4

State My Path

The workplace can have many different types of crucial conversations, such as having to write someone up, letting someone go, or explaining why a promotion may have been given to someone else. Crucial conversation skills are important to have because they can help resolve conflicts and improve collaboration in the workplace. Furthermore, those skills help with a direct, respectful, and constructive approach by focusing on the issues at hand through active listening and keeping an open mind. The goal is to create a safe and productive work environment for all team members and for everyone to feel heard and valued. State My Path provides a person with the necessary skills to have these types of conversations. According to Grenny et al. (2021, p.165): “Share your facts, tell your story, ask for others’ paths, talk tentatively, and encourage testing. The first three skills describe what to do. The last two tell how to do it”.

1.
Share Your Facts:

Sharing your facts about the situation would be the beginning of the conversations, thus indicating that an anonymous tip was received that there may be some favoritism to three employees by Joe, through scheduling them on the better more attractive shifts.

2.
Tell Your Story:

The second step, telling your story would include expressing my perspective on the situation, by providing examples of the shift schedules from the recent weeks supporting the accusation of Joe’s favoritism. This should not involve any blame or accusations; it is more an extension of the first part of sharing facts about what was seen or heard. This should involve letting Joe know of the impact the schedule has on the business and the company culture. Furthermore, including consequences of favoritism such as employees quitting due to unfair treatment, not having enough staff and more work for the remaining staff should be mentioned.

3.
Ask for Others’ Paths:

The third part, asking for other’s paths, should include asking Joe for his perspective. One important skill for this part is active listening, allowing Joe to speak freely, share his point of view, and ask verifying questions. Active listening does not mean that the opinion is shared or agreed with, however, respectful behavior and understanding where Joe’s decisions are coming from can be done without agreeing with the decisions.

4.
Talk Tentatively:

Next, when talking tentatively, it means that we are using words that indicate we are not entirely sure, however trying to understand together what is going on, which will allow Joe to speak more openly and not build up a defense. The text states that Joe is already angry and upset, therefore this can assist in having him calm down and collect himself to have a productive conversation. For example, Lewicki et al. (2020, p.115) explain that choices can have different types of ethical reasonings behind them, such as personalistic ethics. Joe might be using personalistic ethics in his scheduling decisions and therefore scheduling certain employees due to higher sales, less conflict during the shift, or a higher possibility of a bonus if certain goals are met. Talking tentatively may encourage Joe to be open about the motives behind his scheduling methods.

5.
Encourage Testing:

Finally, the step of encouraging testing means that a safe environment should be created where Joe will feel comfortable testing out different solutions or approaches to the problem. This should involve asking open-ended questions, actively listening to his concerns, and providing constructive feedback. Thus, showing that his judgment and input are valued, which can help to lead to a more positive outcome for everyone involved.

Contrasting

Misunderstanding can happen quickly, through misinterpretation of what is being said, emotions, or non-verbal aspects of the conversation and if those misunderstandings are not straightened out can lead to problems. Contrasting this conversation with Joe would include two do’s and two don’ts. The first don’ts would be to explain that no accusations are going on and that neither the employees nor I are trying to tell him how to do his job or dictate anything to him. The dos would include agreeing with reviewing the hiring process, however later and indicating that the scheduling part first must be resolved. Furthermore, the do includes restating the intention of the conversation of understanding what is happening with scheduling and that this is due to others’ opinions and feelings on the matter, however not a fact.

Scripture Integration

The Bible encourages ethical decision-making by explaining that we should treat others how we want to be treated ourselves. Therefore, it can be concluded that everyone would like to be treated fairly, respectfully, and truthfully. This means, that without seeking God in negotiations or crucial conversations, the ethical aspect of the conversations may not be fair, honest, or respectful to one another. Furthermore, decisions may be made for the wrong reasons, thus causing conflict, misunderstandings, or limited outcomes. Matthew 7:12 (ESV, 2016): “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.”

The determination of deception or lies in a conversation can be done by asking direct questions, bluffing, or point of deception cues. The direct approach/questions, such as asking where they are coming from or how their food became dry and moldy can indicate truth-telling, by how prompt an answer is, or how confident the person is in providing the answer. The people of Gibeon have resorted to only answering that they are coming from far away, which did not give a direct answer to the question. Thus, someone who is telling the truth would not have any problem explaining the name of the city that they came from. The part of bluffing can allow the representatives of the people of Gibeon to lose track and confidence in the deception. Statements such as I know you and know where you came from to a specific person in the group could potentially cause them to tell the truth. The last part point of deception cues, simply explains the observation of the representatives to see if they are nervous, repeating themselves, stating different facts, pacing, and tone of voice.

Either of these aspects can indicate the deception of the people of Gibeon to the listener, by showing inconsistencies, struggles, and dishonesty.

References:

Grenny, J., Patterson, K., McMillan, R., Switzler, A. Gregory, E. (2021). Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking When Stakes are High (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill Professional. 

https://mbsdirect.vitalsource.com/books/9781260474190Links to an external site.

Lewicki, R., Barry, B. Saunders, D. (2020). Essentials of Negotiation (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill Higher Education (US). 

https://mbsdirect.vitalsource.com/books/9781260512595Links to an external site.

The Holy Bible, English Standard Version. ESV® Text Edition: 2016. Copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. 

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+7%3A12&version=ESVLinks to an external site.

Vrij, A. Hartwig, M. Granhag, P.A. (2019). Reading Lies: Nonverbal Communication and Deception. 
Annual Review of Psychology 2019 70:1, 295-317 

https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-103135Links to an external site.