jen briggs

As a leader, you need to ensure that you have a good set of options and choices to make better decisions. To get there, it takes leading a round table of conversations. But how many times does that go well? How often have you walked away from a conversation and wished it had gone differently? You weren’t your best self. There was stress but not the productive conversational tension the decision needed.

What mental states did you switch between as you were talking? Frustrated, controlling, defiant, quiet, defensive? What about staying fair-minded, open, and rational? You are a rational person. Right? Yes, but sometimes the emotional regressive slide of stress happens. One easy model to use is a type of Transactional Analysis adapted for business to help you and your team stay in a steady state.

We want to be our most responsible and accountable selves; when we do, others are encouraged to be there too.

When someone takes a controlling or nurturing (positive or negative) position, it risks putting others in a passive or defiant state with possibly lower emotional conversational stability.

For example, overly nurturing environments can drive a passive, happy state where people become entitled and like to be taken care of. Then when something changes and they are no longer taken care of, it can be quite upsetting. In business, we like to call this entitlement culture. In high-control cultures, even unconscious coercion can result in a passive-compliance attitude where I just do what I’m told. Compliance cultures run the same risk of having passive, unengaged employees – but, less happy.

The goal is to drive a critically-thinking, responsible culture by being in this steady state of dialog. The dialog is not controlling or nurturing; it is objective. A nurturing conversation may mean I will take care of you, inadvertently taking responsibility away from the individual. Being warm and objective means I care for you. The expectation for a steady state, rational conversation stays clearly on the shoulders of each professional.

Once you start practicing this idea of steady-state you will see how it feels to stay centered. In one meeting, I witnessed a leader become controlling and dictatorial, but then they wondered why no one was taking responsibility and engaging. This person’s approach to the conversation was to shut it down, forcing the other participants to become quiet or defiant. Both are defensive states. Neither is helpful in accomplishing the objective. The idea is to stay in a responsible conversation focused on progress.

These are unconscious states, and we switch between them. Conversations flow better by becoming more aware and consciously staying in a steady state where conflict can be productive. The idea isn’t to eliminate tension but to make it objective and topic-centered. Good tension can raise the bar on performance and push the boundaries of routine thinking. Bad tension breaks people down.

The objective is to stay in a steady state. When you hear the conversation begin to switch modes – coach yourself to stay in steady state and to not move with them. Control your reaction by not switching your mental state in response to their mental state. If someone becomes figuratively (or maybe even literally) pouty – respond objectively, “I see something is concerning you. Do we need to discuss this to move on”? Through your responsibility-centered approach, the dialog can shift to be solution-oriented focused on the topic at hand. (Don’t forget – tone matters)

Observe some tense conversations. Map them – mark when you see people switch states. Mark when people stay in a steady state. Then get ready to mark your own conversational performance.

If you become frustrated because someone is demanding, but you know they are wrong – don’t switch to a defiant or figurative-pout mode. Stay in a steady state in the conversation, take a breath and present your perspectives in a realistic, rational way.  You might even have “stay-in-steady-state-stay-in-steady-state” as a mantra when you feel triggered. Ah, that ol’ amygdala.

It is important to acknowledge that there are different times for different types of decision-making. There is a time for a directive, fast decision-making. There is a time for collaboration. There is a time for coordination. There are two elements for leaders to consider. First, leaders with a broad range of well-practiced tools and approaches will be more well-prepared to select the appropriate approach. Second, clarity will go a long way in helping people understand and move forward. There is no right way, but there are better ways for each situation. 

This steady state is critical in open or employee-owned cultures. When the books are open, and ideas emerge (a great thing!), there will be conflict with the ideas. Having productive dialog over the tension between choices improves decision-making. Steady-state drives productive dialog. Steady-state drives an open-minded learner attitude which supports innovation and improvement.