How to Prepare for Difficult Conversations
Student’s Name
Institution
How to Prepare for Difficult Conversations
In the business world, managers often find themselves in difficult conversations with employees regarding their performance. In that sense, Karen has to hold a detailed and meaningful conversation with Robert regarding his underperformance as the senior economist. No matter the relationship that has developed between them over the years, it is time for Karen to start the vital conversation devoid of defensiveness. On the other hand, Robert should listen carefully and patiently to the boss. However, both parties have to listen to each other and avoid accusations or jumping into conclusions (Stone, 1999). Last but not least, Karen and Robert should keep their emotions aside and focus on solving the problem at hand. Whereas the conversion might prove to be quite tricky, Karen and Robert have to come at an amicable understanding for the division to prosper effectively.
Subsequently, Karen has to adopt the right tone and approach when meeting with Robert. At most times, difficult conversations are hard to handle as a lot of feelings are involved. As psychologist reveal, emotions can become a risky phenomenon when conducting business. In that sense, Karen has to organize her thoughts and approach to avoid triggering emotions when talking to Robert. Not only should both parties ignore their feelings but also should know that they hinder good listening. Therefore, the only solution for both parties is to identify and comprehend their emotions amicably in a responsible manner. According to Fischer (2005), it can be hard to understand one’s feelings, but simple emotional discomfort can cause more damage than good in business. This consequence is because most people translate their emotions into premeditated judgement. Moreover, Karen needs to use a thoughtful and realistic approach that avoids the blame game as a result of emotional dissatisfaction. Besides, the first move in displaying feelings that Karen should make is to acknowledge that they are a crucial part of the current situation. All in all, productive conversation ensures that all parties recognize everyone’s emotions.
As a senior economist, Robert is quite a respectable figure in the organization. Not only has he been a leader in the division but also has a lot of humour that makes other workers feel comfortable around him. Owing to this fact, Karen’s conversation with Robert will be challenging. As the manager of the Division of Economic Analysis, Karen will have to question Robert on his work performance as well as challenge his identity. Furthermore, Karen has to question Robert’s competency and willingness to work for the division. According to Wilmot (1978), challenging a person’s identity requires crucial knowledge of their identity as well as a healthy way to approach the affected individual. In this case, Karen should apply adaptive thinking that is critical in solving the problem at hand and in the process, improve the division’s performance. From Karen’s point of view, Robert is an uninspired employee who makes little or no effort to change his work ethics. Moreover, Robert seems uninterested in pursuing the Department of Commerce and Economic Development (DCED) mandate, which is critical in the growth and development of the organization. In addition, Karen sees Robert as an extra burden when it comes to the division’s spending. Karen reveals that Robert is paid $6,000 more than the next high paid employee and $15,000 above the average annual salary for economists in the Division of Economic analysis.
Nonetheless, Robert should be given some time to speak his mind about the problem. Karen goes on to reveal that Robert was miserable at his work. Not only does Welch hate his former boss but also blames Mann for withholding promised opportunities. Robert should not take the conflict personally even though it questions his identity but instead should focus on coming up with a solution. Moreover, Robert should recognize the underlying needs in the development of his career. After carefully listening to Robert’s speak his mind about the problem, Karen should ask the following questions: What ways can Robert use to improve his work morale and performance? Is he ready to take a pay cut to the level of other economists in the department? What about career change and development? Nonetheless, before negotiation, it is crucial to evaluate the purpose of the meeting. As negotiation continues, Karen should make an agreement with Robert that is the best alternative for the division and also one that satisfies both parties. Moreover, the agreement should be legitimate and elegant, that is, the best solution among many options (Yilmaz, 2017). The best action Karen should take is to fire Robert Welch from the Division of Economic Analysis. Therefore, this decision should be reached efficiently based on an inclusive conversation that builds on a good relationship for both parties.
References
Fisher, R. (2005). Beyond Reason: Using Emotions as you negotiate. New York, NY: Viking Penguin. P. 22-78
Stone, D. (1999). Difficult Conversations: How to discuss what matters most. New York: Viking Penguin. P. 66-112
Wilmot, W. (1978). Interpersonal Conflict. 9th edition. P. 89-133
Yilmaz, K. (2017). Seven elements of effective communication: Part 1, Interests. 1st edition. P. 67-89