Text.

Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

Prologue

The Harvard Negotiation Project is well known for a book on negotiation and conflict resolution.
of problems titled Yes... Alright! Since its publication in 1981, readers around the
the world has been convinced that negotiations are more effective when they move away from the
opposing positions and work together to satisfy the interests of both parties.

The 'Harvard Method', as it is sometimes called, emphasizes the importance of easy communication.
double-sided. However, both in negotiations and in daily life, for good reasons
oh bad, we often don't talk to each other, and we don't want to. And sometimes, when we do
we talk, things only get worse. The feelings - anger, guilt, pain - increase. Each
We are more sure that we are right, and the same happens to our opponents.

This is the theme of this book and the reason why it is such a useful and relevant book. It explores what it is
what makes conversations difficult, why we avoid them, and why we often handle them
bad. Although the research began motivated by a desire to help negotiators, the
the topic has much deeper implications. This book addresses an essential aspect of the
human interaction. It deals with how we treat children, parents, owners,
tenants, the suppliers, the clients, the bankers, the agents, the neighbors, the members of
team, the patients, the employees, and colleagues of all kinds.

In this book, my colleagues Doug, Bruce, and Sheila take us by the hand and teach us how to open the
doors to greater satisfaction in any relationship. They explain to us what the mental attitude is.
and from the heart and the expressive skills we must have to achieve communication
effective, through the abyss of real differences in experiences, beliefs and
feelings, both in our personal relationships and in business, dealings
commercial or international affairs.

These are the skills necessary to handle a serious disagreement within a company and
transform it from a burden in competitiveness into a driving force for innovation. These are the skills
What can we all employ to have happier and more lasting marriages and make relationships
between parents and teenagers something much better than a war zone. These skills can
heal the wounds that keep us apart. They offer us a better future.

Back after serving several years in the United States Army during World War II
World War, I discovered that my roommate in college, two of my best
friends and dozens of my classmates had died in that same war. Since
So, I have worked to improve the skills with which we deal with our differences;
to improve the future prospects of our children; and to involve others in this cause.
This brilliant and engaging book, written by my younger colleagues from the Negotiation Project
Harvard gives me the optimistic feeling that we are making progress in all three aspects.

ROGER FISHER

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 1
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What Needs to Be Said

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

Introduction

Requesting a raise. Ending a romantic relationship. Writing a critical review of a...

acting. Saying no to someone in need. Confronting with disrespectful behavior or
offensive. To show disagreement with the majority in a group. To offer apologies.

At work, at home, and on the street, every day we face or avoid difficult conversations.

A Difficult Conversation Is Anything That Is Hard to Talk About

Sexuality, race, gender, politics, and religion soon come to mind as topics.
difficult to discuss, and they are for many of us. But this discomfort is not limited to the
important themes. Whenever we feel vulnerable or believe that our self-esteem is
committed, when the matters at hand are important and the outcome is uncertain,
when we have a special interest in what is being discussed or in the people with whom
We discuss, there is a possibility that we feel a conversation is difficult.

We all have conversations that we fear and that seem unpleasant to us,
conversations that we avoid or that we face as if they were a bitter drink:

One of the oldest engineers in your company, an old friend, has become a
loading. Management has chosen you to be fired. You overheard, unintentionally, that your mother-in-law
she said to a neighbor that her children are spoiled and undisciplined. As you intend to spend
A few days at her house, she doesn’t know if you two will be able to get through the week without having a confrontation.

The project he is working on took twice the time of the deadline you offered.
to the client. You cannot stop charging him for the extra time, but you are afraid to tell him.

You want to tell your father how much you love him, but you fear that moment of intimacy.
make them both feel uncomfortable.

And of course, there are the everyday things, conversations that seem more ordinary.
but which, however, cause anxiety: returning merchandise without having the receipt, asking for your
secretary to make some photocopies, tell the builders not to smoke inside the house.
These are interactions that one puts off if possible and handles clumsily when there aren’t any.
more remedy. Situations that one practices over and over again mentally, trying to think about
anticipating what he will say, and wondering afterward what he must have said.

What makes these situations so difficult to face? It is our fear of the

consequences, whether we face the issue or not.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 2
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

The dilemma: To avoid or to confront, it seems there is no ideal path.

We all know the dilemma. We keep going round and round with the same questions: Should I touch
this topic? Or should I keep it to myself?

Maybe the neighbor's dog keeps him awake at night. "Should I talk to him?" you wonder.
First decide not: 'Maybe I'll stop barking. Maybe I'll get used to the barks.' But then
the dog starts barking again, and you decide that the next day you are going to talk to the neighbor once and for all.
for all.

So he reveals himself for other reasons. The idea of fighting with the neighbor over his dog puts him
nervous. You want to make a good impression; maybe you are exaggerating. Finally, you think again that it
it's better not to say anything and that calms his nerves. But just when he falls asleep, the damn...
the dog barks again and its cycle of indecision starts anew.

There doesn't seem to be an option that allows you to sleep. Why is it so difficult to decide if you are facing the
problem or avoid it? Because deep down we know the truth: if we try to evade the problem,
we feel that they are abusing us, our anger boils, we wonder why not
we impose ourselves and take away from the other person every opportunity to improve things. But if
we face the problem, things may get worse. We may be rejected or attacked;
we can hurt a person unintentionally; and the relationship will be damaged.

Diplomatic hand grenades do not exist

Desperate to get out of the dilemma, we wonder if it is possible to act with such tact, to be so
overwhelmingly kind, that everything ends well.

Tact is good, but it is not the solution for difficult conversations. Tact does not make the
the conversation with his father is less intense, nor does it take away his client's anger over the extra charge.
There is also no diplomatic way to remove your friend from the position, nor to let him know about it.
mother-in-law who drives him crazy.

Saying something difficult is like throwing a hand grenade. Wrapped in sugar, thrown with force or
Gently, a hand grenade will always cause harm. No matter what you do, there is no way to
throwing a hand grenade with the touch of avoiding the consequences. And keeping the problem to oneself
For you, it's not better either. Deciding not to say something that will cause discomfort is like holding back.
the grenade when it has already removed the safety.

So we feel stuck. We need more effective advice than 'Be diplomatic.'

Try to maintain a positive thought. The problems are deeper and must be that way.
the solutions.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 3
 Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

This book can help

There is hope. In our work on the Harvard Negotiation Project, we have

found with thousands of people having all kinds of difficult conversations, and we have
discovered a way to make those conversations less tense and more
productive. A way to more creatively handle difficult problems, treating them as such
time to people with respect and integrity. An approach that will help your peace of mind, whether
whether others share it or not.

We are going to help you get out of the hand grenade once and for all, getting you out of the problem of
send (and receive) messages. We will show you how to change the battle of unpleasant messages
for something more constructive that we call instructive conversation.

The reward is worth the effort

Of course, changing the way you handle difficult conversations requires effort.
the same way as changing your swing in golf, adapting to driving on the other side of the
road or learning a new language, this change can make you feel uncomfortable at first. And
It may seem dangerous: stepping out of your accustomed territory is rarely easy and is never without risk.
of risks. It requires you to look at yourself rigorously, and sometimes to change and evolve. But
muscle pain from unaccustomed exercise is better than the sharp sting of the ...
injuries received in an unnecessary fight.

And the possible rewards are abundant. If you follow the steps outlined in this book, you will see
that difficult conversations become easier and cause you less anxiety. You will be
more effective and you will be happier with the results. And as your anxiety decreases and your
satisfaction rises, you will realize that you are more often deciding to hold conversations than
should not have avoided.

In fact, the people we have worked with and who have learned to manage their
more demanding conversations inform us that their anxiety is lower and their effectiveness is greater in
in all cases. They realize that they are less afraid of what others may say.
the feeling of freedom of action is higher in difficult situations, they have more self-confidence
themselves and a greater sense of self-respect and integrity. They also learn that, in the majority
of cases, handle difficult topics and embarrassing situations constructively
It strengthens relationships. And this is too good an opportunity to pass up.

Skeptical? A few considerations

It is understandable that you may be skeptical. You may have struggled with issues like these.
for weeks, months, or years. The problems are complex and the people related to
They are not easy to deal with. How can reading a book change this situation?

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 4
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

There are limits to what you can learn about human relationships by reading a
book. We do not know the specific traits of the situation you are facing, or in what
their particular weaknesses and strengths. But we have discovered that, no matter what in
what context, the things that make conversations difficult, and the mistakes of
thought and action that create those difficulties are the same. We all share the
the same fears and we fall into the same traps. It doesn't matter what or who you face,
this book can help you.

It is true that some situations may not improve, regardless of how skilled you are.
sea. The people involved can be so emotionally confused, what is in
game can be so important, or the conflict so intense, that a book — or even the intervention
from a professional - they probably won't help. However, for each truly
desperate, there are a thousand who seem to be but are not. Frequently, people approach us and
She tells us: "I want you to give me some advice, but I warn you that the situation cannot be fixed." And
they are wrong. Together we are capable of finding a different path, which will end up having
a positive impact on the conversation.

Certainly, you may not be ready or able to face or face again

a difficult situation or a difficult relationship. You may be hurting, healing wounds or
you may just need to step away for a while. You may be angry or confused about it.
what he wants. But even if he is not yet ready to have a real conversation, this book
can help you discern your feelings and choose a path towards a healthier place.

We need to look elsewhere

What can we suggest to you that you haven't thought of already? Probably quite a lot. Because the...
the key is not whether you have done everything possible to find them a 'solution' to the
difficult conversations, but whether you have been looking in the right places. Essentially, the
the problem is not in your actions but in your way of thinking. As long as you limit yourself to thinking
What you should do differently in difficult conversations, you will not find anything new.

This book offers you abundant advice on how to have a difficult conversation. But it
first and foremost, it will help you to better understand what you are facing and why
what makes sense is to move from a position where 'messages are delivered' to a 'position
instructional." Only then will you be able to understand and implement the steps of a
instructive conversation

Difficult conversations are a normal part of life

No matter how skilled you become, difficult conversations will always be a challenge.
We authors know this from personal experience. We know what it feels like to feel deeply.
afraid of hurting someone or being hurt ourselves. We know what it means to feel consumed
for the feeling of guilt due to the way our actions have affected others, or because of the

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 5
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Autores.Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

way in which we disappoint ourselves. We know that, even with the best
intentions, human relationships can erode or become entangled, and, if we're honest,
We also know that we do not always have the best intentions. We know how fragile they are.
the heart and the soul.

So it's better to set realistic goals. Eliminating fear and anxiety is a very
a little unrealistic. Reducing fear and anxiety, and learning to manage what we have left of them, is
more likely. Achieving perfect results without taking risks is something that doesn’t happen. Achieving better
results within certain probabilities may be possible.

And that is enough, for most of us. Because although we are fragile, we have a remarkable
recovery capacity.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 6
 Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What Needs to Be Said

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

Part One: The Problem

1. Distinguish between the three conversations

Juan is about to have a difficult conversation.

He tells us: "The other afternoon Miguel, a good friend of mine and sometimes my client, called me. 'I am in
a problem,' he told me. 'I need to design and print a brochure for tomorrow afternoon.' It turns out
that his graphic designer had left and he was under a lot of pressure.

I was in the middle of another project, but Miguel was my friend, so I left everything and
I worked all night on his brochure.

Early in the morning, Miguel reviewed the proofs and approved the printing. At noon, I deposited
the printed brochures on his desk. He was exhausted but happy to have been able to help him.
Then I returned to my office and found this message from Miguel on the answering machine:

Well, you actually messed up this brochure! I know you were under time pressure.
but... (sigh). The profit picture is not clear enough, and it's a bit tilted.
It's a complete disaster. This is an important client, I suppose you will fix it immediately.
Call me as soon as you arrive.

You can imagine how that message hit me. The picture was crooked but it was almost
imperceptible. I called Miguel immediately.

The conversation went like this:

JUAN: Hi, Miguel, I received your message.

MIGUEL: Yes, look Juan, this work has to be done again.

JUAN: Well, hold on a second. I agree that it’s not perfect, but the painting is
clearly presented. No one can be confused.

MIGUEL: Come on, Juan. You know as well as I do that we can't send this to the client like that.
How are you.

JUAN: Well, I think that...

MIGUEL: There's nothing to discuss. Look, we all make mistakes. Just fix it and that's it.
is.

JUAN: Why didn't you say anything this morning when you saw the evidence?

MIGUEL: I am not the one who is supposed to correct the tests, Juan. I have a zeal.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 7
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What Needs to Be Said

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

It's tremendous that this is done and done well. Either you are in the team or you are not. I need a yes.
Oh no. Are you going to redo the brochure?

JUAN: (Pause) Alright, I'm going to do it again.

This exchange has all the characteristics of a difficult conversation that is happening
derailing. Months later, Juan still feels very bad about this conversation and
his relationship with Miguel remains strained. He wonders what he could have done differently, and
What can be done about it now.

But before we get into that, let's see what the conversation between Juan and Miguel can teach us.
about how difficult conversations work.

How to decode the structure of difficult conversations

It is surprising that, despite seeming to have an infinite variety of difficult conversations,

they share a common structure. When one is entangled in the details and in anxiety
From a difficult conversation, it is not easy to perceive this structure. But it is essential to understand it.
structure to improve the way you handle your most difficult conversations.

There is more than what meets the ear

In the conversation between Juan and Miguel, the words reveal only the surface of what is
reality is happening. To make the structure of a difficult conversation visible, we need to not
only understand what is said, but what is not said. We need to understand what the
participants think and feel, but do not say it to one another. In a difficult conversation, for
Generally, the action is in what is not said.

Let's see what Juan is thinking and feeling, but not saying, as the conversation progresses.
advances

What Juan thought and felt but did not say What Juan and Miguel really said

How can you leave me a message like that, after what happened?

I leave everything, I missed a dinner appointment with my wife and

I stay working all night!

JUAN: Hello, Miguel, I received your message.
MIGUEL: Yes, look Juan, this job has to
to become again.
This reaction is out of all proportion. Neither
at least an expert could say that the chart is
twisted. And at the same time, I am furious with myself
same for having fallen into such a stupid mistake. JUAN: Well, wait a second. I agree.
it's not perfect, but the picture is

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 8
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

presented clearly. No one can be confused.

MIGUEL: Come on, Juan. You know as well as I do
that we cannot send this to the client as is
is.
Miguel tries to intimidate his colleagues to
do what he wants, but he shouldn't treat me that way
that way. I am your friend! I want to defend my
position, but I don't want to have a big fight over it
this. I can't afford to lose Miguel as
client or like a friend. I feel trapped.
JUAN: Well, I think that...
MIGUEL: There is nothing to discuss. Look, we all...
We made a mistake. Just fix it and that's it.
Did we make a mistake? This is not my fault. You do it.
you passed, remember?
JUAN: Why didn't you say anything this morning when
Did you see the evidence?

Is that what you think I am, a corrector of

tests?
MIGUEL: I am not the one who is supposed to
Correct the tests, Juan. I have a tremendous eagerness.
that this is done and done well. Or you are in
the team or you're not. I need a yes or a no. Are you going to
redo the brochure?
I'm fed up with all this. I'm going to get on top of
his stinginess. The best I can do is to be
generous and redo it.
JUAN: (Pause) Okay, I'm going to do it again.

Meanwhile, there are also many things that Miguel is thinking and feeling, but that he does not
Dice. Miguel wonders if, to begin with, he should have given this job to Juan. He hasn't been very
satisfied with Juan's work in the past, but decided to take a risk and give him another chance.
his friend. Miguel is disappointed and wonders if it was a good decision to hire the
Juan's services — personally or professionally.

The first observation is simple: many things are happening between Juan and Miguel.
which are not spoken.

That's typical. In fact, the difference between what one is really thinking and what is
saying is part of what complicates a conversation. One is paying attention to everything that
he goes inside, and he is not sure about what he should say and what is better to stay silent. And one knows that
Simply saying what you are thinking is unlikely to facilitate the conversation.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 9
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Have to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

In a difficult conversation, three conversations really take place.

By studying hundreds of conversations of all kinds, we have discovered that there is a structure.
What underlies what is happening, and understanding that structure in itself is a powerful
first step in improving our way of handling these conversations. It turns out that,
regardless of the topic, our thoughts and feelings fit into the same three
categories or "conversations". And in each of these conversations we make mistakes
predictable, that distort our thoughts and feelings and get us into trouble.

Everything that Miguel and Juan say, think, and feel falls within one of these three
"conversations". The same happens in difficult conversations around the world.

1. The conversation of 'what happened'. Most difficult conversations involve a

disagreement about what happened or should have happened. Who said what and who did what? Who has
reason, who wanted to say what, and who was to blame? Juan and Miguel discuss these matters,
both aloud and mentally. Is it necessary to redo the picture? Is Miguel trying to
Intimidate Juan? Who should have seen the mistake?

2. The conversation of feelings. In every difficult conversation, feelings are also expressed and addressed.
Respond to questions about feelings. Are my feelings valid? Appropriate? Should I
recognize them or deny them, put them on the table or keep them to myself? What do I do in relation to the
the other person's feelings? What happens if they feel furious or hurt? The thoughts of
Juan and Miguel are loaded with feelings. For example, "Is this the way you give me the...
gracias?", muestra rabia, y "Estoy bajo una presión tremenda", revela ansiedad. Estos
Feelings are not expressed directly in conversation, but they still leak out.

3. The conversation of identity. This is the conversation that each of us has.

concerning oneself about what the situation means. We internally discuss whether this means
whether we are competent or not, good or bad people, deserving of affection or unpleasant. What
what impact this can have on our own image and self-esteem, our future and our
well-being? Our answers to these questions largely determine whether we feel
"balanced" during the conversation, or we feel off-center or anxious. In the
conversación entre Juan y Miguel, Juan lucha con el sentimiento de haber sido incompetente, lo
which makes him feel less balanced. And Miguel wonders if he acted foolishly by hiring the
Juan's services.

Every difficult conversation involves getting tangled up in these three conversations, so that for
To manage them successfully, it is necessary to learn how to operate effectively in each of these.
three fields. Managing all three simultaneously may seem difficult, but it's easier than
facing the consequences of blindly committing to difficult conversations.

What we cannot change and what we can change

No matter how skilled we become, there are certain challenges in each of the three conversations.
that we cannot change. We will continue to get involved in situations where unraveling

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 10
 Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

what happened will be much more complicated than we initially suspected. Each one has
information that the other lacks, and getting each one up to speed is not easy. And also
we will continue to face emotionally charged situations that seem to us
threatening because they endanger important aspects of our identity.

What we can change is the way we respond to each of these challenges. The typical
is that instead of finding out what information the other person may have that we do not
let's assume that we know everything necessary to understand and explain things. Instead
instead of trying to manage our feelings constructively, we try to hide them, or we
we let go in a way that we later regret. Instead of exploring the issues
deeper issues that may be bothering us (or others), we continue talking
as if the problem had nothing to do with us — and we do not recognize what is at the bottom
from our anxiety.

By understanding these mistakes and the havoc they cause, we can begin to
trace better methods. Let's explore each conversation more deeply.

The conversation of "what happened": What is the story here?

The 'what happened' conversation is the one in which we spend most of our time in the
difficult conversations, fighting with our different versions of who is right, who
I wanted to say what, and who is to blame. In each of those areas — truth, intentions and
blame — we assume something wrong. Clarifying each of these assumptions is essential for
improve our ability to handle difficult conversations well.

The presumption of truth

When we shout to make our point, we often forget to question the

presumption upon which our entire position is built: I am right, you are wrong. This
Simple presumption causes endless troubles.

What am I right about? I am right that you drive too fast. I am right that you do not
you are able to teach your younger colleagues. Am I right that your comments in
Christmas were not appropriate. I am right that the patient should have received more medication.
After such a painful operation. Am I right that the contractor charged me too much?
I am right in that I deserve a raise. I am right in that the brochure is very well done just as it is.
It is. The number of things I am right about would fill a book.

There is only one problem: that I might be wrong.

That seems impossible. Surely I must be right sometimes!

Well, no. The issue is this: difficult conversations almost never involve establishing the
facts. What they deal with are perceptions, interpretations, and values that come into conflict.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 11
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

It's not about establishing what a contract says, but what a contract means. It's not about
to establish which parenting book is the most popular, but which one we should follow.

Difficult conversations are not about what is true but about what is important.
Let's go back to Juan and Miguel. There is no discussion about whether the graph is perfect or not. Both agree on
agreement that it is not. The discussion is about whether it is worth correcting the error and, if that is the
case, how to do it. It is not about establishing whether something is true or false, but rather an interpretation and
a trial. It is important to explore interpretations and judgments. In contrast, the struggle for
Determining who is right and who is not is a dead end.

In the conversation of 'what happened', if we manage to move away from the presumption of truth,
we are free to stop trying to prove that we are right and to try to understand the
perceptions, interpretations and values of both parties. This allows us to stop sending
messages and start asking questions that try to find out how each person sees the world.
At the same time that we can present our viewpoints as perceptions,
interpretations and values, and not as 'the truth'.

The invention of intention

The second discussion in the conversation about "what happened" revolves around the intentions — mine and
yours. Did you tell me that to hurt my feelings or just to emphasize your point?
View? Did you throw away my cigarettes because you are trying to control my behavior or because you want to?
help me fulfill my commitment to quit smoking? What I think about the intentions of the
Another person will affect my way of thinking about her and, ultimately, the way she develops.
the conversation.

The mistake we make in the realm of intentions is simple yet profound: we assume that
we know the intentions of others when it is not so. Worse still, when we are not sure.
We often decide that someone's intentions are bad.

The truth is that intentions are invisible. We deduce them from the behavior of others.
people. In other words, we imagine them, we invent them. But our stories
invented about the intentions of others are rarely true. Why? Because the
People's intentions, like so many other things in difficult conversations, are complex. A
sometimes people act with a mix of intentions. Sometimes they act without intention, or at least
without anything to do with us. And sometimes it acts with good intentions that, without
embargo, they bother us.

As our concept of the intentions of others (and theirs about ours) are so
In difficult conversations, jumping to unfounded assumptions can be a disaster.

The framework of guilt

The third mistake we make in the conversation of 'what happened' has to do with blame.
most of the difficult conversations focus on who is to blame for the problem in

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 12
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

that we are. When the company loses its biggest client, for example, we know that what
comes is a ruthless game of the blame roulette. We don't care where the ball lands,
as long as it doesn't fall on us. Personal relationships are no different. What about your relationships with
Is your stepmother strict? It's her fault. She should stop bothering her about her room.
messy and with the boys you hang out with.

In the conflict between Juan and Miguel, Juan thinks that Miguel is to blame for the problem.
the moment to show her hypersensitivity in the layout is before the brochure is printed,
not later. And, of course, Miguel believes that the problem is Juan's fault: Juan made the
project, then the errors are your responsibility.

But talking about guilt is like talking about the truth — it produces disagreements, denial, and leaves
little to learn. It evokes the fear of punishment and insists on a black and white response.
Nobody wants to be blamed, especially unjustly, so we put all our
energy in we defend.

Parents of young children know this very well. When the twins fight in the seat of
Behind the car, we know that trying to find the guilty party will always produce the shout: "He hit me
first" or "I hit him because he called me baby." The two children deny their guilt not only to
not to be left without dessert, but out of a sense of justice. Neither of them feels that the problem
it is solely his fault, because it is not.

Looking from the front seat, it is easy to see how each child has contributed to the fight. But
it is much more difficult to see how we ourselves have contributed to the problems we are in
we get in. However, in situations that lead to difficult conversations what happens
it is almost always the result of things done by both parties — or that both parties stopped
to do. And the punishment is rarely logical or appropriate. When competent and sensible people
they do something stupid, the most intelligent thing is to try to understand, first what prevented them from avoiding it and, in
secondly, think about how to prevent the problem from occurring again.

Talking about blame prevents us from figuring out why things went wrong and how we could...
correct them in the future. Instead, focusing on understanding the contribution system we
allows understanding the real causes of the problem and working to correct them. The distinction between
guilt and contribution may seem subtle, but it is a distinction worth understanding, because
it implies a significant difference in our ability to handle difficult conversations.

The conversation of feelings: What should we do with our

emotions?

Difficult conversations are not just about what happened; they also involve emotions.
What matters is not whether strong feelings will arise but how to handle them when they do.
They provoke. Should one tell the boss what one really thinks of their management style, or what
Do you feel for the colleague who stole an idea? Should one tell their sister what they think?
of her for continuing to be friends with her ex-wife? And what is she going to do with the rage that

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 13
 Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

Will you probably feel if you decide to talk to that salesman about his sexist remarks?

In the presence of strong feelings, many of us strive to maintain common sense.

Diving too deep into feelings is confusing, clouds good judgment, and in some
contexts - for example at work - can simply seem out of place. Referring to
Feelings can also be scary or uncomfortable, and they can make us feel vulnerable.
After all, what happens if the other person sets aside our feelings or them
misinterpret? Or if he takes them seriously in a way that hurts her or that damages her forever
relationship with her? And once we have expressed our feelings, it is the other's turn.
Are we willing to hear everything he says about his rage and his pain?

This way of thinking suggests completely avoiding the conversation about feelings — that
Juan will be better off if he doesn't share his feelings of anger and annoyance, nor Miguel his feeling of
disappointment. It's better to focus on the questions about the brochure. Stick to the subject
concrete of what is being discussed.

Is this true?

An opera without music

The problem with this way of thinking is that it does not take into account a simple fact: the
Difficult conversations not only involve feelings; at their core, they are about feelings.
Feelings are not a noisy byproduct of difficult conversations; they are an integral part of
conflict. Having a difficult conversation without talking about feelings is like putting on a stage a
opera without music. You grasp the plot but lose the essence. In the conversation between Juan and
Miguel, for example, Juan never explicitly says that he feels mistreated or underestimated; without
embargo, months later Juan is still angry and feels resentment towards Miguel.

Think about some of your own difficult conversations. What feelings were there?
involved? Pain or anger? Disappointment, shame, or confusion? Did you feel treated unfairly or
grossly? For some people, even saying "I love you" or "I am proud of you" can be
seem risky to them.

In the short term, having a difficult conversation without talking about feelings can save time and
reduce anxiety. It may also seem like a good way to avoid certain serious risks
— for you, for the others, and for the relationship. But the question remains valid: if it is about the
Feelings, what is achieved if they are not talked about?

Understanding feelings, talking about them, managing them, are some of the greatest challenges.
of the human being. There is nothing that facilitates the management of feelings or that avoids the
risks. However, most of us can improve the way we handle the convergence
station of feelings. It may not seem so, but talking about feelings is a
a skill that can be learned.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 14
 Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

Of course, it doesn't always make sense to talk about feelings. As they say, sometimes it is
better to leave things as they are. Unfortunately, the inability to talk about feelings
it can make sure we never have to handle them.

The conversation of identity: What does this say about me?

Of the three conversations, the most subtle and challenging may be the conversation about identity. She
provides us with an important tool to control our anxiety and improve our
skills in the other two conversations.

The conversation about identity has to do with what happens inside: it is about who we are and
how we see ourselves. How what happened affects my self-esteem, the image of
myself and my sense of who I am in the world? What impact will it have on my future? What
I have doubts about myself? In a few words: before, during, and after the conversation.
difficult, the identity conversation is about what I tell myself about myself.

One might think: "I'm just trying to ask my boss for a raise. What does that have to do with it?
with my sense of who I am in the world?
from a brochure, not from me." In fact, whenever a conversation seems difficult to us, it is due to
part that she touches us significantly in some way. Something that goes beyond the subject.
The appearance of the conversation is very important to us.

It can be something simple. What do you reveal about yourself when you talk with your
neighbors about the dog? It may be that having grown up in a small town, you have
a strong image of himself as a friendly person or good neighbor, and he feels uncomfortable that his
neighbors may see it as aggressive or problematic.

What do you reveal when you ask for a raise? What if they deny it? In fact, what if your boss...
give a good reason to deny it? What effect will that have on their own image as an employee
competent and respected? Apparently the issue is money, but what really makes him sweat
I tell you that your self-image is at stake.

Even when you are the one delivering the bad news, the identity conversation comes into play.
Imagine, for example, that you have to reject an appealing project from the department.
creative. The prospect of talking to unqualified people makes him feel anxious, although
do not be the one responsible for the decision. Part of it is because you fear that the conversation will
makes you feel bad about yourself: "I am not the kind of person who does not support others.
and I rekindle enthusiasm. People respect me because I always find a solution and never
"I close the door." His own image of being someone who helps others get things done rebels.
against the imposition of having to say no. And if you are no longer the hero, fear that people
start seeing him as the villain.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 15
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Autores.Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

Maintain the balance

As you notice the implications of the conversation about your image, you may start to
lose balance. The enthusiastic boy from the creative department, who reminds him so much of his
own story when I was that age, feels incredulous and betrayed. Suddenly you
feels confused, and their anxiety rises like a rocket. You wonder if you really have
it makes sense to reject the idea at such an early stage. Without realizing it, he/she mentions something about the
possibility of reconsidering the rejection of the project, although you have absolutely no
no reason to believe that this is possible.

When we lose our balance, the least that can happen is that we lose confidence in ourselves.
the same, that we lose concentration, or forget what we were going to say. In more cases
extremes, it can be a disaster. We can feel paralyzed, overwhelmed by panic and
crowded by the desire to run away, and it even seems to us that we cannot breathe.

The mere fact of knowing that the identity conversation is a component of conversations
difficult can help. And, as in the other two conversations, we can do much better.
Although losing balance may sometimes be inevitable, the conversation about identity does not have to be.
cause so much anxiety. As happens with the conversation about feelings, the conversation about
identity is managed more easily with the development of certain skills. In fact, once
that one learns to manage the conversation of identity, can turn what is usually a
source of anxiety into a source of strength.

How to approach an instructive conversation

Despite our intentions, the essential purpose of sustaining a difficult conversation is to

It is worth trying a point of view, communicating our opinion to others, or making others
Do what we want or be how we want. In other words, send a message.

Once you understand the inherent challenges of the three conversations and the mistakes that
we commit in each one, it is possible that you discover your purpose for having a
The conversation begins to change. You start to recognize the complexity of perceptions.
and the intentions at stake, the reality of the joint contribution to the problem, the role
what role feelings play, and what the matters addressed may imply for identity
and the self-esteem of each person. And it realizes that the position of communicating messages is no longer
it makes sense. In fact, you may find that you no longer have a message to communicate, but
rather some information to share and some questions to ask.

Instead of wanting to persuade and do things your way, you want to understand what has happened.
from the other person's point of view, explain their perspective, share and understand the
feelings, and work with the other to find a way to manage the problem they have between
hands. By doing this, it will be more likely that the other person will be persuaded, and that you
I find out about something that will significantly change the way I understand the problem.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 16
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

Changing our position means inviting the other person to talk with us, so that we
helps to understand things. If we want to achieve our purpose, we have much to learn
from other people and they need to learn a lot from us. We need to have a
instructive conversation.

The differences between a typical message battle and an instructive conversation are summarized in
the following picture.

A battle of messages An instructive conversation

The conversation of "what happened" Assumption: I know everything that Assumption: Each one of us
I need to know to understand it. provides information and perceptions
Challenge: The situation is more complex than it happened different. It is possible that there is

of what they can see the one and the important things that some of
another. the two don't know.

Meta: Analyze the stories of each

Meta: To persuade others that one: as we understand the situation
I am right. and why.

Assumption: I know what they do Assumption: I know what I wanted

they intended to do. to do, and the impact it had on
I don't know what they did.
Can I know what they have in
mind.

Meta: Share the impact that your

Let them know that what actions had on me and
it was wrong. find out what they are
thinking. Also find out what
what impact my actions had on
they.

Assumption: Probably both

we have contributed to this
Assumption: It's their fault (or problem.
it's all my fault).
Meta: Understand how to
our actions were interrelated
Make them admit their guilt and to produce this result, it is
take responsibility for the arrangements. to say, the contribution system.

The conversation of the Assumption: Feelings do not Assumption: Feelings are

feelings important and share them not at the bottom of the situation, and in
I would help. (Or, my feelings are generally complex.
Challenge: The situation is tense the fault of others, and for that I will probably have to

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 17
 Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

emotionally. they must know them to delve a little deeper to understand

my feelings.

Meta: Consider the feelings

Meta: Avoid talking about the (mine and theirs) without
feelings (Oh, make it so prejudices or qualifications.
enter!) Recognizing feelings to
be able to solve the problem.

The conversation of identity Assumption: Either I am competent, or ... Assumption: In this situation
I am incompetent; good or bad; there can be many things in
Challenge: The situation is threatening kind or detestable. There is no play, in psychological terms,
our identity. mean term. both for them and for me.
We are both complex and neither
it is perfect.

Meta: Protect my image Meta: To understand the topics that

same. have to do with the identity of
both parties. Build a
a more complete image of us
the same to better preserve the
balance.

This book will help you turn difficult conversations into instructive conversations,
helping him manage each of the three conversations more productively and
improving your ability to work on all three at the same time.

The next five chapters explore in depth the mistakes that people often make in
each of the three conversations. This will help him take an instructive position when
It presents a difficult conversation and you do not feel very open. Chapters 2, 3, and 4.
They investigate the three assumptions that are present in the conversation of 'what happened'. Chapter 5 moves on to the
conversation of feelings, and chapter 6 deals with the conversation of identity. These
chapters will help you discern your thoughts and feelings. This preparation is essential
to face any difficult conversation.

In the last six chapters, we focused on the conversation itself, starting with
when to bring up a topic and when to let it go, and if you decide to bring it up, what can you do
wait and what not - what purposes make sense. Then we move on to the mechanics of how to speak.
productively about the matters that really matter to you: how to find the best ones
beginnings, how to ask questions and pay attention to learn, how to express oneself firmly and
clarity, and how to solve problems together, including how to bring back the
conversation to your course when things get tough. Finally, we return to the
conversación que podrían sostener Juan y Miguel después del incidente del folleto, para ilustrar
how all this can be seen in practice.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 18
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

Second part: How to transition to an instructional position

The conversation of 'what happened'
2. Stop arguing about who is right: Explore the versions of
each one

Miguel's version of what happened is different from Juan's.

In the last two years, I have really made an effort to try to help Juan, and always
it seems that one thing or another goes wrong. And instead of taking for granted that the customer always has the
Reason, argue with me! I don't know how I'm going to be able to keep working with him.

But what really made me furious was his way of excusing himself for the painting instead of
just fix it. He knew it wasn't a professional job. And the income graphs were
the critical part of the financial presentation.

One of the typical features of the 'what happened' conversation is that people are not
agreement. What is the best way to save for when we are old? How much should one save?
Investing in advertising? Is the brochure up to professional standards?

Disagreement is not bad, and it does not necessarily lead to a difficult conversation. We are in
disagreement with people all the time, and often no one cares. But at other times,
It matters a lot to us. The disagreement seems to be the essence of what doesn't work between us.
Others do not agree with something we want and do not want to do what we need.
Whether we end up doing our will or not, we feel frustrated, hurt.
or misinterpreted. And often the disagreement continues to be present, causing havoc every time
it manifests.

When a disagreement arises, discussing it may seem natural, even reasonable, but
it is not useful.

Why do we argue and why is it not useful

Think about your own difficult conversations, in which there are significant disagreements about
what is really happening or what should be done. What is your explanation of what is
causing the problem?

We think that others are the problem.

When one is in a good mood, they might think: "Well, everyone has their opinion" or, "All
history has two sides." But most of us don't really believe that. Deep down, we believe
that the problem is simply others.

The others are selfish. "My girlfriend doesn't want to go with me to talk to a couples counselor.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 19
 Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

She says it's wasting money. I tell her that it's important to me but she doesn't care.
They are naïve. "My daughter had the great idea of going to New York and succeeding in theater.
He simply does not understand what he is facing.
They are controllers. "We always do everything as my boss says. That drives me crazy, because he
acts as if their ideas are better than anyone else's, even when they don't know about it
what is being talked about.

They are irrational. "My great-aunt sleeps on an old, worn-out mattress. She has problems
Back pain, but no matter what I say, he refuses to let me buy him a mattress.
new. The whole family tells me: 'Roberto, Aunt Berta is just crazy. It cannot be
to reason with her. I believe that is true.

If that's what we think, it's no surprise that we end up arguing. Roberto, for example,
He worries about his aunt Berta. He wants to help her, so he does what we all do: if she
another person becomes stubborn, we insist more firmly trying to break through the barrier that they
prevents seeing what is sensible. ("Just by trying a new mattress you'll see that it's much more comfortable!")

If the other person is naive, we try to teach them how life really is; and if they are selfish or
manipulative, we will try to be frank and draw your attention. We persist in our
hope that what we say will finally yield results.

But, on the contrary, our insistence leads to discussions. And these discussions do not lead to
nowhere. Nothing gets fixed. We both feel neglected and mistreated. We remain
frustrated, not only because the other person is so irrational, but because we feel powerless
to do something about it. And the constant discussion does no good for the relationship.

However, we don't know what to do instead. We cannot pretend that there is no disagreement.
that doesn't matter, or that it doesn't make a difference to us. It does matter to us and that's why we have such feelings.

strong on this matter. But if arguing doesn't get us anywhere, what else can we do?

The first thing we must do is listen to Aunt Berta.

They think that we are the problem

Aunt Berta is the first to agree that her mattress is old and worn out. "It is the
that I shared with my husband for forty years, and it makes me feel safe," she says. "There is
so many other changes in my life, that it is nice to have a small refuge that remains the
"same". Storing the mattress is something that also provides Berta with a sense of control over
her life. When she complains, it is not because she wants solutions, it is because she likes the attention that
it obtains by keeping people informed about their daily comings and goings.

About Roberto, Aunt Berta says: "I love him, but Roberto can be a difficult person. He does not
pay attention nor does it care much about what others think, and when I tell it, it gets
furious." Roberto thinks that the problem is Aunt Berta. She apparently thinks that the problem
It's Roberto.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 20
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

This raises an interesting question: Why is it always the other person who is naive?
selfish, irrational or authoritarian? Why do we never think that we are the problem? If
you are having a difficult conversation and someone asks you why you disagree, what is
The reason you never say 'because what I'm saying makes no sense'?

Everyone gives meaning to their version of what happened.

We never think that we are the problem because, in fact, we are not. And what we say is.
makes sense. What is often difficult to admit is that what the other person says also
It makes sense. Like Roberto and Aunt Berta, each has different versions of what is happening.
in the world. In Roberto's version, his thoughts and actions are perfectly sensible.
In Aunt Berta's case, her thoughts and actions are equally sensible. But Roberto
it's not just a character in its own version, it's also a guest character in the version of the
Aunt Berta. And in this one, what Roberto says seems authoritarian and insensitive. While in the version
From Roberto, what Aunt Berta says seems irrational.

In the normal course of life, we generally do not notice that our view of the world is different.
of the other people. But difficult conversations arise precisely in the
points where the important parts of our visions collide. We assume that what
provokes the clash is the way of being of others; others assume that it is ours. But
In reality, the clash is the result of our visions being simply different, without that
neither of them realizes it. It's not uncommon for us to end up arguing.

Discussing prevents us from exploring others' perspectives.

But the discussion is not only the result of our inability to understand that each person
has a different version of events. It is also part of the cause. Discussing inhibits our
the ability to understand how others see the world. When we argue we tend to
to exchange conclusions — the essence of what we think: "Accept the new mattress" for "Leave
to try to control me." "I'm going to New York to succeed" for "You are naive." "The counseling of
couples counseling is useful" for "Couples counseling is a waste of time.

But neither of the two conclusions makes sense in the other person's version, so that
Each rejects the other's arguments. Instead of helping us understand our differences.
Points of view, the discussion produces a battle of messages. Instead of bringing us closer, it drives us apart.

Discussion without understanding is not persuasive.

The discussion raises another problem in difficult conversations: it hinders change. Telling
someone who changes makes it less likely that I will do it. This is because people almost never
it changes if she doesn't feel understood beforehand.

Let's talk about the conversation between Tomás and Karen. Tomás is the financial manager of the
social services of the Department of State. Karen is a social worker of the
Department. "I can't get Karen to submit her reports on time," Tomás explains. "She

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 21
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What Needs to Be Said

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

I have said several times that he is not meeting the delivery deadlines but it is useless, and when I ...
I talk about that, he/she gets upset.

Of course, we know there is another side to the story. Unfortunately, Tomás does not know what it is. Tomás
he tells Karen what she is supposed to do, but he still hasn't had a conversation with her
of double standard on the matter. When Tomás replaces his intention to try to change behavior of
Karen - demonstrating to him why being late is wrong - for trying to understand first
Karen, and then getting her to understand him, the situation improves greatly.

Karen described to me all the work she has. She spends all her energy attending to her patients.
that they are very poor. I felt that I was not aware of that, and in reality I did not have it in
count. For my part, I explained to her how I have to do all kinds of extra work when she
She submitted her reports late, and I explained it to her in detail. She was embarrassed about it, and it became clear.
that I had never thought about the matter from my perspective. He promised to give it more priority.
submit your reports on time, and so far he has done so.

In the end, each person has learned something, and the foundations for an important change have been established.

To reach somewhere in a disagreement, we need to understand the other person's story.

to see that their own conclusions make sense within their version. And we need to
help others understand our version of events and, therefore, our
conclusions. The fact of understanding each person's stories will not necessarily resolve the
problem but, as in the case of Karen and Tomás, it will be an essential first step.

Different versions: Why each person sees the world differently

As we move away from the discussion and approach trying to understand the version of the
another person, it is good to know, first of all, why people have different versions of
the facts. Our view of the world does not come from nowhere. It does not arise by chance. Our view of the
The world is generally built in an unconscious but systematic way. First, we grasp
information. We experience the world — what we see, what we hear, what we feel. Second,
we interpret what we see, hear, and feel; and we make sense of it all. Then we draw conclusions
conclusions about what is happening. And at every step, there are thousands of opportunities for the
each person's vision is different from that of others.

Simply put, we all have different visions of the world because each of us receives
different information and interprets it in her own exclusive way.

In difficult conversations, we frequently only exchange conclusions of a

side to side, without descending to where most of the real action is: the information and the
interpretation that leads each person to see the world as they see it.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 22
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Authors: Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

We have different information

There are two reasons why we all have different information about the world. First
place, as we move through life — and through any difficult situation — the
the information we have is overwhelming. Simply put, we can't grasp everything.
images, sounds, facts, and the feelings implicit even in a single encounter. It is
Inevitably, we end up noticing some things and overlooking others. And what each person
Note or overlook will be different. Secondly, each one has access to different information.

We noticed different things. Daniel took his four-year-old nephew, Andrés, to see the parade of his
sports team. Mounted on his uncle's shoulders, Andrés shouted happily as they passed the
players, the baton twirlers, and the school band in picturesque floats. After the parade,
Andrés exclaimed: "It's the best truck parade I've ever seen in my life!"

Each float, it seems, was pulled by a truck. Andrés, who was obsessed with the
trucks, he saw nothing else. His uncle Daniel, indifferent to the trucks, had not noticed
none of them. In a sense, Andrés and his uncle had seen two different parades.

Just like Daniel and Andrés, what we notice in each situation has to do with who we are and what we
that interest us. Some pay more attention to feelings and relationships. Others,
to position and power, or to facts and logic. Some are artists, others are scientists, others
pragmatic. Some of us want to prove that we are right. Others want to avoid conflicts.
or to calm things down. Some tend to see themselves as victims, others as heroes, observers or
survivors. The information we pay attention to changes accordingly.

Of course, neither Daniel nor Andrés returned home thinking, 'I enjoyed my particular perspective.'
from the parade based on the information that interested me." Each one walked away thinking, "I enjoyed
with the parade." Each one assumes that what interested them was what had the most meaning. Each one
assumes you have 'the facts'.

We often hold an entire conversation — or even an entire relationship — without realizing it.
that each person is paying attention to different things, that our viewpoints are
they are based on different information.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 23
 Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What Needs to Be Said

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

Each one of us knows ourselves better than others know us.

choose different information, each person has access to different information. For example, the
others have access to information about themselves that we do not have. They know the
pressures they have to endure; we do not. They know their hopes, their dreams and their
fears; we do not. However, we act as if we had access to all the information
important that exists about them, although we do not have it. Their internal experience is much more
more complex than we imagine.

Let's go back to the example of Juan and Miguel. When Miguel describes what happened, he doesn't say anything about
that Juan has spent the whole night working. He may not know that Juan worked all the
night, and even if he knows it, his 'knowledge' about it is very limited compared to that of
Juan. Juan was there, he knows what it is to fight against sleep. He knows how uncomfortable it is to be
Turn off the heating at midnight. He knows how furious his wife got for having to cancel.
their dinner together. He knows the anxiety he felt about having to postpone other important work.
to work on Miguel's project. Juan also knows how happy he felt to do it
a favor of a friend.

And there are many things that Juan doesn't know. Juan doesn't know that Miguel's client had an attack of
Rabia that very morning when she saw the photographs they had chosen for another brochure that Miguel had
had prepared. Juan does not know that the profit figures are a particularly sensitive issue.
due to certain recent decisions the client made. Juan does not know that the graphic designer
Miguel requested an unscheduled leave in the middle of the busiest work period, which
it has affected not only this project but others as well. And Juan does not know how happy Miguel was about
to do a favor for a friend.

Of course, to begin with, we do not know what we do not know. But instead of assuming that we already
we know everything we need to know, we should assume that there is important information at the
which we do not have access to. This is indeed a good assumption.

We have different interpretations

"We never make love," complains Alvie Singer in the movie Annie Hall. "We're always
"Making love," says his girlfriend. "How often do you make love?" asks the therapist.
"Three times a week," the two respond in unison.

The second reason we have different perspectives on the world is that, although we have the same
information, we interpret it differently — we give it another meaning. I see the cup half
empty; you see it as a metaphor for human fragility. I am thirsty; you are a poet. Two
Important factors in our way of interpreting what we see are 1) our previous experience.
and 2) the implicit rules we have learned about what should and should not be done.

Previous experiences influence our vision. The past gives meaning to the present.
however, only in the context of someone's past can we understand why what is
saying or doing makes any sense.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 24
 Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

Blanca and her coworkers pooled money together to celebrate their supervisor and
celebrate the end of a long project. They took her to dinner at a nice restaurant. Throughout
the food, Carolina, the supervisor, did nothing but complain: "Everything is super expensive", "How
pueden mantener estos precios?" y "¡Tiene que ser un chiste, cinco dólares por un postre!" Blanca
she returned home frustrated and embarrassed, thinking: "We knew she was stingy, but
this is ridiculous. We paid for her not to have to worry about money, and
he was still complaining about how much everything cost. He ruined the night.

Although Blanca thought that what was happening was simply that Carolina was a person
stingy, decided to ask him one day why he was so outraged by the cost of eating out.
After reflecting, Carolina explained to him:

I suppose it has to do with the fact that I was raised during a time of great
economic recession. I can still hear my mother's voice when I was little and I would go out
for school in the morning. "Carolina, there are five cents on the table for your lunch!"
she said. She was so proud to be able to give me money for lunch every day. When
I turned eight or nine years old, five cents were no longer enough for lunch, but I never had
heart to say it.

Years later, even a moderately priced meal could seem like an extravagance to him.
Carolina, when I saw her through the filter of those images and feelings of her experience.

Every strong belief one has is deeply influenced by past experiences.

Where to spend the holidays, where to give the kids a pat on the back, how much to spend on advertising
All of that is influenced by what one has observed in their own family and has learned to.
long in your life. Often we don't even realize how these experiences affect us.
our interpretation of the world. We simply believe that things are that way.

We apply different implicit rules. Our previous experiences often become

rules according to which we live our lives. We all follow those rules, whether we realize it or not.
It counts or not. These tell us how the world works, how people should act, or how they
it is assumed that they are things. And they have a significant influence on our version of what
It is happening in a difficult conversation.

When our rules clash with those of others, we run into trouble.

Olga and Teresa, for example, are embroiled in a conflict of rules. Due to their work as
Sales representatives spend a lot of time together. One afternoon they agreed to meet at 7:00.
the next morning to finish preparing a presentation. Teresa, as usual,
She arrived at exactly 7:00. Olga appeared at 7:10. It wasn't the first time Olga had arrived.
afternoon, and Teresa was so upset that she struggled to concentrate during the first twenty
minutes of the meeting. Olga was furious because Teresa was upset.

It's useful to clarify the implicit rules that each person unconsciously applies. According to the rule of
Teresa, "It's unprofessional and inconsiderate to arrive late." According to Olga's rule, "It is not

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 25
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

professionally obsess over trifles to the point of being unable to concentrate on things
"important." Since both Teresa and Olga interpreted the situation through the lens of
their own implicit rule, each thought that the other was not acting appropriately.

Our implicit rules often take the form of what people "should" or "should not"
hacer: "Uno debe gastar en educación, pero no en ropa", "Uno no debe criticar jamás a un
colleague in front of other people", "One should never leave the toilet unflushed, tighten the
to cut the toothpaste tube in half, or let the kids watch more than two hours of television." The
the list would be endless.

There is nothing wrong with having these rules. In fact, we need them to organize our lives.
But when one is in the middle of a conflict, it is necessary to explain one's own rules and encourage.
the other person to do the same. This greatly reduces the likelihood of getting caught up in a duel
accidental of contradictory rules.

Our conclusions reflect our own interests.

Finally, when we think about why each person tells their own version of events, we do not
One cannot overlook the fact that our conclusions are biased and often reflect
our self-interest. We seek information to support our viewpoints and we give it to
this is the interpretation that suits us best. Then we feel even more confident that
We are right.

Professor Howard Raiffa, from Harvard Business School, demonstrated this phenomenon when
he gave several groups of people a set of facts regarding a company. To some he told
they would negotiate to sell the company and others who would negotiate to buy it. Then he asked him to
each team that would make an appraisal of the company as objectively as possible (not the price at which
they would offer to buy or sell, but rather what they truly believed it was worth). Raiffa found that the
sellers in the bottom of their heart believed that the company was worth 30% more than the set value
independently in the market. In turn, buyers valued it at 30% less.

Each team developed, unknowingly, a perception that suited them. They became more focused.
in the things that favored what they wanted to believe and tended to overlook, to take away from them
importance and to quickly forget those that did not favor them. Our colleague Roger Fisher defined
this phenomenon in a sarcastic reflection of his days as a litigator: "Sometimes I couldn't persuade
to the court that I was right, but I never stopped persuading myself!

This tendency to unconsciously develop biased perceptions is very human, and it can
can be dangerous. It demands a dose of humility about the 'certainty' of our version,
especially when something important to us is at stake.

How to go from certainty to curiosity

There is only one way to come to understand another person's perspective, and that is to be curious. Instead of

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 26
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

instead of wondering, 'How can he think that?', ask yourself, 'What information does he have?
And I don't? Instead of asking yourself, 'How can he be so irrational?', ask yourself, 'How
Will he interpret this situation so that his point of view makes sense? Certainty keeps us away from the
version of the other while curiosity allows us to enter.

Curiosity: the entry to the other's version

Let's think about the disagreement between Antonio and his wife, Keiko. Antonio's sister has just
to give birth to her first child. The next day, Keiko prepares to go to the clinic. To her surprise,
Antonio tells her that he will not go with her, but will stay to watch a football match on TV. When
Keiko asks him why, Antonio mumbles something about it being a 'great match', and adds:
Tomorrow I will stop by the clinic.

Keiko is deeply troubled by this. She wonders: "What kind of person does she think football
Is it more important than family? This is the most selfish, superficial, and ridiculous thing I have ever heard in my life.
life!”. But he quickly realizes that he is prejudging, and instead of saying, “How
"Can you do such a thing?" he places himself in the field of curiosity. He wonders what Antonio knows.
that she does not know, and that leads him to that decision.

Antonio's version is different from the one Keiko had imagined. According to the
appearances, Antonio is just watching a game on TV. But for Antonio it is a matter of
mental health. Throughout the week, he works ten hours a day under conditions
extremely tiring and tense, and then he gets home and plays with his two children. After the
it's hard to get them into bed, spend some time with Keiko, talking about how she did
during the day. Finally, he goes to bed. For Antonio, watching that game is the only opportunity during the
a week in which you can truly relax. Your stress level decreases, almost as if you were
meditating, and those three hours for himself have a significant impact on his ability to
to face the following week. As Antonio thinks that his sister does not care if he goes today.
or tomorrow, decide in favor of your mental health.

Certainly, this matter does not end here. Keiko needs to share her version with Antonio, and
So, when they have put the cards on the table, they think together about what should be done.
But this would never happen if Keiko simply assumes she knows Antonio's version, wouldn't it?
it matters how safe she is at the beginning of knowing her.

What is your version of the facts?

One way to change your attitude is from the easy certainty that you have thought about the problem.
From every possible angle, it is about feeling curiosity about what you ignore about yourself.
This may sound strange. After all, you are always with yourself; wouldn’t it be
So quite familiar with his own perspective?

In one word, no. The process by which we build our vision of the world often
It happens so quickly and so automatically that we don't even realize what influences it.
about our viewpoints. For example, when we saw what Juan really thought.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 27
 Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

During his conversation with Miguel, we did not find anything about the fact that they turned off the
heating, nor about his wife's anger for canceling the dinner plan. Even Juan did not
He was fully aware of all the information that was behind his reactions.

And what implicit rules did he think were important? Juan thought that the way it was was unfair
Miguel was trying, but he didn't realize that he was starting from the assumption that
There is an implicit rule about how people should be treated. Juan's rule goes something like this
as, 'Appreciation for others should be shown no matter what.' Many of us agree.
with that truth but it is not a truth but simply a rule. Miguel's rule
Good friends can get mad at each other and not take it as anything
personal." What matters is not knowing which rule is better; what matters is recognizing that they are
different. But Juan will never know that they are different unless he thinks beforehand about the rules that are
he bases his own version of what happened.

Let's remember the story of Andrés and his uncle Daniel at the parade. We refer to Andrés as a
boy "obsessed with trucks". This description is made from the perspective of his uncle.
Uncle Daniel realizes 'what Andrés is like,' but is less aware of what he himself is like.
Andrés is obsessed with trucks if we use the level of interest in them as a reference.
trucks that his uncle feels, which is zero. But, from Andrés' point of view, Uncle Daniel
he could be considered 'a fanatic for baton twirlers'. Among the group of the four-year-old children
Over the years, Andrés's point of view is closer to the general rule.

Embrace both versions: adopt the 'position and'

It can be very difficult to feel curious about someone else's version when you have your own.
version to tell, especially if one thinks that only one can be true. After all,
your version is very different from the others and makes a lot of sense to you. Part of the stress
Maintaining curiosity can be eased by adopting what we call the 'Y position.'

In general, we assume that we must accept or reject the other person's version, and that if the
we accept, we must abandon our own. But who is right between Miguel and Juan, Olga and
Teresa, or Blanca and her boss, Carolina? Who is right among a person who likes
sleeping with the window open and one who prefers to close it?

The answer is that this question makes no sense. Do not choose between the two versions; embrace them.
both. That is the "position y."

The suggestion to embrace both versions may seem hypocritical. It may sound like 'pretend that
both versions are true." But, in fact, it suggests something completely different. Don't pretend anything.
Do not worry about accepting or rejecting the other person's version. First, try to understand it.
My understanding of another person's version does not require you to abandon yours.
"position and" allows you to realize that the way each person sees things matters,
that the way both feel is important. It doesn't matter what they end up doing, it doesn't matter.
If one's version influences the other or the other influences theirs, both versions are important.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 28
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

The 'y position' is based on the assumption that the world is complex, that you may feel
furious, hurt and treated unfairly, and the other may also feel just as furious, hurt and
treated unfairly. The other may be doing the best they can, and you may think that
it's not enough. You may have done something stupid, and the other may have contributed
also to the problem in an important way. You may be furious with him, and you may also feel
affection and appreciation for him.

The 'and position' offers you a place to assert the full strength of your viewpoints and your
feelings, without having to belittle the viewpoints and feelings of the other. Neither
one does not need to give up anything to hear someone who feels and thinks differently. Because
one and the other can have different information or different interpretations, both perspectives can
make sense at the same time.

It may occur that, when sharing them, their versions change due to new information or acquiring
different perspectives. But still, they will not end up being the same, and that is okay. Sometimes the
people have sincere disagreements, but even so the most useful question is not, "Who has
reason?
is this problem good?

Two exceptions that are not exceptions

You may be thinking that the advice to replace certainty and discussion with curiosity
and the 'y position' makes sense in general, but there should be exceptions. Let's look at two.
situations that may seem like exceptions but are not: 1) What happens on occasions
in which I am absolutely sure that I am right? and 2) The suggestion to 'understand the
"the other person's version" always applies, even when, for example, I am firing them
Am I leaving a job or breaking a relationship?

When I am sure I am right

Two clerics are arguing about how to do God's work. In a conciliatory tone, one
finally he tells the other: "You and I see things differently, and that's okay. Not
we need to be in agreement. You can do God's work your way, and I will do it my way.
God's work in His own way.

The tendency to think this way can be overwhelming. Even if you understand the version of a
a person with genuine sensitivity and empathy, can still stumble in the next step, when
to think that no matter how much sense the other person's vision makes to them, you are still in 'the
"true" and he is "wrong".

For example, what happens in the conversation you have with your daughter about smoking. You know
It is true that smoking is harmful to her, and the sooner she quits, the better.

That's right. You are correct about both things. But here is the problem: that's not the point

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 29
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Autores.Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

about what the conversation is really about. The conversation is about what each one feels
about your daughter smoking, what she should do about it, and what role you should play.
It's about the terrible fear and sadness you feel when you imagine that she gets sick, and your
Rabia at feeling powerless to make her stop smoking. It's about the girl's need to feel.
independent, and breaking out of the 'good girl' mold in which she feels suffocated. It's about the
her ambivalence in doing something that she enjoys and that at the same time terrifies her. The conversation
it deals with various issues between you that are complex and must be explored. It's not about whether it is
It's true that smoking is bad for health; they both agree on that.

Even when it seems that the dispute is about what is true, you may find that being
who is right doesn't take it very far. His friend may deny that he is an alcoholic and that the
the drink is affecting your marriage. And even if everyone agrees with your assessment,
to assert that you are right and try to make him admit it will probably not contribute to
help your friend.

What can help is to talk to him about the impact that his drinking habit has on him, and then
trying to understand his version of the events. What leads him to refuse to acknowledge the truth?
What would it mean for him to admit that he has a problem? What is standing in the way?
As long as you do not understand his version, and share yours with him, you will not be able to find a way to
help him to make things better. In this case, you may be right and your friend
wrong, but just being right won't be of much help.

When bad news is given

What to do if you have to fire someone, end a relationship, or let someone know
supplier that is going to cut your orders by 80 percent? In many conversations
difficult you are not in a position to unilaterally impose a result; but when it comes to
of a dismissal or a reduction in orders, yes, it is. In such situations it is reasonable
to wonder if the other person's version still matters.

Most of the difficulty in firing someone from their job or breaking up a relationship is
presents in the conversations of feelings and identity, which we will explore more
go ahead. But the issue of different perspectives is also important. Remember,
Understanding another person's perspective does not mean that you have to agree with it.
she, as if I should have to give up hers. And the fact that you are willing to try to understand
the viewpoint of the other does not diminish the power you have to implement your decision
and make it clear that it is final.

In fact, the 'and position' is probably the strongest place one can be when
one finds themselves involved in a difficult conversation that requires communicating bad news or delivering it
in practice. If you are ending an emotional relationship, the 'and' position allows you to say, 'I am
breaking up with you because it seems right to me (that is the reason), and I understand the hurt
what you are, and what you think we should rehearse again, and I am not going to change my mind, and
I understand that you think I should have been clearer about my confusions, and I don't believe that...
I have become a bad person, and I understand that I have done things that have hurt you, and I know that

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 30
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

I can regret this decision, and yet I stand firm... And, and, and I know that you have done
things that have hurt me, and...

The 'and position' helps you to be curious and clear.

To move forward, first understand where you are.

As you progress along the path of improving your way of handling conversations
, you will realize that the fact that each person interprets the world in their own way,
it continues like the moon in the night sky. That is a guide to which you can always return, not
It doesn't matter where I am or what problem I have at hand.

To come to understand the other person, and to understand yourself more deeply, not
it means that differences will disappear or that you will not have to solve real problems or
make real decisions. It does not mean that all points of view are equally valid nor
It may be a mistake to have solid beliefs. However, it will help you assess whether your views
make sense in light of new information and different interpretations, and to help others to
understand the importance of those points of view.

It doesn't matter where you want to go, understanding — seeing yourself within the version
from the other person — it has to be their first step. Before thinking about how they can move forward,
You need to know where it is.

The next two chapters delve into two problematic aspects of our version:
our tendency to misinterpret the intentions of others, and to focus on blame.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 31
 Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What Needs to Be Said

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

3. Do not assume what others mean: detach the intention.

of the impact

The question of who was trying to do what is the center of our version of what is happening.
going through a difficult situation. Intentions strongly influence our judgments about the
If they tried to harm us, we judged them more harshly than if they did it by mistake.
We are willing to be uncomfortable for someone, if that person has a good reason: we
It irritates me to think that others do not care about the impact their actions have on us.
Although both of us are equally affected, we react differently to a malfunctioning ambulance.
parked on a narrow street, in front of a BMW.

The battle for intentions

Let's think about the story of Laura and Leo, who have been married for two years and have a
recurring fight that is painful for both. The couple was at a friend's party, and
Laura was about to eat a second bowl of ice cream when Leo said to her: 'Laura, are you really going to'
"eat that second ice cream?" Laura, who has issues with her excess weight, threw at him.
a furious glance and the two avoided each other for a while. Later at home things were
bad to worse.

LAURA: It really hurt me that you treated me that way at the party, in front of our
friends.

LEO: The way I treated you? What do you mean?

LAURA: By the way about the ice cream. You act as if you were my father or something like that. You have a huge
need to control me or make me look bad.

LEO: Laura, I wasn’t trying to offend you. You said you were on a diet, and I was just trying to
help you keep it. You get defensive so often. Anything seems to you like a
attack, how long am I trying to help you.

LAURA: Help me? Do you think humiliating me in front of my friends is helping me?

LEO: You know? I can't do anything right with you. If I say something, you think I'm trying to
humiliate you, and if not, you ask me why I let you eat too much. I am so tired of this. A
Sometimes I wonder if you don't start these fights on purpose.

This conversation left both Laura and Leo feeling furious, hurt, and misunderstood.
The worst part is that it's a conversation they have over and over again. They are determined to have a
classic battle over intentions. Laura accuses Leo of hurting her on purpose, and Leo denies it. They are
trapped in a cycle they do not understand and do not know how to break.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 32
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

Two key mistakes

There is an exit. Two crucial mistakes make this conversation infinitely more difficult to
what it should be — one from Laura and one from Leo. When Laura says: "You have a huge need
to control me or make me look bad," he is talking about Leo's intentions. His mistake is
to assume that one knows Leo's intentions when in fact one does not know them. It is a mistake.
easy to make and exhausting, which we continuously commit.

Leo's mistake is to assume that by clarifying that his intentions were good, Laura no longer has.
reason to be upset. He explains that "I wasn't trying to offend you," that, in fact,
I was trying to help him. And having explained this to him, he thinks that this must be the end of
Subject. As a result, he does not take the time to find out what Laura is really feeling.
and why. This mistake by Leo is as common as it is unhealthy. Fortunately, both mistakes can
to be avoided with a little attention.

The first mistake: Our assumptions about the intentions of others

the comments are erroneous

Exploring 'Laura's mistake' requires understanding how our mind works when we are
inventing versions about what others propose, and learning to recognize the set of
debatable assumptions on which those versions are built. Here is the problem:
even though we worry a lot about the intentions that others have towards us, we do not
we really know what those intentions are. We cannot know. The intentions of the
others exist only in their mind and in their heart. They are invisible to us. And as real and
correct that our assumptions about the intentions of others seem to us, often
they are incomplete or simply incorrect.

We assume intentions based on the impact they have on us.

A large part of the first mistake can be reduced to a basic fail: we assume what the
intentions of another person based on the impact their actions have on us. We
we felt hurt, then the person tried to hurt us. We felt slighted, then the person
he was trying to snub us. Our way of thinking is so automatic that we don't realize
that our conclusion is only an assumption. We are so convinced that our version
about what the others were trying to do is true, that we cannot imagine that they could
try something else.

We assume the worst. The conclusions we draw about the intentions of others
agreement with the impact of their actions on us is rarely good. When a friend
arrives late to the cinema, we don't think: 'He probably ran into someone who needed him.'
It is more likely that we think: "Shameless, he doesn't care about making me miss the beginning of the...
"movie". When we feel hurt by someone else's behavior, we assume the worst.

Margarita followed this trend. A prominent surgeon, a man who seemed gruff and difficult to approach.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 33
 Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What Needs to Be Said

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

to treat, he had operated on her hip. When Margarita arrived for her first appointment after the
operation, the receptionist told him that the doctor had unexpectedly extended his vacation.
Margarita, furious, imagined her wealthy doctor strolling through the Caribbean with his wife or his
girlfriend, and giving herself too much importance to be considered and return on time. That image
strengthened his anger.

A week later, when Margarita saw her doctor, she bluntly asked him how she
He had gone on his vacation. He replied that wonderfully. 'Sure,' she said,
wondering if he should say what he thought. But the doctor continued: "It was some
vacation dedicated to work. I was helping to install a hospital in Bosnia. There the
the conditions are horrendous.

Finding out what the doctor was actually doing did not erase the fact that the appointment was
would have delayed. However, knowing that his doctor was not acting selfishly
but for generous and different reasons, made Margarita feel substantially better because of
having to wait one more week.

We make assumptions about the intentions of others all the time. Nowadays, with the use
extended email, answering machines, fax, and teleconferences to manage the
business relationships, and even personal ones, often require us to read between the lines to
give us an idea of what people really mean. When a customer writes, 'I suppose
that you still haven't received my order... is it coming off as sarcastic or furious? Or is it
trying to tell someone who knows they are overwhelmed with work? Without the tone of voice to guide us,
It’s easy to assume the worst.

We treat ourselves more kindly. The ironic thing - and, after all, very human
— from our tendency to attribute bad intentions to others is that we ourselves ...
we treat it very differently. When her husband forgets to pick up the laundry, it is a
irresponsible. When you forget to book the plane tickets, it's because you are overwhelmed by
work and stress. When a colleague criticizes your work in front of the department colleagues,
is trying to lower it. When you make suggestions to someone in the same meeting, you are
trying to help you.

When it is us who act, we know that most of the time we do not have the.
intention to annoy, offend, or overshadow others. We are absorbed in our own
concerns and often we do not realize that we are having a negative impact on
the others. When we are the object of someone else's action, however, we tend to
too easy for us to imagine a story of bad intentions and ill will.

Are there never bad intentions? Of course, sometimes we feel hurt because someone wanted to.
to harm us. The person we are dealing with is unfriendly or inconsiderate, trying to harm us.
to leave a bad impression or to lose our best friend. But these situations are rarer than what
we imagine, and without hearing the other person, we really cannot know their intentions.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 34
 Text. Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

Misinterpreting the intentions of others is costly

Intentions are important, and misinterpreting them is dangerous for our

relationships.

We assume that bad intentions mean ill will. Perhaps the greatest danger of
assuming that a person has bad intentions means that we easily jump from 'he/she has bad
"intentions" to "is a bad person." We make judgments about the character of others that tarnish.
our idea of them affects not only any conversation we might have, but the whole
our relationship. Once we think we already know what someone is like, we see all their
actions through that lens. Even if we do not share our point of view with them, the
impact of falling. The worse our view of the other person is, the more easily we will justify the
avoid her or talk bad about her behind her back.

When you find yourself thinking: 'That traffic officer is crazy,' or 'My boss is'
manipulator
basis? It is based on the fact that you feel powerless, or that you fear manipulation, or that you
feeling frustrated, realize that your conclusion is only based on the impact that it has on the
other people's behavior towards you — which is not enough to be sure of what their intentions are or
the character of someone.

Accusing others of ill intentions puts us on the defensive. Our assumptions about
the intentions of others can also have a significant impact on our
conversations. The easiest and most common way to express those assumptions is with a question.
accusatory: 'Why did you want to hurt me?' 'Why are you sidelining me like that?'
What have I done for you to think it's okay to run me over?

We think we are sharing our wounds, frustrations, anger, or confusion. We try

to start a conversation that ends in greater understanding, perhaps better
behavior, and perhaps an apology. But what the other person thinks is that we are
trying to provoke, accuse or mistreat her. (In other words, making the same mistake in judging
our intentions.) And since our assumptions are incomplete or false with so much
frequency, the other person often not only feels accused, but falsely accused. Few
things are more harmful.

We should not be surprised, then, that the other person tries to defend themselves or to
counterattack. From his point of view, he is defending himself against false accusations. But from
from our point of view, we think that they have only gotten defensive because we are in
The truth is, and he simply cannot admit it. The result is a mess. No one finds out.
You're welcome, no one apologizes, nothing changes.

Laura and Leo are exactly in that case. Leo is defensive from start to finish; and when
he says that sometimes he wonders if Laura "stages these fights on purpose," in reality she is
accusing of having bad intentions. And thus begins a cycle of accusations. If they were asked
Later about their conversation, both Laura and Leo would say that they were victims of the bad.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 35
 Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

intentions of the other. Each would assert that their own statements were made in self-defense.

These are the classic characteristics of the cycle: both parties believe they are the victims, and both
They think they are acting only to defend themselves. This is how well-meaning people get involved.
in trouble.

Assumptions can become predictions that come true. Our assumptions about the
the intentions of another person often come true, even if they were not true initially.
You think that your boss is not giving you enough responsibilities. You assume that this is happening.
because he does not trust that you will do the job well. So, he feels unmotivated, and believes that
Nothing you do will change your boss's way of thinking. This makes your job...
affect, and your boss, who had not been worried about you before, is now very concerned.
So it gives him fewer responsibilities than before.

When we think that others have bad intentions towards us, this affects our
behavior. And, in turn, our behavior affects the way they treat us. Before
realizing that our assumption that they have bad intentions towards us becomes true.

The second mistake: Good intentions do not mitigate the negative impact.

As we have seen, the mistake Laura makes by assuming she knows Leo's intentions, although
small in appearance, has great consequences. Now let's return to Leo, who commits a
a serious error in the conversation. He assumes that, since he had good intentions, Laura did not
She must feel hurt. What she thinks is something like: 'You said that I wanted to hurt you. I have clarified it to you already.'
It's not like that. So you should feel very good now, and if not, it's your problem.

We do not grasp what the other is really trying to say.

The problem with focusing only on clarifying our intentions is that we end up
not to capture significant parts of what the other person is trying to say. When they tell us,
Why were you trying to hurt me?
first, "I know what you are trying to do," and second, "I feel hurt." When we are the person
accused, we focused only on the first message and overlooked the second. Why?
Because we feel the need to defend ourselves. As Leo is so busy defending himself, he does not...
she is hurt. She does not recognize what all this means to her, how hurt she is.
is it or why this topic is so painful for him.

Striving to understand what the other person is really saying is particularly important.
Because when someone says, 'You were trying to hurt me,' this is not all they mean.
Focusing only on intentions ultimately clouds the conversation. Often we say,
"You were trying to hurt me," when in reality we mean to say, "You do not care about me at all."
sufficient." This distinction is important.

The father who is too busy with work to attend his son's basketball game

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 36
 Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

he does not try to hurt him. He would prefer not to hurt his son. But his desire not to hurt him is not as strong as his
desire or need to work. Most of us when we are the object of the action do not
we make a greater distinction between 'I wanted to hurt myself' and 'I didn't want to hurt myself but I wasn't prioritized'

place." Anyway, it hurts us. If the father responds to his son's complaint by saying, "I
I wasn't trying to hurt you," he is not taking into account what really hurts his son: "Maybe it
you didn't mean to hurt me, but you knew you were hurting me, and you did it anyway.

It is advisable to clarify our intentions. The question is when. If you do it at

at the beginning of the conversation, it is most likely that I will do it without fully understanding what the
another person wants to express.

We overlook the complexity of human motivations

Another problem with assuming that good intentions mitigate a negative impact is that the
intentions are often more complex than simply 'good' or 'bad'. Do intentions
Are Leo's intentions purely angelic? Is he just trying to help Laura with her diet? Maybe.
he himself feels embarrassed by Laura's tendency to eat too much and feels
forced to say something. Or maybe he wants her to lose weight, not so much for herself but for
He. If he cares about her as much as he says, shouldn't he be more aware of how they affect her?
his words?

As often happens, Leo's intentions are probably diverse. It may not be realized.
full account of what really motivates him. But the answer to the question of what motivates
Actually, Leo is less important than his willingness to ask the question and to search for an answer.
response. If your first reply is, 'No, I had good intentions', you are putting a
barrier in the conversation, which will prevent him from having a true exchange of information and
learning something new. And at the same time, he is sending a message to Laura that says: 'I am more
interested in defending myself than in investigating the complexities of what may be happening in
our relationship.

It is interesting that when a person takes the time to think about what their
own intentions, sends a positive message to the other person about the importance of their
relationship. After all, that kind of effort is made only for someone who matters to you.

We escalate things with hostility - especially between groups

This dynamic of attributing intentions, defending ourselves, and overlooking the impact we produce in
the others is especially common in conflicts between groups, whether it is about the
members of a union and management, neighborhood organizations and developers, plant
administrative and the professionals it supports, or my family and their family. The desire to mitigate the
impact is especially common in situations related to the existence of differences, already
whether of race, gender, or sexual orientation.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 37
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

How to avoid the two mistakes

The good news is that the two errors related to intentions and impact can be avoided.

How to avoid the first mistake: disconnect the impact from the intention

How can Laura avoid the mistake of attributing intentions to Leo that he may not have?
The first step is simply to realize that there is a difference between the impact it causes.
her from Leo's behavior and what Leo intended. She won't get anywhere if she doesn't detach herself.
two things.

Separating the impact of intentions requires us to realize the automatic leap from, 'I felt
"hurt", as in "You were trying to hurt me". This can be done by asking three things:

Turn off impact and intention

I am aware of I am not aware of

My intentions. The intentions of others.

The impact that others have on me. The impact that my actions have on others.

Actions: 'What did the other person really do or say?'

2. Impact: 'What impact did this have on me?'
3. Assumption: "Based on that impact, what assumption am I making about what is
What did the other person propose?

Consider your opinion as a hypothesis. Once you have answered these clearly
three questions, the next step is to be absolutely sure to realize that your
Assumption about the other's intentions is only an assumption. A conjecture, a hypothesis.

Your hypothesis has a basis; you know what was said or done. But, as we have seen, this does not
It is a very strong piece of evidence from which we can start. Its assumption may be true and may be
false. In fact, your reaction can say as much about you as it does about what the other person did. Maybe
you have had an experience that gives special meaning to the action of the other. Many
people find certain types of jokes hostile, for example, because of a bad experience
At home, while others think that joking (in moderation) is a way to
to communicate and to show affection. In any case, however, one cannot afford to do
an accusation based on weak data.

Share the impact that the actions of others have on you; ask them what they are.
his intentions. You can use his answers to the questions mentioned above.
To start the difficult conversation: say what the other person did, explain what impact it had.
about you, and what you suppose were your intentions, taking care to present
that assumption as a hypothesis that you are trying to test, rather than as a
affirmation of the truth.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 38
 Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

Think about how this would have changed the beginning of the conversation between Laura and Leo. In
instead of starting with an accusation, Laura can start by identifying what Leo said, and what
the impact it caused her:

LAURA: You know? When you asked me if I was really going to eat that other scoop of ice cream,
Well, I felt hurt.

LEO: Did you feel hurt?

LAURA: Yes.

LEO: I was just trying to help you stick to your diet. Why does that bother you?

LAURA: I felt embarrassed that you said it in front of our friends. And I wonder if you
you said it to embarrass me or to hurt me. I don’t know why, but that’s what I think when something
this is how it happens.

LEO: Well, of course I don't do it on purpose. I think I didn't realize it was

annoyed. I am not clear on what you want me to say if I see you breaking the diet.

The conversation is just beginning, but it is heading towards a better development.

Don't pretend that you don't have a hypothesis. Realize that we are not suggesting you set it aside.
his assumptions about the intentions of the other. That wouldn't be realistic. Rather, take your
assumptions for what they are — mere conjectures subject to modification or refutation. Laura does not
says, "I know you didn't want to hurt me." That wouldn't be true. When you share your
assumptions about what he/she thinks were the intentions of the other, make it clear that they are assumptions
—conjectures— and that you are sharing them with the purpose of knowing if they make sense to
the other person.

It's inevitable to be a little defensive. Of course, no matter how skillfully you handle the
things, it is inevitable that one encounters a defensive attitude. The topic of intentions and the
impacts are complex and, at times, the distinctions are subtle. Therefore, it is best to foresee certain
defensive attitude, and being prepared to clarify what you are trying to communicate.

The freer you make the other person from the need to defend themselves, the easier it will be for them.
understand what you are saying and reflect on the complexity of your motivations. For
For example, you could say: "I was surprised that you made that comment. It did not seem like you."
assuming that is true (that comment did not seem like that person), you
It is providing some balance to the information it is offering. If there was a certain malice mixed in.
while the other spoke, this balance makes it easier for him to confess it.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 39
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

How to avoid the second mistake: Pay attention to your feelings and reflect on them.
intentions

When we find ourselves in the position of Leo - accused of evil intentions - we have
a strong tendency to want to defend ourselves: "That was not what I intended". We defend.
our intentions and our good disposition. However, as we have seen, starting like this
it can be problematic.

Go beyond the accusation and pay attention to the feelings. Remember that the accusation
about our bad intentions is always composed of two separate ideas: 1) us
we had bad intentions and 2) the other person felt frustrated, hurt, or embarrassed. Don't pretend
that the other is not saying the first. You will want to respond to that. But do not overlook the
second. And if you start by paying attention to their feelings and taking them into account, and then
return to the topic of intentions, this will make your conversation easier and more constructive.

Be willing to reflect on the complexity of your intentions. When the time comes.
Instead of thinking about their intentions, try to avoid the tendency to say: 'My intentions were good.'
In general, we think that about ourselves, and sometimes it is true. But often, like
We have seen, the intentions are more complex.

We can imagine how the initial conversation would have been if Leo had followed this.
advice with Laura:

LAURA: It really hurt me that you treated me that way at the party, in front of our
friends.

LEO: The way I treated you? What do you mean?

LAURA: By the way about the ice cream. You act like you're my father or something. You have a huge
need to control me or make me look bad.

LEO: Wow, it seems that what I told you really hurt you.

LAURA: Of course it hurt me, what were you expecting?

LEO: Well, at that moment I was thinking that you had said you were on a diet and only
I was trying to help you save her. But I can understand that saying something like that in front of everyone...
The world can be embarrassing. I don't know why I didn't realize it.

LAURA: Maybe you felt forced to do it.

LEO: Yes, maybe. Perhaps I thought you were out of control.

LAURA: That's true. And it probably was.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 40
 Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

LEO: In any case, I'm sorry. I don't like hurting you. Let's think about what I should do or say, if it is
of the case, in situations like that.

Good idea.

Understanding how we distort the intentions of the other person, making them more complicated.
Difficult conversations are crucial to untangle what has happened between two people. Without
embargo, there is still another part of the conversation about 'what happened' that can get us into
problems — related to who is to blame.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 41
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

4. Put aside the guilt: Outline the contribution system

The advertising agency you work for sends you to another city to do a
presentation to the executives of a large sportswear company, which is a client
important potential. You are about to start your presentation and discover that you have the
wrong sketches. Those of an old campaign for the same company. Totally disturbed,
gives a nonsensical talk. With an error, her assistant, in charge of packing her suitcase, has
ruining weeks of work.

In our version, the blame seems clear.

You blame your assistant, not only because she is a perfect target for your frustration,
or because telling others that it was her and not you who failed can help to save your
reputation, but because the simple truth is this: it was her fault.

When you and your assistant finally talk about what went wrong, you can choose one of these.
two approaches. You can explicitly blame her by saying something like: "I don't know how you could allow
"What will happen this!" Or, if you tend to not go straight to the point (or you have been taught that it is useless to blame
to people), can blame her implicitly, with something less threatening like: "Let's do it
better next time." In any case, she will get the message: it was her fault.

We are trapped in the web of guilt

Guilt is an important matter in many difficult conversations. Whether on the surface or

Further down, the conversation revolves around who was to blame. Who is the bad one in the relationship?
Who made the mistake? Who should apologize? Who can rightly be outraged?

Focusing on guilt is a bad idea. But not because it is difficult to talk about it, nor because it could harm.
the relationship and cause pain and anxiety. Many topics are difficult to discuss and have side effects
potentially negative, but they must be addressed. Focusing on guilt is a bad idea because it inhibits
our ability to figure out what is really causing the problem and do something to correct it.
And because, often, blaming someone is unnecessary and unfair. The need to blame
someone is literally based on a misunderstanding of what has led to what is happening between you
and the other person, and about the fear of being blamed. Too often, guilt is nothing but a
poor substitute for direct conversation about hurt feelings.

But the advice, 'Don't blame others' is not the answer. You cannot escape from blame.
as long as I don't understand what guilt is, what motivates us to want to blame each other and how
to steer ourselves towards something that better serves our purposes in a difficult conversation. That something is the
concept of contribution. The distinction between fault and contribution is not always easy to understand,
but it is essential to improve our ability to handle difficult conversations well.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 42
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

Distinguish between guilt and contribution

In essence, guilt consists of judging, and contribution consists of understanding.

Guilt consists of judging and looking back

When we ask 'Who was to blame?', we are actually asking three questions.
First of all, did that person cause the problem? Was the action (or inaction) of your assistant...
Was it the reason that you brought the wrong sketches? Secondly, if so, from
agreement with a code of conduct how should the actions of your assistant be judged? Should they
did it in an immoral, unreasonable, incompetent manner? And thirdly, if the judgment is negative,
How should she be punished? Should she be spoken to harshly? Should she be reprimanded? Maybe even fired?

When we say, 'this was their fault', we are essentially giving condemning answers to
the three questions. We do not only want to say that you were the cause of something, but that you did something wrong
and must be punished. It's not surprising that guilt is such a threatening issue and that
Let's not rush to defend ourselves when we feel that something is coming down on us.

When guilt comes into play, you can expect a defensive attitude, strong emotions,
interruptions and discussions about what 'good attendees' should and should not do
"lovers spouses" or "any reasonable person". When we blame someone, we are
assigning the role of "defendant"; that's why this person does what defendants do:
defend oneself as best one can. If we take into account what is at stake, it's easy to see why the dance
Mutual accusations often become unkind.

The contribution consists of understanding and looking ahead.

In the contribution, there is a game of questions related to the previous one but different. The
The first question is: How did each of us contribute to the situation being produced?
actually? Or, in other words: What did or did not each one do to get us into this
tangle? The second question is: Once the contribution system is identified, how can we
Change it? What can we do to move forward? In summary, the contribution is useful when
Our goal is to understand what really happened, so that we can improve our work.
set in the future. Both in the business world and in personal relationships,
too often we focus on guilt, when our real goals are the
understanding and change.

To illustrate this point, let's return to the story of the advertising campaign and imagine two
opposing conversations between the executive and his assistant. The first conversation begins
focus on guilt, the second, on contribution.

EXECUTIVE: I wanted to talk to you about my presentation at the sportswear company. You packed me.
the wrong sketches. I didn't know what to do in that situation. You made me look very bad. No
we can keep working like this.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 43
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

ASSISTANT: I knew that. I'm very sorry. I..., well, you probably don't want to hear my excuses.

EXECUTIVE: I just don't understand how this could happen.

ASSISTANT: I really apologize.

EXECUTIVE: I know you didn't do it on purpose, and I know you feel bad, but I don't want this
happen again. Do you understand what I am saying to you?

ASSISTANT: It won't happen again, I promise.

The three elements of guilt are all present: you caused this, I am judging you.
negatively, and what I am saying implies that you will receive a punishment in one way or another.
another one, especially if it happens again.

On the contrary, a conversation about the contribution might sound like this:

EXECUTIVE: I wanted to talk to you about my presentation at the sportswear brand. When I arrived,
I found the wrong sketches in my briefcase.

ASSISTANT: I knew that. I'm sorry. I feel very bad.

EXECUTIVE: Thank you. I also feel very bad. Let's review the process and
Let's think about how this happened. I suspect that both of us may have contributed to the problem.
From your point of view, do you think I did anything different this time?

ASSISTANT: I'm not sure. We were working on three accounts at the same time, and in the
what came before this, when I asked you which sketches you wanted me to pack for you, you got angry.
I know it's my responsibility to know what sketches you need, but sometimes, when there's a lot
urgent work, one gets confused.

EXECUTIVE: If you're not sure, you should always ask. But it seems that it's not always easy.
do it.

ASSISTANT: Well, yes, sometimes you intimidate me. When you're very busy, it's like you don't
Would you like to be bothered? On the day of that presentation, you were in a very bad mood. I tried not to
to interpose myself in your path because I didn't want to aggravate things. I had planned to review again.
What sketches did you need when you finished talking on the phone, but then I had to run?
at the photocopy center. When you left, I remembered, but since I know that you usually check it
What do you have in the suitcase, I thought everything was fine.

EXECUTIVE: Yes, usually I check, but this time I was in such a hurry that I forgot.
I think it's best if we both double-check everything always. And it's true that I get upset.
bad mood. I realize that it must be hard to work with me when I get like this. I have
try to be less impatient and less harsh. But, if you are not sure, I need you to

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 44
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

questions, no matter what mood I'm in.

ASSISTANT: So do you want me to ask you even if I think I’m going to annoy you?

EXECUTIVE: Yes, however, I am going to try to be less irritable. Can you do what I tell you?

ASSISTANT: Well, talking about this makes things easier. I realize that it is necessary.

EXECUTIVE: You can even bring up this conversation. You can tell me: 'I know you are'
under pressure, but you made me promise that I would ask about this..." Or, just tell me:
Please, you promised not to be so unbearable!

ASSISTANT (laughing): Well, that’s very good.

EXECUTIVE: And we can also think about how you can better anticipate what presentations there are.
what to do for what companies...

In the second conversation, the executive and his assistant have started to identify the
contributions of each to the problem, and how the reactions of one and the other are part of the
general panorama: the one is altered and anxious because of the presentation they have to make,
and he speaks harshly to his assistant. The assistant assumes that her boss doesn't want to be disturbed, and she
Set aside. The matter is not completely forgotten and the next time the executive is preparing a
presentation, he feels even more anxious and worried because he is not sure he can trust
that your assistant helps you. So they become more irritable, more difficult to approach, and the
Communications between the two continue to erode. Mistakes are multiplying.

When these two people understand the communication system they have created, they can see the
what both need to do to avoid or change that system in the future. As a result, the
the second conversation lends itself much more than the first to produce lasting change in
the way of working of the two. In fact, the first conversation can aggravate the problem.
As part of the system, the assistant is reluctant to speak to her boss for fear of provoking.
his bad mood, a conversation about guilt can worsen this tendency, not improve it. If
if she takes that path, the assistant will eventually conclude that the boss is a
a person who cannot be worked with, and the executive will declare that the assistant is incompetent.

The contribution is joint and interactive

Focus on the contributions of both the boss and the assistant - trying to understand in
a place of judgment — is fundamental. It is not simply a good habit, it is a more profound attitude.
realistic. As a general rule, when things go wrong in human relationships, everyone
has contributed significantly.

Of course, this is not the way we usually experience contribution. A distortion.

It is common to see the contribution in singular — that what went wrong is entirely our fault or (with
greater frequency) blame on others. However, only a B-class movie is this simple. In the

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 45
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What Needs to Be Said

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

In real life, the causes are almost always more complex. The facts are the product of a system of
contribution that includes inputs from both people. Let's think about a baseball pitcher.
facing a batter. If the batter is 'struck out' in a crucial situation, one can explain that it is not
I was seeing correctly that his wrist injury was still bothering him or perhaps simply
he failed in the way of holding the bat. The pitcher, on the other hand, can describe what happened, saying:
I knew he was thinking of a curve, and that's why I threw him a high and fast ball.
I was inspired. I knew I had it under control before he stepped up to bat.

Who is right? The batter or the pitcher? Of course, the answer is that they both are.
both, at least in part. The same applies if they "strike out" the batter as if he hits a home run,
What happens is the result of the interaction between the pitcher and the batter. According to their
perspective, you can focus on the actions of one or the other, but the actions of
both to produce the result.

The same happens in difficult conversations. Except in extreme cases, almost every situation that arises
A place in a conversation is the result of a joint system of contribution. To focus only on
in one way or another among those who contribute, it is something that darkens the system instead of clarifying it.

The costs of guilt

There are situations in which focusing on guilt is not only important but essential.
Our legal system is based on the assignment of blame, both in criminal trials and
to the civilians. Publicly assign blame according to clearly defined legal or moral codes.
established is something that shows people what is expected of them and allows them to
society to exercise justice.

When blame is the goal, understanding is the victim

But even in situations that require a clear assignment of blame, one must pay a
cost. Once the idea of punishment arises - legal or not - finding out the truth about what happened
it becomes more difficult. People, understandably, become less direct, less frank, less
willing to excuse themselves. After a car accident, for example, a car manufacturer
those who expect to be sued may resist making improvements in car safety due to
fear that they may seem like an admission that the company should have done something before the accident.

Sentence reductions often occur due to this exchange in assigning the

blame and find out better what really happened. A reduction of penalty offers clemency to
real change. In South Africa, for example, it is unlikely that so much would have been known about
the abuses of the past, under apartheid, if the research systems and trials had
they were the only means of investigation.

Focusing on guilt hinders the solution of problems.

When the dog disappears, who is to blame? The person who opened the door or the one who didn't?
Did you manage to grab him by the collar? Should we start discussing that or look for the dog? When

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 46
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What Needs to Be Said

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

the bathtub overflows and damages the ceiling of the living room of the apartment below, should we blame the
person who forgot to turn off the water tap? Or to the lady who called her to breakfast? Or to the
the manufacturer who designed a drain that was too small? Or the plumber who didn’t warn us about
that defect? The answer to the question of who contributed to the problem is: everyone
mentioned. When their real goal is to find the dog, fix the roof, and prevent those.
incidents in the future, focusing on blame is a waste of time. It does not help you to
understand the problem, nor to prevent it from continuing.

Guilt can prevent a bad system from being discovered.

Even if the punishment seems warranted, using it instead of thinking about what really happened and why is
a disaster. The vice president of Commodity Corporation led the decision to build a
new factory as a means of increasing profits. However, the new plant not only does not
it managed to increase profits, but the increase in production lowered them. When the
decision to construct the new plant, several people privately predicted that this was going to happen,
but they didn't say it frankly.

To handle the situation, the vice president was dismissed and a new member was added to the board of directors.
new strategy planner. Upon leaving the person who made the wrong decision and
replace her with someone "better," it was believed that the administrative matter was resolved.
But although the company had changed a 'part' of the contribution system, it had left
to see the problem in its entirety. Why did those who foresaw the failure remain silent?
Were there hidden motives that encouraged that attitude? What structures, policies, and processes were being followed?
allowing wrong decisions to be made and what should be done to correct them?

Removing a participant from the system is correct at times. But the cost of doing that instead
taking the trouble to examine the broader contribution system is often
surprisingly high.

The benefits of understanding the contribution

By nature, talking about blame makes conversations more difficult, while

Understanding the contribution system makes them easier and more likely.
to be productive.

The contribution is easier to propose.

José manages an international office of a company. His biggest problem is the lack of
the inability of the central office to communicate with him effectively. José does not
They find out about the policy changes only after they have been adopted, and the customers are the ones being lied to.
(or in some cases, the newspaper) those who inform them about the work they are doing themselves
company in the region where José operates. José decides to bring up the matter to the head office.

Before he does it, one of José's bosses points out his responsibility in the problem. José

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 47
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Authors: Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

has installed a computing system that is incompatible with that of the main offices, and
rarely takes the initiative to ask the questions that should be asked. Unfortunately, instead
by seeing his own contributions as part of the total system, José falls into the temptation of assigning
blames and starts to wonder if the blame is really theirs and not the main office's. Ends.
for not addressing the issue and their frustration continues.

The tendency to blame becomes a heavy burden. It is necessary to be sure that the
others are wrong and one is not, to feel justified in raising a problem. And since,
As we have described, there are always ways in which one may have contributed to the
problem, most likely we will end up not addressing important issues. This
It would be a shame, because the opportunity to understand why they are not working well is being lost.
communications between you and others and how they could be improved.

The contribution encourages learning and change

Let's imagine a couple facing an infidelity problem on the part of the wife. The
accusations arise when the issue of guilt is confronted. After much anguish, the
the husband decides to continue in the marriage on the condition that infidelity does not happen again
to occur. There is an apparent solution. But what has each one learned from that experience?

As unilateral as an adventure may seem, it often involves the contribution of the

two spouses. Unless this contribution is recognized, the problems and patterns of
behavior that motivated the wife's adventure will continue to cause difficulties. They must
asking certain questions: Does the husband listen to his wife? Does he work very late? Does she
Was the wife feeling sad, lonely, unwanted? And if so, why?

And to understand the system, the couple needs to ask themselves more questions. If the husband does not listen to
his wife, what does she do to help make that happen? What does she do or say that induces him to
to shut oneself in or to withdraw? Does she work every weekend or does she withdraw when
Do you feel sad? How does your relationship work? If it is about understanding the factors that
they contributed to the infidelity and to correct them, these aspects must be explored - this must be done
a plan (a description) of the contribution system.

Three misconceptions about contribution

Three very common misunderstandings can prevent people from fully taking advantage
the benefits of the concept of contribution.

Misconception # 1: I should focus only on my contribution

The recommendation to explore the joint contribution to a problem is sometimes understood as

that you should overlook the contribution of the other person and focus only on yours
own. That is a mistake. Recognizing your contribution does not in any way deny the contribution of
the other person. It took both of them to create that mess, and probably it will take both to

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 48
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What Needs to Be Said

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

both to get out of it.

Recognizing that everyone involved in a situation has contributed to the problem does not mean that
everyone contributed equally. One can be responsible for 5 percent or for 95 percent.
a hundred, but it is still the result of the contribution of two people. Of course, it is not easy.
quantify the contribution, and in most cases it does not help much. The goal is to understand,
do not distribute percentages.

Mistake #2: Putting aside guilt means forgetting my feelings

Trying to understand the contribution system instead of focusing on blame does not mean
overlook strong emotions. On the contrary, when you and the other person try
To see how each one has contributed to the problem, it is essential that they share their feelings.

In fact, the very urge to blame the other is often triggered by strong emotions that
they remain unexpressed. When someone finds out that their wife is unfaithful, they want to tell her:
You are responsible for ruining our marriage! How could you do something so
"stupid and so hurtful?" In this case, the person is resorting to guilt to mask their
feelings. If I spoke more directly about my feelings, I would say: 'I feel shattered
for what you did" or "My trust in you has collapsed" — this really reduces the drive to
to blame. Over time, looking ahead, this leaves people free to speak more
calmly and productively in terms of contribution.

If you find yourself tangled in a continuous need to blame others or for the other person
Admit that you were wrong, you might find some relief by asking yourself: 'What feelings am I'
stopping to express?
you will explore this territory, you will be able to move from the realm of blame to that of contribution. You will be able to give yourself

It accounts for the fact that what you seek is understanding and recognition. What you want from the other
The person should not say: 'It was my fault,' but rather: 'I realize that I hurt you and I'm sorry.'
the first statement implies a judgment, the second is a demonstration of understanding.

Mistake #3: Exploring the contribution means 'blaming the victim'

When someone blames the victim, they suggest that the victim "asked for it," that they deserved it, or even
I wanted them to turn her into a victim. Often this is terribly unfair and painful both
for the victim as for others.

Finding the joint contribution has nothing to do with any kind of blame. Imagine that it
They are attacked when walking down a dark street late at night. Guilt asks: "Did you do something wrong?"
Did he break the law? Was it against morality? Should he be punished? The answer to all those questions is
No. You did nothing wrong; you didn't deserve to be assaulted. It wasn't your fault that it happened.

The contribution poses a series of distinct questions. The contribution asks: "What did I do to
contribute to the situation? One can find contribution even in situations where not
You are to blame. You did contribute to being assaulted. How? By deciding to walk alone at night.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 49
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

If I had been with another person, or in a group, it would have been less likely that I would have been assaulted.
we are trying to punish someone for what happened, we would punish the attacker. If we try to
to help you feel less helpless, we would encourage you to seek your contribution.
You may not be able to change the contributions of other people, but with
frequency can change yours.

In his autobiography, A Long Walk to Freedom, Nelson Mandela gives an example of how
even people who have lived very oppressed may try to understand their own contribution to their
problems. Mandela narrates how he learned this from an Afrikaner:

Reverend Andre Scheffer was a minister of the Dutch Reformed Mission Church in
Africa... She had a particular sense of humor and liked to have fun with us. "You know?", she said to us.
he said, "the white man has a harder task than the black man in this country. Whenever there is a
problem, we (the whites) have to find a solution. But when you all the
blacks have a problem, they have an excuse. They simply say 'Ingabilungu'... an expression
they are the whites

It said that we could always blame the white people for all our problems. Their
the message was that we should look within ourselves and take responsibility for our actions,
a feeling with which I completely agreed.

Mandela does not believe that black people should be blamed for their situation. What he does believe is that the
blacks must seek their contribution to the problems of South Africa and take responsibility for it
she for the nation to progress.

By identifying what you are doing to perpetuate a situation, you find out how you can
Change the system. By just changing your own behavior, you gain at least some influence.
about the problem.

How to find what is right: four difficult-to-recognize contributions

"The concept of contribution makes sense," you might be thinking. However, upon reflecting
about your most urgent problem, you say to yourself: "In this particular situation, I can't see how
I can have some participation." Recognizing one's own contribution becomes easier with practice.
But it is useful to familiarize oneself with four common contributions that are often overlooked.

Elude

One of the most common contributions to a problem, and one of the easiest to overlook,
it is the simple act of evasion. You have allowed the problem to continue, simply because you do not
he has wanted to confront him. It may be that her ex-husband has been coming late every time he passes by
pick up the children over the last two years, but you have never told him that it is a
Problem. Your boss may have treated her with disregard since you started.
You have been working for four years, but you have preferred not to tell her that it is affecting her.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 50
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

One of his sales managers deserves a warning or even dismissal, but his record of
Life is full of good reports about its performance in previous years. Why? In part
because you wanted to avoid the effort of documenting the problem, but mostly because
You and the other bosses have wanted to avoid the discomfort of having a difficult conversation with
a problematic person. And because the executives of their company agree to tolerate
that kind of conversations should be avoided.

A particularly problematic way to evade a situation is to complain to a third party.

a person instead of doing it with the person they are angry with. It makes them feel better.
you, but puts the third person in the middle and without a way to help. Can't speak for
you, and if you try to do it, the other person might think that the problem is so terrible that you
he cannot deal with her directly. On the other hand, if the third person remains silent,
you have to bear with the partial and incomplete version of the story that you have given him.

This does not mean that it is not good to ask a friend for advice on how to handle a
difficult conversation. What is suggested is that, if you do, you communicate to that friend
any change in your feelings that has occurred as a result of the conversation
difficult, so that it does not end up with a biased story.

Be very distant

The downside of not expressing what one thinks or feels is developing a style
interpersonal that keeps people at a distance. You contribute to that by being indifferent,
unpredictable, impatient, very critical, vengeful, hypersensitive, hostile or argumentative. Of course, the
What's important is not whether you really are any of those things or if you want to give that impression. If
someone feels that you are like this, they are less likely to raise an issue, and that becomes
part of the system to avoid awkward situations.

3. Intersections

Intersections are the result of a simple difference between cultural baggage, tastes, the
the communication style or the ideas that two people have about their relationship. Let's think about
Tomás and Anita, who have been married for almost four months. Their fights start to
follow a predictable pattern. Generally, it is Tomás who starts the discussion: who is
doing more work at home, why didn't Anita take her side when they argued with her
Mother, whether to spend or save the year-end bonus. When things heat up,
Anita ends the argument by saying, "I don't want to talk about that right now," and leaves.

When Anita shuts herself in or leaves, Tomás is left feeling abandoned and solely responsible.
about the solution to the problems in their relationship. She complains to her friends that 'Anita is
unable to talk about his feelings, and tends to deny even the smallest things. Tomás
feels increasingly frustrated with both of their inability to make difficult decisions or
just discuss.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 51
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

Meanwhile, Anita was confessing to her sister that she felt that Tomás was harassing her too much.
Everything is an emergency, everything has to be discussed immediately. He doesn't care what I think.
about the matter or if it is a good time for me. I wanted us to clarify a discrepancy.
minimum in our current account the eve of my general report to the board! It is always there.
turning small things into big problems that we have to discuss for hours.

When Tomás and Anita finally talk explicitly about what is happening to them, they realize
that their past experiences have created a conflicting intersection in their way of
to conceive communications and relationships. Tomás's mother had problems with alcohol
who was increasing during his childhood. Tomás was the only member of the family who
I wanted to talk about what was happening. Her father and her sisters refused to do so, and
they acted as if nothing bad was happening. They overlooked the erratic behavior of the mother, without a doubt.
in the attempt to unconsciously cling to the hope that the situation would improve in some way
way. But this didn't happen. Perhaps for that reason, Tomás feels that discussing and trying to solve the
Addressing problems immediately is crucial for your relationship with Anita to remain healthy.

Anita's home was completely different. Her brother had a mental limitation, and life revolved around...
around his schedule and his needs. Although Anita loved her brother very much, from time to time
when I needed a breath from the constant whirlwind of worries, crises, and cares that the
surrounded. He learned not to react too soon to a potential problem and worked hard to
establish the distance I needed in such an emotionally burdened family. The reactions of
Tomás and his disagreements threatened that distance that had been built with such care.

Contribution system chart

Here we see how the combination of these two distinct visions produces a system of
interaction in which Tomás speaks and Anita leaves. Working within the assignment system
of blame, Tomás came to the conclusion that the difficulties in his relationship were Anita's fault,
because "he refused to speak" and "he couldn't face his feelings". And Anita decided that Tomás

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 52
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

he was to blame for the difficulties, because he "worried too much" and "harassed her". Upon passing to
land of contribution, the couple was able to gather the elements of the system that led them to
to fight and find a way to handle it. Only then did his communication improve.

Tomás and Anita were fortunate to understand their interference in time to do something about it.
regarding. Not doing it can be a disaster. In fact, treating an interference as a matter
The struggle between the just and the unjust is something that leads to the death of many relationships. When a
in a relationship, infatuation can prevent the couple from realizing each other's shortcomings.
another. Later, as the relationship deepens, each one notices small discomforts in the
the way the other behaves, but tends not to worry. He assumes that, over time and thanks to
from your example, the other will learn to show more affection, to be more spontaneous or to show themselves more
worried about not overspending.

The problem is that things don't change because everyone is waiting for the other to change.
And then the couple starts to wonder if the other loves them enough.

As long as we continue to see this as a matter of right against wrong, rather than as a
intersection, there is no way to avoid failure. On the contrary, successful relationships, the same way
in our personal lives as in business, are built on the principle that in the
interferences no one is to blame. People are simply different. If we want to stay together for
a long time, sometimes we will have to find a middle ground.

4. Assume problematic roles

A fourth contribution that is difficult to notice is the assumptions, often unconscious, about the
role played in a situation. When what we assume is different from what
others assume, an intersection like that of Tomás and Anita can be presented. But to assume
papers can be problematic even when everyone is in agreement.

Each member of Jorge's family, for example, knew their role in the dynamic.
familiar. Jorge, seven years old, was doing something annoying, like hitting the dog's plate with a
spoon. Then Jorge's mother said to her husband, 'Why don't you make her stop doing
noise?
Then the mom would turn to her husband and say, 'Well, you didn't have to yell at him like that.'
Soon the dad sighed and continued reading the newspaper, and a few minutes later, Jorge
another irritating way of calling attention was found and the pattern was repeated. Although to no one
a family member particularly enjoyed that dynamic, it was the way how they
they were emotionally related.

It is obvious that this way of relating —fighting to show love— has its limitations.
However, this and many other dynamics that are not ideal are surprisingly
common, both at home and at work. Why? First, because despite their
problems, the family pattern is comfortable, and the group members seek to ensure that each person
continue to play its role. Second, because changing a contribution system requires something
more than noticing it and realizing its limitations. The involved parties also have to

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 53
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Autores.Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

find another way to obtain the same benefits. Jorge and his parents need to find
best ways to show affection and maintain closeness. And it is likely that this demands a
great effort in their conversations about identity and feelings.

In an organization, this explains why people find it difficult to change the way they...
they work with each other, even when they realize the limitations that the roles have
which are generally assumed, such as "the leaders who dictate the strategy; and the subordinates"
that develop it." To change the way people interact, both a
alternative model that everyone thinks is better, like the skills to make that
the model should function at least as well as the current one.

Two ways to see the contribution clearly

If you are still unable to see your contribution to a situation, try one of these two methods.

Change the roles

Ask yourself: "What would others say is my contribution to this situation?" Pretend
that you are the other person and answer the question in the first person. See yourself with
the eyes of another can help you understand what you are doing to contribute to the system.

The inner vision of the observer

Step back and view the problem from the perspective of an uninterested observer. Imagine that
you are a consultant whom they have called to help people who are in that situation to
understand it and move forward. How would you describe the contribution of each of the
involved, in a neutral way and without judging them?

If it is hard for you to step out of your own shoes, ask a friend to try doing it for you.
you. If what your friend reveals surprises you, do not reject it immediately. Rather,
imagine that it is true. Ask yourself how it could be possible and what it would mean.

How to move from guilt to contribution - An example

Moving from finding blame to exploring contribution is not something that happens overnight.
Tomorrow. It requires hard work and persistence. Several times you will see or will see others fall again.
in the mania of searching for culprits, and will always need to be alert to correct the course.

Juana learned this while leading a team of engineers on a consulting mission in the
Brazil. She was the only woman in the project, and she was fifteen years younger than the rest of the team.
One of the members of this group, Miguel, was particularly hostile towards her leadership and she
she proposed to earn it by having him work with her on a series of tasks. The two carried out several
projects successfully, and each began to feel more comfortable with the other's style and skill.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 54
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What Needs to Be Said

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

So one afternoon, when they were working together in the hotel restaurant, Miguel changed.
the terms of the relationship. He said to Juana: "You are so cute and we are so far from home," and then
he leaned across the table and stroked her hair. Juana, uncomfortable, suggested going back to the numbers,
Sheed Miguel's gaze and quickly picked up the papers.

Miguel's provocative behavior continued for a few days. He would stand next to Juana, he
I paid more attention to her than to the other team members, I sought her out whenever I could.
Although he never made any invitation for physical contact, Juana wondered if that was what
what I was looking for.

At first, like many of us do, Juana set out to find someone to blame. The behavior
de Miguel was, in his opinion, inappropriate, and he felt like a victim of it. But along with the idea of
assigning blame led to several doubts. Just when I was about to tell Miguel that his
the behavior was wrong, Juana began to fear that she was exaggerating or misinterpreting the
Miguel's acts. Perhaps it was just a cultural difference.

Juana also feared that accusing Miguel would make things worse. 'The situation
it's uncomfortable but manageable," she thought. "If I tell Miguel that his behavior is wrong, I run
the risk of it exploding, breaking the equipment, or doing something that endangers the project. And the
project is my first priority." As she continued to think in terms of guilt, Juana was running the
risk of the matter becoming unmanageable.

Draw the layout of the contribution system

The first step to moving away from the idea of guilt is to reorient your own way of thinking about
the situation. You can begin to elucidate the system by searching for the contribution of each one to
the creation of the problem. Some of us are prone to focusing on the contributions of
another, and we are not willing to see our own. We tend to consider ourselves the innocent victims
— when something goes wrong, it is always the consequence of what someone else did. Others have the
opposing trend: we become too aware of the negative consequences of our
our own actions, and then, the contributions of others seem insignificant to us. That kind of
the person feels responsible for everything.

Knowing your predisposition can help you combat it, and it allows you to have an overview.
balanced contributions from each person. To understand a contribution system, one must
needs to understand all its components.

How are others contributing? Miguel's contributions are relatively easy to.
identify. It is expressing romantic affection, but without clarifying its intentions or the extent of its
interest. He prefers to stay close to Juana, spending more time talking to her than with the
other colleagues, to imply that she is missing. She decides (consciously or unconsciously) not
take into account the non-verbal signals that Juana is giving. She changes the subject, changes the
task assignment, she walks away. But he follows her and has decided not to ask how she feels about
what is happening.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 55
 Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

Miguel may or may not realize that Juana feels uncomfortable. His actions may be culpable.
or may not be. And it may be fair to punish him or not. But these are questions that have nothing to do
what to see with the contribution. What matters here is that they are pieces of the puzzle that
They correspond to Miguel.

How am I contributing? Juana's contributions start to appear when we

We moved out of the realm of blame. She paid particular attention to Miguel's observations.
about the team and made an exception in the distribution of tasks to work more with him. He
She may have interpreted this as interest on her part. Juana has avoided telling Miguel.
— at least directly — that has felt uncomfortable. It doesn’t matter how justified or
understandable as Juana's actions were, what she did and what she did not do contributed to the
current situation, and help to understand why Miguel continues to act as he does.

Make a list of each person's contribution

My contribution Your contribution

I gave Miguel special attention at the beginning. Tell me that he is in love, that he wants to spend
I stepped out of the usual to work more with him. time with me, etc.
I haven't told him that I feel uncomfortable. Not being clear about his intentions.
Not receiving or not taking into account my signals
indirect hints.
Don't ask me if I feel comfortable with them
insinuations.

Who else is involved? Often there are other important contributors to the system. By
For example, in the case of Tomás and Anita, the families of both played an important role. In the
In Juana's case, other team members may have encouraged Miguel, unknowingly or
I have wasted opportunities to help Juana. When I examine a contribution system,
Please consider if other participants may be contributing something important.

Take responsibility for your contribution soon

Bringing up the idea of contribution during the conversation itself can be surprisingly
easy. Making the other person move from guilt to contribution can be more difficult. One of the
the best ways to show that you want to move past the issue of who was at fault is
acknowledge her own contribution at the beginning of the conversation. For example, Juana could
tell Miguel:

Forgive me for not having talked about this earlier, when it hadn't become something so serious.
I also realize that having decided that we would work together at the beginning of
the project may have given you a wrong impression, although all I wanted was to improve
our professional relationships. What was your reaction?

She could also add: 'Are there other things I have done that turned out ambiguous or
"They suggested that she might be interested in something more?" In this way, Juana would receive valuable ...

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 56
 Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Autores.Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

information about the impact it had on Miguel, and at the same time would establish the basis for
discuss Miguel's contribution.

You may fear that being the first to acknowledge any contribution puts you in a position
vulnerable for the rest of the conversation. What if the other person continues to focus on the guilt
and remains more than happy to acknowledge your contribution (saying, in effect: "I agree
Is this your fault") and then does not admit for any reason to having contributed with anything?

This is an important concern, especially if you tend to blame yourself.

Recognizing her contribution is a risk. But not recognizing it also implies risks. If Juana
start by pointing out Miguel's contributions, it is most likely that Miguel will get to
defensive and think that the conversation is unfairly biased. Instead of acknowledging their
contribution, Miguel may be tempted to divert attention from it, and the
The easiest way to do it is to point out the role that Juana has played in the problem.
Taking responsibility for your contribution at the beginning prevents the other person from using it as
shield to avoid the discussion about his own contribution.

If you feel that the approach is directed only at you, you can say it: "It's not right for us to...
let's focus only on my contribution. That is not the reality as I see it. I believe that
I am trying to observe the behavior of the two. Am I doing something that prevents you from looking?
your performances?

Help the other person understand their own contribution

In addition to taking responsibility for what you contributed, there are things you can do to
help the other to find their contribution.

Make your observations and reasoning explicit. To be sure that they are based on the
same information and that they understand the interpretations of each one, talk, with so much
accuracy as they may remember it, about what the other person did or said to provoke their
reaction. Juana could say, for example: "When you caressed my hair, or when you
you asked if we could spend some free time together at the beach, I didn’t understand what it was that
you were looking for in our relationship. Then I started to fear that you wanted to have a romance with me;
in which case I would have a serious problem on my hands.

Tomás could tell Anita: "When you left home last night in the middle of our fight, I
I felt abandoned and furious. I think that's why I started that fight this morning over the juice of
orange. I needed to reconnect with you even if it was just by shouting at you.
things that provoked your reaction, you will be starting to understand actions and reactions
what constitutes the contribution system.

Clarify what you would like the other person to do differently. In addition to explaining what caused their
Reaction, you must be prepared to say what you expect the other person to do.
different in the future, and to explain how this can help you also behave in
another way. The husband who tries to restore his relationship with his unfaithful wife could say:

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 57
 Text.Difficult Conversations - How to Face Them and Say What You Need to Say

Autores.Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen

I want to pay you more attention and not distance myself so much in the future. Something that would help me pay you
the thing is that you ask me first how my day at the office was and if it is a good time for me to
let's talk. Sometimes I am worried or anxious about work, and when you start to tell me
The problems you have with your boss, I just feel overwhelmed and I shut myself in.
And sometimes I get furious because I think that you don't care about what happens to me.
If you ask me first, I think I will be much more willing to listen to you. What do you think?
Could you do it?

Make a specific request to the other person to try to change their contribution, in order to
that you can change yours, can be a very effective way to help you understand it
What she or he are doing to create and perpetuate the problem. And it gets to the heart of the purpose.
to understand the contribution system — and to know what each one needs to do accordingly
different to influence the situation and improve it.

The same applies whether it is about their contradictory versions, their intentions, or their contributions,
the goal is not to get something accepted. The goal is to better understand what is happening between
You two, in order to start talking constructively about where to go.

But besides clarifying the conversation about 'what happened', there are two other conversations that
they need to untangle. The next two chapters examine the conversations of the
feelings and identity.

UNTREF VIRTUAL | 58