Discussing "Undiscussables"

If you carefully observe families and organizations long enough, you'll notice that there are some issues and subjects that are best described as "undiscussables." These are issues that are considered taboo or that people implicitly agree to avoid in an effort to keep the peace. This may include the proverbial subjects of sex, religion and politics that we are taught to avoid discussing at cocktail parties. In families and organizations, the lists of undiscussables are much more extensive and often much more sensitive than these big three. They hold power because everyone knows they are there, lurking just below the surface. The result of continuing to push down and ignore undiscussables is that we create a false sense of peace at the expense of not speaking the truth. Worse, we convince ourselves that we are doing the right thing. After all, its not polite to speak our minds, question our elders, challenge authority, or "call people out" when we disagree with them. Make no mistake. Keeping the peace is a very noble pursuit. It should not be confused; however, with suppressing the truth. While it is accurate that the truth can sometimes hurt, speaking truth to others is the best path to follow over the long term. The key is to speak the truth while being respectful and keeping the best interests of people in mind.

One of the best books that I have read over the past five or so years is Crucial Conversations: Tools for talking when stakes are high. It was a New York Times best seller and I liked it so much that I went through an extensive certification process in order to teach it while at Duke University. I recall that in my exuberance one day I told a training class, "If I were marooned on a desert island and could only take a handful of books with me, one would be Crucial Conversations." Of course, an astute person piped up and said, "If you were marooned on a desert island, exactly who would you need to have a crucial conversation with, yourself?" "Good point," I replied, thinking to myself that I was an idiot and needed to rework my pitch line. Anyway, the book is excellent. It provides very practical strategies for engaging in difficult discussions. The reason we need good strategies is because issues that have a relational aspect to them never get truly resolved unless all parties invest themselves in productive dialogue. It's impossible to work out an issue like this by avoiding a conversation or bludgeoning your way through one.

The authors of the book describe a crucial conversation as one where the stakes are high, opinions vary and emotions run strong. When these three factors converge, they create the makings of a perfect storm. In the midst of the swirling wind and waves, we are faced with a very important decision: we can either rationally talk out the underlying issue or allow our emotions to take over, leading us to either clam up or lash out. Unfortunately, since this decision is often made at a subconscious level with lightning quick speed, our emotions often rule the day, smothering our rationality. We literally "act out" in the behavioral sense. We all have experience acting out. It is never pretty or productive. When we don't fully engage our brains, our primal fight or flight instincts get triggered instead. These instincts may be very helpful when being confronted by an angry bear but they are counterproductive in human relationships.

The image that comes to mind of a person acting out is something like a temper tantrum, verbal tirade or bullying. This is what the authors of Crucial Conversations describe as "violence." It includes the verbal behaviors of attacking, labeling and controlling. Individuals using these behaviors are trying to force their ideas, perspectives and viewpoints into the discussion and shut down any opposition, even though they may be doing so at a subconscious level. This type of behavior is easy to recognize; however, acting out can also include what the authors call "silence." It is expressed through the verbal and non-verbal behaviors of masking, avoiding and withdrawing. Interestingly, both violence and silence are driven by fear.

"You hesitate to stab me with a word, and know not - silence is the sharper sword."

 - Samuel Johnson

Fear can act like venom if it is allowed to take root. It must be extracted for relationships and organizations to thrive. The strategy for doing this involves establishing the safety that individuals and groups need in order to engage in dialogue. This is something that skilled counselors are trained to do and that managers and team members need to learn as well. The first step is to have the courage to put important issues on the table and then to continually look for signs of violence and silence, since they indicate that safety is at issue. Violence is best counteracted by efforts to establish and maintain mutual purpose. Silence is best addressed by seeking to establish and maintain mutual respect. Let's look at a quick example. As a manager of a team, you could open a meeting by saying, "It's obvious that you all have some very negative feelings about how promotions have been handled in the group. I think you're bitter that advancement has been based on performance and not on seniority. I'd like to address this so we can improve the attitudes around here." Saying this would certainly be brave (it may express your truth and your purpose) but it would also add insult to injury. It's best to avoid judgments and "calling out" everyone in the group. Any statements that can be accented by a pointed index finger or another digit will never be received well. A better approach would be to prepare the team by letting them know you plan to talk about promotional practices and career development at the next staff meeting. At the appropriate time during the meeting, you might say, "I'd like our team meetings and all of our other interactions to be open, honest and respectful. I believe this is the way that teams work best together. I've spent a lot of time listening and observing and I know that some of you have concerns about how promotional decisions have been made in the past. I'd like to hear and discuss your concerns. I just have a few ground rules for our team discussions: (1) we speak candidly; (2) we speak respectfully, and (3) we work to achieve mutual understanding and closure. I'd like all of us to adopt these ground rules and use them to guide our discussions." There is obviously more to it but you get the point.

Don't expect that this type of approach will work instantly, because it won't. People will not share their undiscussables until they feel safe in doing so. They will need to see that you are genuine and consistent -- two qualities that provide the foundation for trustworthiness. Just stay the course and continue to do your part to drive fear out of the workplace. The more you work to air the undiscussables the less power they will hold.