The EQ edge: How leaders handle tough work conversations

Garreth Hanley:
This is INTHEBLACK, a leadership, strategy and business podcast brought to you by CPA Australia.

Jacqueline Blondell:
Welcome to CPA Australia's INTHEBLACK podcast. I'm Jacqueline Blondell, and today we're diving into the sensitive area of having difficult conversations at work. With me today is emotional intelligence expert, Amy Jacobson, author of The Emotional Intelligence Advantage. She's going to help me tackle five of the most difficult conversations we face as leaders. Welcome to INTHEBLACK's Career Hacks, Amy.

Amy Jacobson:
Thanks, Jacqueline. It's so nice to be here.

Jacqueline Blondell:
Well, let's start off with something you mention in your latest book. You say that IQ, your IQ, lands you the job, but your EQ gets you the promotion. Can you explain why emotional intelligence is so important to career progression, particularly at this time?

Amy Jacobson:
Absolutely. So we know that most applications for a job start with your resume. And your resume is going to be filled with your IQ, so it's going to have your experience, your technical ability, the courses, the qualifications that you've done. But we know that once you get past that IQ area, and look, I think we've all worked with people that are technically brilliant at what they do, but it really comes down to are you a decent person to work with?

And we know out there that there are people that will be in a job that they absolutely love, but they will leave that job because of the people that they're working with. Where there are people that are in jobs that they maybe don't love, but they really enjoy the people they work with, and they'll actually stay there for that component. So we know that your success in the workplace is your ability to be able to balance that IQ and your emotional intelligence.

Jacqueline Blondell:
Let's turn to tricky conversations then. We all hate them, and why is it? Is it fear of conflict or are there other emotions at play?

Amy Jacobson:
It's absolutely fear. Fear is the number one thing that's driving it. And it really comes down to it's not just that fear of conflict, it's also the fear of the unknown. So when we have to have a difficult conversation, it's the amygdala part of our brain, which is our emotional brain, that kicks in that fight or flight response.

Because all of a sudden we don't know how this conversation's going to go. We don't know if they're going to respond with anger, whether they're going to be upset, whether they're going to take it really well. But we also don't know whether they're going to judge us as well on our delivery or whether it'll ruin a relationship that we have.

So as soon as we start to think about having that difficult conversation, our mind goes into that protection mode where it's trying to protect us based on those potential fears actually coming true. Which is why the first step, I always say, with a difficult conversation actually happens before the conversation even starts, and that is being really careful not to over practise, or over research, or over prepare for the conversation.

Because what we tend to do to feel safer going into that conversation, to kind of cover our fear or to put our fear at ease, is we build this ammunition pack, right? This pack that we take into the conversation that has all of the stats and the reports and the examples of why we're right and they're wrong. And it gives us that sense of security when we go into the conversation, but what it actually does is it means we're completely in our own head and we're likely to send the other person into defence mode. And that's where difficult conversations actually start.

Jacqueline Blondell:
So how do you stop this over-catastrophizing and how do you prepare and be natural about approaching that conversation?

Amy Jacobson:
We've got to go back to that natural human instinct. So we know that human beings, the core thing about human beings is our connection. It's that communication and that connection. Now, when we get to the point that we've owned the fact that this difficult conversation has to happen, that's when we want to start looking at, okay, what is the outcome that we're looking for? What are the potential outcomes that we're looking for in this conversation?

Because once we get into it, if that fear or that emotional brain is driving, we're more worried about ticking the box of having that conversation than we are of actually getting the right outcome.

So to prepare better for it, it's about yes, understanding. Certainly having that level of preparation where you have got examples and things, but not leading with that. It's being able to look and be curious and understand how did we get to this point? So what has happened and what has led to this point? So if you're having a conversation about underperformance, it's important to understand what is actually driving that underperformance.

Because it's going to be a very different outcome to that conversation if what's driving that underperformance is a lack of confidence or a lack of training or a lack of skill, as opposed to somebody's lack of motivation or lack of enjoying the job or something really terrible is happening in their life outside of work at the moment.

So really focusing on what are the potential outcomes? What am I hoping to achieve from this conversation? And go into it curious, asking the right questions.

Jacqueline Blondell:
So that's one of the difficult conversations is underperformance. Let's look at another one, which is probably one of the most stressful things that can happen to anyone, which is redundancy. When you've got to make someone redundant, and you write about this in your book, what's the best way to approach this? I mean, it's never going to be pleasant for either party, but how do you go about it?

Amy Jacobson:
I believe that this is one of the toughest things that we have to do as leaders is to make somebody redundant. And making somebody redundant, if it has gone down that path, a lot of the time it's a decision completely based on the organisation and not based on that person's ability.

So to be able to sit in front of somebody who is performing that, who is contributing and doing a good job, to make them redundant and let them know that they've no longer had a job is a tough call. And when we go into these conversations, the human side is going to be so important and you're really going to be looking to follow the emotion.

Now, it's at this point in time that we kind of want to pull back the emotional brain and go quite factual. So we are going to go into the conversation and let them know, here are the circumstances, this is what has led to, unfortunately, this is the outcome of it. And then give the person a chance to process it. Just give them the chance to process it through to feel all of the feels that are going through their head, and give them the space and the environment to do that.

To rush them through it, say what you need to have and then get straight out the door, is a terrible way to have that conversation. But if you can sit there in the presence and just pause and let them feel the feels and then ask the questions, and then look at how you can help that person.

Because even though you've just made them redundant, there are many ways that you can help them. Whether it is helping them to sit down and draw up a plan of what they're going to do next, help them to rebuild their resume, help them to connect with people in your network, help them by being a reference. There's so many different ways that you can turn that conversation by the end into actions, and into a way to help them progress through the process. So that's what you're looking for.

Jacqueline Blondell:
What about the other side of the coin, when you have to let someone go because their performance is really, really poor and they're never going to make the grade?

Amy Jacobson:
Tough, right?

Jacqueline Blondell:
Yes.

Amy Jacobson:
This is a method that I use and refer to in the book. It's called Ask, Ask, Tell. And when you have somebody who is really not performing, so your conversation's going to start more around that underperformance, right? To really understand what it is that's driving and whether it can be fixed or whether it can be changed or improved.

Once you get to the point where you know that this person cannot deliver what they need to deliver in this job, less is actually best. Because the conversations prior to that should have been quite in-depth. They should have been asking a lot of questions.

So you will have had at least two conversations where you're asking the questions of, "What do you think about your job? Do you enjoy your job? How do you find your performance is going? How can we support you to lift that performance?" So all of these questions that you've asked in the lead-up to this last conversation should have been encouraging the other person to own it, to own the situation, and to engage their emotional intelligence.

But once you get to this last step, continuing to ask questions is not going to get you the outcome you're looking for. So this is where we flick into tell mode. This is where we tell and state the facts. So this is a logical brain coming in to say, "We've had these conversations, or here are the expectations of the role that you're performing. Unfortunately, your performance does not align to that, so here is what is going to happen."

And you're actually going through with those actions and telling them this is when it will happen. This is why it'll happen. This is how it all happened, and this is who is involved with it. So getting really factual.

Jacqueline Blondell:
Let's look at the internal promotion scenario where someone, maybe a couple of colleagues have applied for the same job and only one's got it. You've got to let the other one know that they're unsuccessful and you know they're going to be super disappointed and probably in denial. What do you do then?

Amy Jacobson:
Relationships are in question, when we had these conversations. The reason being is that if the person was an external applicant, it's still very hard to deliver the message. But when it's internal people, you know the delivery of this message could actually impact their performance as well.

So when you're going into these conversations, you want to be really honest with feedback. You want to talk about the things that they actually do really well and they contribute in, that would've been fantastic in this role. But you want to identify the gaps, and the gaps will be relevant to what that team or what that role requires today. Now, that might be very different to what it required 12 months ago.

It might be very different to what it requires in the next 12 months, but you want to be able to explain to the person that what they bring to the job isn't quite what that team or what that role requires at this point in time.

But what you do want to do is use it also as a growth opportunity. So sitting down with that person and say, "Okay, this is the part of the role that is required at the moment that you're not a hundred percent filling. Let's build some development goals. Let's build a plan around how we can help to develop you in those areas and that skill in the next 12 months, so that when an opportunity or a job comes up like this in the future, you are more aligned to the requirement."

Jacqueline Blondell:
Let's talk about two staff member or a couple of staff members in a more personal situation. We're all different with different personalities and values, and conflict between staff members can be awkward. How do you approach this and what happens if the situation is ignored?

Amy Jacobson:
The first thing we want to make sure is that we don't avoid it. That we do not sweep it under the carpet, we don't just expect it to go away or that they will be able to resolve it straight away. It needs addressing.

The first thing that we would do is to sit down with each individual by themselves to have a chat. Because there's a good chance that their emotions are running high at this point, that they've got something to say. They need to vent, they need to talk to you about why they're feeling this way and what their part of the story is.

Because it is very normal to have a conflict in a workplace because when you look at it, we are bringing together people with completely different skill sets, very different interests, and we're expecting them to spend a lot of time together. So it is normal for them to have that little bit of conflict around their different values, their beliefs, their opinions, their personality styles. But what we want to encourage for them is to actually use that as something to complement each other. So how do you work with each other rather than against each other?

Now, coming into these conversations, you want to let them speak because it's obviously their emotions are going to be high and they're going to need to get off their chest. The he said, she said, or this is what happened and this is why I'm not happy. But at the end of the day, we've got to turn around to them and ask them, "How do we fix this?" We being a key word in there is saying, we're doing this together, you don't have to do it alone, we're doing it together. But it's also getting them to think about, well, what is the solution? So it's moving them past the problem and into solution mode.

Now, quite often with conflict, there is no solution. It's not like you can force one of them to change their personality or change their opinions or change their values and beliefs. So when we start to ask this question, "How do we fix this?" This is when we start to talk to them about the fact that if they're not planning to go anywhere, to leave this role or to move organisations, and you know that the other person isn't either, how do you make this work? Because you're going to need to work together day in, day out, and it's not going to be a great thing to come in and have this conflict in play. So how do we fix this? And continue to ask that question, wanting them to buy into it and find a solution.

Jacqueline Blondell:
Personal issues, that's another tricky area because they're just that they're personal. What are some of these types of individual issues that people have that other people might complain about at work, and how do you tackle them?

Amy Jacobson:
The worst thing that we can do with personal issues is start with the statement of, "This is not personal or don't take it personally." Because it 100% is. It is a personal issue and it is going to impact that person personally. And these personal issues can range from anything to do with hygiene issues, whether it is an odour, whether it is a strong perfume, whatever it is, inappropriate clothing at work, to behavioural issues, to cultural sensitivity inclusion, even into mental health concerns.

So when we start to look at these personal issue conversations, it's really about being able to sit down and start with the facts of why you're actually addressing this. So you need to be able to say there has been a complaint received regarding the strong body odour or perfume. What is the impact that it's having? Because if you cannot share with somebody, based on these personal issues, the actual impact that it's having, it's going to be very hard for them to accept that this is an issue and why they should change.

So say, for instance, it is a really strong perfume, it might be the fact that you have people that work around them that struggle with migraines, and therefore a really strong perfume actually triggers migraines for them. The inappropriate clothing at work, the impact might be that it's impacting the brand and what we stand for, the culture we come with, it's the way that we want to identify the identity of the organisation. So regardless of what it is you're talking about, you want to state exactly what it is, why it's come to your attention and the impact that it's having. And then throw it over to them. What are their thoughts on this?

Jacqueline Blondell:
Wouldn't their natural thoughts be, "Who said this about me?" What happens when you're confronted with that question by the person?

Amy Jacobson:
You'll need to decide at the time whether it is relevant for them to know who or where the complaint actually come from. I would say 99% of the time it's not relevant where it came from. And it is hard, because as a human being we want to find somebody to blame. When we're in an uncomfortable situation or we're feeling embarrassed, we want to find somebody to blame.

So you don't want to give them that person, because that is just meaning they're going to focus on the person rather than the issue that was raised. So at that point, I would be saying, "I don't believe that the person or where this came from is important." Or as a leader, you might even say, "This is something that I've raised. It's something that I've noticed." And take on that ownership. Because if you don't agree with the complaint, if you don't agree with the issue, then you probably shouldn't be at this point having the conversation in the first place.

Jacqueline Blondell:
You write in your book that time is the greatest excuse we all use to avoid that difficult conversation. Why is this such a dangerous concept?

Amy Jacobson:
Time is the number one excuse that we use in our mind. And the reason why we tend to blame time is because it takes the blame off us. So it wasn't our choice, it wasn't our doing, it was time's fault, we just didn't have time to do it. But really what that's doing is it's just justifying bad behaviour. Because when we look at the truth, the truth is is that time is the one thing that we all have the same amount of in every day. In every day we have 24 hours. And when you look, there are people around the world doing incredible things in 24 hours. And what we choose to do in that 24-hour period is 100% our own choice and priority.

So when we start to look at that and say, "I don't have time," we want to take that ownership back and say, "We did have time." We had 24 hours in the day, the same as anybody else did, but the reason why we didn't do it is because we didn't make it a priority. And what is the reason behind why we feel that this was not a priority? And it might be based on the other things that have happened that day, but it also, highly likely, will be driven by that sense of fear. That sense of fear, because our mind is always weighing up, what do I stand to gain in this situation versus what do I stand to lose in this situation? And if the gain is great enough, we'll do it. But if the loss is too big as well, we're going to start questioning it.

So when you're saying to yourself, "I don't have time to have this conversation," I want you to own it and actually accept the fact you do have time. Why are you not making it a priority? What are you avoiding? What are you trying to justify in your head?

Jacqueline Blondell:
Brilliant, Amy. Well, thanks so much for sharing your fascinating insights with us today.

Amy Jacobson:
You're very welcome. Thanks for having me.

Jacqueline Blondell:
For our listeners eager to learn more, please check out the show notes for the links to Amy's website and her books, and additional resources from CPA Australia. And don't forget to subscribe to INTHEBLACK, and share this episode with your colleagues and friends in the business community. Until next time, thanks for listening.

Garreth Hanley:
To find out more about our other podcasts, check out the show notes for this episode. And we hope you can join us again next time for another episode of INTHEBLACK.