By the time we enter a difficult conversation, we may have already had it several times in our own minds.
We have imagined how to begin, what the other person will say, and how we will respond. Sometimes, we are frustrated with an explanation they have not yet offered, or we have postponed the conversation because we can already picture how badly it will go. When we finally sit down together, we carry that preparation and whatever it has stirred in us. The other person may be encountering the concern for the first time.
We spend a great deal of time learning how to have difficult conversations. Yet by the time we reach for those skills, we may already be caught up in an exchange the other person has had no part in.
In “What I Know About the Work I Do,” I wrote about how results are shaped by what we can — and cannot — see and the conditions that allow people to work together effectively. A recent conversation with a small team of senior leaders brought those ideas into view. As they examined their interactions, they began to recognize how much was happening before anyone spoke.
What we have already decided shapes what we hear
One leader acknowledged coming into their discussions with preconceived ideas shaped by past interactions and expectations. Others recognized something similar in themselves. Their history together was influencing what they expected to hear and how they interpreted what was said. One person’s realization gave the team something to examine together: how much of their listening was being shaped by what they had already decided about one another.
This is a common occurrence, and often an invisible one.
I recognize this in myself, too. I can be well into an imagined exchange before I notice what I am doing — anticipating someone’s response, preparing my defense, and feeling the frustration of a conversation that has not happened. Knowing this pattern does not keep me from falling into it. Sometimes, it simply helps me catch myself sooner.
Our history with someone matters. But familiarity can keep us from considering whether something has changed. We hear the beginning of an explanation and believe we know the rest.
A missed deadline, for example, gives us something specific to address. Yet “the deadline was missed” can become “they do not care.” Once we reach that conclusion, an explanation may sound like an excuse. We leave more certain of our judgment without understanding much more about what happened. For this team, naming those assumptions gave them a chance to reconsider what they thought they knew about one another.
What are we trying to make happen?
As the senior leaders examined what they were bringing into their conversations, they also began to recognize what they wanted from one another. Resolving the issue was part of it. So was wanting their own perspective to be understood and, at times, accepted as right. Those intentions were present together, but they did not always lead the conversation in the same direction.
This showed up in returning to a point already acknowledged because the acknowledgment had not felt sufficient, or inviting another perspective while still waiting for an answer that confirmed their own. What looked like an effort to reach clarity could become an effort to steer the exchange toward a conclusion someone had already reached.
The realization gave the team another question to consider: Were they willing to let what they heard change their understanding?
They still had responsibilities to meet and decisions to make. Being open to one another did not remove those obligations. It created room to understand more about what fulfilling them required, including where authority was unclear, resources were insufficient, or an agreement had been understood differently.
Their discussion made visible how easily we can want to move forward while remaining attached to having our version of events accepted. Once we recognize that attachment, we can consider what we need from the conversation — and whether being right is helping us get there.
What we rehearse can shape how we feel and listen
An imagined conversation can affect us before anything new has happened. We anticipate being dismissed and feel frustration building. We picture disagreement and become anxious, or feel energized by preparing the argument that will finally make our point. The response has not occurred, but our experience of imagining it is real.
We may notice our jaw tightening, our breathing becoming shallow, or a restless energy that makes it difficult to settle. Sometimes, there is a heaviness that makes postponing the conversation feel like relief. By the time we begin, we may already be ready to defend ourselves.
From there, a pause can feel like disapproval. A question sounds like a challenge. We prepare our reply before the other person finishes because we believe we know where they are going. Part of our attention is occupied with the conversation we rehearsed.
An expectation can become more than a thought about someone. It can affect how much patience we have, what catches our attention, and how quickly we respond. If the reaction we feared comes, we may take it as proof that we knew all along, without considering how our tone or readiness to argue contributed to the exchange.
Our concern may be well-founded, and the other person remains responsible for their behavior. Noticing what is happening within us helps us address that concern with greater clarity.
Close relationships add another layer. We expect someone who knows us well to understand what matters without our explaining it. To protect the relationship, we may let concerns pass or take on extra work. Eventually, we arrive carrying frustration the other person never knew was building.
We do not need to become emotionless before speaking. But it helps to ask what we are responding to: something that happened, something left unresolved, or something we imagine will happen next. Sometimes, we need a break from the rehearsal, time to notice the tension we are carrying and return to what we actually know.
Making room for the conversation we have not yet had
What I find meaningful about the senior leaders’ conversation is that one person’s acknowledgment allowed others to recognize their own participation. Their history remained, but its influence was now something they could discuss.
That matters because the person in front of us may have something to say that never entered our preparation. They may have been addressing a problem we did not know existed or carrying a concern about our actions that they have struggled to express.
Curiosity asks us to stay with their answer long enough to understand it. We may still disagree or need to make a difficult decision. But we have more to work with when we can hear beyond what we expected.
Before the next conversation you have been rehearsing, consider:
- What have I already decided about this person?
- What am I trying to make happen?
- How is imagining this exchange affecting me?
- What am I still willing to discover?
The other person has not yet spoken. There may still be something to discover.
Explore my website to learn more about the work I do with leaders, businesses, and organizations. I’d love to connect and start a conversation about how we might work together.
Follow along on Substack for more articles like this one!
Comments +