Crucial Accountability

Tools for Resolving Violated Expectations, Broken Commitments, and Bad Behavior

By Kerry Patterson, Joseph Grenny, Ron McMillan, Al Switzler, David Maxfield

McGraw-Hill Education

Copyright © 2013 VitalSmarts
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-0-07-182931-1

Contents

ForewordPrefaceAcknowledgmentsIntroduction: What Is Crucial Accountability? And Who Cares?Part One: Work on Me First What to Do Before an Accountability
ConversationChapter 1: Choose What and If How to Know What Conversation to Hold and
If You Should Hold ItChapter 2: Master My Stories How to Get Your Head Right Before Opening
Your MouthPart Two: Create Safety What to Do During an Accountability ConversationChapter 3: Describe the Gap How to Start an Accountability ConversationChapter 4: Make It Motivating How to Help Others Want to Take ActionChapter 5: Make It Easy How to Make Keeping Commitments (Almost)
PainlessChapter 6: Stay Focused and Flexible What to Do When Others Get
Sidetracked, Scream, or SulkPart Three: Move to Action What to Do After an Accountability
ConversationChapter 7: Agree on a Plan and Follow Up How to Gain Commitment and Move
to ActionChapter 8: Put It All Together How to Solve Big, Sticky, Complicated
ProblemsChapter 9: The 12 “Yeah-Buts” How to Deal with the Truly ToughAppendix A: Where Do You Stand? A Self-Assessment for Measuring Your
Accountability Conversation SkillsAppendix B: Six-Source Diagnostic Questions The Six-Source ModelAppendix C: When Things Go RightAppendix D: Discussion Questions for Reading GroupsNotesIndex

CHAPTER 1

Choose What and IfHow to Know What Conversation to Hold and If You Should Hold It

I made a Freudian slip last night. I called my husband by the name of my firstboyfriend. It was embarrassing.

I did the same sort of thing. I meant to say to my husband, “Please pass thepotatoes,” but I said, “Die, loser; you’ve ruined my life!”

Problems rarely come in tiny boxes—certainly not the issues we care about. Thosecome in giant bundles. For instance, your boss promises you a raise and thenrecants. This is the second time he’s promised you something only to go back onthe promise, except this time he dropped the bomb in a meeting, and so youcouldn’t complain on the spot. When you stopped him in the hallway to bring upthe issue, he told you that he was in a hurry and said you should “stop beinginsensitive to my time demands.” You asked if you could talk later, and he said,”Hey, I didn’t get the money I deserved either.”

Let’s try a home example. Your in-laws just walked in unannounced while you wereeating dinner. You’ve talked to them about giving you a heads-up, particularlyif they plan on dropping in at dinnertime, and they still prance in on a whim.What problem do you address?

You don’t have enough food to go around. That could be easy to discuss. They’verepeatedly promised they would notify you but are constantly breaking thatagreement and losing your trust. That is likely to be hard to bring up. Finally,after turning down your invitation to join you at the table, they pout andwhimper in the corner. That could be really difficult to confront.

In each of these cases, you’re left with two questions that you have to answerbefore you open your mouth: What? and If? First, what violation or violationsshould you actually address? How do you dismantle a bundle of accountabilityproblems into its component parts and choose the one you want to discuss? Youhave a lot to choose from, and you can’t talk about them all, at least not inone sitting. Second, you have to decide if you’re going to say anything. Do youspeak up and run the risk of causing a whole new set of problems, or do youremain silent and run the risk of never solving the problem?

Let’s take these two questions one at a time. We’ll deal with the if questiononce we’ve resolved the what question.

CHOOSING WHAT

The question of what you should discuss may be the most important concept wecover in this book. When problems come in complicated bundles, and they oftendo, it’s not always easy to know which problem or problems to address.

For example, a teenage daughter swears to her father she’ll be home from herfirst big date by midnight but doesn’t come home until 1 a.m. Here’s thepressing question: What problem should he discuss? “That’s easy,” you say. “Shewas late.” True, that’s one way to describe the problem.

Here are several other ways: She broke a promise. She violated her father’strust. She drove her father insane with fear that she had been killed in a carwreck. She purposely and willfully disobeyed a family rule. She openly defiedher father in an effort to break free of parental control. She was getting evenwith her father for grounding her the weekend before. She knew it would driveher father bonkers if she stayed out late with a guy who sports a dozen faceperforations, and so she did that.

Although it’s true that the daughter walked in the door 60 minutes after curfew,this may not be the exact and only problem her father wants to discuss. Here’sthe added danger: if he selects the wrong problem from this lengthy list ofpossible problems and handles it well, he may be left with the impression thathe’s done the right thing. However, if you want to follow the footsteps of ourpositive deviants, you have to identify and deal with the right problem, or itwill never go away. This still leaves us with this question: What is the rightproblem?

Signs That You’re Dealing with the Wrong Problem

Your Solution Doesn’t Get You What You Really Want

To get a feel for how to choose the right problem, let’s look at an actual casewe recently uncovered during a training session for school principals. It’s froma grade school principal’s experience. During recess a teacher notices thefollowing interaction. Two second-grade girls are playing on the monkey bars. AsMaria pushes Sarah to hurry her along, Sarah shouts, “Don’t you ever touch meagain, you dirty little Mexican!” Maria counters with, “At least I’m not a bigfatty!” This is the precipitating event.

The principal calls the children’s parents, describes what took place, andexplains that the school will be disciplining them. Maria’s parents are finewith the idea and thank the principal, and that’s the end of the discussion.Sarah’s mother takes a different approach. She asks, “Exactly what form ofdiscipline will each child receive?” The principal explains that the disciplinewill suit the nature of the offense.

The next day Sarah’s mother shows up unannounced, catches the principal in thehallway, and proclaims in loud and harsh tones that she doesn’t want the schoolto discipline her daughter. She’ll take care of the discipline on her own. Theprincipal explains that the school is bound by policy to take action. In fact,tomorrow Sarah will be separated from her friends during lunch and required totake her meal in the media room under the supervision of a teacher’s aide.That’s the prescribed discipline. Sarah’s mother then announces that tomorrowshe’ll be picking up her daughter for a private mommy-daughter lunch at a nearbyrestaurant.

There are several problems in this scenario. When the principals in the trainingsession hear about the incident, many become emotional. “That’s an easy one tofigure out,” some suggest. “You turn it over to the district disciplinecommittee. Besides, since there are racial issues involved here, you could getthe mother in trouble for interfering.” Of course, the goal here isn’t to causethe mother grief, so what should the principal do?

As the principals settle down to discuss the problem in earnest, they bring tothe surface an assortment of issues: “First, there’s the problem of meddling.She has no right to ask about the other child’s discipline. It’s a privatematter.” “No, the bigger issue is that she is demanding to take away theschool’s right to discipline. That’s simply unacceptable.” “Plus the kid’s goingto be rewarded with a special lunch instead of being punished. Who wants that?””How about the fact that the mother is rude and manipulative? That can’t begood.”

Finally, one of the assistant principals brings up an issue that everyone seemsto think is important: “I’m worried that the parent and the school won’t bepartnering in solving the problem. I’d want to work with the mother to come upwith a plan jointly. Otherwise, she might begin to characterize the schoolofficials as the enemy, and the child will soon agree.”

Once this important issue is highlighted as the main problem, a discussion canbe held to resolve it, and the principal can get what it is he or she reallywants: a working partnership with the parent that will help benefit the child.Solutions to any of the other problems would not have accomplished this, andpeople would have remained frustrated.

So take note: if the solution you’re applying doesn’t get you the results youreally want, it’s likely you’re dealing with the wrong problem entirely.

You’re Constantly Discussing the Same Issue

Before we deal with the aggressive mother, let’s look at another problem. Thistime you’re working with the owner of a real estate firm in a rural community.

“The woman who works the front desk is constantly coming to work late,” theowner explains.

“Have you talked to her?” you ask.

“Repeatedly” is the response.

“And then what happens?” you continue.

“She’s on time for a few days, maybe even a week, and then she starts coming inlate again.”

“Then what do you say to her?”

“I tell her that she’s late and that I don’t like it.”

This situation presents a terrific example of what separates accountabilityexperts from everyone else. The owner has the courage to converse with the deskclerk. That separates him from the worst. However, the fact that he returns tothe same problem each time puts him far below top performers. This is anindication that there is some other infraction that needs to be discussed: thefront desk clerk isn’t living up to her commitments, she’s disrespecting companypolicy, etc.

In summary, if you find yourself having the same accountability conversationover and over again, it’s likely there’s another, more important violation youneed to address.

You’re Getting Increasingly Upset

As you continue your conversation with the realtor, you say, “Obviously, thefact that your clerk comes in late is the behavior that catches your attention,and that’s what you talk to her about. But what is the real issue here?”

“I’m not exactly sure. I do know that it’s starting to bug me a lot—more than itprobably should.”

“Are you becoming more upset because the problem’s escalating?”

“Not really,” the broker responds hesitantly.

Finally, you ask, “When you’re angry enough to complain to your wife, coworkers,or best friend about this repeated infraction, how do you describe it?”

A light goes on in the broker’s eyes as he excitedly states, “It’s killing methat she’s taking advantage of our relationship. She’s my neighbor, she’s helpedme out a lot, and now she doesn’t do what I ask because she knows that I won’tdiscipline her since we’re good friends. At least that’s how it feels to me.”

That’s the violated expectation the broker needs to confront. He’s becomingincreasingly upset with each instance because he’s never dealt with the issuethat is bothering him. Being late is the frozen tip floating above the chillywaters. Taking advantage of a friendship is the iceberg itself.

Confronting the Right Issue

As you can see from these examples, learning how to get at the gist of aninfraction requires time and practice. Feeling pressured by time constraints andhyped up by emotions, most people miss the real deal. It takes grade schoolassistant principals 20 minutes or more to discuss the assortment of challengespresented in the case of the aggressive mother. In fact, most never come to therealization that it’s the lack of cooperation that they probably ought todiscuss. Many can’t get past their emotional reaction. They want to stick it tothe feisty mother, and, frankly, that’s exactly what many would do.

Along a similar vein, most parents who pace the floor nervously as a teenagedaughter breaks curfew can’t see beyond the hands of the clock, when in truthwhat really has them concerned is the fact that the girl didn’t have thecourtesy to call them, let them know she’d be late, and bring a merciful end totheir tortured worrying. Many don’t even realize that this is what is troublingthem.

The ability to reduce an infraction to its bare essence takes patience, a senseof proportion, and precision. First, you have to take the time to unbundle theproblem. People are often in too much of a hurry to do this. Their emotionspropel them to move quickly, and speed rarely leads to careful thought. Second,while sorting through the issues, you have to decide what is bothering you themost. If you don’t, you’ll end up going after either the wrong target or toomany targets. Third, you have to be concise. You have to distill the issue to asingle sentence. Lengthy descriptions of violated expectations only obscure thereal issue. If you can’t reduce a violation to a clear sentence before you talk,the issue almost never becomes more understandable and focused as a conversationunfolds.

Helpful Tools to Get to the Right Conversation

Let’s say that despite your best efforts, you keep returning to the sameinfraction. Your emotions are getting worse, not better, and in retrospect youbelieve that you’re choosing to talk about what’s easy, convenient, or obviousbut not what’s important. In short, you have every reason to believe that you’rerepeatedly dealing with the wrong issue. How do you turn this bad habit around?To hit the right target, use the following tools.

Think CPR

This acronym can help give direction to an accountability conversation as wellas eliminate Groundhog Day. The first time an infraction occurs, talk about thecontent, what just happened: “You drank too much at the luncheon, becameinebriated, started talking too loud, made fun of our clients, and embarrassedthe company.” The content of a violated expectation typically deals with asingle event—the here and now.

The next time the infraction occurs, talk pattern, what has been happening overtime: “This is the second time this has occurred. You agreed it wouldn’t happenagain, and I’m concerned that I can’t count on you to keep a promise.” Patternissues acknowledge that problems have histories and that histories make adifference. Frequent and continued violations affect the other person’spredictability and eventually harm respect and trust.

Warning: It’s easy to miss the pattern and get sucked into debating content. Forinstance, your boss repeatedly leaves your agenda items to the end of themeeting—meaning that they typically get abbreviated or dropped altogether.You’ve spoken with her about it before. This time when you bring it up, sheexplains how full the agenda was and how you need to be more flexible abouturgent issues. If you give in to that explanation, you’ve missed the point. Yourconcern is not today’s meeting (the content issue); it’s the long-standingpattern. Sometimes the pattern sneaks up on you, and a new issue arises. Youpoint out the problem, and the other person begins to either rant or pout,something that’s starting to happen a lot in your conversations with him or her.It’s becoming a pattern. Accountability savants notice this pattern of behaviorand find ways to address it before moving back to the original topic.

As the problem continues, talk about relationship, what’s happening to us.Relationship concerns are far bigger than either the content or the pattern. Theissue is not that other people have repeatedly broken promises; it’s that thestring of disappointments has caused you to lose trust in them: you’re beginningto doubt their competency and doubt their promises, and this is affecting theway you treat one another: “This is starting to put a strain on how we worktogether. I feel as if I have to nag you to keep you in line, and I don’t likedoing that. I guess my fear is that I can’t trust you to keep the agreements youmake.”

If your real concern is around the relationship and you discuss only the patternof behavior, you’re likely to find yourself feeling dissatisfied with theoutcome. Even worse, you’re likely to experience Groundhog Day: you’ll have thesame conversation again later. To understand the various kinds of content,pattern, and relationship issues that routinely pop up during accountabilityconversations, consider the following two factors: consequences and intentions.Each provides a distinct method for first unbundling and then placing a priorityon violated expectations.

Unbundling

Consequences

Accountability issues are almost never contained in the behavior of theoffender. They’re much more likely to be a function of what happens afterward.The problem lies in the consequences. For example, a staff specialist who worksfor you has promised to complete a financial analysis by noon. She miscalculateshow long it will take and delivers the job to you three hours late.
(Continues…)Excerpted from Crucial Accountability by Kerry Patterson, Joseph Grenny, Ron McMillan, Al Switzler, David Maxfield. Copyright © 2013 VitalSmarts. Excerpted by permission of McGraw-Hill Education.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.