In Crucial Conversations; written by Kerry Patterson, Joseph Grenny, Ron McMillan, and Al Switzler, the authors seek to describe linguistically the every day experiences that many people have previously not been able to identify in suitable terms. Specifically, that relationships experienced during every day living frequently involve conversations in dire need of mastery in order to achieve positive results, or to avoid negative consequences; both of which can become far-reaching. The instructions provided in Crucial Conversations benefit the individual as well as entire organizations by encouraging the reader to explore ways to overcome high emotions in tense situations in order to communicate effectively and thereby achieving the positive benefits of important dialogue.
The authors purport that how people handle crucial conversations is critical to their success with all relationships. They describe that crucial conversations have three primary criteria: 1)The stakes are high, 2) Opinions vary, and 3) Emotions run strong. Each time they are encountered the authors point out that three options are available to us when confronted with such conversations; we can avoid it, face it and handle it well, or face it and handle it poorly.
Interesting is the assertion by the authors that we humans are designed wrong for being able to handle such situations; pointing out physiological responses that circumvent our ability to properly handle these stressful conversations. Yet they go on to point out that with the proper mindset, and a little practice, anyone can become capable in handling these situations and overcoming their physiological responses.
The authors initiate their discussion with one critical aspect to mastering crucial conversations; that being to get all the relevant information out into the open, and into a shared pool of meaning through dialogue. The authors illustrate that dialogue begins with thinking about your preferred outcomes for the interaction, and suggest asking three questions of self with regards to the dialogue: What do I really want for myself? What do I really want for others? What do I really want for the relationship? Again, in tense situations, our emotions often cause us to behave in a way that is divergent from our real motivations, and we can often get trapped in either/or ways of thinking rather than what the authors recommend; finding ways to get what you want, while also not getting what you do not want.
The authors provide many examples that illustrate how fragile conversations can be, and how quickly they can erode into unsafe conversations wroth with poorly chosen words and bad impulses manifesting themselves into bad behavior. The authors emphasize the need to stay focused on maintaining a safe environment for holding these conversations by focusing on mutual purpose and mutual respect as ways to keep crucial conversations safe.
The problem is that crucial conversations can quickly and easily become unsafe, and that lines of propriety are occasionally crossed. In these cases, the authors strongly recommend taking action immediately to re-create the safety for conversations to continue; citing that most people respond by either becoming silent in these unsafe arenas, or becoming violent with their conversations; i.e. lashing out emotionally, name-calling, etc. At these stages conversation safety is at risk because individuals do not feel comfortable adding to the shared pool of meaning. Crucial conversationalists must be cognoscente of when the safe environment for dialogue deteriorates, and work to re-establish mutual purpose and mutual respect through the use of three skills: apologizing, contrasting, and the CRIB method; which stands for Committing to seek a mutual purpose, Recognizing the purpose behind the strategy, Inventing a mutual purpose, and Brainstorming new strategies. The CRIB technique can be very effective in correcting dissipating conversation, though the authors do emphasize the need to be aware when additional step, such as apologizing, are necessary.
The authors offer two additional sets of useful skills for crucial conversation, which they term STATE, and AAMP. Both skill sets are designed to have effective crucial conversations, but from two different perspectives, respectively, speaking, and listening. STATE stands for Share your facts, Tell your story, Ask for others’ paths, Talk tentatively, and Encourage testing (i.e., inviting opposing perspectives). Sharing, telling, and asking form the three action steps, while talking tentatively and encouraging testing are the methods used to implement these three actions. Following this process will help one to speak effectively without jeopardizing the safety of the conversation with poorly chosen words, or poorly monitored behavior. The authors discuss the fact that some people do not feel safe sharing their opinions and perspectives during a dialogue – even if the dialogue is safe. In such cases, they discuss the AMPP strategy; which stands for Ask to get things rolling, Mirror to confirm feelings, Paraphrase to acknowledge their story, and Prime, or take a best guess at what the other person might be thinking. These skills can help to conduct what is arguably the most crucial part of a crucial conversations – listening – by facilitating the opportunity (or necessity) for others to speak.
In the final chapters, the authors suggest all parties in a crucial conversation discuss the decision-making process and make explicit how a final decision will be made at the conclusion of the dialogue. Noting that it is important to determine how the group will follow through on the issues they discuss. The authors conclude with practical ways to hone crucial conversation skills, including rehearsing with a friend and practicing the skills during less crucial conversations. With these essential dialogue skills, the authors believe that a more productive workplace will be created; where employees and managers alike feel valued, and one where issues can be resolved efficiently and respectfully in both one to one conversations and committee meetings alike.