Great leaders face the tough stuff.
They don’t hide from conflict. They don’t back away from hard decisions. They don’t ignore criticism.
Seeking out the tough stuff is how great leaders excel. And, beware, the ease from ignoring it is short-lived.
Running toward danger
As in previous years, I attended my local ANZAC Day service and then watched the televised dawn service from Gallipoli, punctuated with a side of croissants and coffee.
At the local service, the mayor mentioned Inspector Amy Scott (the policewoman who stopped the recent knife attacks in Bondi Junction), drawing a parallel between Australian military heroes and the actions of Scott.
At the time I thought this conflation was a little odd but then I heard it again when Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles spoke at the Gallipoli service. Marles said: “The spirit of ANZAC was on display when Inspector Amy Scott faced the terror at Bondi just two weeks ago.”
The premise that the ANZAC spirit lives on in Australians is in the ether (unless, of course, my local mayor and the Deputy Prime Minister share a speech writer!!!).
Without taking anything away from Amy Scott or our military heroes, is it really true that ordinary Australians intuitively run toward danger?
It seems so when we face extreme challenges – like bush fires, floods and armed attackers – but in everyday life, in our workplaces and homes, I don’t see people consistently meeting conflict eyeball-to-eyeball. I don’t see them tackling the difficult conversations they should tackle or negotiating unwaveringly for changes that would improve their lives.
Heck, just getting managers to give timely feedback can be a challenge.
As a nation, we pride ourselves on our bravery, but culturally we are highly likely to avoid conflict.
In families and community groups, we see people holding onto grudges for so long they can barely remember what the initial issue was.
Avoiding conflict almost always makes things worse. Don’t do it. It is always a disservice to you and to the other person.
If you steer away from uncomfortable subjects, you miss career opportunities and you damage relationships. If you withhold feedback from someone, you deny them opportunities for improvements which otherwise may not be possible.
Surely we can be inspired by the ANZAC spirit to run toward danger in everyday life? Surely we can do better at squaring up to conflicts that are brewing with those in our lives?
Avoiding an Omnishambles
Like many Australians, I have been following the Bruce Lehrmann defamation proceedings and managed to listen in as some of the judgement was delivered yesterday.
I was heartily amused by some of the quirky turns of phrase used by Justice Michael Lee and, even within the first few sentences, we witnessed Lee use the magnificent word “Omnishambles”.
I love a good word, and omnishambles might just have to go in the repertoire!
In my field of negotiation and conflict, words matter a great deal. Overly aggressive or confrontational language (like using “demand” instead of the less-inflammatory “request”) can put the other party on the defensive. Ambiguous language almost always leads to misunderstandings, which in turn erodes credibility and trust. Insensitive or offensive language can escalate tensions and derail the negotiation process.
Here are some quick tips for avoiding an omnishambles in your next negotiation:
- Identify Hot Buttons
Hot Buttons are emotionally charged words or phrases that can elicit a strong reaction in negotiations. Identify hot buttons early and navigate them carefully. - Try “We” not “I”
Where appropriate, endeavour to use inclusive language (like “we” and “us”). This will foster a sense of collaboration and make the issue being negotiated a joint challenge to be solved. - Use precise language
At all points in the negotiation, but especially when finalising terms, use precise language so that all parties have the same interpretation of the agreement. - Balance empathy and power
Practise using language that shows empathy for the other party’s interests while subtly highlighting your source of power or leverage in the negotiation. - Reframe
Make use of positive framing (like using “opportunity” instead of “problem”) to shift the focus from obstacles to potential solutions.
There are always gaps – when people are negotiating, when they are in conflict, or simply when they aren’t on the same page.
It’s important to remember that words can build bridges, and bridges close gaps.
Negotiation has an image problem
People don’t know that they should learn to negotiate. They think negotiation is something that only people in boardrooms do, or something that involves large sums of money. Or even an activity involving hostages and balaclavas!
But, really, negotiation is just about wanting something from someone else and finding a way to make it happen.
In his bestseller “Never Split the Difference: Negotiating as if your life depended on it”, Chris Voss shows how negotiating skills can be applied in various contexts, from the mundane to the high stakes. He argues that even though negotiations might seem daunting or reserved for high pressure situations, the principles of negotiation are applicable to everyday scenarios.
At its core, negotiation is simply about communication and understanding. It’s about figuring out what you want, expressing your needs, considering the needs of the other party and anticipating and responding to any setbacks. It’s about navigating obstacles and reaching agreements.
We do this in our homes every week when we have the discussion about which takeaway food to order. This is no less a negotiation than what goes on at the UN. Maybe the stakes are higher at the UN and the issues are more complex … but the discussion about whether tonight should involve sushi or pizza is still a negotiation.
When we are weighing preferences, considering options and reaching agreements, we are negotiating; and these skills are valuable in any negotiation, whether it’s over dinner or in a boardroom.
So, despite negotiation’s image problem, it’s clear that we’re all negotiating all the time. And with the right mindset and skills, we can navigate all negotiations more effectively.
Isn’t it time we learned more about it?
Cecilia Vega
Cecilia Vega is an American 60 Minutes correspondent and former member of the White House press corps.
Vega was interviewed by Stephen Colbert yesterday and they discussed the time she was told by former President Donald Trump that she never thinks. You can see the hostile exchange in the video.
Reflecting on the exchange, Vega said she remembered everything happening in slow motion and that her brain compartmentalised to deal with it. She told herself not to cede turf to him.
I love this example of how to manage emotions in the face of a verbal attack.
Compartmentalisation is a psychological defence mechanism – it means mentally separating conflicting thoughts and emotions to avoid discomfort.
When we are experiencing conflict, it is helpful to find ways to keep the focus on the problem, rather than your response to the problem. Compartmentalising is one way to do this.
This isn’t about suppressing the emotions and never dealing with them – I’m sure Vega revisited her Trump encounter afterwards; it just means that you are putting the emotions aside to deal with later so that you can focus on the issues at hand and deal with them rationally.
@colbertlateshow What’s the secret to facing off against the former president according to Cecilia Vega? Don’t get down in the mud with him. #Colbert #CeciliaVega #journalism #60minutes
Bring the Spice
You might think that when everyone’s on the same page, it’s all rainbows and unicorns, but that’s hardly ever the case. What looks like smooth sailing on the surface often masks some serious undercurrents of tension.
In my experience, real agreement doesn’t just happen magically. It’s like making a good stew – you need to mix in some spices. Well, those spices are the different opinions and ideas that come from a bit of healthy arguing.
I’ve seen it time and time again – when people are too scared to speak up or they’ve been shut down before, you end up with a room full of nodding heads but not much else. It’s like everyone is playing a silent game of “agree to disagree” without ever voicing opposition or getting anything done.
But here’s the thing: conflict is rarely a bad thing. In fact, it’s often the secret sauce that makes consensus actually work. When you’ve got people throwing around different perspectives and hashing out ideas, that’s when the real magic happens.
Next time you’re in a meeting and everyone seems a little too agreeable, maybe it’s time to stir the pot a bit. Embrace the disagreements, listen to what everyone has to say, and who knows? You might just cook up something amazing together.
__________________
Hi, I am Fiona McKenzie and I think everything in life is better when we face the tough stuff.
Having spent the last few decades as a negotiator and mediator, it’s clear to me that while avoiding conflict is natural, it’s when we face it and indeed seek it out that we can make progress.
To do this well, leaders need to be able to:
- negotiate agreement
- mediate conflict
- facilitate alignment
Those who are skilful in these areas are better leaders and can make progress faster on all fronts.
Contact me for an initial briefing around how I can help you and your team face the tough stuff and make progress.
Don’t stay stupid
One of the biggest mistakes I see in negotiations is lack of preparation, even when it’s freakishly simple to prepare.
Often, my government and corporate clients ask me to assess the negotiation performance of their people. These participants have everything it takes to be successful in the assessments – they’ve attended my training workshops, they’ve had the chance to practise their new skills, and they have opportunities to seek my guidance before the assessment.
And, most helpfully, they have all the templates I’ve developed to help them prepare thoroughly.
Do they use them?
Often not.
Obviously the stakes aren’t as high in an assessment compared with a real-life negotiation, but the participants know that their managers get a copy of my feedback!! That should drive some desire to prepare well.
Why don’t they prepare?
I think it’s a combination of underestimating the complexity of even the simplest of cases and overestimating their ability to manage it.
What is encouraging is that attendees rarely make the same mistake twice. Having experienced the difference that solid preparation can make (and having experienced the polite but pointed reprimand they get from me), they always do better in subsequent assessments.
Benjamin Franklin said: “By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail”. For negotiators who don’t learn from their mistakes, this quote of his is also apt: “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid”.
I’m going heavy on the alliteration here to make a point … People, Please do your Prep Properly. It makes a world of difference to your success.
____
I help leaders use constructive conflict and negotiation skills to be more effective. If this post resonates, get in touch.
Gender Pay Gap
There have been a lot of posts this week about the WGEA gender pay gap data. For the first time ever, companies employing more than 100 people have had their gender pay gap data on display for everyone to see.
Who hasn’t looked up their current employer?
Who hasn’t looked up the results of a company they dislike and smirked at their poor stats?
Who hasn’t read the Employer Statements submitted with the data and marvelled at the gender-washing – all those companies who are “proud to be a leader in gender equality” but have pay gaps of 25%+ because the ” gender pay gap is heavily influenced by the shape of the organisation”?
The good thing is that we can revisit this data again each year to see whether these companies really are aligning their practices with their professed values.
Despite what Senator Matt Canavan had to say on the WGEA data, removing gender bias and pursuing equality is a good thing. It’s good for individuals, good for families and good for business – countless studies have shown this. And it’s also just the decent thing for workplaces to do.
Now this might be a controversial opinion, but it isn’t just the organisations that have a role to play – women should also consider what role they can play themselves. The WGEA suggests that women should learn to negotiate their salaries and know their value (admittedly, all of the WGEA articles mentioning this were published in 2018 so they are getting on).
Having spent years helping leaders learn negotiation skills, it is clear to me that men and women have the same innate abilities. However, I have observed very often that women can be reluctant to negotiate when they are asking for themselves (as opposed to asking for the benefit of their family or employer).
Transparency of the WGEA data is a great, great thing and I urge all organisations to keep pursuing equality.
I also urge women to remember that negotiation skills can be learnt; and having helped women negotiate salary increases of up to 28%, I have seen how learning negotiation skills can reap extraordinary benefits.
____
I help leaders use constructive conflict and negotiation skills to be more effective. If this post resonates, get in touch.
Why do mediocre people get promoted?
Have you ever wondered “Why them?” when you see someone get promoted?
Well, sometimes it’s not about skills or hard work; it’s about managers trying to pass on problem employees. Instead of tackling issues, some bosses take the easy way out – promote the headache to someone else’s team.
But here’s the thing – leadership isn’t about taking the easy road. It’s about doing what’s best for everyone, even when it’s uncomfortable. Promoting problem employees is short-sighted; it just spreads the trouble instead of fixing it.
Leaders need to step up and tackle issues head-on. Avoiding tough conversations only hurts the team and the organisation in the long run. Promotions should be earned, not used as an escape hatch for managers.
Let’s create workplaces where people are recognized for their contributions and where leaders aren’t afraid to deal with challenges. It’s time for leaders to step up, have those hard conversations, and lead by example. That’s how we build strong teams and thriving organisations.
____
I help leaders master Positive Friction so that they can use constructive conflict and negotiation skills to be more effective. If this post resonates, get in touch.
What causes turnover?
Did you know that 72.3% of employee turnover is caused by leaders not understanding friction?
We get told that turnover is the result of poor job satisfaction, bad workplace cultures and lack of salary growth, but actually turnover is mostly caused by the misuse of friction.
It’s easy to think of friction as bad (and it can be if applied inappropriately) but skilful use of friction is definitely good!
The brake in your car is a form of friction – without the right level of control, accidents can be caused by applying the brake too much AND by applying it too little. The same is true with friction in the workplace:
- When leaders don’t negotiate the friction caused by the diverse expectations of different stakeholders (customers, boards, teams), turnover follows.
- When leaders don’t doggedly pursue an understanding of the causes of conflict in their organisations, friction increases and turnover follows.
- When leaders don’t want feedback (on themselves or their plans) and don’t seek out different opinions, valuable friction is inhibited and turnover follows.
Now, confession time, I made up the 72.3% but you feel it, right? It’s the lived experience of many of us. We’ve all had leaders who pay lip-service to collaboration but it’s an illusion. We have all had leaders who don’t want to negotiate internal tensions, or acknowledge conflict or hear our opinions, so we leave!
Understanding how to use positive friction is the key to improving turnover. Instead of blaming turnover on those leaving, you should be looking at how you use friction.
I’d love to talk with you about positive friction, so do get in touch.