A great article from CrucialSkills.
The Problem:
In our hospital, we have a person who made a grave mistake during surgery. As the manager's pet, she was not disciplined or reprimanded, but anyone else would have been fired on the spot. The rest of the staff noticed the special treatment given to this individual and are extremely resentful. How do I, as one of those staff members, interact with the offending person without letting my resentment show?
The Solution:
We studied this very problem in our research, Silence Kills, and found that 84 percent of healthcare professionals observe colleagues take dangerous shortcuts when working with patients and yet less than 10 percent speak up about their concerns.
I applaud you for raising your concerns. Nobody wants to work in an atmosphere of resentment that could compromise your paramount concern of patient safety. However, the situation you describe is complicated. There are many parties and probably many perspectives on the same set of facts. Let's begin by examining your concerns.
1. Ask yourself, "What do I really want?" Think about what you want long-term for yourself, the other person, and for your relationship. This is what I learned from your question:
• You want fairness and justice. You think your peer is "the manager's pet," receives "special treatment," and perhaps should have been disciplined, reprimanded, or even fired.
• You want to make sure your team provides patients with the safest, best care possible.
• You want a positive set of relationships so people don't feel resentment toward one another.
2. Master your stories. Each of these concerns is based on a set of facts and/or a series of incidents, including the mistake that happened during surgery. But different staff members, and your manager, may interpret these same facts in different ways. All of you are telling yourselves stories about what these facts mean.
Treat your story as a story, not as a fact. Your story should be your best, most honest interpretation of what the facts mean. But also look out for what we call "clever stories"—interpretations that let you off the hook for feeling resentful and letting your feelings show.
Interrogate your story with two questions: a) "Do I really have all the facts I need to be certain my story is true?" and b) "Is there any other story that could fit this same set of facts?" Let's examine two of the stories you're telling yourself:
Your story about fairness and justice: What are the facts or incidents that combine to make you tell yourself a story about injustice? How confident are you that your story is true? Here are a few questions to consider:
It sounds as if you are holding your peer accountable for not being disciplined. Shouldn't that concern be with your manager more than with your peer?
I wonder whether you and your manager are telling yourselves different stories about the "grave mistake." Your manager may not have witnessed the mistake and that may mean he/she has less information. On the other hand, your manager may have interviewed your colleague as well as others who were there and this information might be both important and confidential.
Your story about patient safety: Any time you have a concern about patient safety you need to deal with it. It's one of those non-negotiables. However, before you have this crucial conversation, examine your story.
It would be easy to tell yourself the story that your manager is putting friendship above patient safety. That would be a very troubling conclusion. But is it true?
In the old days, errors were often blamed on whoever touched the patient last. Every error was considered "operator error." Then the pendulum swung toward "system error." Errors and near misses were seen as caused by faulty processes and procedures rather than individuals. Of course, sensible people demand both capable systems and capable individuals. Neither is sufficient by itself. Do you see how this interplay complicates the stories you and your manager tell about the very same incident?
I don't have enough information to know whose story is closer to the truth. But I think there is a lot of room for people who value fairness, justice, and patient safety to disagree. Have this conversation with your manager, but don't assume he or she has bad intentions.
3. Start with the facts, then tentatively share your story. Take the time to prepare for this conversation. Try writing it out as a script and then review it to make sure you:
• Avoid accusations or any "hot" words or phrases.
• Begin with your good intentions—what it is you really want. Explain that this conversation is about patient safety. That is your mutual purpose.
• Start with the facts. These facts include the incidents you are fairly sure you and your manager will agree on. This is your common ground.
• Tentatively tell your story. Draw the pattern these facts are forming for you. But remember, your manager may see the facts—and almost certainly sees the pattern—differently than you do. Be careful to be respectful of your manager's story.
• Stop so that your manager can share his or her perspective. Understand that some of the facts your manager has are likely to be confidential.
I also encourage you to review our latest study, The Silent Treatment, at www.silenttreatmentstudy.com or register for The Silent Treatment learning series to learn how to solve critical communication breakdowns and avoid dangerous mistakes in the hospital.
26. mai 2011
20. mai 2011
90% OF ALL HEALTH BOOKS SAY THE SAME THING
| Roughly 90% of Self Help books contain the same advice repeated over and over. Don't believe me? Stop by your local bookstore sometime and read the Table of Contents of a dozen or so Self Help books. The advice may be worded differently or geared toward a specific target audience (eg. men, women, various enthnic and social groups), but the underlying message is pretty much always the same. Here's a list of that advice: |
| 1. CREATE YOUR OWN LIFE You are not a victim. You are 100% responsible for the life you have right now. If you are unhappy, you have the power to change your attitude and actions to begin making your life better. Always remember, whether you think life sucks or you think life is great, either way, you're right. |
| 2. MAKE YOURSELF FEEL THE WAY YOU FEEL... Ever notice how some people are able to brush off insults, while others get furious and start throwing punches? Realize that nobody can "make" you feel anything. You are the one that "chooses" to feel good or bad about a particular event or action that occurs. |
| 3. FAKE IT UNTIL YOU MAKE IT If you want to be more confident, happy, or positive, then "pretend" that you already are this way. Eventually, after practicing this long enough, you'll realize that you're no longer "pretending". |
| 4. FOLLOW YOUR PURPOSE A purpose is what you enjoy doing that you never get tired of and you will do for the rest of your life. Is your purpose to write screenplays? Is it to help sick people? Write down on index cards a list of purposes and choose the one that speaks to you the most. |
| 5. SET GOAL AND SCHEDULE YOUR DAY List out 5 to 10 goals that you want for your life. Break each goal up into smaller sub-goals and then break those sub-goals into individual tasks and action steps. Every night, plan the next day in advance. Create a daily "to-do list" with those tasks that you need to do to accomplish your goal. |
| 6. LIVE IN THE PRESENT Regret and shame come from dwelling in the past. Worrying and anxiety come from living in the future. True peace of mind comes from living in the present. The more you become aware of being in the present, the more it becomes a part of your daily life. |
| 7. THE POWER OF ATTRACTION The power of attraction is a powerful mental tool. The process works by focusing on something that you want while visualizing that you already have it. You then have a heightened level of awareness for recognizing opportunities that occur around you. These opportunities will then assist in bringing what you want into your physical reality. |
| 8. EXPAND YOUR COMFORT ZONE Your comfort zone (what you feel comfortable doing) is always in a state of either expanding or contracting. The more you get out in the world and do what you feel uncomfortable doing, the less inhibited you become, thereby allowing you to live a richer and fuller life. |
| 9. BE THANKFUL FOR WHAT YOU HAVE Every morning before you start your day, give thanks and appreciation for what you have. It's only when we are thankful for what we have that life gives us more blessings and abundance to be thankful for. |
| 10. THE POWER OF ASKING... Don't be afraid to ask for what you want. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. It's the reason that children ask their parents for the same thing over and over again, because they know mom and dad will eventually cave in. The same concept works in the real world. If there is something in the world you want, ask for it...or at least ask how to get it. |
| 11. LEARN FROM THE PROS AND COPY THEM Find the successful people in your field and ask them for advice. Ask them what they do to be successful, take notes, and then copy them. A lot of people think that the pros don't want to share. The opposite is actually true. Most successful people are more that willing to share their knowledge if you ask them. |
| 12. IGNORE THE TROLLS Trolls are people that will try to discourage you from your dreams. Don't listen to them. Realize that the only reason they are doing it is because by seeing you chase after your dreams, it's reminding them that they aren't chasing theirs. Misery loves company. www.chopcow.com |
15. april 2011
Imposing Consequences
The Problem:
My in-laws live six hours away, but frequently visit and stay at my home. They have a wonderful relationship with my three young children, but I'm worried because they bring their dog, and in the last year, the dog has started nipping at my kids. Although my husband and I told them in no uncertain terms that the dog is not to be near the children, we found out that my father-in-law sneaks the dog out when we're not looking. This rule was ignored and the dog recently bit the hand of my oldest child and drew blood.
We recently visited family, and because the dog was around multiple children, I told the mothers that the dog bites and everyone was beyond angry that my father-in-law kept letting the dog out. He knows how we feel, yet refuses to put the safety of his own grandchildren over the coddling of his dog! It has created an extremely tense environment and is affecting our relationships. We have tried asking nicely, stating directly, and are on the verge of an ultimatum. What should we do now?
The Solution:
In a situation where we are weighing Dad's convenience and preference against the safety of children, it's time for a crucial confrontation. You said you tried "asking nicely" and "stating directly" but your father-in-law continues to sneak the dog out when you are not looking. Your father-in-law is likely seeing this conflict in terms of his "sweet little dog that wouldn't hurt a fly" and is "practically a member of the family" against some "nervous Nelly" moms who are over-protective. He thinks his little allowance in letting the dog out to play with the kids is a minor infraction that doesn't matter all that much.
He is obviously discounting your collective wishes and ignoring your fears; he is minimizing the importance of your concerns. The way you motivate others to give your concerns more weight is by helping them understand the consequences that could result from a given course of action. Natural consequences are those that will naturally result without any imposition on your part. In this case, even a misplaced nip from a small dog could result in blindness to a child or life-long scarring.
Imposed consequences are consequences you enforce if others do not comply with your requests. Such a consequence is that you will call animal control. However, I don't recommend using this consequence. It's best to talk about natural consequences first.
Talking through the consequences should motivate Dad to consider your concerns. If you don't get compliance with natural consequences, then carefully consider whether to move to imposed consequences. Damaging the relationship is a real possibility. However, when dealing with danger to your children, Dad's compliance with your standards may be more important to you than sparing his feelings.
I will assume you shared consequences in your earlier conversations. If Dad still misbehaves, what do you do next?
Verbal persuasion has failed to change Dad's behavior; the children's safety is paramount. It's time to impose consequences. Be respectful! Emphasize that you want to continue the relationship with Dad but not the dog. Begin by factually reviewing how you arrived at this point. Try something like this:
"Dad, we've talked to you several times about our concerns with having your dog around your grandchildren. Yet the dog continues to get out, and last time you visited, he bit Jeremy's hand. Dad, we want you to visit. Your visits with us and our visits to your place are very important to us, but to make them work we have to arrange for the dog to go to a kennel or find a dog sitter. We can help arrange one here or you can find one near your home, but we will not let the dog come to our home or visit your home if the dog is there."
Use contrasting to prevent misunderstandings. "We don't want you to shorten your visits or make them less frequent. We love you and your visits. We do want you to make other arrangements so the dog is not present during our visit."
Listen to your father-in-law's feelings and concerns, then brainstorm workable solutions. Don't jeopardize your children's safety with an unrealistic compromise.
Now, follow through. Be prepared to pack up if the dog is there when you arrive at Dad's. Be prepared to not let the dog in your house if he accompanies Dad on a visit. Reaffirm your love for Dad and your resolve to protect your children, even if the cost is Dad's hurt feelings.
- On the road with my iPhone
My in-laws live six hours away, but frequently visit and stay at my home. They have a wonderful relationship with my three young children, but I'm worried because they bring their dog, and in the last year, the dog has started nipping at my kids. Although my husband and I told them in no uncertain terms that the dog is not to be near the children, we found out that my father-in-law sneaks the dog out when we're not looking. This rule was ignored and the dog recently bit the hand of my oldest child and drew blood.
We recently visited family, and because the dog was around multiple children, I told the mothers that the dog bites and everyone was beyond angry that my father-in-law kept letting the dog out. He knows how we feel, yet refuses to put the safety of his own grandchildren over the coddling of his dog! It has created an extremely tense environment and is affecting our relationships. We have tried asking nicely, stating directly, and are on the verge of an ultimatum. What should we do now?
The Solution:
In a situation where we are weighing Dad's convenience and preference against the safety of children, it's time for a crucial confrontation. You said you tried "asking nicely" and "stating directly" but your father-in-law continues to sneak the dog out when you are not looking. Your father-in-law is likely seeing this conflict in terms of his "sweet little dog that wouldn't hurt a fly" and is "practically a member of the family" against some "nervous Nelly" moms who are over-protective. He thinks his little allowance in letting the dog out to play with the kids is a minor infraction that doesn't matter all that much.
He is obviously discounting your collective wishes and ignoring your fears; he is minimizing the importance of your concerns. The way you motivate others to give your concerns more weight is by helping them understand the consequences that could result from a given course of action. Natural consequences are those that will naturally result without any imposition on your part. In this case, even a misplaced nip from a small dog could result in blindness to a child or life-long scarring.
Imposed consequences are consequences you enforce if others do not comply with your requests. Such a consequence is that you will call animal control. However, I don't recommend using this consequence. It's best to talk about natural consequences first.
Talking through the consequences should motivate Dad to consider your concerns. If you don't get compliance with natural consequences, then carefully consider whether to move to imposed consequences. Damaging the relationship is a real possibility. However, when dealing with danger to your children, Dad's compliance with your standards may be more important to you than sparing his feelings.
I will assume you shared consequences in your earlier conversations. If Dad still misbehaves, what do you do next?
Verbal persuasion has failed to change Dad's behavior; the children's safety is paramount. It's time to impose consequences. Be respectful! Emphasize that you want to continue the relationship with Dad but not the dog. Begin by factually reviewing how you arrived at this point. Try something like this:
"Dad, we've talked to you several times about our concerns with having your dog around your grandchildren. Yet the dog continues to get out, and last time you visited, he bit Jeremy's hand. Dad, we want you to visit. Your visits with us and our visits to your place are very important to us, but to make them work we have to arrange for the dog to go to a kennel or find a dog sitter. We can help arrange one here or you can find one near your home, but we will not let the dog come to our home or visit your home if the dog is there."
Use contrasting to prevent misunderstandings. "We don't want you to shorten your visits or make them less frequent. We love you and your visits. We do want you to make other arrangements so the dog is not present during our visit."
Listen to your father-in-law's feelings and concerns, then brainstorm workable solutions. Don't jeopardize your children's safety with an unrealistic compromise.
Now, follow through. Be prepared to pack up if the dog is there when you arrive at Dad's. Be prepared to not let the dog in your house if he accompanies Dad on a visit. Reaffirm your love for Dad and your resolve to protect your children, even if the cost is Dad's hurt feelings.
- On the road with my iPhone
12. april 2011
Confronting Workplace Sarcasm
The Problem:
I work in a large international company and lead a team of eight experienced human resource managers. Several of the managers use irony and humor to downplay their colleagues, and I strongly feel that this creates a bad atmosphere because most of the colleagues do not appreciate this way of talking. Should I confront the issue with the entire group or should I deal with the misbehaving colleagues individually?
The Solution:
This is an interesting challenge because it deals with the use of humor at its worst—humor used as a tool for taking shots at people, but done in a way that maintains plausible deniability.
"Hey, I was just kidding, can't you take a joke?"
I know a fair amount about this particular tactic because it was a huge part of my influence repertoire during, say, the first thirty years of my life. I—like most of my close friends—developed keen skills in the use of sarcasm and irony. It was a huge part of my identity. Then, one day, after my wife stumbled awkwardly and I
retorted, "Smooth move, did you enjoy the trip?" she responded: "You know what? If you never again use sarcasm—until the day I die—that would be just fine with me. I don't like it, the kids don't like it, and there's no place for it in our home."
"Hey! Who died and left you in charge?" I shouted boldly and firmly within the confines of my mind as a way of testing out my response before actually putting my foot in my mouth. Then I thought better and whined: "But I really like being sarcastic."
As the conversation unfolded, I learned that it's actually quite difficult to defend your right to take cheap shots, dole out insults, and cut people down—all in the name of humor. Trust me. You never want to be the defense attorney when sarcasm goes to court. So, maybe I needed to reconsider my stance. Perhaps, getting a laugh at the expense of a coworker, colleague, friend, or loved one isn't nearly as endearing as I had once thought it was. And so, I said goodbye to that part of me and my wife has been ever grateful.
Now, to your question as to whether you should bring up the problem individually or in a group. It's tempting to say something to the entire team. That way you don't have to accuse anyone directly, plus it's efficient. One conversation replaces five or six. But then again, you take several risks when you hold a team problem-solving discussion.
First, as you talk with a group, one or more of the people who abuse humor might conclude that you aren't talking to them. They, after all, are actually quite funny and their cute remarks are loved and appreciated by all. Or so they think.
Second, those who don't fall into the trap of abusing humor won't like being thrown into the pot with the actual offenders. Nobody likes being accused of a crime they haven't committed.
Third, it's hard to anchor your discussion in facts by pointing to the last instance of abusive humor when you're talking in general terms. When it comes to discussing problems in an effective way, you need to point to actual instances, preferably on the heels of the occurrence, so the person understands the exact nature of the offense.
It will take longer, but you need to talk to the offenders one-on-one.
Assume the best of others. Perhaps others do think they're only having fun and they're unaware that their use of humor can be hurtful. Respectfully and unemotionally describe the last instance, focusing on specific behaviors.
Ask if others see the problem differently. If others seem unmoved to drop their use of sarcasm and irony, explain the consequences of their actions in detail. Talk about how it has affected you. Suggest an alternative means of dealing with the issues.
Discuss the pros and cons. Jointly discuss the benefits of honestly and openly addressing problems rather than approaching them obliquely and possibly at the expense of others.
Thank others for their efforts. End by thanking them for the frank conversation and express your appreciation for their willingness to drop harsh humor from their repertoire.
You are right to confront this damaging behavior immediately, especially because a few managers are creating a bad atmosphere for the rest of your team. As you talk to each employee individually, don't let him or her use the excuse I mentioned above—"Hey, I was just kidding, can't you take a joke?" Make sure each employee is aware of the damage he or she is doing to morale, productivity, and results. Establish a zero tolerance policy and encourage employees to hold others accountable when they violate that policy.
- On the road with my iPhone
I work in a large international company and lead a team of eight experienced human resource managers. Several of the managers use irony and humor to downplay their colleagues, and I strongly feel that this creates a bad atmosphere because most of the colleagues do not appreciate this way of talking. Should I confront the issue with the entire group or should I deal with the misbehaving colleagues individually?
The Solution:
This is an interesting challenge because it deals with the use of humor at its worst—humor used as a tool for taking shots at people, but done in a way that maintains plausible deniability.
"Hey, I was just kidding, can't you take a joke?"
I know a fair amount about this particular tactic because it was a huge part of my influence repertoire during, say, the first thirty years of my life. I—like most of my close friends—developed keen skills in the use of sarcasm and irony. It was a huge part of my identity. Then, one day, after my wife stumbled awkwardly and I
retorted, "Smooth move, did you enjoy the trip?" she responded: "You know what? If you never again use sarcasm—until the day I die—that would be just fine with me. I don't like it, the kids don't like it, and there's no place for it in our home."
"Hey! Who died and left you in charge?" I shouted boldly and firmly within the confines of my mind as a way of testing out my response before actually putting my foot in my mouth. Then I thought better and whined: "But I really like being sarcastic."
As the conversation unfolded, I learned that it's actually quite difficult to defend your right to take cheap shots, dole out insults, and cut people down—all in the name of humor. Trust me. You never want to be the defense attorney when sarcasm goes to court. So, maybe I needed to reconsider my stance. Perhaps, getting a laugh at the expense of a coworker, colleague, friend, or loved one isn't nearly as endearing as I had once thought it was. And so, I said goodbye to that part of me and my wife has been ever grateful.
Now, to your question as to whether you should bring up the problem individually or in a group. It's tempting to say something to the entire team. That way you don't have to accuse anyone directly, plus it's efficient. One conversation replaces five or six. But then again, you take several risks when you hold a team problem-solving discussion.
First, as you talk with a group, one or more of the people who abuse humor might conclude that you aren't talking to them. They, after all, are actually quite funny and their cute remarks are loved and appreciated by all. Or so they think.
Second, those who don't fall into the trap of abusing humor won't like being thrown into the pot with the actual offenders. Nobody likes being accused of a crime they haven't committed.
Third, it's hard to anchor your discussion in facts by pointing to the last instance of abusive humor when you're talking in general terms. When it comes to discussing problems in an effective way, you need to point to actual instances, preferably on the heels of the occurrence, so the person understands the exact nature of the offense.
It will take longer, but you need to talk to the offenders one-on-one.
Assume the best of others. Perhaps others do think they're only having fun and they're unaware that their use of humor can be hurtful. Respectfully and unemotionally describe the last instance, focusing on specific behaviors.
Ask if others see the problem differently. If others seem unmoved to drop their use of sarcasm and irony, explain the consequences of their actions in detail. Talk about how it has affected you. Suggest an alternative means of dealing with the issues.
Discuss the pros and cons. Jointly discuss the benefits of honestly and openly addressing problems rather than approaching them obliquely and possibly at the expense of others.
Thank others for their efforts. End by thanking them for the frank conversation and express your appreciation for their willingness to drop harsh humor from their repertoire.
You are right to confront this damaging behavior immediately, especially because a few managers are creating a bad atmosphere for the rest of your team. As you talk to each employee individually, don't let him or her use the excuse I mentioned above—"Hey, I was just kidding, can't you take a joke?" Make sure each employee is aware of the damage he or she is doing to morale, productivity, and results. Establish a zero tolerance policy and encourage employees to hold others accountable when they violate that policy.
- On the road with my iPhone
8. april 2011
Holding Your Ground
The Problem:
I have been with my company for five years and consistently receive "exceeds expectations" ratings on my performance reviews. I recently found out that a newly hired business partner is planning to take over my office. There are a handful of open offices in our area that he could take without interrupting another employee, and this individual will not be in the office on a daily basis. I have worked very hard to get where I am and do not feel it's right for a new employee to make me move.
I get upset every time I think about this situation because I do not want to get pushed around, but I fear I will become emotional and rude if I speak up. I feel completely insulted that someone would think their title allows them to kick another employee out of their office. Can you give me some advice on how to approach the situation calmly, yet effectively?
The Solution:
I can tell you're frustrated because you feel like your options are limited. You can bite your lip and take it, and then move and lose. Or, you can speak up, blow up, and then move and lose. As I try to explore these and other options, I acknowledge that I don't know all the facts, so I'm basing my advice on my experience with similar issues.
My approach to addressing this challenge is rooted in a poem that comes from Mathematics Theory. I know that sounds like an oxymoron, but the poem has a great point:
"What one does is only one of many things one might have done;
to appreciate the thing selected one must know the things rejected."
Realizing I could have the facts wrong—and hoping you'll forgive me if I do—I think there are a couple of good lessons we can learn from exploring your situation from several perspectives.
Action: You don't speak up. If you're like most people, you can't keep your emotions "If you don't talk it out, you'll act it out." So you sprinkle a negative comment here or there when talking with your friends and that leaks out as gossip. You find yourself frowning at and avoiding the new business partner. Probable outcome: you move and your reputation is hurt because of the gossip and your bad attitude.
Action: You speak up with emotion. Forget about the namby-pamby courteous stuff. This is about what's right and what's just. You storm into your boss' office and tell him or her all the good reasons you should stay and make the case that the new person should take a different office—all in one breath, no pauses, with fervor. If you take this approach, there are several possible outcomes:
1. Your boss listens and says, "Oh, I thought you knew the new partner has a son with disabilities in the facility across the parking lot. I thought it would be nice if he could see him when his son had recess or outings." Probable outcome: You move, your reputation is a bit tarnished, and you feel guilty. You have a new problem, this time with your boss.
2. Your boss listens and says, "Are you finished? Look, I didn't want to do it, but corporate policy requires that a business partner must have a window that is over sixty square feet in size. Yours is the only office that qualifies. What can I tell you? It's policy." (By the way, this policy is real in some organizations—you can't make up stuff like this.) At least now you know what the real problem is and you can tackle the real issue if you choose to do so. Probable outcome: You move, you feel frustrated about red tape and bureaucracy, and your reputation is likely a bit tarnished. When people blow up only a little, other people start looking for this behavior a lot.
3. The boss says, "Whoa, don't badmouth the new business partner; he doesn't even know I'm moving him to your office. I made the decision; and it's final. Now quit your whining." Probable outcome: You move and it's pretty clear what your boss thinks and you have another challenge to deal with—relationship and trust issues with your boss.
While some of these outcomes might occur no matter how skilled your approach, I know with 100 percent certainty that you'll feel better about yourself and you'll make it safe to have future tough conversations if you start this one in a positive way. This leads me to your third possible action.
Action: You speak up with candor and courtesy. You look at this situation, ask the humanizing question—"Why would a reasonable, rational, decent person do this?"—overcome your fears, practice in private with a friend, then set an appointment with your boss and explain the situation.
It could sound something like this: "Jan, I read your e-mail saying the new business partner is moving into my office and I am moving to office 2C. I'm wondering how that decision was made and if it's final. I think there are several reasons for me to stay in that office and have the new business partner take a different office. Can we talk?"
Your boss responds: "Oh, I didn't know it was an issue. If you like, stay where you are."
For an instant, you hesitate. You have eleven good reasons you should stay put and she's not asking for them, but you swallow all of them and say thanks. You realize you assumed you knew the reasons for the office change—this caused you to get upset and potentially rude. However, you prepared and practiced, spoke up, and found that there wasn't really a reason. Probable outcome: you stay in your office and you maintain your reputation.
Of course, there are other variations of these three actions—don't speak up, speak up with emotion, speak up with candor and courtesy—but this is the point I want to reinforce: when facing a crucial conversation, we have three options:
1. We can avoid the issue, but our feelings generally leak out as gossip and we don't get the results we want.
2. We can attack and unleash pent-up frustration and demands, but even if we get what we want in the short term, our actions almost always tarnish our reputation.
3. We can address the issue with candor and courtesy and fill the pool of shared meaning with information from all sides of the issue. When we engage in dialogue, we are likely to get the best result—even if it isn't always the one we wanted—and we are likely to maintain our good reputation and strong relationships.
I hope my advice will help you hold the right conversation to achieve the right result.
I have been with my company for five years and consistently receive "exceeds expectations" ratings on my performance reviews. I recently found out that a newly hired business partner is planning to take over my office. There are a handful of open offices in our area that he could take without interrupting another employee, and this individual will not be in the office on a daily basis. I have worked very hard to get where I am and do not feel it's right for a new employee to make me move.
I get upset every time I think about this situation because I do not want to get pushed around, but I fear I will become emotional and rude if I speak up. I feel completely insulted that someone would think their title allows them to kick another employee out of their office. Can you give me some advice on how to approach the situation calmly, yet effectively?
The Solution:
I can tell you're frustrated because you feel like your options are limited. You can bite your lip and take it, and then move and lose. Or, you can speak up, blow up, and then move and lose. As I try to explore these and other options, I acknowledge that I don't know all the facts, so I'm basing my advice on my experience with similar issues.
My approach to addressing this challenge is rooted in a poem that comes from Mathematics Theory. I know that sounds like an oxymoron, but the poem has a great point:
"What one does is only one of many things one might have done;
to appreciate the thing selected one must know the things rejected."
Realizing I could have the facts wrong—and hoping you'll forgive me if I do—I think there are a couple of good lessons we can learn from exploring your situation from several perspectives.
Action: You don't speak up. If you're like most people, you can't keep your emotions "If you don't talk it out, you'll act it out." So you sprinkle a negative comment here or there when talking with your friends and that leaks out as gossip. You find yourself frowning at and avoiding the new business partner. Probable outcome: you move and your reputation is hurt because of the gossip and your bad attitude.
Action: You speak up with emotion. Forget about the namby-pamby courteous stuff. This is about what's right and what's just. You storm into your boss' office and tell him or her all the good reasons you should stay and make the case that the new person should take a different office—all in one breath, no pauses, with fervor. If you take this approach, there are several possible outcomes:
1. Your boss listens and says, "Oh, I thought you knew the new partner has a son with disabilities in the facility across the parking lot. I thought it would be nice if he could see him when his son had recess or outings." Probable outcome: You move, your reputation is a bit tarnished, and you feel guilty. You have a new problem, this time with your boss.
2. Your boss listens and says, "Are you finished? Look, I didn't want to do it, but corporate policy requires that a business partner must have a window that is over sixty square feet in size. Yours is the only office that qualifies. What can I tell you? It's policy." (By the way, this policy is real in some organizations—you can't make up stuff like this.) At least now you know what the real problem is and you can tackle the real issue if you choose to do so. Probable outcome: You move, you feel frustrated about red tape and bureaucracy, and your reputation is likely a bit tarnished. When people blow up only a little, other people start looking for this behavior a lot.
3. The boss says, "Whoa, don't badmouth the new business partner; he doesn't even know I'm moving him to your office. I made the decision; and it's final. Now quit your whining." Probable outcome: You move and it's pretty clear what your boss thinks and you have another challenge to deal with—relationship and trust issues with your boss.
While some of these outcomes might occur no matter how skilled your approach, I know with 100 percent certainty that you'll feel better about yourself and you'll make it safe to have future tough conversations if you start this one in a positive way. This leads me to your third possible action.
Action: You speak up with candor and courtesy. You look at this situation, ask the humanizing question—"Why would a reasonable, rational, decent person do this?"—overcome your fears, practice in private with a friend, then set an appointment with your boss and explain the situation.
It could sound something like this: "Jan, I read your e-mail saying the new business partner is moving into my office and I am moving to office 2C. I'm wondering how that decision was made and if it's final. I think there are several reasons for me to stay in that office and have the new business partner take a different office. Can we talk?"
Your boss responds: "Oh, I didn't know it was an issue. If you like, stay where you are."
For an instant, you hesitate. You have eleven good reasons you should stay put and she's not asking for them, but you swallow all of them and say thanks. You realize you assumed you knew the reasons for the office change—this caused you to get upset and potentially rude. However, you prepared and practiced, spoke up, and found that there wasn't really a reason. Probable outcome: you stay in your office and you maintain your reputation.
Of course, there are other variations of these three actions—don't speak up, speak up with emotion, speak up with candor and courtesy—but this is the point I want to reinforce: when facing a crucial conversation, we have three options:
1. We can avoid the issue, but our feelings generally leak out as gossip and we don't get the results we want.
2. We can attack and unleash pent-up frustration and demands, but even if we get what we want in the short term, our actions almost always tarnish our reputation.
3. We can address the issue with candor and courtesy and fill the pool of shared meaning with information from all sides of the issue. When we engage in dialogue, we are likely to get the best result—even if it isn't always the one we wanted—and we are likely to maintain our good reputation and strong relationships.
I hope my advice will help you hold the right conversation to achieve the right result.
30. mars 2011
Yawn - It's one of the best things you can do for your brain.
Go ahead: Laugh if you want (though you’ll benefit your brain more if you smile), but in my professional opinion, yawning is one of the best-kept secrets in neuroscience. Even my colleagues who are researching meditation, relaxation, and stress reduction at other universities have overlooked this powerful neural-enhancing tool. However, yawning has been used for many decades in voice therapy as an effective means for reducing performance anxiety and hypertension in the throat.
Several recent brain-scan studies have shown that yawning evokes a unique neural activity in the areas of the brain that are directly involved in generating social awareness and creating feelings of empathy. One of those areas is the precuneus, a tiny structure hidden within the folds of the parietal lobe. According to researchers at the Institute of Neurology in London, the precuneus appears to play a central role in consciousness, self-reflection, and memory retrieval. The precuneus is also stimulated by yogic breathing, which helps explain why different forms of meditation contribute to an increased sense of self-awareness. It is also one of the areas hardest hit by age-related diseases and attention deficit problems, so it’s possible that deliberate yawning may actually strengthen this important part of the brain.
For these reasons I believe that yawning should be integrated into exercise and stress reduction programs, cognitive and memory enhancement training, psychotherapy, and contemplative spiritual practice. And, because the precuneus has recently been associated with the mirror-neuron system in the brain (which allows us to resonate to the feelings and behaviors of others), yawning may even help us to enhance social awareness, compassion, and effective communication with others.
Why am I so insistent? Because if I were to ask you to put this magazine down right now and yawn 10 times to experience this fabulous technique, you probably won’t do it. Even at seminars, after presenting the overwhelmingly positive evidence, when I ask people to yawn, half of the audience will hesitate. I have to coax them so they can feel the immediate relaxing effects. There’s an unexplained stigma in our society implying that it’s rude to yawn, and most of us were taught this when we were young.
As a young medical student, I was once “caught” yawning and actually scolded by my professor. He said that it was inappropriate to appear tired in front of patients, even though I was actually standing in a hallway outside of the patient’s room. Indeed, yawning does increase when you’re tired, and it may be the brain’s way of gently telling you that a little rejuvenating sleep is needed. On the other hand, exposure to light will also make you yawn, suggesting that it is part of the process of waking up.
But yawning doesn’t just relax you—it quickly brings you into a heightened state of cognitive awareness. Students yawn in class, not because the teacher is boring (although that will make you yawn as well, as you try to stay focused on the monotonous speech), but because it rids the brain of sleepiness, thus helping you stay focused on important concepts and ideas. It regulates consciousness and our sense of self, and helps us become more introspective and self-aware. Of course, if you happen to find yourself trapped in a room with a dull, boring, monotonous teacher, yawning will help keep you awake.
Yawning will relax you and bring you into a state of alertness faster than any other meditation technique I know of, and because it is neurologically contagious, it’s particularly easy to teach in a group setting. One of my former students used yawning to bring her argumentative board of directors back to order in less than 60 seconds. Why? Because it helps people synchronize their behavior with others.
Yawning, as a mechanism for alertness, begins within the first 20 weeks after conception. It helps regulate the circadian rhythms of newborns, and this adds to the evidence that yawning is involved in the regulation of wakefulness and sleep. Since circadian rhythms become asynchronous when a person’s normal sleep cycle is disturbed, yawning should help the late-night partygoer reset the brain’s internal clock. Yawning may also ward off the effects of jet lag and ease the discomfort caused by high altitudes.
So what is the underlying mechanism that makes yawning such an essential tool? Besides activating the precuneus, it regulates the temperature and metabolism of your brain. It takes a lot of neural energy to stay consciously alert, and as you work your way up the evolutionary ladder, brains become less energy efficient. Yawning probably evolved as a way to cool down the overly active mammalian brain, especially in the areas of the frontal lobe. Some have even argued that it is a primitive form of empathy. Most vertebrates yawn, but it is only contagious among humans, great apes, macaque monkeys, and chimpanzees. In fact, it’s so contagious for humans that even reading about it will cause a person to yawn.
Dogs yawn before attacking, Olympic athletes yawn before performing, and fish yawn before they change activities. Evidence even exists that yawning helps individuals on military assignment perform their tasks with greater accuracy and ease. Indeed, yawning may be one of the most important mechanisms for regulating the survival-related behaviors in mammals. So if you want to maintain an optimally healthy brain, it is essential that you yawn. It is true that excessive yawning can be a sign that an underlying neurological disorder (such as migraine, multiple sclerosis, stroke, or drug reaction) is occurring. However, I and other researchers suspect that yawning may be the brain’s attempt to eliminate symptoms by readjusting neural functioning.
Numerous neurochemicals are involved in the yawning experience, including dopamine, which activates oxytocin production in your hypothalamus and hippocampus, areas essential for memory recall, voluntary control, and temperature regulation. These neurotransmitters regulate pleasure, sensuality, and relationship bonding between individuals, so if you want to enhance your intimacy and stay together, then yawn together. Other neurochemicals and molecules involved with yawning include acetylcholine, nitric oxide, glutamate, GABA, serotonin, ACTH, MSH, sexual hormones, and opium derivate peptides. In fact, it’s hard to find another activity that positively influences so many functions of the brain.
My advice is simple. Yawn as many times a day as possible: when you wake up, when you’re confronting a difficult problem at work, when you prepare to go to sleep, and whenever you feel anger, anxiety, or stress. Yawn before giving an important talk, yawn before you take a test, and yawn while you meditate or pray because it will intensify your spiritual experience.
Conscious yawning takes a little practice and discipline to get over the unconscious social inhibitions, but people often come up with three other excuses not to yawn: “I don’t feel like it,” “I’m not tired,” and my favorite, “I can’t.” Of course you can. All you have to do to trigger a deep yawn is to fake it six or seven times. Try it right now, and you should discover by the fifth false yawn, a real one will begin to emerge. But don’t stop there, because by the tenth or twelfth yawn, you’ll feel the power of this seductive little trick. Your eyes may start watering and your nose may begin to run, but you’ll also feel utterly present, incredibly relaxed, and highly alert. Not bad for something that takes less than a minute to do. And if you find that you can’t stop yawning—I’ve seen some people yawn for thirty minutes—you’ll know that you’ve been depriving yourself of an important neurological treat.
By Andrew Newburg, Pennstate Gazette
22. mars 2011
Building Fit Minds Under Stress: Penn Neuroscientists Examine the Protective Effects of Mindfulness Training
PHILADELPHIA –- A University of Pennsylvania-led study in which training was provided to a high-stress U.S. military group preparing for deployment to Iraq has demonstrated a positive link between mindfulness training, or MT, and improvements in mood and working memory. Mindfulness is the ability to be aware and attentive of the present moment without emotional reactivity or volatility.
The study found that the more time participants spent engaging in daily mindfulness exercises the better their mood and working memory, the cognitive term for complex thought, problem solving and cognitive control of emotions. The study also suggests that sufficient MT practice may protect against functional impairments associated with high-stress challenges that require a tremendous amount of cognitive control, self-awareness, situational awareness and emotional regulation.
To study the protective effects of mindfulness training on psychological health in individuals about to experience extreme stress, cognitive neuroscientist Amishi Jha of the Department of Psychology and Center for Cognitive Neuroscience at Penn and Elizabeth A. Stanley of Georgetown University provided mindfulness training for the first time to U.S. Marines before deployment. Jha and her research team investigated working memory capacity and affective experience in individuals participating in a training program developed and delivered by Stanley, a former U.S. Army officer and security-studies professor with extensive experience in mindfulness techniques.
The program, called Mindfulness-based Mind Fitness Training (MMFT™), aims to cultivate greater psychological resilience or “mental armor” by bolstering mindfulness.
The program covered topics of central relevance to the Marines, such as integrating skills to manage stress reactions, increase their resilience to future stressors and improve their unit’s mission effectiveness. Thus, the program blended mindfulness skills training with concrete applications for the operational environment and information and skills about stress, trauma and resilience in the body.
The program emphasized integrating mindfulness exercises, like focused attention on the breath and mindful movement, into pre-deployment training. These mindfulness skills were to regulate symptoms in the body and mind following an experience of extreme stress. The importance of regularly engaging in mindfulness exercises was also emphasized.
“Our findings suggest that, just as daily physical exercise leads to physical fitness, engaging in mindfulness exercises on a regular basis may improve mind-fitness,” Jha said. “Working memory is an important feature of mind-fitness. Not only does it safeguard against distraction and emotional reactivity, but it also provides a mental workspace to ensure quick-and-considered decisions and action plans. Building mind-fitness with mindfulness training may help anyone who must maintain peak performance in the face of extremely stressful circumstances, from first responders, relief workers and trauma surgeons, to professional and Olympic athletes.”
Study participants included two military cohorts of 48 male participants with a mean age of 25 recruited from a detachment of Marine reservists during the high-stress pre-deployment interval and provided MT to one group of 31, leaving 17 Marines in a second group without training as a control. The MT group attended an eight-week course and logged the amount of out-of-class time they spent practicing formal exercises. The effect of the course on working memory was evaluated using the Operation Span Task, whereas the impact on positive and negative affect was evaluated using the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule, or PANAS.
The Positive Affect scale reflects the extent to which a person feels enthusiastic, active and alert. The Negative Affect scale reflects unpleasant mood states, such as anger, disgust and fear. Working memory capacity degraded and negative mood increased over time in the control group. A similar pattern was observed in those who spent little time engaging in mindfulness exercises within the MMFT group. Yet, capacity increased and negative mood decreased in those with high practice time over the eight weeks.
The study findings are in line with prior research on Mindfulness Based Stress Reduction, or MBSR, programs and suggest that MMFT may provide “psychological prophylaxis,” or protection from cognitive and emotional disturbances, even among high-stress cohorts such as members of the military preparing for deployment. Given the high rate of post-traumatic stress disorder and other mental-health disturbances suffered by those returning from war, providing such training prior to deployment may buffer against potential lifelong psychological illness by bolstering working memory capacity.
In the several months prior to a deployment, service members receive intensive training on mission-critical operational skills, physical training and “stress-inoculation” training to habituate them to stressors they may experience during their impending mission. They also must psychologically prepare to leave loved ones and face potentially violent and unpredictable situations during their deployment.
Persistent and intensive demands, such as those experienced during high-stress intervals, have been shown to deplete working memory capacity and lead to cognitive failures and emotional disturbances. The research team hypothesized that MMFT may mitigate these deleterious effects by bolstering working memory capacity.
The study, published in the journal Emotion and also featured in the most recent edition of Joint Force Quarterly, the advisory journal for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was funded by the John W. Kluge Foundation and the Department of Defense.
Jha was the principal investigator on the project, and Anastasia Kiyonaga, Ling Wong and Lois Gelfand from the Department of Psychology Penn’s School of Arts and Sciences comprised her research team.
Stanley is the creator of MMFT and is on the Board of Directors of the Mind Fitness Training Institute, a nonprofit 501(c)(3) established to support the delivery of MMFT.
The study found that the more time participants spent engaging in daily mindfulness exercises the better their mood and working memory, the cognitive term for complex thought, problem solving and cognitive control of emotions. The study also suggests that sufficient MT practice may protect against functional impairments associated with high-stress challenges that require a tremendous amount of cognitive control, self-awareness, situational awareness and emotional regulation.
To study the protective effects of mindfulness training on psychological health in individuals about to experience extreme stress, cognitive neuroscientist Amishi Jha of the Department of Psychology and Center for Cognitive Neuroscience at Penn and Elizabeth A. Stanley of Georgetown University provided mindfulness training for the first time to U.S. Marines before deployment. Jha and her research team investigated working memory capacity and affective experience in individuals participating in a training program developed and delivered by Stanley, a former U.S. Army officer and security-studies professor with extensive experience in mindfulness techniques.
The program, called Mindfulness-based Mind Fitness Training (MMFT™), aims to cultivate greater psychological resilience or “mental armor” by bolstering mindfulness.
The program covered topics of central relevance to the Marines, such as integrating skills to manage stress reactions, increase their resilience to future stressors and improve their unit’s mission effectiveness. Thus, the program blended mindfulness skills training with concrete applications for the operational environment and information and skills about stress, trauma and resilience in the body.
The program emphasized integrating mindfulness exercises, like focused attention on the breath and mindful movement, into pre-deployment training. These mindfulness skills were to regulate symptoms in the body and mind following an experience of extreme stress. The importance of regularly engaging in mindfulness exercises was also emphasized.
“Our findings suggest that, just as daily physical exercise leads to physical fitness, engaging in mindfulness exercises on a regular basis may improve mind-fitness,” Jha said. “Working memory is an important feature of mind-fitness. Not only does it safeguard against distraction and emotional reactivity, but it also provides a mental workspace to ensure quick-and-considered decisions and action plans. Building mind-fitness with mindfulness training may help anyone who must maintain peak performance in the face of extremely stressful circumstances, from first responders, relief workers and trauma surgeons, to professional and Olympic athletes.”
Study participants included two military cohorts of 48 male participants with a mean age of 25 recruited from a detachment of Marine reservists during the high-stress pre-deployment interval and provided MT to one group of 31, leaving 17 Marines in a second group without training as a control. The MT group attended an eight-week course and logged the amount of out-of-class time they spent practicing formal exercises. The effect of the course on working memory was evaluated using the Operation Span Task, whereas the impact on positive and negative affect was evaluated using the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule, or PANAS.
The Positive Affect scale reflects the extent to which a person feels enthusiastic, active and alert. The Negative Affect scale reflects unpleasant mood states, such as anger, disgust and fear. Working memory capacity degraded and negative mood increased over time in the control group. A similar pattern was observed in those who spent little time engaging in mindfulness exercises within the MMFT group. Yet, capacity increased and negative mood decreased in those with high practice time over the eight weeks.
The study findings are in line with prior research on Mindfulness Based Stress Reduction, or MBSR, programs and suggest that MMFT may provide “psychological prophylaxis,” or protection from cognitive and emotional disturbances, even among high-stress cohorts such as members of the military preparing for deployment. Given the high rate of post-traumatic stress disorder and other mental-health disturbances suffered by those returning from war, providing such training prior to deployment may buffer against potential lifelong psychological illness by bolstering working memory capacity.
In the several months prior to a deployment, service members receive intensive training on mission-critical operational skills, physical training and “stress-inoculation” training to habituate them to stressors they may experience during their impending mission. They also must psychologically prepare to leave loved ones and face potentially violent and unpredictable situations during their deployment.
Persistent and intensive demands, such as those experienced during high-stress intervals, have been shown to deplete working memory capacity and lead to cognitive failures and emotional disturbances. The research team hypothesized that MMFT may mitigate these deleterious effects by bolstering working memory capacity.
The study, published in the journal Emotion and also featured in the most recent edition of Joint Force Quarterly, the advisory journal for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was funded by the John W. Kluge Foundation and the Department of Defense.
Jha was the principal investigator on the project, and Anastasia Kiyonaga, Ling Wong and Lois Gelfand from the Department of Psychology Penn’s School of Arts and Sciences comprised her research team.
Stanley is the creator of MMFT and is on the Board of Directors of the Mind Fitness Training Institute, a nonprofit 501(c)(3) established to support the delivery of MMFT.
Abonner på:
Innlegg (Atom)
