By Angie White, Ph.D., JVA Consulting

After spending the past six years practicing and teaching effective communication and community building in academia, it’s been great to put my background to use to help social changemakers with difficult conversations. Some recent communication struggles I’ve helped with have included concerns about a coworker whose joking comments felt more mean-spirited than humorous, staff members who felt too important to take on shared tasks such as answering the phone, and an overeager board member who seemed set on proving he was better suited than the ED to lead the organization.

With these concerns in mind, and with the holiday season quickly approaching (dare I say, looming!), I thought the timing apt to send out a few strategies for tactfully navigating through tough and touchy conversations. You can use this simple and effective framework to tackle problem issues with your staff, board members, volunteers, and also (wink wink) to get through the inevitable family friction during the holidays. And, if the holiday season has you dreading the stress of family bickering instead of dreaming of sugarplums, you’re not alone; in fact, according to Shenfeld, 68% of Americans are expecting a family fight to occur over the holidays!

In any of these scenarios, if someone’s problem behavior is weighing on you, use the framework below to address the issue in a direct and constructive way.

Start by doing some prep work on your own. First, you’ll want to make sure that you have a clear purpose for approaching the other person about the issue. Take a few minutes to jot down observable details that describe the problem behavior that is bugging you. For example, “Jill agreed to contact five potential donors by Friday, but didn’t.” Avoid making judgments on the behavior (such as labeling it “laziness” or “disrespect”), using absolute language (“you never listen!”), or including your feelings; rather, stick solely to a description of what can be seen or heard.

Second, identify your goal for confronting the other person by asking yourself, What do you really want to happen from this conversation? Keep this in mind during your conversation, especially to remember that accomplishing this goal is much more important than proving to the other person that you’re right for confronting them.

Third, spend some time brainstorming potential problems or areas for miscommunication. For example, if your boss says “Could you try a bit harder to show up on time for meetings?,” you’re probably not as concerned about the need to physically get yourself to work on time as you are worried that the boss thinks you’re lazy or that you don’t care much about your job!

To prevent these sources of miscommunication from cropping up, think about ways people could misinterpret your confrontation. According to Patterson, Grenny, McMillan and Switzler (2005), if you bring up an issue about quality, a potential danger is that the other person might think you are insinuating his or her lack of skill; if you bring up an issue about effort, you risk being perceived as suggesting the other person is lazy or uncommitted.

Fourth, to head off potential problems, use what Patterson et al. (2005) call the preventative contrasting statement technique, or PCS. This is a do/don’t technique to explicitly state these brainstormed potential sources of miscommunication in your meeting so you can make your intentions clear. You can use the goal you identified as your “do” and the potential miscommunication for your “don’t.” Write this ahead of time so that you’re fully prepared for the conversation.

For example, “I don’t want you to think that I’m implying that you’re a careless worker; I’ve seen how carefully edited your reports can be. I just want to talk about our content review and editing process to make sure that our organization is putting out a consistent product.”  Or, “I’m not saying that you shouldn’t disagree with me in our board meetings, and I do want you to express your perspective openly, but I want to make sure that all board members’ views can be heard, and so I’d like to have an open conversation about how we can better get input from the entire team.”

With this advance work completed, it’s time to tackle the conversation. If you’re concise, it should take no more than five sentences.

With an open mind anticipating a mutually beneficial outcome, explain your issue in a clear and straightforward way using the judgment-free language you mapped out (1–2 sentences). Transform your observations only slightly; stick to observable details: “I thought that we agreed you were going to contact those five potential donors by the end of last week. It’s Wednesday and it’s still not done.”

Next, use your PCS to make your intentions clear (another 1–2 sentences). Steer clear of humor or sarcasm and avoid hedging or apologizing (“I’m sorry, but…”). If you’ve planned what you want to say, and feel good about it, then there is no need to apologize or sugarcoat the issue with humor.

Lastly, end your appeal with a simple question (one sentence). Patterson et al. recommend the simple, “What happened?” You could also warmly and honestly ask, “What’s going on?” Your goal in asking this question is to turn the conversation over to the other person to give him or her space to take charge of the issue and fix it. Once you ask your question, it’s your turn to listen. Prevent the temptation to keep talking to describe a laundry list of why the behavior bothers you or to prove why you’re right in correcting the other person in the first place.

After the conversation, you’ll want to agree on a plan to prevent the problem from occurring again—Patterson et al. recommend determining (a) who (b) does what (b) by when—and follow up, especially to a positive turnout by saying, “I wanted to let you know how much I appreciate your promptness. Your extra effort hasn’t gone unnoticed.”

If you need more, I highly recommend Patterson, Grenny, McMillan and Switzler’s (2005) Crucial Confrontations: Tools for Talking When the Stakes are High.

Wishing you good conversations, resolved issues and happy holidays!

Angie White is an associate for communication and evaluation at JVA. In this dual role, she conducts qualitative research and facilitates evidenced-based training that promotes ongoing learning and actionable next steps.