Point Lookout: a free weekly publication of Chaco Canyon Consulting
Volume 12, Issue 49;   December 5, 2012: When Over-Delivering Makes Trouble

When Over-Delivering Makes Trouble

by

When responding to inquiries such as "Is that correct?" we sometimes err by giving too many reasons why it's incorrect. Patterns of over-delivery can lead to serious trouble. Here's how.
A schematic representation of the flagellar components of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium

A schematic representation of the flagellar components of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium, in cross-section. View a larger image. The flagellum, which provides locomotion for the bacterium, is a long helical structure that is shown in abbreviated form at the top of the drawing. Locomotion is achieved by rotating the flagellum. The apparatus at the bottom of the figure, shown in cross-section, is the motor. The motor is approximately 150 Å in diameter. For reference, an oxygen molecule is approximately 3 Å in diameter.

The structure itself is a marvel, but even more wondrous is the process by which it is built. That process is the topic of the paper from which this figure is drawn. As described by F.F. Chevance and K.T. Hughes, the proteins required are manufactured within the cell, and passed along the portions of the apparatus that have so far been assembled. As the different components are completed, chemical signals are fed back to the cell with instructions for what proteins are needed next, and what proteins are no longer needed. This complex choreography is a sequence of messages — requests and responses — that results in a complete motor and flagellum.

The sequence of requests and responses that builds a flagellum and motor would fail utterly if any element of the system decided to over-deliver. That is, if, say, the cell body decided to anticipate the needs of the flagellum under construction, it would deliver proteins that could not yet be used. Or, if used, they would clutter the "construction site," resulting in malformations and a non-functional motor assembly or flagellum. Nature and evolution have solved this problem by inhibiting over-deliveries of the kind discussed here. People in organizations must learn to do the same.

The image is from Chevance F.F. and Hughes K.T. "Coordinating assembly of a bacterial macromolecular machine." Nature Reviews Microbiology. 2008,6:455-465.

When asked a question such as "Is that correct?" some of us embark on paths that create trouble in our working relationships. For example, suppose Jan knows that the premise isn't correct, because she knows of at least one counterexample — call it X. Instead of responding, "No, it isn't correct, because of X," she begins forming a mental catalog of all possible counterexamples. If Jan receives the query in conversation, she pauses while she assembles her response. If she receives the query in email, she takes a day or two to do research.A schematic representation of the flagellar components of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium

That's why it takes Jan longer to respond than the person who asked the question expects. Often, people interpret these delays as shiftiness, evasiveness, or secretiveness. They might see her as being careful in her words, or plotting, or scheming, or taking time to manufacture lies or misleading responses, or lacking in confidence.

Questioners who fairly evaluate her responses are much less likely to make these erroneous conclusions. But some questioners don't want the complete responses Jan always delivers. Questioners who ask, "Is that correct" sometimes don't want a full catalog of the reasons why it isn't correct, and they ignore it when she delivers it. Their preferences thus lead them to misunderstand what takes Jan so long to respond.

By over-delivering, some people, like Jan, convey the impression of being untrustworthy, scheming, reluctant, or incompetent.

To avoid this problem, apply a general principle:

When asked for an opinion or judgment, and the request doesn't specify a need for a complete or absolutely reliable response, a partial and estimated response — delivered right now — might suffice. If you're unsure, deliver the short answer, then ask.

Some examples:

Is this possible?
If you know one reason why it's impossible, that might be enough. Offer it and ask if more are needed.
Can you do it by Friday?
One reason why you can't might be enough.
Why is that so?
If you know one possible explanation, provide it, acknowledging that it isn't 100% certain or complete.
Who do you think can do this?
This is a question about capability, not availability. A complete list might not be required.
Can we do this for under $X?
This just requires a By over-delivering, some people
convey the impression of being
untrustworthy, scheming,
reluctant, or incompetent
yes-or-no answer. Yes can require significant research. No can be very easy.
Who told you that? Or: Where did you hear that?
A complete list isn't required. It might not be necessary to provide the date on which you were told, or the order in which various people told you.
Would any changes be required to meet that requirement?
If you know of one, then the answer is yes. You don't necessarily need to devise a complete, priority-ranked or cost-ranked list of all changes that would be required.

And I don't think I need to supply any more examples. You get the idea. Go to top Top  Next issue: Problem-Solving Preferences  Next Issue

See "How to Create Distrust," Point Lookout for May 18, 2011, for a catalog of other behaviors that erode trust.

101 Tips for Managing Conflict 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!

Your comments are welcome

Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenxPhepEPSwRtYLCkSner@ChacdeyzvSZHeGTBQIWKoCanyon.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.

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 Effective Communication at Work:

Thank You!Appreciations
When we take time to express to others our appreciation for what they do for us, a magical thing happens.
An iceberg in Antarctica's Gerlache Strait, March 1962The Uses of Empathy
Even though empathy skills are somewhat undervalued in the workplace context, we do use them, for good and for ill. What is empathy? How is it relevant at work?
The musical energy behind "Shall We Dance" (1937)What We Don't Know About Each Other
We know a lot about our co-workers, but we don't know everything. And since we don't know what we don't know, we sometimes forget that we don't know it. And then the trouble begins.
Marie Antoinette, queen of France from 1774 to 1792Recognizing Hurtful Dismissiveness
"Never mind" can mean anything from "Excuse me, I'm sorry," to, "You lame idiot, it's beyond you," and more. The former is apologetic and courteous. The latter is dismissive and hurtful. We have dozens of verbal tactics for hurting each other dismissively. How can we recognize them?
Donald Trump (left) and Hillary Clinton (right), candidates for U.S. President in 2016The Paradox of Carefully Chosen Words
When we take special care in choosing our words, so as to avoid creating misimpressions, something strange often happens: we create a misimpression of ignorance or deceitfulness. Why does this happen?

See also Effective Communication at Work and Conflict Management for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Five almondsComing October 25: Workplace Memes
Some patterns of workplace society reduce organizational effectiveness in ways that often escape our notice. Here are five examples. Available here and by RSS on October 25.
Terminal 3 of Beijing Capital International AirportAnd on November 1: Risk Creep: I
Risk creep is a term that describes the insidious and unrecognized increase in risk that occurs despite our every effort to mitigate risk or avoid it altogether. What are the dominant sources of risk creep? Available here and by RSS on November 1.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenQKMKOTJLcwpVhBhsner@ChacFCKVSlbpcgfSXOqloCanyon.com or (617) 491-6289, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

Reprinting this article

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 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info

Public seminars

Ten Project Management Fallacies: The Power of Avoiding Hazards
Most Ten Project Management Fallaciesof what we know about managing projects is useful and effective, but some of what we know "just ain't so." Identifying the fallacies of project management reduces risk and enhances your ability to complete projects successfully. Even more important, avoiding these traps can demonstrate the value and power of the project management profession in general, and your personal capabilities in particular. In this program we describe ten of these beliefs. There are almost certainly many more, but these ten are a good start. We'll explore the situations where these fallacies are most likely to expose projects to risk, and suggest techniques for avoiding them. Read more about this program. Here's a date for this program:

The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power
Many The Power Affect: How We Express Personal Powerpeople who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.

Follow Rick

Send email or subscribe to one of my newsletters Follow me at LinkedIn Follow me at Twitter, or share a tweet Follow me at Google+ or share a post Subscribe to RSS feeds Subscribe to RSS feeds
The message of Point Lookout is unique. Help get the message out. Please donate to help keep Point Lookout available for free to everyone.
Workplace Politics Awareness Month KitIn October, increase awareness of workplace politics, and learn how to convert destructive politics into creative politics. Order the Workplace Politics Awareness Month Kit during October at the special price of USD 29.95 and save USD 10.00! Includes a copy of my tips book 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics which is a value!! ! Check it out!
Go For It: Sometimes It's Easier If You RunBad boss, long commute, troubling ethical questions, hateful colleague? Learn what we can do when we love the work but not the job.
303 Tips for Virtual and Global TeamsLearn how to make your virtual global team sing.
101 Tips for Managing ChangeAre you managing a change effort that faces rampant cynicism, passive non-cooperation, or maybe even outright revolt?
101 Tips for Effective MeetingsLearn how to make meetings more productive — and more rare.
Exchange your "personal trade secrets" — the tips, tricks and techniques that make you an ace — with other aces, anonymously. Visit the Library of Personal Trade Secrets.