Looking for a printer friendly version or having trouble reading this email? View the online version.
To avoid having our newsletter blocked as spam, please add VitalSmarts@en25.com to your address book.

Please do not reply to this email.

Newsletter Archives Header
  June 25, 2008 Vol. 6 Issue 26  
[Image: In This Issue]

[Image: Editors Note]

Announcing Reach '08

Whether you're thinking of becoming a VitalSmarts certified trainer or you're a seasoned facilitator, Reach '08 is the conference for you!

JOIN US Oct 8-10 in Salt Lake City for the first-ever VitalSmarts certified trainer conference.

— Gain valuable facilitation tips.

— Learn strategies for gaining executive support.

— Share ideas with other trainers and VitalSmarts leadership.

Register today to take advantage of the early-bird discount!

See www.vitalsmarts.com/reach08 for conference details.

[Image: Editors Note]

Talking Politics

As the election nears, the debates are heating up. How are you handling the political banter happening around you? Do you avoid these conversations at all costs or are you the one campaigning for your candidate of choice?

We're taking a closer look at how people handle political discussions with friends, family, and co-workers. Help shed some light on how effectively we navigate these difficult discussions by taking our survey.

Please take our three-minute reader poll.

Everyone who completes our short survey will get access to a compelling audio lesson (MP3) from our popular Crucial Conversations Audio Companion.

[Image: Learn More]
[Image: Public Workshops]

Crucial Conversations

Crucial Confrontations

» Click here for International Public Events

Register today for an event by clicking on one of the links above.

For questions, contact us toll free at 1-800-449-5989.

[Image: Contact Us]

Questions, feedback, or information you would like to see in the newsletter? E-mail us at editor@vitalsmarts.com.

Submit your Q&A question online to the authors of Crucial Conversations and Crucial Confrontations.

Newsletter Archive
Subscribe
My Account
Speakers
Training
Submission Guidelines

[Image: Tips For Getting the Results You Want]

"If everybody thought before they spoke, the silence would be deafening."
- George Barzan

[Image: Q & A]

Vicarious Conversations

[Image: Kerry Patterson -- Kerry Patterson is coauthor of the New York Times bestseller, Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking When Stakes Are High.
  [Image: Question] Dear Crucial Skills,

I was wondering if you could share your insights on a perplexing issue: How can I devise a plan to creatively/effectively communicate with workers on shift (those who can't attend regular face-to-face meetings with supervisors, all-hands meetings with plant managers, etc.)? Our managers/supervisors are finding it hard to have crucial conversations with shift personnel because of their odd schedules. As a result, these employees feel "disengaged" and not aligned with our company's strategies. Can you help?

Signed,
Indirect Communication

  [Image: Answer] Dear Indirect,

Thanks for the question. The problem you bring up is shared by thousands of people worldwide. It highlights the challenges often explored under the behavioral science category known as “propinquity”—that is, physical distance and frequency of interaction. It turns out proximity and interaction have a greater effect on likeability, collaboration, respect, and inclusion than virtually any other variable. Research on friendship patterns reveals that distance and the frequency of interaction account for a great deal (often almost all) of the variance. You like people you see all the time. People you don’t see, you don’t care for as much. In more common relationship terms, “Absence doesn’t make the heart grow fonder.” The more likely outcome is “Out of sight, out of mind.”

As a consultant, I worked on this very issue long before we ever wrote our books. The finding was always the same. A lack of face-to-face time typically creates problems. People who work on different shifts in the same workspace (usually sharing the same equipment and production line) suffer twice. First, they don’t see each other. Second, they share the same space, so they’re constantly causing each other problems. One shift doesn’t clean up or does all the easy jobs, etc. Under these circumstances you have the unsavory combination of high interdependence with almost no direct interaction. It’s a near perfect formula for backbiting, stereotyping, and infighting. And as you pointed out, people who don’t work on the day shift typically feel less included and often act less engaged.

So, what’s a person to do?

Beware of e-mail, voice mail, and other electronic solutions. These modern technologies aimed at resolving propinquity problems can be both an aid and a challenge. E-mail may make it easier to share information—and that can be good—but it keeps people from ever talking face-to-face—and that’s generally bad. “We’ll just drop them a note,” people think to themselves. That way they don’t have to stay after work to hold an actual conversation. If you’re merely sharing information, it’s a good use of the medium. If you’re trying to replace an actual conversation, it’ll never work.

Of course, when people start to talk about problems via e-mail it can be a real disaster. You don’t have the normal give-and-take you would have in a tête-à-tête. You can’t read nonverbals. You can’t make quick adjustments. Problems end up going unresolved and relationships typically grow worse. Like it or not, you can’t hold a crucial conversation via e-mail.

The same is true when giving complicated or tough assignments. People resent being given additional assignments through an e-mail that implies they have plenty of free time when, in fact, their plate is full. People want to be able to discuss priorities, push back where it makes sense, and otherwise discuss what should happen. It’s hard to do this when you can’t read each other. Even a phone conversation doesn’t completely suffice.

The solution to a lack of face time, as you might imagine, lies in offering more actual human contact. Everything else falls woefully short. With shift work in manufacturing, many companies now schedule the two groups to overlap one afternoon every couple of weeks. They pay one team overtime to come in early or to stay late and then discuss common challenges and the solutions. This has proven enormously effective in reducing conflict.

When it comes to supervisors having to deal with people who are working different hours, there is no royal road to helping those who are on different shifts feel included—short of meeting with them fairly regularly, even if for just a few minutes. If you want to find a group of really disgruntled people, talk to employees whose boss works in a different town or isn’t on the same shift. This same boss writes these people’s performance reviews, and as you might imagine, employees almost always feel unfairly judged when they’re being evaluated merely on output measures by a person from afar. These folks don’t only feel excluded, they also typically feel mistreated.

Until leaders schedule time to meet and work with people on different shifts, don’t expect much to change. The presence or absence of the ability to rub shoulders and get to know and respect one another is such a powerful force that almost nothing can replace it. In your efforts to create a sense of commitment and inclusion you can give fancy speeches, write clever memos, even put together engaging videos; but nothing will ever replace meeting informally, chatting, problem-solving, and just having actual time together. So, meet informally and share your views of what can be. Jointly celebrate your successes and mourn your losses. It’s the only cure to the propinquity problem.

Best of Luck,
Kerry

[Image: VitalSmarts Logo]

Back to top

[Image: Letters to the Editor]

RE: "Addressing Performance Without Feeling Guilty" (June 4, 2008)

I appreciated Ron's clear description of the elements required to give feedback effectively, in answer to 'Addressing Performance without Feeling Guilty', however I think it is important to also address the crucial conversation of self-demeaning behavior that the particular co-worker demonstrated.

It may be possible that a Pattern or even a Relationship conversation needs to take place, to help the co-worker become aware of the way she continually puts herself down and the affect this has on her professional relationships (not to mention her self-esteem). It may be that the behavior is so ingrained that she isn't even aware she is doing it.

I feel that addressing only the specific performance issue is missing a holistic approach to building better relationships at work & increasing staff happiness.

Yours sincerely,
Sam F.

------------------

RE: "The Manipulation Situation" (June 4, 2008)

I enjoyed Steve Willis' thoughts on "The Manipulation Situation". When I am not sure if I am manipulating, I also ask myself if the results I want benefit both me and the other person. It goes back to focusing on what you really want: for you, for the other person, and for the relationship. If I can't find a benefit for the other person or the relationship, I know some part of my story is wrong. Then I can go back and try to realign my thinking to something more beneficial for everyone.

Julia M.

------------------

RE: "Avoiding Anonymous Feedback" (June 11, 2008)

The best thing we have done is to institute "peer evaluations." We have selected the values important to us, and ranked each other anonymously on a 1-4 scale (like a G.P.A.). No one has to stick there neck out, and there is objective evidence no one can argue with.

The effect, when positive, is a truly humbling and grateful acknowledgement of a job well done. When negative, whoever is presenting the information now has objective evidence to say "this is what you're peers are seeing. Why do think that is?" and most importantly "How can we do better?"

In my opinion, this is a powerful tool towards affecting positive change.

Tom B.

------------------

RE: "Kerrying On: Some Thoughts on Knowing" (June 18, 2008)

Kerry

Very good. In our area there are some recent TV ads about direct TV and the 'other company'. There is a hot shot who uses a number of these type of conclusions. Like 90% of all studies have at least 80% faulty conclusions—and then points to some number as if that proves his point. All the room is speechless.

I work in the field of data processing in the narrow area of Capacity Planning and Performance Analysis. We are always going over tests that other areas are doing to prove or disprove that a change they did was better for their system. It is really sorry how many ways people will try to pawn off numbers and say they prove their point.

Continue the good work.

Henry S.

[Image: VitalSmarts Logo]

Back to top

 
Newsletter Archive | Subscribe | My Account | Speakers
Training | Submission Guidelines
 

To unsubscribe from the Crucial Skills Newsletter, click here
© 2008 VitalSmarts All rights reserved. Privacy Notice: We never release your e-mail address to third parties.