The Meaning of "Mean" (Behavior-Based Communication)

When we communicate with each other, whether it's as leaders, friends, or family, we don't usually name the specific behaviors we see. Instead, people usually offer a summary of those behaviors. We interpret what they're doing, put a label on a handful of behaviors, and use that word or phrase instead of naming the specific behaviors we see.

For example, when was the last time you saw someone be rude to someone else? To be over-technical, you've actually never seen anyone be rude. Rude isn't a behavior. What you've seen were behaviors that you interpreted as rude (interrupting, rolling their eyes, ignoring you, etc). Rude is the label you use to interpret and summarize behaviors you've seen.

And if you've ever tried to tell someone they were rude and they replied, "No, I wasn't." then you've experienced the problem of using labels vs. behaviors when you communicate.

Using labels muddies the message. Instead of saying, "You're being rude", you could have said, "When you interrupted me, that frustrated me." It's much, much harder to argue with the specific behaviors.

So why do we use labels? In part, it saves us a lot of time. "Rude' is a lot shorter than listing out all the behaviors. And, in part, get into the habit of it. We start using labels very early in our lives. My children learned to label other's behavior when they were toddlers. Many times they've reported to me and my wife that a sibling was being "mean".

But we learned early on, that like adults, kids use "mean" to cover a wide range of situations. So when they come and complain to me, I have learned that they don't always have the same definition for "mean" that I do. It could be that their sister came and took away the toy they were playing with. (I'd agree with the "mean" label there.) Or it could be that they tried to steal the toy, but were thwarted. (Their sister wasn't being very "mean" in that case.)

"Mean" doesn't always mean what you think it means.

What happens when you don't use behavior-based communication

• People can dismiss your statements as invalid

• People are unsure of what to do and so do nothing

• People may misunderstand you and guess (wrongly)

• People don't know how to fix the problem

• People transmit your message with very different interpretations

What happens when you do use behavior-based communication

• People can't argue with your statement (you did or didn't do a specific behavior)

• People know exactly how to improve

• People know exactly when they do or do not meet the standard

• It's easily reproducible--leaders who work with you can hold others to your standards exactly how you would have done

This might seem like I'm playing a game of semantics without any substance. But I believe that up to 80% of interpersonal conflict between friends comes from the arguers using different definitions for a word (or phrase) without realizing it.

For example, if I told you my wife said I was mean when we played a board game, what would that imply to you? What do you see happening when you hear me say that? A few years back, we had a real argument following the end of a board game when she did make that claim. I won that particular game. No, I crushed everyone else. It was awesome.

And my wife thought it was mean.

What she meant by 'mean' was that when I pulled ahead and took a strong lead in the game I didn't start throwing the game so that people weren't beat too badly. Instead, I used my strong position as leverage to slow my competitors down even more and win WAY ahead of everyone else.

In my competitive mind, when playing a strategy board game this was only logical behavior. But to my emotionally sensitive wife who measured a successful game by how much fun everyone had, this was "mean" play. We argued for a while before we finally got around to naming the behavior that frustrated her. What could have been a 2 minute conversation became a 30 minute disagreement. When I finally realized what she was really talking about (how I mostly shut down my brother, who was playing the game for the first time) I acknowledged she was right and apologized.

My wife and I were talking in generalized, summarized language which led to miscommunication and frustration.  We moved from saying, "You were mean tonight" to "When you shut down my city even when I was so far behind I'd never catch you it felt like you were trying to keep us from having any fun at all, since we weren't a threat anyway." That was something I could do something about. That was behavior-based communication.

How much conflict could you save in your life if you stopped labeling and started naming specific physical actions? How much would it change your conversations with your kids? Your friends? Your coworkers?

Can I Drive This Truck Over That Bridge? Pt 3 of 3 - Relational Capital & Energy

In the last two posts on this topic (Part 1 and Part 2), I talked about deciding when to deal with conflict by asking the question: Can I drive this truck over that bridge? The truck is the conversation--and the more difficult the issue the heavier the load. This post deals with the last 2 of 4 sub-questions that help me decide when to press the gas pedal and launch into a confrontation.

MAKE IT UP THE BRIDGE

3. Do I have the relational capital to issue this challenge?

Compare the "weight" of the challenge and the "strength" of the relationship. The stronger your relationships, the heavier the load you can carry on your truck.

 

One way that helps me is to think about my relationship like a bank account. The more I do to encourage, help, and serve the other person, the more I have in the account. But when I criticize, correct, or hurt the other person, I make a withdrawal. Make sure that you have enough in your account to cover the cost of the conversation. If you attempt too much, your check can bounce, so to speak, and not only do they not change and grow, but they usually charge your relationship an extra fee for reaching too far.

Or, to return to our main metaphor, not only does the truck not get there, it breaks the bridge and crashes into the water. You're worse off than when you started.

 

MAKE IT DOWN THE BRIDGE

4. Does my client have the energy to implement this change?

Change requires energy. Have you ever started working on a new habit, only to quit 3-4 weeks later? It's likely that you didn't change your mind--you still wanted to make the change. But you ran out of the energy to keep working on it.

For years, I tried to implement morning exercise habits and never made it past 2-3 weeks. I wanted to do it, but among my mistakes, I didn't pay attention to the energy required.

This is one of the reasons that I'd recommend tackling one issue at a time. It is possible to convince someone who trusts you to attempt to change far more than they have the energy to actually pull off. You'll get the truck up the bridge, but crash with success almost in your grasp.

  

CONCLUSION

In the end, like a real truck driver, you don't get paid for driving almost the whole way and losing your cargo in the river. You drive the truck so you can get to your destination, not just to see what happens. How often in your confrontations have you driven a truck into the river? Which of the four supporting questions is the one you most often forget?

What's the one change you can make to increase your chances of truly helping others grow when you offer challenging feedback?

Can I Drive This Truck Over That Bridge? Pt 2 - Heavy Loads & Permission

Confrontations don't have to be so risky. In my last post, I challenged you to think about when you confront, not just whether you're right. And I revealed the question that has made a huge difference to the confrontation conversations in my life:

Can I drive this truck over that bridge?

In the last post, I offered some principles that change how you think about hard conversations. In this post, I'm going to dive deeper into the diagram and help make it very clear how to when it's the right time to confront.

Specifically, there are four questions I ask. Their answers add up to the final answer to the big question above:

LOAD THE TRUCK

1. How challenging to the other person is the issue I'm bringing up?

 

The more emotionally difficult the issue is, the "heavier" the load in your truck and the stronger your bridge (relationship) needs to be.

 

In general, start with the easiest issues and as you experience success your relationships and their maturity grows. You can then work your way up to the heaviest issues.

 

Also, I strongly recommend taking one load at a time (dealing with only one issue). We all have multiple areas of our lives that need improvement and change. But the best people developers I know accept us before we fix all our issues AND therefore have the freedom to challenge us to work on only one or two substantial changes at a time.

 

CHECK WITH THE BRIDGE GUARD

2. Do you have permission to proceed?

Just because you see an issue doesn't mean you are allowed to address it. And just because you have permission in one area of life, doesn't mean you have it in another. Correction without permission feels like an attack. Ask permission and respect their answer. (Note roles like being a boss or a parent have built in permissions--even obligations--to offer challenges. The other 3 questions need to be addressed, but this one should be clear for them.)

 

Note: Sometimes you have to proceed anyway. There is a place for major life interventions, when someone is about to ruin their life long-term. It's like trying to jump the truck over the bridge. Oh, and it's about as easy to do successfully as it would be to really jump a huge 18-wheeler over a bridge. Do it only when you really believe there is no other choice and the rest of their life hangs in the balance.

In my next (and final post on this diagram/metaphor), I'll cover the last two sub-questions.

 

Can I Drive This Truck Over That Bridge? Confrontations- Part 1

Confrontation conversations are hard. They rarely go well and most people don't like them. But what if you could dramatically increase your success rate?

Most advice on this focuses on what to say. This is important, but not the whole picture. I used to believe that the truth was sufficient all by itself. If I shared truth in love, then the confrontation should be successful. But it didn't always work. In fact, it often didn't work. Something beyond the content of my correction made a big difference. (Of course, that's assuming I was always right--which would be bad assumption.)

This post is about a part of the confrontation that most people don't think enough about. Not only do you need to think about what to say, you need to be mindful about when you say it. Even the most carefully crafted conversation can go wrong if you do it at the wrong time.

 

I use this question to decide when to confront: Can I drive this truck over that bridge? 

There are some special relationships that I think have special rules, such as marriages or your boss--and yes, those are supposed to be two different relationship categories. :) But for the vast majority of relationships, I think about a truck on a bridge.

First, take a good look at this diagram--which not only has a truck and a bridge, but a cute bird. (It's a picture with something for everyone.)

 

BASIC DEFINITIONS

• The truck: the issue/problem you need to talk to the other person about
• The bridge: the strength of your relationship with the other person
• Driving the truck successfully across the bridge: the other person receives your challenge and growth happens (enter the cute birds singing)
• Driving onto the bridge, the bridge breaking, and the truck crashing into the river: the other person rejects your correction--no positive change and a good bit of frustration on both sides

Big Idea 1: Having a hard conversation is about helping the other person grow.

It's not about venting your emotions so you feel better. Success--getting to the other side of the bridge--is helping them change and grow, not you feeling better. Usually, the better job you do blowing off steam and feeling vindicated, the worse job you've done helping the other person grow.

Big Idea 2: Readiness is defined by the other person, not yourself.

You've prepped your content and are eager to correct--but it's not about your readiness. Yes, get that ready. But then pay attention to their state of mind and your current relationship with them.

Confrontations are much more successful when they are about helping the other person, not making life easier for you. 

Big Idea 3: You can never MAKE someone change.

No matter how well you prepare for confrontations, you will not achieve 100% success. You do have the responsibility to do your part well. But perfection on your part does not remove their part--personal choice. Even Jesus, the perfect man in my faith, had one of his hand picked disciples (Judas) choose not to reconcile in the end. Allow others the same right you want for yourself. Don't try to choose for them. And don't make other's choices your measure of success. Take responsibility for handling your part well--their response is between them and God.

In the next post, I'll show you some "sub-questions" I use to really decide whether I can drive the truck over the bridge (and I'll talk more about the details of the diagram, like the pillars on the bridge).