Diverse Conversations
Have you noticed how many books are out there on how to have conversations? There are books on powerful, difficult, crucial and fierce conversations. Who knew there were so many flavors?
Recently, my coaching colleague, Dr. Janice Shack Marquez of the Federal Reserve Board, shared on the Georgetown Leadership Coaching Program listserv a terrific summary that compares three of the well known books on conversations. I liked it so much that I asked Janice if she'd like to run it here. She said yes, so here it is. Thanks Janice!
I work in an organization where it is all about the conversation. As with any organization there are plenty of times when this is a real challenge. We also have our own more specific brand of challenge as well. We have more than 200 Ph.Ds on staff. Individual success as an academic researcher depends, in part, on one's ability to dissect and analyze other's arguments. But we are a policy-making organization and success in developing effective policies relies first on valuing other's opinions and independent professional judgments and then on our ability to work as a team to mold independent viewpoints into coherent, effective policies.
As an executive coach and a leader, I'm always looking for tools to put in my toolkit, so I've been trying to come to an understanding about the distinctions among several excellent books on conversations: Crucial Conversations by Patterson, Grenny, McMillan and Switzler, Fierce Conversations by Scott, and Difficult Conversations by Stone, Patton and Heene and Fisher.
There are strong similarities between Difficult Conversations and Crucial Conversations. Both deal with how to conduct conversations that are high-stakes and emotionally charged. Difficult Conversations comes out of the Harvard Negotiation Project and shares important insights from law, organizational behavior, cognitive, family and social psychology and "dialogue" studies. The interdisciplinary nature of the Harvard Project provides a strong academic foundation for the reader. They break these difficult conversations into their component parts: the conversation about what happened, the conversation about your feelings about what happened, and how the conversation affects our sense of identity. One of the book's strengths is how to prepare well for tough talks in advance. The techniques in the book are geared toward getting people to lower their defenses, creating mutual respect and understanding, increasing emotional safety, and encouraging freedom of expression. The strength of Crucial Conversations is a formula for high-stakes conversations; this can be valuable for those who want or need the structure.
In my view, Fierce Conversations is different from Difficult and Crucial in that it focuses on how to have conversations about things that are important, but that may not have risen to the emotionally-charged level. The book is based on principles developed as part of the author's consulting practice. Its thesis is that relationships, both professional and personal, hinge on how conversations go, and that the best conversations require honesty and a willingness to listen. Of course, this is not a new concept, but the focus of the book is squarely on how to have the conversation that needs to be had, rather than the conversation that is easy in the short run. The book includes tools and assignments designed to help the reader develop the skills to have these robust and honest conversations. Fierce's contribution is that it teaches how to have a conversation so that you can avoid having it escalate to difficult or crucial levels.
When I am working with leaders, I find that Fierce Conversations has broad appeal because it focuses on improving the general quality of conversation, where a quality conversation is one that is held with integrity, honesty and forthrightness. And, of course, these are leadership qualities that transcend the conversation.
COMMENTS
Post a Comment
By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although GovExec does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.
ABOUT THIS BLOG
Executive coach Scott Eblin’s goal is to help you succeed at the next level of leadership. Throughout the week, he’ll offer his take on the leadership lessons in the news and his advice on your most pressing leadership questions. A former government executive, Scott is a graduate of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government and is the author of The Next Level: What Insiders Know About Executive Success.
Scott,
I think you've captured the differing databases of these three books well. We had no interest in communication studies when we started our research 20 years ago. We were curious about why organizations continue to suffer the same problems year in and year out. In the government space, for example, we heard recurring complaints about employee performance, productivity, service quality levels, etc. Well-intended leaders would attempt to solve these problems with little effect. We ended up focusing on politically and emotionally risky conversations because they were the reason people continued to put up with problems year after year. We found, for example, that in a state government organization in California that service levels improved markedly when superviors were more skilled at holding people accountable--a very emotionally challenging thing to do.
I agree with your conclusion that if you imrpove the quality of general conversations lots of problems are avoided. However, the vast majority of persistent and profound problems people and organizations can't be solved without much more skill at crucial/difficult conversations.
That's my two bits!
Joseph Grenny Posted Thursday, May 28, 2009 3:50 PMThanks for a great blog,
Joseph Grenny
co-author, Crucial Conversations
Thanks for the comments about my book, Fierce Conversations. Four thoughts from the book that many find helpful. 1. There is something within us that responds to those who level with us, who don't suggest our compromises for us. 2. A careful conversation is a failed conversation, because it merely postpones the conversation that wants and needs to take place. 3. The conversation is not about the relationship. The conversation is the relationship. and 4. While no single conversation is guaranteed to change the trajectory of a career, a company, a relationship or a life, any single conversation can. Having offered this, my second book: Fierce Leadership, A Bold Alternative to the Worst "Best" Practices of Business Today will arrive in book stores in September and is available for pre-order on Amazon.com. Susan Scott
Susan Posted Friday, May 29, 2009 9:12 AMWell done analysis and comparison of these three books. Based on my readings of these you have hit the nail on the head.
I would offer a fourth book for your consideration - Authentic Conversations: Moving from Manipulation to Truth and Commitment.
My partner Maren and I co-authored this Berrett-Koehler book based on almost 20 years of consulting around its big ideas:
1. If you want to change organization/community culture, change the conversations.
2. The conversations in organizations that value hierarchy are parent-child in nature and are loaded with manipulative intent and techniques.
3. Manipulative conversations aimed at "holding others accountable", colluding with cynicism and helplessness, dealing with individual performance by prescribing top down solutions and countless other examples are debilitating and create the opposite of our longing - accountability, commitment and engagement.
Conversations that take others seriously and cease the focus on others as objects to be manipulated become relationships we can believe in and that allow us to create a preferred future of mutual benefit.
Would love to hear your thoughts should you choose to pick up a copy.
All the best, j
jamie showkeir Posted Thursday, June 4, 2009 8:15 PMRegardless of which source one uses for the approach to learning/training, what is really important is the motivation behind the initiative. If the desire is to inservice only management for the purpose of enabling them to better hold others 'below them' accountable, you will not likley achieve the commitment and engagement that is fundamentally at the heart of what all these approaches are seeking.
Ken Moore Posted Tuesday, September 15, 2009 1:19 PM