I recently upgraded my email program to a new version that "monitors messages for offensive text." I wasn't sure how this would help, because I already know how to feel offended. It hasn't worked out well.
Corresponding with a colleague, I asked, "What's the X Foundation?" He told me some, and added, "Please excuse my ignorance, I don't know much." So I started typing, "Your ignorance is exceeded by my own."
At this point, my email program had had enough. Just as I typed the period, it bolded "Your ignorance" and colored it red. I tried to get rid of the bold-red, but I couldn't, so I sent the message anyway, hoping that the bold-red would somehow rub off en route.
The documentation for my email program told me that I had transgressed. To check this, I sent myself some deliberately offensive material. Sure enough, even though I wasn't offended at all, my email program became quite alarmed. I immediately unchecked the appropriate option, which is how you tell programs to buzz off. Now that it's gagged, I feel much better.
But the whole affair got me to think about everyday phrases that do tend to set people off. Here's a little catalog.
- Blaming
- Starting sentences with "You…", risks sounding like blaming or attacking. To really increase the chances, say, "You always…", "You never…", or "You're constantly…". To be clever, you might try "I think you're always…" but most people see right through that. The general rule is that if you try to tell people something unpleasant about themselves, and they haven't directly asked you for the information, you risk the appearance of attack or blame. If you must, ask for permission first.
- Minimizing
- When we use certain
trigger phrases, people
can feel blamed, minimized
or interrogated, and we
undercut the very goals
of our communications - Beginning with "Oh, that's easy…", "I don't see that as a problem, …", "Just make it happen," or "Let me explain it to you," risks being heard as minimizing another person's concerns, which can feel like minimizing the other person. Other ways to achieve the same explosive results: "Don't worry," "Calm down," "Relax," or "Trust me." Instead, give information about yourself, and then check it out: "Hmm, I wasn't worried about that, but perhaps I should I be?"
- Interrogating
- Starting a sentence with question words, such as who, what, where, or how much can be OK. Do it twice in a row, though, and you might come across as an interrogator. Try stating your conjecture as a guess, and asking for a comment about it. "It looks like you're pretty close to on budget," probably will elicit what you want much more effectively than "How much over budget are you?"
There are dozens more ways to set people off. You probably have a few of your own, so far undocumented by any expert. When it comes to conversational danger, we're all inventive. Top Next Issue
Are you fed up with tense, explosive meetings? Are you or a colleague the target of a bully? Destructive conflict can ruin organizations. But if we believe that all conflict is destructive, and that we can somehow eliminate conflict, or that conflict is an enemy of productivity, then we're in conflict with Conflict itself. Read 101 Tips for Managing Conflict to learn how to make peace with conflict and make it an organizational asset. Order Now!
For a more complete catalog of dangerous constructions, see Robert Bolton's People Skills: How to assert yourself, listen to others, and resolve conflicts Touchstone Books, 1986. Order from Amazon.com
Your comments are welcome
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.
Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
Related articles
More articles on Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness:
- Corrales Mentales
- Perhaps you've achieved every goal you've ever set yourself, but if you're like most of us, some important
goals have remained elusive. Maybe you had bad luck, or you weren't in the right place at the right
time. But it's just possible that you got in your own way. Getting out of your own way can help make
things happen.
- Learning
- What have you learned today? What has enriched you, changed your understanding of the world, or given
you a new view of history or the future? Learning something new every day is a worthy goal.
- Collaborations That Need to Be Cooperations
- Modern products and services are so complex that many people cooperate and collaborate to produce them.
When people are collaborating but the work actually requires merely cooperating, risks arise that can
threaten the success of the group's efforts.
- The McNamara Fallacy
- The McNamara Fallacy is the idea that measuring properly chosen attributes of inputs and outputs provides
all we need for decisions about organizational and human performance. And we can safely ignore anything
that can't be measured. It doesn't work.
- Goodhart's Law and Gaming the Metrics
- Goodhart's Law is an observation about managing by metrics. When we make known the metrics' goals, we
risk collapse of the metrics, in part because people try to "game" the metrics by shading
or manufacturing the data to produce the goal result.
See also Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness and Effective Communication at Work for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming May 1: Antipatterns for Time-Constrained Communication: 2
- Recognizing just a few patterns that can lead to miscommunication can reduce the incidence of miscommunications. Here's Part 2 of a collection of antipatterns that arise in communication under time pressure, emphasizing those that depend on content. Available here and by RSS on May 1.
- And on May 8: Antipatterns for Time-Constrained Communication: 3
- Recognizing just a few patterns that can lead to miscommunication can reduce the incidence of problems. Here is Part 3 of a collection of antipatterns that arise in technical communication under time pressure, emphasizing past experiences of participants. Available here and by RSS on May 8.
Coaching services
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
Follow Rick
Recommend this issue to a friend
Send an email message to a friend
rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.comSend a message to Rick
A Tip A Day feed
Point Lookout weekly feed
- Your stuff is brilliant! Thank you!
- You and Scott Adams both secretly work here, right?
- I really enjoy my weekly newsletters. I appreciate the quick read.
- A sort of Dr. Phil for Management!
- …extremely accurate, inspiring and applicable to day-to-day … invaluable.
- More