about their behavior in about four seconds flat, and you believed it completely.

That’s weird, I know, but it’s also completely normal. Someone does something confusing or contradictory, and our brain doesn’t sit with “Huh, that’s odd.” It jumps straight to a verdict— they’re flaky, they’re two-faced, they’re doing this on purpose—and then we react to the verdict like it’s a fact. But it never was. It was a guess, and probably not a generous one.

So before you can figure out what’s driving someone, you may have to stop doing what feels natural when you’re irritated—like reacting before thinking. Here’s how to start.

Step 1: Don’t say anything yet.

When this person’s behavior confuses, irritates, or frustrates you, you’re probably not in a great place to have a conversation. You’re likely in a place to make matters worse. So your first job isn’t to probe or fix them. It’s to NOT turn a flame into a forest fire while you’re still running on that four-second judgment.

Here’s the scary part about that four-second judgment: in the moment, you may feel like you’ve completely figured them out. And you’re certain about it. Certainty is an absolute killer to productive dialogue.

Step 2: Separate what happened from what you think it means.

Try this. You called their behavior “confusing” and “emotionally charged.” Fine…but what did they actually do? Rewind the tape.

Maybe they supported the plan on Monday, then noisily opposed it on Thursday. Maybe they tell everyone being on time matters, then show up fifteen minutes late twice a week. That’s the whole tape. Everything else: confusing, inconsistent, emotionally charged; that’s all the story you laid on top of it.

Here’s why that split matters: the same set of facts can support a dozen different stories. Maybe they got blindsided by new information between Monday and Thursday. Maybe they’re running on no sleep. Maybe they really are just inconsistent. You don’t know yet, and that’s the point. The facts don’t make you angry. The story does. Strip it back to just the facts, and your temperature drops fast, even before you’ve “solved” anything.

Step 3: Ask what a reasonable person could have been dealing with—then go write the next chapter.

I heard a line once from a restaurant leader that’s stuck with me for years: “The road to a success is paved with mistakes well handled.” Her team’s whole approach to someone messing up came down to two moves, in this order. First, make the most generous assumption you can. Not to excuse the poor performance, but to loosen your grip on the one story you’ve already decided is true. Second, go write a great next chapter. This is where you talk about your concern, what happened, and the behavior in question.

Notice the order. If you skip straight to “writing the next chapter” while you’re still convinced they’re just difficult, you’re not writing a next chapter. You’re pronouncing your initial verdict.

You’ve actually got two separate problems here, and most people try to solve them in one breath: your reaction to their behavior, and the behavior itself. You can’t fix both at once. Fix the first one—get honest about the story you’re telling—and the second one gets a lot easier to talk about.

And none of this is about letting them off the hook. They may genuinely be doing plenty they shouldn’t be doing. The goal isn’t to excuse behavior, it’s to have some influence over it. And you’ll be a lot more successful persuading someone to change their approach if you show up curiously instead of condemning them.

Step 4: Have the conversation.

If you do all the above, the good news is you don’t have to be all that polished about what you say. Your curiosity is going to show up in your tone and your face before it ever shows up in your words, and that alone will carry most of this conversation. That’s why most of my suggestions are about getting your head right instead of giving you a script.

But since you’re going to want something to say, here’s a simple structure: Intent, Facts, Story, Ask.

Start by sharing your good intent: “Hey, I want to talk to you about something that’s been kind of frustrating me, and I want to be honest about it because I want us to work well together.”

Then share the facts, just the facts: “I’ve noticed a pattern in meetings. You’ll say you support an idea, and then afterward you come tell me you actually hated it.”

Then your story—offered as a story—not as a fact: “It’s starting to feel like you’re not being consistent with the rest of the team, and honestly, I’m not sure what you really think anymore.”

Then ask: “Can you help me understand how you’re seeing this?”

Come in with real intent, lay out the facts, share your story humbly, then ask. In my experience, the vast majority of the time, that approach turns into a genuinely good conversation, and people are far more likely to actually hear you.

Now, to find out what’s driving them, listen. Here’s what you’re listening for: the reasonable explanation sitting underneath the behavior. Are they overloaded? Burned out? Missing a skill they need? Getting pulled by incentives you can’t see? Getting hit by pressure from somewhere/someone else? You don’t have to agree with the reason. You’re just trying to find the why.

Ask with curiosity, and people tend to tell you. What you’ll usually find is that you’re dealing with a reasonable person acting in an unreasonable way, for reasons that make sense once you hear them. That doesn’t let anyone off the hook. But it does make you more effective at raising the concern, and a lot more likely to help them—and the relationship—improve.

Justin

The post Why Their Behavior Is Driving You Crazy appeared first on Crucial Learning.

I work with someone who seems to rely on AI for almost everything. Emails, assignments, and even simple brainstorming sessions feel like they’re coming from a chatbot rather than from them.

At first, I thought they were just trying to be efficient, but now I’m starting to question their competence. I’m not sure how much of their work they actually understand or what they actually think. It’s also becoming harder to trust their judgment. And it’s affecting our relationship because interactions don’t feel authentic anymore.

We’re encouraged to use AI here at work, so how do I talk to a colleague about their dependence on it without sounding judgmental or accusing them of being incapable?

Signed,
A Real Human

Dear Human,

Thank you for your timely question. Ironically, we just filmed a short video series highlighting this challenge. Our main character queries AI on everything from how to respond to their manager’s feedback to how to contribute intelligently in meetings to how to manage their direct report’s performance. The concluding sentiment is that while AI might give you good ideas and information, it simply can’t have the Crucial Conversations for you. In this age of advanced technology, humans—and human skills—are still required. (You can watch our videos now.)

And our videos aren’t the only evidence that your concern is growing increasingly common. We’ve now lived with AI long enough that we can get a clearer picture of how it’s impacting us.

The latest research suggests we’re more accepting of AI for analytical tasks than for situations where we expect human judgment, personalization, or understanding. Specifically, when it comes to moments of discretion, wisdom, coaching, or leadership building, we distrust AI and we prefer a human.

It seems obvious. And yet you and so many others are working alongside people who’ve overlooked the fact that genuine human connection and interaction still reign supreme. Research has long confirmed that what keeps us grounded and engaged is our interactions with other humans. A foundational study called “The Need to Belong” by Baumeister & Leary concluded that people need frequent positive interactions, enduring relationships, and mutual concern and care. When those social needs are not met, they experience poorer mental, emotional, and even physical health.

So, how do you share your concern with your AI-dependent colleagues? What can you say to make it clear that their tendency to default to AI is impacting you and others negatively? As is often the case, the best way is with a conversation. And if you use a few Crucial Conversations skills you’ll be able to have this conversation in a way that doesn’t come off as judgmental or accusatory. Here are a few skills you can use.

Master Your Story

The best way to master your story is to ask yourself the humanizing question: “Why would a reasonable, rational person act this way?” Resist the urge to assume your colleague is lazy or incompetent. Instead consider there might be other forces at work. For example, we have been encouraged to learn and use AI at work and I’m sure others are feeling this same pressure from their leaders. Maybe your colleague assumes this level of AI use is what is expected of them and a lack of clear organizational guidelines is perpetuating the problem. Maybe all that’s required is simply letting them know how their AI-usage is being perceived so they can self-correct.

The use of the word “maybe” indicates you don’t have all the facts. You don’t know that your colleague is incompetent. You just know that their behavior is causing you to question their competence. If you stay curious and resist the urge to tell yourself an ugly story, you’ll set yourself up for productive dialogue.

Start With Heart

Once you’ve mastered your story, next figure out what it is that you want from the conversation—for yourself, your colleague, and the relationship? Do you want them to stop using AI? Probably not. It’s more likely that you want to trust their judgment, hear their ideas, and feel like you’re working with them rather than with their AI assistant.

Understanding what you want out of the relationship is essential to driving the conversation. If you stay anchored to these motives, then even when the conversation gets rocky, you can find your way back to positive, genuine intentions.

Engage in Curious Dialogue

After, and only after careful preparation, are you ready to have the conversation. I encourage you to review the full set of skills for having a productive Crucial Conversation in our book and course, but ultimately, you’ll want to begin the conversation by tentatively sharing your concern and asking if they’d be open to discussing it with you. Keep the tone light, leaving room to both be proven wrong about your assumptions and hear a different perspective. You might say, “Could we discuss how we are using AI to work together? I’d love to hear your thoughts and maybe even set some guidelines that work for both of us.”

Share Facts and Natural Consequences

I’ll borrow a skill from Crucial Conversations for Accountability, and that is to share natural consequences of their behavior. Again, they might think they’re using AI just as prescribed and don’t have a reason to act differently until they understand how their approach is impacting their relationships or reputation. Don’t say they are doing it all wrong or allude to their intentions being nefarious. Instead share how the way they are using AI is affecting you and others in ways they probably don’t see.

In addition, as you share those consequences, be sure to stick to the facts of what you’ve observed rather than your conclusions about what you think they mean. This will allow you to be direct in your feedback. For example, “I’ve noticed that when we’re brainstorming or working through an issue, you often turn to AI before sharing your own thinking. I’ve realized it’s left me wondering what you think and, at times, questioning how much confidence I should put in the work. I don’t want to make assumptions, so I’d like to understand how you think about it.”

Explore their Path

Once you’ve tentatively shared your concerns, it’s now their turn to add meaning. Be open to hearing their side of the story and maybe you’ll get better insight into why they are leaning so heavily into AI. Perhaps there are some skill gaps they are trying to fill with AI and if that’s the case, use that information to support them rather than punish them.

AI isn’t going away, nor should it. It can help us generate ideas, challenge our thinking, and work more efficiently. But when its use begins to interfere with trust, judgment, or connection, that’s worth talking about. Good luck in your Crucial Conversation.

Brittney

The post When AI Use Starts to Erode Trust at Work appeared first on Crucial Learning.

How can I address a situation where I’m taking on extra responsibilities without recognition or fair pay, and my supervisor dismisses my concerns?

Signed,
At a Loss

Dear At a Loss,

I’ve lived in Utah most of my life and so have always had a love for mountains. I would walk out the door of my childhood home and this was my view.

Being so close to these beautiful mountains, I’ve gone on many hikes to summit a particular peak, find a waterfall, or to simply enjoy the animals, plants, and fresh air.

On these hikes, there are times of flat ground and ease. But to go up a mountain you inevitably have to go…up. You begin to meet inclines, navigate loose dirt and rocks, and feel a strain as your body works to navigate the climb.

Now, if you have a clear path before you and know that your hike is getting you to your beautiful destination, the pain and the effort are worth the reward. Similarly, extra responsibilities at work may not always be bad, even if they are unappreciated in the moment. If you can see that those assignments will lead you to somewhere you want to go – an eventual promotion, more skills, or even a better position at a new company – then the effort and sacrifice may be worth getting to that proverbial summit.

Conversely, if you don’t know how long the hike is, what your destination is, or how to get where you want to go, that same hike will be much more miserable – and may not even be worth the climb.

If you’re missing details about how to get where you want to go, it’s up to you to get the directions you need. The immediate problem isn’t simply that you have too much work, it’s that you and your supervisor may not have a shared understanding of your role, expectations, and what happens next. While you say your supervisor has dismissed your concerns in the past, here are some suggestions to have a better conversation.

Share Your Facts

Don’t complain or vent. State the facts of the situation. Identify the specific new responsibilities you’ve assumed, how they differ from your original role, and any other pertinent facts, such as comparable workloads and their compensation. Don’t litigate each new assignment individually; take them as a whole to show a pattern. For example, you could say: “Over the last six months, I’ve taken responsibility for X, Y, and Z in addition to my original responsibilities. I’m glad I’ve been trusted with important work, and I’m also concerned that the scope of my role has changed significantly without a corresponding change in title or compensation.”

This gives your supervisor something concrete to respond to rather than asking them to react to a general sense that things feel unfair.

Explore Others’ Paths

Once you’ve stated your path, it’s vitally important you understand your boss’ path as well. As you speak respectfully and invite them to share their point of view, you’ll avoid crippling assumptions. Ask: “Can you help me understand why you’ve given me these new responsibilities?” or simply, “What’s your perspective?”

Listen for information that might change how you understand the situation. Your supervisor may see the additional work as temporary, developmental, expected for the role, or evidence that you’re ready for greater responsibility. You may disagree with that perspective, but understanding it will help you respond to the actual issue rather than to assumptions about their intent.

When you understand their reasoning, you’ll be better able to respond productively. Stay curious, be calm, and be patient as they share.

Decide Next Steps

Finally, the conversation should end with the old journalistic guidelines to a good story: who, what, where, when, and how. Which responsibilities will you own? What can be deprioritized? Will compensation be reviewed? If so, how and when? The goal is to leave with a shared understanding of expectations and clear commitments you can follow up on.

Unfortunately, the skills in our courses can’t guarantee a receptive supervisor or better compensation. If your boss won’t agree on changes or next steps, or if they do agree and don’t follow through, then it’s time for you to make a decision. You need to decide whether the path you’re on is taking you somewhere you want to go. Can you see your way to the summit, or is it time to find a new mountain to climb?

Wishing you the best,

Jordan

The post Talking to Your Boss When You Feel Overworked and Underpaid appeared first on Crucial Learning.

What are some ways I can train myself to be a better listener and create a safe space for those around me?

Signed,
Listening

Dear Listening,

Thank you for your question. I am confident you are not alone in your request and desire to be a better listener. Before we discuss ways to train yourself for improved listening skills, let’s begin with the idea of creating a safe space for others.

I offer a simple but powerful visual frame. When listening we have the opportunity to create two very different spaces: a courtroom or a porch. Often we enter a conversation like walking into a courtroom. In a courtroom, we listen to gather evidence, prepare our defense, spot weaknesses, and build our response. We are not really trying to understand. We are trying to prove our point and win the case.

A porch is a place where we can sit down, slow down, and just talk. It isn’t about agreeing or disagreeing, proving or supporting. It’s merely making room for each other’s meaning. Good listening is less like entering a courtroom and more like inviting someone on the porch.

When one sits on a porch they are able to see their world as it passes by. Creating safety is more than granting permission for others to share their perspective, it also creates a space where others can see their world in a new way. Carl Rogers, an influential American psychologist, once stated, “When I have been listened to and…heard, I am able to re-perceive my world in a new way.” Good listening doesn’t always provide the answer. Sometimes it can create a space in which the other person can discover it.

So, how do we train ourselves to create more porches and fewer courtrooms? Better listening isn’t something you have or don’t. It’s a discipline we can practice and develop. It begins by checking our intent, learning to listen for more than words, increasing safety, and making listening visible.

Check Your Heart Before You Use Your Ears

Like most things, good listening begins with the listener. Train yourself to check your motive in the moment. Before entering an important conversation ask:

• Am I trying to understand, or am I preparing to respond?
• Do I want to learn what is true, or prove I am right?
• What do I genuinely want for this person, for myself, and for the relationship?

This is what we call Start with Heart. People tend to sense whether our curiosity is genuine or insincere. Safety begins with intent. Remember the goal is to enter the porch, not the courtroom.

Listen Beneath the Words

Train yourself to listen on three levels:

1. Content: What are they sharing? Listen for the facts, events, and details of the situation as they understand them.
2. Emotion: How do they feel about it? Listen for the feelings beneath the story – frustration, disappointment, fear, excitement, or concern.
3. Motive: What matters most to them? Listen for the deeper concern, value, need or desired outcome driving their response.

AMPP Up the Safety

A key ingredient to listening is providing a safe place to be heard. Because of past experiences and often strained relationships, it can be hard for others to feel safe to share. A simple way to train yourself to create safety is to AMPP up your listening skills.

• Ask: Start by simply inviting the other person to express themselves by asking an open-ended question, like, “What’s going on?” or “How do you see it?”
• Mirror: Describe how the other person looks or acts when their tone or body language doesn’t match their words. For example, “You say you’re fine, but you seem upset.” Like helping them see themselves in a mirror.
• Paraphrase: Restate what the other person said in your own words to show you understand and to give them a chance to clarify.
• Prime: When you prime a pump, you put water into the pump in order to get water out. Take your best guess at what the other person might be thinking or feeling when they are still struggling to find the words. If you are correct, they will confirm. If you are not, they will correct.

Let Them See You Listening

Unlike a courtroom where we are listening to gather evidence, a porch is where we provide others evidence that we are listening. We may feel we are fully engaged, but if we are looking at our phone, typing on our laptop, interrupting, or constantly shifting the conversation back to ourselves, they may experience something different.

Let them see you listen. Remove distractions, give them your attention, make eye contact, and slow your response. Good listening should leave visible evidence. They should know and feel that they have your attention, they matter, and you care.

Good listeners do more than hear words. They help people feel seen, understood, and safe. Creating a porch provides more than just a place to sit, slow down, and be heard. It allows them to see their world more clearly. And that’s a better gift than merely providing an answer.

Scott

The post How to Become a Better Listener appeared first on Crucial Learning.

I’m a structural engineer with six years of experience, and I recently joined a smaller firm where I’m one of only two engineers. At my previous firms, I was encouraged to contribute to improving well-established systems and processes. At this new firm, many practices feel outdated, but I’m unsure how to share my insights without coming across as critical or disruptive. How can I approach this conversation in a way that’s constructive and collaborative?

Signed,
Fix-It Engineer

Dear Fix-it Engineer,

Twenty-seven words. I love the last 27 words of your message and would suggest that, with just a small preface, they are the perfect words to use to start your conversation. Here is why.

When relationships are new (or strained), it is incredibly helpful to have a process conversation in which we discuss how we want to discuss things. These conversations tend to be less risky because nobody is giving critical feedback, and they lay the groundwork for future, riskier conversations. They also become a touchstone that we can come back to in future conversations when things get tough. For example, “Remember when we talked about how we wanted to hold these conversations, and we agreed to listen to each other?”

I suggest you have a conversation with your team lead or another senior member of the team. Here is what I suggest adding to your 27 words:

“I’d like to get your advice on something. I am happy to be here and want to contribute in ways that draw on my previous experience. I have some ideas that I think could help move us forward. (Then add your last 27 words.) I’m unsure how to share my insights without coming across as critical or disruptive. How can I approach these conversations in a way that is constructive and collaborative?”

Then just stop and listen.

When you take the time to have this kind of process conversation, you are doing two things at once:

• You let the person know you have ideas to contribute.
• You show respect for the current team members and practices.

Striking this balance of candor and respect is a great foundation for all relationships. My guess is they will likely welcome your suggestions. After all, presumably they hired you for your expertise.

Best,
Emily

The post How to Share Feedback as a New Employee appeared first on Crucial Learning.

As certified trainers, we are constantly looking for frameworks that offer that exact kind of utility. We don’t just need content that fills a two-hour workshop; we need ideas that sticky-note themselves to the brains of our participants and change how they actually work every single day.

That is exactly what the Strength Deployment Inventory® (SDI®) represents: the ultimate organizational Swiss Army Knife. But it is only as valuable as your willingness to explore its depth.

To the Beginner: Scratching the Surface

If you aren’t currently utilizing the SDI in your organization, you might see it as just another personality assessment—a “one-and-done” workshop where people learn their colors, put a certificate in a drawer, and promptly forget them.

But the SDI is fundamentally different because it doesn’t just measure what people do; it decodes why they do it. By revealing an individual’s Motivational Value System (MVS)—their combination of three core motives driving their behavior (People, Performance, Process)—it hands your learners a universal translator.

When you introduce the SDI to your training ecosystem, you aren’t just teaching communication; you are changing organizational identity. Seth Godin famously noted that culture boils down to a simple shared understanding: “People like us do things like this.” Or, our culture is connected to our actions.

By adopting the SDI, you establish a new standard for what “people like us” do. It empowers individuals by showing them that you can change what you do without changing who you are. In an SDI culture, teammates don’t send blind, data-heavy demands to a relationship-driven colleague. Instead, managers lean on real-time relationship intelligence insights—looking up a teammate’s MVS on the SDI Platform and intentionally adjusting their delivery style before hitting send. The learning lasts because collaboration integrates seamlessly into daily operations.

To the Certified: Unpacking the Hidden Layers

For those of you who are already SDI certified, it’s worth asking: Are you only scratching the surface?

If you only pull out the SDI for team-building workshops, you are leaving the best parts of the framework folded shut. To truly embed that “people like us do things like this” identity into your company culture, you need to start unpacking the platform’s hidden applications across everyday business operations:

• The Conflict Navigator: When departments hit a wall (like Sales vs. Compliance), skip the fluff coaching. Consider building a team Conflict Triangle in the platform to visually demonstrate how everyone moves as conflict begins. You may see that Sales moves immediately to Assert (Red) wanting quick action and resolution, while Compliance drops into Analyze (Green) wanting to think it through logically. It shifts the narrative from “they are trying to block us” to “this is what they need as we navigate conflict.” This is how “people like us” resolve tension without drama.
• The Meeting Mechanics Protocol: Before a critical strategic meeting, teach your teams to look at their team MVS Triangle to spot collective blind spots. If a leadership team is heavily Red/Blue, they can intentionally assign a “Designated Green” role to a team member, explicitly charging them with asking the hard, data-driven questions to encourage the team to slow down and consider the risks.
• The Behavioral Thermostat: In 1:1 leadership coaching, use the SDI to map out top strengths helping a leader achieve results with their team and consider the overdone strengths limiting their effectiveness. Leaders learn to recognize the exact moment their Persuasive nature flips into Abrasive, giving them a tool for self-regulation and strengths-based agility.

Go All In

Whether you are looking to bring the SDI into your organization for the first time or trying to embed it deeper into your daily operations, it’s time to look past the basic profile.

Let’s stop treating relationship intelligence like a workshop topic and start treating it like organizational infrastructure. Your learners don’t need another heavy toolbox. Hand them a multi-purpose tool and teach them how to use it.

The post More Than a Workshop: Making the SDI Part of Who You Are appeared first on Crucial Learning.

Over the past year, a team in our organization fell apart, and we’ve identified differing priorities around shared values as a root cause. While team members agree on the same values in principle, they prioritize and apply them differently in day-to-day work. How can I help this team realign and get back on track?

Signed,
HR at a Loss

Dear HR at a Loss,

When I first read that a team in your organization “fell apart,” my mind immediately went to Humpty Dumpty. The good news is unlike Humpty, teams are not eggs. They can usually be put back together. The challenge is that when a team cracks, leaders often focus on repairing relationships or clarifying expectations without examining what caused the fracture in the first place.

In your case, the crack may not be in team values. It may be in how those values are interpreted and prioritized when difficult decisions arise.

That’s because shared values don’t automatically create shared meaning. Team members can sincerely agree on principles like accountability, innovation, respect, or customer focus, but can reach a very different conclusion about what those principles require in practice.

For example, two employees may both value accountability. One believes accountability means raising concerns immediately when they see a problem. The other believes it means working independently to solve a problem before involving others. Both are acting from the same value, but their different interpretations can create frustration and conflict. Compounding the issue, when these differences remain unspoken, misunderstandings multiply, trust erodes, and collaboration suffers.

Reassembling the team requires more than reminding people of the organization’s values. It requires helping them build a common understanding of what those values mean, how they should guide decisions when priorities conflict, and what behaviors team members can expect from one another. To do that, focus on three key leadership tasks: rebuild shared meaning, surface value collisions, and create behavioral agreements.

Rebuild Shared Meaning

A natural leadership tendency when conflict arises is to rush into reinforcing the values themselves. But if everyone already agrees on the values, repeating them won’t solve the problem. The real challenge is helping team members understand what those values mean to one another and how they apply them in daily decisions.

Rebuilding shared meaning requires creating dialogue where people can openly discuss their assumptions, reasoning, and experiences. The goal isn’t immediate agreement. The goal is mutual understanding. Once people understand how others are interpreting shared values, they are far more likely to find productive ways forward.

To rebuild meaning, invite team members to explore how they interpret and apply the team’s values. Consider questions like the following to help expand the pool of shared meaning and uncover hidden differences.

• What does this value mean to you?
• How would you explain this value to a new team member?
• What behaviors demonstrate this value in action?
• What expectations do you have of others based on this value?

Surface Value Collisions

Once differing interpretations have been discussed, the next step is to identify where values are competing with one another. Value collisions occur when two important principles pull people toward different courses of action. Because both sides can point to a legitimate value in support of their position, these disagreements can be particularly difficult to resolve.

The leader’s role is not to determine which value is “correct.” Instead, it is to help the team openly discuss the tradeoffs involved and develop a shared understanding of how decisions should be made when competing values come into conflict.

By naming value collisions and talking through them directly, teams can move beyond personal disagreement and focus on solving the real problem: how to honor multiple important values applications at the same time. Some possible questions could include:

• Where do our values most often come into conflict?
• What difficult decisions regularly create disagreement?
• What value is each side trying to protect?
• How can we honor both values in this situation?

Create Behavioral Agreements

Once teams understand one another’s perspectives and have discussed competing priorities, they need clear agreements about how they will work together moving forward.

Values become meaningful when they are translated into observable behaviors. Rather than assuming everyone shares the same expectations, identify the actions that will demonstrate your values in practice.

Returning to our accountability example, team members may have different views about when concerns should be raised and when problems should be solved independently. Rather than leaving it open to interpretation, the team can create a behavioral agreement. They may decide that accountability is a combination of both and agree to raise significant risks immediately while taking ownership of resolving routine issues. The goal is to translate shared values into consistent actions.

In my experience, teams are more resilient than nursery-rhyme characters. When leaders help team members rebuild shared meaning, surface value collisions, and create behavioral agreements, they restore trust and clarity and improve collaboration. Unlike Humpty Dumpty who remained broken, with the right conversations, teams can be put back together again.

What suggestions and ideas do you have to help restore a team with shared values, but feels “broken” due to differing applications of day-to-day interpretations of those values?

Scott

The post Why Teamwork Breaks Down Despite Verbal Agreement, and What to Do about It appeared first on Crucial Learning.