I have an almost genetic aversion to paying for parking. When I can't escape it, the inevitable question arises: pay 75 cents for the minimum time period or take a chance that I can run my errand and be back before anyone notices I haven't paid?* If I misjudge, the ticket might cost me about $30.
75 cents is less than $30. That's basic math. It makes sense to pay the minimum rather than risk being ticketed for the maximum. Right?
Wrong, apparently.
I often encounter litigants who are performing a similar calculation: I could settle now for this amount, or go to trial and be vindicated** Why pay 75 cents when you can pay 0? The risk of losing at trial (a.k.a. getting a $30 ticket) is summarily dismissed.
This is bad litigation math. The choice is not 75 cents or 0 cents. It's usually 75 cents or $30.
In the parking analogy, if I run off without paying, believing that I am faster than the average bear, or more efficient, or that all will go smoothly with my errand, or that there is no parking enforcement officer nearby, that is just a bunch of hope masquerading as knowledge. I have no objective certainty that the chances of getting a ticket are lower for me than for anyone else in this situation. I'm gambling.
Similarly, if a litigant does not have a full appreciation of the relevant risk factors, their assessment of the chances of being vindicated** is likely based more on hope than data.
On the other hand, if I have just seen the parking enforcement officer leave, or I see that the place I am visiting is empty, which means I will be able to complete my errand faster, these are concrete data points that might inform my decision not to pay the 75 cents.* It's a more calculated risk than one built on self-assurance and wishful thinking.
If you are going to trial on facts that are not great, with no assurance that the law is squarely in your favour, and your witnesses are not yet lined up, you simply do not have the data to support your confidence in total vindication**.
If you've thoroughly canvassed all the risk factors, however, that's a different story. I have no problem with parties telling me that the deal on the table is worse than what they might obtain in court, as long as it is a meaningfully-considered conclusion. In my view, vague assertions of confidence, wishful thinking, and inflated expectations are not enough.
Sometimes you have to pay to play.
* the right thing is to pay for parking when required and nothing in this post should be construed as advice to evade parking bylaws
** whatever that means
Relationships Matter
Work relationships matter most when things are not "business as usual." When everyone does what they're supposed to do, things run smoothly, like a river in its banks.
It's when things go "off-book" that the trouble begins. Trouble can look like differential treatment, or unexpected missteps, or last-minute requests. That's when you need backup, like a river has a floodplain or levee.
In a work context, the backup system starts with healthy communication. Talking through shifts in workflow or unexpected events ensures that the affected people are updated and aware of, or contributing to, the decision-making taking place.
The next safety measure is relationship. If people don't know what is going on, but they know and trust those in charge, it creates reassurance. The steps being taken might not be clear but there is confidence that they are fair, and that there will be an opportunity at another time to discuss the decisions taken.
Nothing goes according to plan all the time. Bolster your work environment by building relationships and developing clear and consistent communication channels.
Holiday Greetings
Schools just let out for the break, I'm still not done everything, and the cute holiday cards I was going to send you with a carefully crafted bespoke message are still sitting blank in their boxes. Not happening. Instead, please accept this open letter as my season's greeting to you.
When my son was in preschool, his teacher used to say "stop, look and listen" as a cue to the students to quiet down and pay attention. If you have an opportunity to step away from work in the coming days, I invite you to consider this sentence as a scaffold for rest.
STOP working for a minute and give yourself a break. Stop worrying, planning, or wishing circumstances were different.
LOOK away from your screens. Look outside. Look for the silver lining. Look inward, to find yourself again.
LISTEN to yourself. Listen to the birds, to the subway trains, to the silence. Tune out the auditory clutter for a while. Not every moment needs a podcast or a news update.
If you can, I hope you will take a real break this month. I hope you will give yourself permission to stop, look and listen. Here's to 2022, and to you.
De-Escalation of Conflict
Right now, everyone is on edge. Increased aggression and belligerence are on display at every turn. People who deal with people (that's almost all of us) need help navigating these encounters.
I recently gave a workshop on conflict de-escalation for a client. My favourite tip is this: stop arguing your point when the other person becomes inflamed. Once the conflict has escalated to become an emotional, rather than a rational, encounter, your goal is to de-escalate the conflict. That's it. It's not to win the point, or prove the justice of your cause, or shame the other person for their reaction. It's just to take the temperature down.
How can you do this? Try changing your mindset from "what kind of person would react this way?" to "this person is having a natural response to something that has really bothered them."
If you can see the anger as justified, even if you do not agree that it is, you can start to speak to the person in a way that makes them feel understood. In mental wellness circles, this is called emotional validation.
Things you can say to try to de-escalate: "I can see this really makes you upset", "I get why you're angry - [fill in reason]", "you don't want to ___, I understand", "These rules are frustrating", etc.
Once people are calmer, then you can go into the expectations and consequences for the situation. But trying to reason through an emotional outburst is like singing an aria during a fire drill. It may sound good, but no one is listening.
(article published on LinkedIn on September 10, 2021).
How Are you Going to Spend your Energy?
Your energy is finite, the pandemic has made that very clear. The question to answer (posed once in a milk commercial, if I remember correctly), is how are you going to spend that energy?
September offers something of a fresh start (https://www.wsj.com/articles/september-is-the-real-new-year-1473875636). It is a good time to consider what matters most to you. Before you launch back into life as it once was for the sake of feeling normal, give yourself the space to think about where your energy is best used. When you are clear about your values and priorities, you can set up boundaries to protect your energy.
As coach Gary Wood likes to ask, "what gets your 'yes'?" Remember that every "yes" has a corresponding "no" - yes to increased responsibility in one place means that you have less time or energy for something else (including sleep!) Having foregone many of the usual commitments and events this year, you have an opportunity to decide what to pick back up and what to leave out. What did you not miss? What kinds of interactions drain you? Which ones fill you up? What matters enough that you are willing to spend energy fighting for it?
This has been a very hard year. Whether or not you are aware of it, you have expended considerable energy just keeping the wheels on all these months. You might be burned out and in need of recuperation. You might just need a few days off to refocus. If nothing else, the pandemic offers an opportunity to look at your life with fresh eyes. You would be wise to put some energy into doing so.
This Article was previously published on LinkedIn on September 9, 2020: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/where-you-spend-your-energy-christine-kilby/
You Can Learn a Lot of Things from the Actors
(5 minute read)
TL;DR: When someone at work asks for additional support, by giving them what is requested, we give them the tacit validation that they know what they need and their judgment is valued. When we instil value in others, they receive it as empowerment, which they apply to their work. Even a “no” can be validating if a person feels understood.
While we may not always think of acting as a job, it does require time, skill, and hard work. At the Emmy Awards on September 22, 2019, Michelle Williams offered a rare insight into the effort actors expend to perfect their performances. Accepting the Emmy Award for her role in Fosse/Verdon, Williams thanked her “bosses” for believing her when she said she needed more dancing lessons, more singing lessons, and a different set of false teeth (!) Williams described these things as costly, but necessary for her to do her job. Judging by the Emmy win, she was right.
What really moved me, however, was the connection Williams drew between the “yes” to her requests and the feeling of empowerment she experienced. In a powerful moment in her acceptance speech, Williams explained how we value people when we trust them to understand their own needs. When so valued, a person can connect with their own inherent value, and put that value into their work. It is a strikingly simple concept: believe that a person knows how to do their job - even if what they think differs from your own views - and watch them flourish.
Ideally, you can say “yes” to most requests. However, there may be times when saying “yes” is more difficult, or change requires buy-in from many others. In such circumstances, there is still an opportunity to value someone by listening to, and trying to understand the interests behind, the request.
I delivered a workshop for a group of professionals about how to use the principles of negotiation to strengthen work relationships and build resilience. One take-away for the group was that even if a request is difficult to meet, or is outside your control, listening and understanding someone’s point of view can be helpful.
Sometimes a person may only be able to express frustration about the status quo and demand a change. To get beyond the frustration to what is truly at issue, leaders must practice active listening, asking questions, paraphrasing, and most importantly, listening with the aim of understanding rather than refuting. Even if you cannot supply the requested item, demonstrating understanding may go a long way to building trust and renewing engagement. Perhaps equally importantly, you can learn what the person does NOT need - more donuts in the break room might not be the right salvo for low office morale if people are trying to cut back on sugar.
The next time someone complains about a problem at work, or asks for something to change, think about whether the validation of a “yes” is possible to give. If it does not seem possible to give a full “yes”, you may find that through listening and asking questions, you can uncover other options. Most importantly, by taking the time to hear more about the request, you will convey to the person asking that they are a valued member of the team.
On Endings
(5 minutes reading time)
June may only be a halfway point in our calendar, but it is often a time for endings. For some, June marks the end of the school year, or the conclusion of a long career. In our family, we said goodbye to two different schools today as my sons move on to new schools next year. It is bittersweet to make a change and to leave behind the familiar for an uncharted path. Yet there is value in finishing well, and, as with a good joke, timing is important to achieving a strong ending.
It is never easy to let go of the familiar to embrace an uncertain future. When I was considering a shift from law into mediation, I spent many months considering my next move, shying away from the difficult decision to say goodbye to my firm and colleagues, who were more like family than coworkers. However, the change has given me an opportunity to pursue a new direction in my career and to grow my skills in conflict resolution and workplace dynamics.
There is no “right” time to leave. As with a great performance or a thrilling book, sometimes we are not ready for the end. We believe that the right time to say goodbye is when we are emotionally ready. In fact, the right time can often be before you are emotionally settled on the decision to make a change. It is scary and difficult, but often the “right” time feels premature. Waiting for everything to line up perfectly before making a move can paralyze us and prevent any change from occurring at all. Worse, waiting too long can take the decision-making power out of our hands and place it in someone else’s.
In mediation, it can feel unsatisfactory to choose a settlement and let go of our arguments, or the prospect of vindication in court. Ending a lawsuit before we are completely ready to do so can be a good decision for many reasons, but it is still difficult. Settlement often feels like a second rate outcome because we are not always emotionally ready to let the case (or the person on the other side) go. However, if we operate on the principle that a good ending always comes too soon, we learn to accept the discomfort that comes with letting go before we are completely ready. By doing so, we keep control over the outcome in our own hands, rather than waiting for a third party to dictate the ending for us.
Good endings always come with some struggle. They are just as much the product of toil and hard work as any good beginning. And every ending is also a beginning - a new school, a new career, a new outlook. Change is hard and accepting the end of something is always painful. Yet we do well to choose for ourselves the how, the when, and the why of an ending, if we are to look back with satisfaction on the turns we have taken.
But I'm Right!
I love comedy. In another life, I might have pursued a career as a stand-up comedian. In this life, I simply enjoy the artistry of talented comedians like Mike Birbiglia. In his 2013 album “My Girlfriend’s Boyfriend”, Birbiglia starts by telling the audience that his strong belief that he is right often creates tension when he is arguing with other people. The tension, he says, stems from the fact that he is right. While Birbiglia’s line produces a laugh, it also speaks great truth about how we feel about our position in a conflict. Rarely do we embrace, or even consider, the idea that another person’s point of view may be justified, or that the person holding a different belief may be as thoughtful as we are.
Take the example of a recent wrongful dismissal mediation where the employer held fast to its position that it had acted in the best interests of the company. After three hours, the mediator asked the employer representative how he would have felt if his daughter had been terminated while she was on maternity leave. The employer representative, who (as the mediator knew), had recently become a grandfather, quickly changed his position and resolved the matter at a respectful level of settlement.
The mediation example demonstrates how easy it is to artificially distance ourselves from those with whom we disagree. We are quick to vilify or attack them for holding their particular view. Having “othered” the person so completely, we free ourselves from any responsibility to think of them as a fellow human being. The result is that we decide, prematurely, not to engage with someone on the basis of a difference in opinion. We thus lose the opportunity to expand our own knowledge by learning from those who have different - and valid - experiences and perspectives.
Moreover, when we close our minds to others’ perspectives, we do so to the potential detriment of our own arguments. There may be some truth in another person’s attacks on our reasoning. If we can move away from the visceral reaction of jumping to defend ourselves, we may learn something about our point of view, its frailties, and the potential for a shift in thinking that might better reflect our beliefs. At a minimum, we can identify and improve weaknesses in our position, just as we can improve our contributions to the workplace by learning from, rather than disagreeing with, a negative performance assessment.
I remember being in court early in my litigation career and receiving what seemed like a harsh rebuke from the judge. In the moment, I chose to listen carefully to what she was saying and receive it as helpful career guidance dressed up as criticism - a sheep in wolf’s clothing. I modified my approach to correct my mistake, and felt grateful for the intervention by a person who could just as easily have left me to flounder. Had I instead taken umbrage at her comments, or worse, become defensive, I would have missed an opportunity to learn and improve.
It is all too easy to reside in echo chambers where everyone agrees with our point of view. However, if we wish to grow in our thinking, and improve our reasoning, we must make room for other perspectives. By intentionally engaging with points of view that we regard as wrongheaded, we expand our understanding of those positions and the ways in which our own arguments may be lacking. An argument developed in a vacuum is bound to lose. Put differently, if you know you are right, you probably are not.
In the coming weeks, watch this space for articles I think are interesting, viewpoints I think are worth sharing, and maybe the odd joke or two.
I look forward to your comments and suggestions, with the request that all comments use respectful language. I reserve the sole discretion to remove any comments or posts which do not adhere to this standard.