SIX
The Rationale
What I Teach and When I Teach It
Why do I teach what I do in a particular session? What do I need to consider in creating a curriculum design within a semester? How do I play to my strengths and teach content, question the students’ assumptions, and help them learn something about themselves?
As you have learned, I believe awareness of behavioral patterns benefits teachers. Similarly, I want students to understand the patterns that are serving them in productive ways. I also want them to figure out ways to disrupt the patterns that are inhibiting their learning and classroom performance.
I increase the probability of their learning new skills, gaining new insights, and absorbing new content when I possess a sound theory or rationale for what I’m teaching. I also try to be clear about the needs of the students and where they are developmentally. What are each student’s development requirements? Given that they are all in different stages psychologically and emotionally during a given class, I must design the curriculum and the eighty minutes of class in a way that takes these stages into consideration.
I wrestle with creating the process that leverages what needs to be taught, how it should be taught, and what the sequencing should be to take advantage of our time together.
Now let’s focus on a specific course and a specific class. While I need to tailor my teaching to individual student needs, I also must communicate specific content, content that can be challenging both for the students to grasp and for the teacher to convey. I’m going to start by describing this course and my content goals and then take you into the classroom so you can see how I attempt to implement my lesson plan and the obstacles to doing so effectively.
We’ll focus on an Authentic Leadership course to illustrate the methodology behind the madness. The following are the fundamental assumptions behind why I teach this session:
- Leaders must understand the linkages between important conversations and being authentic.
- An investment must be made. Conversations that matter demand something of leaders, so leaders must invest in the interaction to achieve the desired outcome.
- There is a natural gap between what we think and feel and how we assess others based on what we see and hear. Most individuals don’t have the skills to reduce that gap.
- Difficult conversations require “deactivation”—settling down with our best intentions as we share what we think and feel in a constructive way.
- Tough conversations require us to be courageous because we don’t know what the outcome will be of the conversation on multiple levels.
My goal is to give students tools so they will take care of business relative to tough conversations. With the tools, they will (ideally) become more courageous and thoughtful about the timing and the rationale behind their challenging conversations. Whether they plan on repairing a broken relationship or initiating a tough discussion in the future, these tools will help them.
I also emphasize that the session may feel a bit like a workshop, and it is meant to be. Practical skills are needed to step over the threshold of discomfort into the zone of problem solving.
Successful conversations are not defined by having both parties smile and hug at the end. We cannot judge the outcome based on whether someone likes us at the end of the conversation. Instead, we need to learn how to deactivate ourselves, to give our best selves a shot at sharing how we think and feel constructively. As we share, we must recognize that our conversational partner has the right to react however he or she chooses. Finally, I emphasize to students what difficult conversations are usually about: assumptions, values, interests, perceptions, experiences, and judgments (and predictions about the future).
My Difficult Conversations
Given that preamble, let me share the concerns that run through my head when I’m facing tough discussions, both with students and with other people in my professional and personal lives.
How do I tell my partner what frustrates me about her behavior when she comes home from work? Why can’t I tell her what I’m thinking and feeling? Why do I delay having tough conversations with students who I believe aren’t doing good work or aren’t committed? When I see a student using her iPhone in class, why do I perseverate about how to confront her without ruining our relationship? How do I share my strong opinions to a colleague with whom I’m writing a paper when his effort falls below my expectations?
How do I tell my department head that she needs to deal with another faculty member who is bullying other junior faculty members? How do I speak to students who I believe are taking shortcuts in their preparation for class? How do I tell my daughter I think she is selecting a job that isn’t a good fit?
The aforementioned examples are just the beginning of a string of important conversations that I should have, that seem to stare back at me through any given day. Students probably have similar questions and worries coursing through their brains. To understand what these conversations are and how I attempt to teach them the art of tough talks, let’s focus on one specific eighty-minute session that falls halfway through the course on authentic leadership.
Introduction to Session
The students have been assigned to read a book on having difficult conversations. More important, they come to class with a difficult conversation in mind that they know they should have or want to have.
Some students will focus on personal issues. They will want to know how to end a relationship or how to communicate their strong feelings to prospective romantic partners. A student may want to know how to tell his parents that he is gay and wants to “come out” to them in a way that doesn’t cause distance in their relationship.
Other students focus on previous jobs that they left in part because they were unable to have difficult conversations. One student opined that he applied to business school because he hated his boss and work situation and applying to school was a reasonable way to rationalize the decision and save face—and avoid expressing his feelings to his boss. Another confessed that at her previous job, she fired someone because she was threatened by this individual’s expertise. She wanted to rewrite the script, having a discussion with this person she fired so she could come clean about her mistake.
Most of my students have already been considering the topic, contemplating a particular situation that needs attention or repair. In theory and practice, the session on difficult conversations has already begun the moment they have revisited and reflected upon a prior event or situation. So they come to class primed for an intense experience.
On the blackboard I write the following two questions:
1. If you didn’t have the conversation, why not?
2. And if you did, why did you?
These two questions set up an exercise I do later in the session. But I want to prepare the students for the multiple exercises we do in class during the session. I want them to “turn and talk” throughout the session so they can hear their own voices say and feel and taste words that are tough to say—or words they have felt internally but haven’t vocalized.
The Class in Session
When the class begins, I have the following situations ready for discussion, ones that involved the need for a difficult conversation. This process is consistent with my philosophical approach of beginning class with a metaphor or story. My style is to give students a visceral experience to capture their collective interest and focus on the topic at hand. I want to get them in the room and engaged in the topic as soon as I can.
I read out loud situations where I had to have an uncomfortable conversation. “During a two-week period last February, the following incidents occurred:
- The snow removal guy shoved the snow so hard against our fence that it shattered.
- Vineeta expressed her frustration that I began to clear the dinner table before she was finished eating.
- My daughter Catharine informed me she had no plans to visit Boston during the summer for the third summer in a row.
- When I arrived in Salt Lake City I went to pick up a rental car, but the company had just rented its last car. They weren’t sure what I should do as I stood in the Salt Lake City airport.
- My brother called the day after his birthday to remind me that I forgot to call him on his birthday again.
- I needed to talk with Bill about something he said during the faculty meeting that was over the line.
- A student wrote and told me I had offended him in class by making fun of him.
- A student was overly aggressive in class in response to another student, causing minutes of real tension in the class. I needed to call and talk with him.”
Why do I go through this list? I want to make the point that tough, uncomfortable conversations are the rule, not the exception. They are awkward and yet ever present, waiting for us to delay having them, ignore them, or hope they go away. I want to highlight that when students become managers, their days will be full of uncomfortable, gray-zone issues—they will feel uneasy, as will others. And they will need to lean into the discomfort.
Ten minutes into the class, I’ve given them heartfelt examples of how difficult conversations show up in all of our lives. I’ve normalized difficult conversations, allowing students to reflect on the situations where tough conversations have been part of their lives. I’ve also shared the rationale behind why these interactions are not easy but are imperative for dynamic relationships.
I walk through assumptions behind the session. I mention the three key assumptions noted previously but don’t dwell on them. Students are often apprehensive because they aren’t good at having this kind of conversation; many young adults are carrying around unfinished business as it relates to relationships. Anticipating this, I want them to jump in rather than think too much and become even more apprehensive.
Warm-Up Exercise: Unfinished Business (7–10 Minutes)
I ask the students to think of a time they needed to have a conversation that mattered but didn’t have it. Why didn’t they have it? What was the outcome?
Then I give them another assignment: Think of a time you did have a tough conversation. Did you get the outcome you wanted? If not, why not? If you did, why do you think you did?
I might also ask them to think of “unfinished business” they have in both their personal and professional lives. Each student selects a situation in each of the categories. If time permits, I might have the students talk to someone in class about these issues. I want them to verbalize, to hear their own voices addressing these important issues.
For example, Devika turns to Jaya and relates the story of a current roommate, Kavita, who doesn’t clean up after herself. Devika describes how the situation has evolved and how she hasn’t been able to confront Kavita for fear that conflict would ensue, making the situation worse.
One student talked about how at a previous job, he was a manager and had a crush on a subordinate. He explained that he didn’t know what to do about it because of the boss–direct report relationship. So he pretended his feelings didn’t exist. He didn’t want to walk near the woman’s desk. He began to flush whenever he passed her in the hallway. He confessed that he became even more frustrated when this subordinate began dating someone he knew. This knowledge made the situation worse. As the student related the story to the class, students sat straight and silent, completely focused on the speaker—they could all relate to the difficulty he had experienced. The storyteller began to speak more slowly, lowering his voice as he fought back the emotion behind what he was describing. This experience helped the class reach a deeper level of mature vulnerability where it was okay to access emotions, not knowing what the outcome might be.
The Teaching Plan (15–20 Minutes)
Students need to understand the motives behind their behaviors, and whether to have a difficult conversation underscores this subject’s importance. This is a crucial task, in that once students grasp their motives, they are better able to deactivate the situations. I ask the students to assess the costs and benefits of having one of these conversations.
Through the processing of the previous questions, we induct three basic reasons to avoid a tough conversation:
- To answer the question, is the real conflict inside me?
- To answer the question, is there a better way to address the situation than talking about it like changing my behavior, just acting differently?
- To answer the question, do I have the wrong goals in mind—change the person, hurt the person, tell the person off?
Some reasons to have the conversation can be discovered by asking the following questions: Am I genuinely interested in learning the other person’s story? Do I really want to share my views in a spirit of listening and understanding? Do I really want to problem-solve together?
Here I emphasize one of the themes of the course and session: Don’t slide or resign yourself into patterns of behavior that don’t serve you. Decide whether you want to have a particular conversation. Act with intentionality.
Too often, we opt for avoidance, which usually makes a bad situation worse. Let me share the story of Jeffrey, a professor who didn’t respect or like Jordan. Their offices were next to each other, and at first, this proximity was merely awkward. Over time, though, Jordan found Jeffrey’s dislike off-putting, in large part because Jeffrey was a full professor who carried a lot of weight in the department. Jordan wanted to talk to Jeffrey about the reasons for his animosity—Jordan assumed a lot of it had to do with Jordan’s well-received publications in a journal that had rejected Jeffrey’s submissions—but Jordan could never muster the courage to have this conversation. Finally, the tension between them grew so intense that Jordan resigned and sought a position elsewhere. Not only did the department lose a valuable young member, but everyone except Jeffrey liked and respected Jordan and missed him when he left.
The same thing happens in personal relationships. I know many couples where one member of the dyad isn’t happy but doesn’t know how to deal with the situation. So instead of talking about the tough issues with the partner, the one member of the couple decides to resign himself or herself to the situation and endure in hopes of not upsetting their children. The secret is that the children already know there is tension and discontent in the marriage. Avoidance of difficult conversations does no good to the children or the two people in the relationship.
Todd and Scott (20 Minutes)
Now let’s return to the classroom and a more formal exercise involving difficult conversations. We have a practice run that requires students to analyze a Harvard Business School (HBS) case titled Crucial Conversations (see appendix B). The students receive a form (see appendix A) that asks them to evaluate an interaction between a boss and a subordinate. The case describes a situation where Todd (the subordinate) feels his boss (Scott) has been dishonest with him. Todd decides to act out in counterproductive ways that causes a tense situation.
The HBS students must follow a structured process that follows the theory discussed in Difficult Conversations. The students try to understand context that analyzes the story along three dimensions: What happened from the subordinate’s point of view, what was the impact and intent of the conversation, and in what ways did the individual contribute to the situation?
The students complete the form, responding first from the point of view of Todd (the subordinate). They do the same for Scott. I try to force students to see another person’s point of view from these three different dimensions. I ask students to complete the matrix based on what the other person might be thinking and feeling. What is the reality of the other person? What did the students contribute, what were their intentions, and what was the subsequent impact on them?
I then ask students to assess the feelings behind their attributions and judgments from both perspectives. Finally, we turn to the following question: How does what has happened threaten both individuals’ identities? What is at stake for both parties?
I give two single-sheet handouts per person, one to deconstruct the Todd-Scott situation and later to do the same with their particular conversation. I have students get into groups of three and complete the sheet in detail. They process what they have learned by seeing the situation from both individuals’ perspectives.
Note: This practice round with Todd and Scott prepares students to deconstruct their own respective conversation they have identified earlier in the session.
Student Practice and Role Play (20 Minutes)
I give the students time in class to complete the second handout regarding their own situation on which they’ve chosen to focus. Also, I ask students to write the first paragraph of how they will begin the conversation in real life.
The students pair up, and one student plays the role of the person who will receive the message from the student. They role-play the situation and then switch places and do it again. We process as a class what emerged from the role plays.
Session Summary (5 Minutes)
First: I make it clear to the class that I’m not insisting that they have the conversation. I am insisting that they make a choice rather than just resigning themselves to a given situation or backing into a state of being. “Decide, don’t slide” is the takeaway.
Second: Some students who have taken this class in the past have spent their time talking themselves out of having the conversation. I communicate that I hope that they have the opposite effect on one another. I want them to express support for and faith in one another.
Third: I highlight the theme of the Internal Revenue Service: Pay now or pay later with interest and penalties. Human interactions, miscommunications, and misunderstandings don’t vanish into thin air. They are circular in nature. They will come back in some form until people learn the lesson they need to learn or until they learn the skills of having conversations that matter all the time.
Fourth: This is also an appropriate time to introduce the term experiential avoidance: the process of delaying conversations and allowing the tension to build up because of the unfinished business between the parties.
The Moral to the Session on Difficult Conversations
Courage. That is what I want to teach students throughout the course and specifically during this session. Courage is defined by doing something difficult or frightening where you don’t know what the outcome might be. I want students to recognize the value of ceding control and trying different behavioral patterns.
Having important though difficult conversations is a daily opportunity to be courageous and discerning simultaneously. I don’t believe in confrontation for confrontation’s sake; I have no interest in having students walking around delivering bombs to others just to see the emotional effects of the explosion. I do expect students to be self-aware enough to know when to confront and when to be quiet. I expect them be conscious about how and when having a tough conversation will benefit both parties rather than resigning themselves to avoiding tough talks at all costs—including the cost of their quality of life.
Following the eighty-minute class period, the students head off to meet in small groups. I encourage each group to discuss what the group members are planning to do or not do in terms of having an important conversation. I warn them to be aware whether they are colluding in talking each other out of having these conversations. I ask them to follow up with one another through the week to see if they did what they agreed to do.
The biggest challenge in teaching this session is remaining deactivated emotionally so that I don’t lose my courage. I want to be teacher, confidant, cheerleader, and fan. I want students to figure out their respective talents and patterns—especially the patterns that are causing reticence and fear. Because we have been together for half the semester, the students trust one another and me enough to explore new ways of considering future career alternatives. The challenge for me is to not sound too optimistic to the students who are feeling frightened and fearful of the future. I have succeeded if some students act and work through their fears. I’ve never heard someone say that he or she was sorry about taking the step to have an important conversation.
Teaching a class that is equally challenging for students, I want to do everything possible to help them meet this challenge. To that end, I use the “doctor model”: See one, do one, teach one. First, I have them observe two people having a tough conversation. Second, I have students engage in a difficult conversation. Third, I give them the assignment of teaching someone outside of the classroom how to have a tough conversation.
I also introduce students to the concept of affective labeling, the process of noticing and acknowledging internal dialogue, to help them grapple with the tough conversation challenge. By recognizing this interior voice that may raise all sorts of fears and objections to tough conversations, students can quiet this voice. I’ve seen how people use affective labeling to calm themselves. During class throughout the semester, we practice affective labeling. Most students become much more aware of what’s going on inside of them and are much better able to engage in tough conversations because of this knowledge.
For instance, one student decided to ask her sister why she felt distant from her. I will call her Sarah. She wanted to understand her younger sister and was concerned that the distance between them grew as they got older. As Sarah shared her feelings with her sister during a phone conversation, her sister’s silence became palpable. The silence was broken as Sarah heard the sniffles and tears of her sister. The sibling stated that she was frightened to tell anyone in the family that she had a girlfriend, that she was a lesbian. As soon as Sarah heard those words, she began to cry. But the tears were based on relief. They were tears of relief that there was a way to close the distance in their relationship. Sarah stated her support and love for her sister. They cried together. The following weekend they met in New York and her little sister brought along her partner. Over time, Sarah coached her little sister on how to talk to their parents.
Not everyone engages in a conversation like Sarah did. But even those who do will need to understand the danger of not practicing this behavior regularly. By the end of the session, I hope the students are prepared to reflect on how the conversations they are not having have begun to define how they are living their lives. The “difficult conversation” session also sets up the subsequent sessions in which I ask students to interview family members. This session also is a precursor to another session we have on building a support network, how to ask for help, and how to express gratitude.
The end goal is to give students the courage to live more authentically. I want them to experience the process of living more honestly with themselves and worry less about image management. By the end of this session, students will feel that anything is possible and also that life is more challenging when they live from their essence because they must listen more honestly to self. While the short-term discomfort can be powerful, the long-term payoffs begin to show sooner than students expect.
In the coming chapter, I will walk you through what I’m thinking and working through mentally after teaching a class session. I will share with you the postmortem of the eighty-minute session.