Many companies see the need for effective communication for business intelligence professionals, but they often fail to provide the opportunities to focus on the skills required to achieve it.
Darren was furious! Bob had committed to finishing the business requirements by Tuesday, and as of Thursday, it still wasn’t done. In their meeting with their CFO and her staff, the financial analysts had specifically requested the reports for the Board meeting on the first of December. Darren was dependent on Bob so he could complete the reports that were due on Monday. So, Darren did what many competent business intelligence professionals do; he vented to a third person on the team, Ron.
“Can you believe he put me in this position? Now I’ll have to work over the weekend! We seem to care about our team’s reputation, but apparently he doesn’t! He had plenty of time to complete this so he must be trying to get back at me for that time I told him the requirements were incomplete.”
Ron was more than empathetic, willing to listen and validate his point of view. Thus, the triangle of miscommunication is completed, and another opportunity to actually improve the dynamics of the business intelligence team is lost.
Why? Why didn’t Darren just talk to Bob directly? It’s a common phenomena experienced in most work groups to some degree. Intelligent, competent adults resort to “triangulation” – an easy and rewarding, but ultimately ineffective approach for managing our frustration when someone lets us down. Instead of taking the more difficult but effective path of initiating a direct conversation, we frequently allow ourselves to fall into the pattern of unhealthy triangles and involve others in our drama. And, if your team is like many other business intelligence teams, there is a “Ron” just waiting to be involved in that drama. We “make up stories” about the incident, take it personally, see others as malicious, insensitive or incompetent and we may even withdraw, react, get mad or get even.
Many universities and companies see the need for effective communication for BI professionals, but do not always provide the opportunities to focus on the skills required to achieve it. In fact, at a recent CIO conference, a common theme was evident: there is a need for “soft skills development” in IT organizations, but training budgets are typically consumed by “hard” technical topics and user conferences. There are, of course, exceptions to this; but, even then, the investment in these types of skills tends to focus on managers and not team members.
So, if you are in that situation and want to proactively become a better communicator, here is a simple seven-step formula for having difficult conversations. It is not necessarily linear and may feel a little mechanical at first. At the very least, however, it should prepare you for a better conversation than if you let the words fly! And, it is certainly more likely to achieve a better outcome than gossiping to a coworker.
Intention: Describe your intention in having the conversation. This should be something positive to set the tone for the conversation. Good examples:
- My intention is to improve our working relationship.
- My intention is to ensure we meet our deadlines.
- My intention is to better coordinate our project dependencies.
Bad example: My intention is to let you know what an idiot you are (doesn’t set a positive tone)!
Facts: Pinpoint the actual facts that have occurred. This requires that you take a detached view of the incident. Imagine there was a video camera recording the event or interaction. What would it have captured that would have been documented as fact by all parties? Example:
- The financial analysts requested the information in time for the Board meeting on December 1; the requirements had not been received as of Thursday; there is a dependency between tasks.
Interpretation: Differentiate your view of the facts. Distinguishing between the facts and our interpretation of the facts is a critical step toward effective communication. Most of the time, we don’t separate these two things and believe that our interpretation is fact. Examples:
- Bob missed the deadline because he doesn’t respect me.
- Bob is incompetent and doesn’t care about our team’s reputation.
- Bob is trying to get back at me.
Impact: Identify the impact the event had on you; this could be task-related or emotional. Examples:
- When I didn’t receive the requirements, I was afraid of how I would appear to the customer.
- When I didn’t receive the requirements, I felt like I had to give up my weekend to catch up.
Ownership: Ask yourself: is there anything related to this incident that I should take ownership of? In most interactions, there are two parts: my part and your part. If there is something I have done wrong or misunderstood, taking ownership of it will generally reduce the defensiveness of the other person. When we are at the peak of our frustration, this might be difficult to see, but try! Examples:
- I should have said something sooner.
- Perhaps I misunderstood your commitment to that date.
- I am really sensitive to how our customers perceive our team.
Request: Specify what you want. There are lots of conversations that go round and round, attributing blame and defending positions without ever making a clear request. You can’t go backward in time; but based on where you are right now, what do you want the other person to do? Examples:
- Please let me know in advance if you are going to miss a deadline.
- Please don’t do that again.
- My request is that you let the project manager know today that our deadline is in jeopardy.
Agreement: If you specify what you want (and the other party may also have their own set of requests), agree how you will interact going forward. It’s one thing to ask someone to let you know in advance, but have they agreed to that? Don’t leave any opportunity for mutual mystification. What do you both agree to do going forward?
If you are a manager or project manager, is it your job to become the “triangle” where people vent to you and want you to communicate for them? Yes, it’s your job to listen but don’t allow your team to “put the monkey on your back.” Coach them to use this model to have direct conversations and hold them accountable for having those conversations. See what happens when Darren vents to you and you insist that he have a direct conversation with Bob. He will either: a) quit complaining, b) have the conversation, or c) avoid the conversation. Try suggesting that he have the conversation within the next 24 hours and let him know that you’ll be checking in to see how it went. And, by the way, if he is unable to have the conversation within the next 24 hours, make yourself available to facilitate a three-way conversation. Your employees will be better communicators, and you’ll have less drama and more productivity.
Maureen Clarry the Founder and President/CEO of CONNECT: The Knowledge Network (CONNECT), a consulting firm that specializes in helping IT people and organizations to achieve their strategic potential in business. CONNECT was recognized as the 2000 South Metro Denver Small Business of the Year and has been listed in the Top 25 Women-Owned Businesses and the Top 150 Privately Owned Businesses in Colorado. Maureen also participates on the Data Warehousing Advisory Board for The Daniels College of Business at the University of Denver and was recognized by the Denver Business Journal as one of Denver’s Top Women Business Leaders in 2004. She has been on the faculty of The Data Warehousing Institute (TDWI) since 1997, has spoken at numerous other seminars, and has published several articles and white papers. Maureen regularly consults and teaches on organizational and leadership issues related to information technology, business intelligence and business. Maureen can be reached at mclarry@connectknowledge.com or 303.730.7171, ext. 102