314. Rethinks: Turn Tension Into Trust

[00:00:00] Matt Abrahams: The secret to mastering difficult conversations, delivering effective feedback, and resolving stubborn conflicts actually begins with a tough negotiation with yourself. My name is Matt Abrahams, and I teach Strategic Communication at Stanford Graduate School of Business. Welcome to this special Rethinks episode of Think Fast, Talk Smart, the podcast. We all struggle when having challenging conversations, be they arguments, negotiations, or constructive feedback. When I find myself in these difficult situations, I often return to the excellent advice of Sheila Heen. Sheila provided so many practical, useful tips that I wanted to provide you with an extended version of her insights. So you know, you can hear more extended episodes when you join our premium offering. So let's dive right in and learn from Sheila.

[00:00:56] Most advice on conflict resolution, negotiation, and feedback is to focus on the other person. And while important, it is more important to focus first on yourself. My name is Matt Abrahams, and I teach Strategic Communication at Stanford Graduate School of Business. Welcome to Think Fast, Talk Smart, the podcast. Today I look forward to speaking with Sheila Heen. Sheila is a lecturer at Harvard Law School and co-founder of Triad Consulting Group. She's also the co-author of the best-selling books Difficult Conversations and Thanks for the Feedback. Welcome, Sheila. 

[00:01:35] Sheila Heen: I am delighted to be here. We're gonna have fun. 

[00:01:38] Matt Abrahams: Shall we get started? 

[00:01:39] Sheila Heen: Let's. 

[00:01:40] Matt Abrahams: Many people avoid difficult conversations out of fear. What advice do you have for overcoming the anxiety that often accompanies these types of interactions? 

[00:01:50] Sheila Heen: I think overcoming the anxiety is maybe better framed as getting honest with ourselves about the anxiety. Some of that anxiety is well-placed, particularly if my purpose in the conversation is to convince you that you're wrong or to convince you that I'm right, 'cause obviously I'm right. It is probably not going to go well. So when I'm negotiating with myself about having the courage to take the risk to have a conversation, the two things that help me are, number one, to remember that worrying about the potential costs of raising something important to me is only half the ledger. The other half of the ledger is what are the potential costs of avoiding it and letting it fester?

[00:02:29] And those are slower, they're less Technicolor in my imagination because they're not going to happen in the moment that I raise it, but they're still very real, and I think we discount the cost of avoiding. The second thing is to negotiate with myself about what am I trying to achieve in this conversation? And if I can shift my purpose from convincing you of something to instead just understanding how you see it and why we might see it differently, that actually is more likely to generate a good conversation with less defensiveness for both of us. And at the end, we don't have to agree. I can achieve my purpose simply by asking a lot of questions and then sharing how I think about it differently, and that'll push the conversation forward, and then we can go away and think about what we've heard and what might make sense next. 

[00:03:20] Matt Abrahams: So this notion of reframing it as an opportunity to get understanding can take a lot of the pressure off.

[00:03:25] Sheila Heen: It can take a lot of the pressure off. When I invite you into a conversation about why I'm right, I'm basically saying, "Hi, I'm casting a play. In this play, I am the hero, and you are the problem. Would you like to be in my play?" And you're like, "No, I don't want to be in your play 'cause it's completely miscast." If I can shift my purposes, "Hey, I'm casting a play where two characters try to understand what's up," and you're like, "That sounds like an interesting play. Let's try it out." 

[00:03:49] Matt Abrahams: So make it an invitation 

[00:03:51] Sheila Heen: Make it an invitation that somebody would want to say yes to. 

[00:03:53] Matt Abrahams: I like your analogy of the play. And thinking about the cost of avoiding is really important, because I know in my own life and in the lives of many I know, we focus on the other side of that equation, and not focus on what are the costs of avoiding the interaction, instead of just fixating on the interaction itself. In your book Difficult Conversations, you emphasize the importance of understanding the underlying emotions and assumptions in tough conversations. What tactics can we use to stay calm and focused as emotions escalate, and how can we reflect on those emotions in advance? 

[00:04:30] Sheila Heen: One of the things that I've found really interesting about difficult conversations is that by the time something becomes a difficult conversation, we've got at least two problems. We've got whatever we're disagreeing about on the surface, should Mom stay in rehab, or is she ready to come home? Is this the right strategic decision and investment for us as a board? But if it's a difficult conversation, typically there's a deeper issue, which is how we each feel treated in how we're navigating this together. Because you never listen, because you always think you're right and need to get your way. And that's really a feelings question. Or, why am I never consulted about this? Or when I am consulted, you never take my advice. Part of the feelings piece is, let's talk about the real issues here. And if we can actually talk a little bit about those deeper issues, then we're actually addressing more of the root of the problem that's gonna make the surface issues easier for us now and over time.

[00:05:26] Ironically, the instinct for us is to try to keep feelings out of the conversation. Let's not open that whole can of worms. Stay calm, rational, business-focused. When we do that, we're not getting to the deeper issue. Part of what causes people to yell, cry, or get sarcastic when emotions burst into the conversation is because we're trying to tamp them down and keep them out. So they come out as being emotional. There's a big difference between being emotional and handling feelings well. Paradoxically, naming or describing the emotion I'm feeling can be a release valve for it. So if I say, "I feel confused, I just am frustrated 'cause I feel like we're going in circles," then my physiological feeling of being frustrated can ease a little bit. And if we can narrate and just name what we're feeling, it can help us acknowledge that this isn't easy, and then refocus on what we're trying to understand or unpack. 

[00:06:22] Matt Abrahams: So it takes a moment to reflect on how we are feeling. And then once that happens, just sharing that can be a way of bringing them to the conversation without them just bursting onto the scene. They also lay the groundwork to have a discussion about them. 

[00:06:37] Sheila Heen: I think that's right. And in doing so, I'm also inviting yours. One mistake it's easy to make is that I'm either so preoccupied with my own feelings that I forget that you often have many of the same feelings. You also feel frustrated and impatient and whatever. Or I'm so preoccupied with your reaction that I am neglecting thinking about how I'm gonna manage myself, and really, we need to be paying attention to both. 

[00:07:02] Matt Abrahams: And you said something earlier that I think is really important. It's the story that we bring to the situation. So we have in our minds a story about this interaction that we're about to have that may or may not be accurate.

[00:07:14] Sheila Heen: So we have a story about what has happened, what is happening right now, and what we think should happen. In Difficult Conversations, we talk about that story itself having three key components. One is, I'm preoccupied with what I'm pretty sure I'm right about. The second is, whose fault is it that we're having this problem? And the third is, why are you acting this way? What are your intentions or motivations or character that are causing you to be so difficult? That story drives how I pretend to listen to you. The first negotiation is actually a negotiation I have to have with myself about my own story.

[00:07:49] To shift from being focused on what I'm right about to being curious about why it is, given it's so obvious that I'm right, that you see it differently. To shift from blame to thinking about what are we each contributing to the problem, and to shift from focusing on your intentions or character to, can I describe the impact on me? I don't know why you're doing what you're doing, but what's important to me is that you understand the impact it's having, either on me or on the team or on the business or the community. If I can make that shift in my own mind, then it's actually a more inviting conversation for both of us. 

[00:08:19] Matt Abrahams: Teasing out those different components of the story is really important. I can imagine for myself in a situation where I have to have a difficult conversation, maybe with one of my kids or a coworker, I would have to damp down some of my emotions first to get to that place where I could actually do that introspection about my story. And then how do I actually kick off that conversation about the deeper level? I've invited you here to have a conversation about some topic, but really it's the underlying issue that's the challenge. How do I start that conversation about the underlying issue? 

[00:08:51] Sheila Heen: The natural place to start is within my own story. In my story, you're the problem. The mistake we sometimes make is we think, "Well, I've been told, and I've heard on this podcast a lot, that I should listen and ask lots of questions, so now I'm gonna try to start by asking questions about your story." There's not something necessarily wrong with that, but if I'm not dealing with my own story and including it, it can feel false or forced, or I'm asking questions, but they're not real questions. So the key from our point of view is to try to step to the third story.

[00:09:23] As an observer who understood what we each think, how would they describe the difference between us? I can do that myself. So it might sound something like, "I'm guessing we have really different preferences for how this should be handled," or, "I'm guessing we have really different predictions about what the risks are here, and I'm curious to talk about that. I'm happy to share mine, and I'm particularly interested to hear what you're worried about." That is what we call starting the conversation from the third story, and it's one that includes both of our stories as part of the purpose of the conversation, and that's an invitation that they're likely to take.

[00:09:59] Matt Abrahams: You mentioned this notion of questions and how questions can actually be misused. But I know, and I've heard you speak about, the power of questions. Can you share with me a little bit about how questions can be helpful in managing conflict and negotiation? 

[00:10:14] Sheila Heen: Yeah, a question should be an invitation to understand the other person. When you are the other person and someone wants to, genuinely, wants to understand you, that's a tough invitation to turn down because feeling understood by others is such a fundamental human need. So genuine curiosity is something that is hard for other people to resist being responsive to. And then because reciprocity is such a strong social norm, so if you attack me, I'm gonna attack you back. If you're genuinely curious about me, once I feel understood, I may be able to then turn to be more curious about why you would possibly disagree. So questions can move us toward understanding and finding some things that we have in common, even if it's just we both agree this is a problem, even if we disagree about what kind of problem it is, or who's causing it, or what we should do about it.

[00:11:10] But that common ground can help us think about, if we both agree it's a problem, where do we go from here? The other thing that questions can do, and I've both had this experience, and I periodically get asked about this experience, which is, how long do I have to listen to someone who just monologues the whole time? Because I don't want to ask them more questions. They're not listening. I can hardly get a word in edgewise, and they're not going to even pause. At the end of the conversation, they believe it went really successfully, and they leave the room. I think that questions can actually be really helpful because people will monologue about whatever comes into their head, and you can use questions to direct their monologue toward the things that actually would be helpful for you to hear more about.

[00:11:52] And I think we're taught not to interrupt people, but, and if I'm interrupting you to cut you off to say what I want to say, that gets a bad reaction. But if I'm interrupting you to better understand you, that is usually well-received. So saying, "Okay, hang on one second. Just, can I get a word in edgewise here? Because I just am not sure I'm tracking what you mean by this. Help me understand that first." I'm helping to shape the conversation about things that are helpful. And then I can paraphrase back, "Before we go too much further, I wonder whether it would be helpful for you to hear how I think about those things." So I can be more assertive about asking for reciprocity, that my perspective needs to be part of the conversation. 

[00:12:36] Matt Abrahams: So questions can do a lot, especially when paired with paraphrasing, to move a conversation in the direction that you think it needs to go. And it's a way of asserting yourself without shutting the other person down. And questions, by their very nature, as you mentioned, are invitations, and reciprocity drives us to respond. So it's a way of bringing people to a conversation. I want to talk about when these types of interactions get stuck. Negotiations, conflict gets stuck. We're, we're cycling or circling on the same issue. We're not able to get out of our own worldview. How do you get unstuck without sacrificing your position or your self-worth? 

[00:13:20] Sheila Heen: So I think the first question to ask is, why do I think we're stuck? To do some diagnosis. Is it because we're not understanding why we each feel so strongly about it? Is it because we're trading positions? This is the outcome that I need. In negotiation, people typically take positions and then say, "We must have X, Y, or Z," and, "We can't give you X, Y, or Z, but we can give you A, B, or C." If we're trading positions, then maybe we need to dig underneath for the underlying interests and concerns that we each think our solution will meet, and we need to talk about those deeper concerns that lead us to think that's the only thing we can accept. It might be that we're at impasse because we have the wrong people at the table.

[00:14:04] So every time we think of an idea that might move us forward, then, well, we can't do that. We would need higher-ups or collaborators or whatever. And we don't think they'd agree to that. Maybe we should find out. For me, the impasse question has 10 or 15 possible answers, and if you're not asking that question first, you're gonna misdirect your energies. And one thing you can do is just observe, name. It feels like we're going in circles and we feel stuck, and I wonder why that's happening. What's your sense of why it's happening? And then I'm happy to share what I'm noticing. And now I've made it a joint problem to do the diagnosis together, and that alone can help us come together to understand why we're stuck.

[00:14:51] I'll say one more thing, which is occasionally we're stuck because it doesn't make sense for me to move forward with this. I should say no, but a lot of people have trouble saying no and walking away 'cause they don't wanna let other people down. It's usually rooted in identity. I'm very loyal. I don't want to abandon you. I feel it might be rude, but that means I'm not being upfront about, I just am thinking this doesn't make sense for me to move forward with. I like you, and as things play out, if we check in in a month, we might be at a different place. But right now, I don't think it makes sense for us to move forward. 

[00:15:24] Matt Abrahams: So it sounds like the way to manage an impasse or being stuck is to reflect in terms of what is causing that impasse. And in some cases, it might be your unwillingness to just cut bait and say, "We're done."

[00:15:38] Sheila Heen: Yes. 

[00:15:39] Matt Abrahams: But much like you talked about when you were talking about emotion, we have to look deeper and understand what might be causing this and have the conversation at that level. 

[00:15:50] Sheila Heen: I think that's right. Yeah. And we often skip that and just try a bunch of different things, or we try the same thing over and over, thinking we'll get a different response.

[00:15:58] Matt Abrahams: Again, it can be very hard to take that step back and reflect and see what's going on, but reminding ourselves that by getting to perhaps the root cause can remove, in this case, the impasse, in the case of emotions, can allow us to have the real conversation that needs to be had.

[00:16:15] I wanna highlight something I've noticed in many of your answers. When you give examples, you use words like wonder, curious. Those are very inviting words. Those are words that bring about connection and a, a sense of we're collaborating. Talk to me about your thoughts of, down to the linguistic level, what are your thoughts about the importance of language in conflict management?

[00:16:40] Sheila Heen: So I'm giving my internal voice a job. My internal voice believes that its job is to protect me and defend me and fight back on my behalf when someone says, "That makes no sense at all." But if I can give my internal voice the job, not turn it off, but the job of figure out why they see it in that way, which doesn't make sense, then my internal voice is actually on my own side. Needs to be curious in order to give me answers. And so I think some of it is just negotiating with your own internal voice to give it the right job. 

[00:17:12] Matt Abrahams: I often think of conflict management, negotiation, feedback as things that are happening outside of myself with someone else, and they obviously are, but a lot of what you were talking about is the dialogue I have with myself, and that is really powerful. And a lot of us, I think, just jump right into the interactive piece without the self-reflection piece first. I want to switch to feedback because I know you have a lot of thoughts on feedback. What are some common mistakes people make when giving feedback, and how can we avoid them to ensure that our feedback is received as constructive rather than critical?

[00:17:47] Sheila Heen: Probably the first question is, does this person want my feedback? And unsolicited feedback can be some of the hardest feedback to be on the receiving end of. Now, that said, sometimes we are responsible for providing feedback. We're a manager, we're a parent, we're a colleague that sees that what's happening right now, actually, I have a responsibility to say something. One of the things that has helped me is just to understand that there are really three types of feedback. And often, as a giver, I'm not clear on which kind I'm offering, or my receiver is hoping for a different kind than what I am offering. So the three kinds, the easy way to remember them is ACE, A-C-E. So the first is appreciation. Just, "I see you, I get you, I'm noticing what's valuable about what you're doing, how hard you're working at it," et cetera.

[00:18:35] The C is coaching, and by coaching I mean anything that helps someone else become more effective or efficient or knowledgeable. If my goal is to help you get better, it counts as coaching So that's the engine for learning, but it bumps into the third type, which is evaluation. And evaluation rates or ranks you about whether you're meeting expectations, about whether you are exceeding or falling short. Part of what's hard, and from my point of view, the term constructive criticism comes from this cross transaction where, as a giver, I think I'm offering you coaching, but as a receiver, what you hear is judgment, evaluation, right? So I'm super clear that I give my kids, three of them, all kinds of brilliant coaching that is really helpful to them, and yet they hear that they're not measuring up. Part of it is just naming it and getting an alignment.

[00:19:33] So when someone says to me, "Hey, could you give me some feedback about this draft?" I've learned to ask, "What would be helpful to you right now?" Maybe it's just appreciation 'cause you're not sure there's even any value here, so do I see anything worth pursuing? Which is a combination of appreciation and evaluation. Or, "What do you like about this draft? What speaks to you about this draft?" Might be helpful at this stage. Another would be, "I can't figure out this story. I don't think it's working, and I'd love your input." So they're asking for coaching. And a third might be, "We think this is ready to send out. Do you think it's ready to go?" And that's an evaluation question. Does it meet expectations, or do we each think it's good enough? And so just getting aligned on that as a giver and a receiver can really straighten out what we're each hoping for. 

[00:20:18] Matt Abrahams: It is important to delineate the type of feedback, and I appreciate the ACE, the appreciation, the coaching, the evaluation. It seems to me that we, as the person giving feedback, can ask, what is it that you're looking for? But it also, I believe, could be really helpful if those of us seeking feedback could be very clear. A lot of times we'll just say, "Can you give me feedback?" Or, "How'd that go?" Instead of being more specific. Do you have specific guidance around the actual phrasing of feedback that can actually help it be beneficial?

[00:20:50] Sheila Heen: As a receiver, one question that I've found useful is, what's one thing that if I changed it, you think would make this better or make this meeting more effective, or whatever the context is. The other thing that I try to keep in mind is that getting clear so that as a receiver, I can see what my giver is trying to say, or as a giver trying to help my receiver understand what I mean, is really a joint endeavor. And there's no avoiding the fact that you've got to start with a sort of label or topic. Like, I think one of the things that would be helpful is if you were more responsive or if, yeah, I think you're too nice. That's incredibly vague and frustrating. And because as a receiver, I have a reaction to it, I'm so like, "Okay, thanks for your feedback. Goodbye." Rather than saying, "Wow, I don't know what to think about that. Help me understand what you mean." And we can, as givers and receivers together, we can ask questions in a couple directions. One is backward-looking. Where is this coming from?

[00:21:48] You must have noticed some things that concerned you, or you had some expectations about how I would handle something, and I did something different. Like, there were a bunch of specific things that happened that have led you to offer me this feedback. So that's backward-looking. The other thing that we can do is ask questions forward-looking. If I were to take your advice, what would I do differently? What specifically would I do differently? Or it might be, look, if there was one thing you were going to do tomorrow or change to experiment with, it would be when you get an email, just send back a note that says, "On it. Back to you soon." 'Cause we can't tell whether you're getting our emails. That's a very specific thing that matches being more responsive, but is less global maybe than you thought it was before, and I'm getting clearer about what I actually am picturing you would change. More concrete. 

[00:22:38] Matt Abrahams: It clearly seems that effective feedback is a dialogue where there's a communication and questioning and, and clarity that is sought and delivered. And as a feedback giver, I need to remind myself that I need to be specific. It seems to me that feedback, negotiation, and conflict management are all circling around some of the same key ideas. If you were to give one or two practical bits of advice to help people in each of those areas what would it be?

[00:23:11] Sheila Heen: For me, the thing that has made the biggest difference is to have a few analytical tools that just help me see beneath the surface. 'Cause on the surface, whether it's conflict or difficult conversations or negotiation or feedback, on the surface it just feels like a mess, and why do I wanna get any closer to that mess? And if you look underneath the mess, there are a handful of things going on that if we can understand them, we have our first win. We don't know what to do about them yet, but we better understand them.

[00:23:41] So for me, thinking, what is this about for each of us? Often we're talking past each other. One of the things that happens is that what we each think this conflict is about is different, so we keep saying what's most important to me, and then you say what's most important to you, and we're not actually responding to each other. I think just as a first step, understanding what is this about, what's most important about it to each of us, can at least help us name the different topics that we should talk about and get aligned on which to talk about first. 

[00:24:15] Matt Abrahams: Thank you. I think that's a very powerful starting place. And then I think the second step you already mentioned as well, which is to reflect what's the story I'm bringing, or what's my take on this. Very helpful. Sheila, this has been fantastic. Before we end, I'd like to ask three questions of all the guests. One I create just for you, and then the other two are similar. Are you up for that?

[00:24:34] Sheila Heen: Sure.

[00:24:34] Matt Abrahams: So my first question is quite self-serving. I find myself in several challenging situations, often in my personal life with my family. What advice do you give to people who have to negotiate and manage conflict in a situation where you know it will be continual? We're gonna have another family meal, we're going to take another family vacation. What advice and guidance do you have to help take some of the edge off and effect change in a way so we don't feel like we're having the same fight over and over again?

[00:25:06] Sheila Heen: We are having the same fight over and over again, aren't we? 

[00:25:09] Matt Abrahams: Yes. 

[00:25:09] Sheila Heen: And partly because we're each bringing such, I'll call it rich family experience with us into those relationships. And also the beauty of being in a family is that you hopefully have the sense that people accept me for who I am despite my flaws, and that means that we're less careful And we're more reactive. I think the thing that I regret looking back is early on not taking a beat to decide how I want to respond, and instead just reacting where my internal voice thinks, "Okay, that's ridiculous." So I just say, "That's ridiculous," and dismiss something that someone's trying to actually raise with me that's important.

[00:26:01] Matt Abrahams: That notion of reflexively responding and not taking a beat certainly plays out in my life, and I'm easily triggered to respond in the ways I have, and I think taking that beat will help. Question number two, who is a communicator that you admire and why? 

[00:26:18] Sheila Heen: Oh boy, there are so many communicators that I admire for different reasons, but one of the ones I've been thinking about a lot lately is, oddly enough, Anderson Cooper. His new podcast series, All There Is, it's a podcast about grief. And one of the things I really have appreciated about it is how honest and raw it is. It's beautifully edited, but it also just invites us into his internal experience of grappling with grief, which then connects us all. And I also love the way that he invites others in.

[00:26:54] Matt Abrahams: Thank you for sharing that, and he's certainly a master communicator. I am not surprised that you would be drawn to a communicator who addresses emotion and who is all about inviting others to collaborate or experience something together. Those are two themes that came through in much of what you said. Final question, what are the first three ingredients that go into a successful communication recipe? 

[00:27:19] Sheila Heen: Your guests have named just wise and insightful ingredients. So I found myself, in thinking about this question Thinking about what are the seasonings or spices you would add that other people might not be thinking about?

[00:27:35] Matt Abrahams: All right. 

[00:27:35] Sheila Heen: So we're gonna assume that the cake is baked and, and is beautiful from your other guests. One of the things that I've been thinking a little bit about is just degrees of difficulty. Because I think we hear a lot these days especially about how, boy, disagreement is good, and disagreement should be out on the table, and that's where we really learn from each other, and that's where we can connect with each other. And I think what we're maybe not talking about enough is degrees of difficulty. So there are three things that I think increase the degree of difficulty. One is, is it about a topic that matters to me? So if I ask you what kind of ice cream is your favorite, do I care whether you eat different ice cream than I eat?

[00:28:18] But if it's about a topic that isn't near and dear to my heart, it's not that hard. And of course, disagreement is interesting and fun to talk about. Now let's take it to the next level, which is, is it about me in some way? If it's something that we disagree about and that has implications on who I am, well, now that ups the level of difficulty here. Or should you be here? Do you deserve to be here? Are people like you supposed to be here? Well, now we're upping the difficulty because it's about identity. And the third level of difficulty, is the outcome of this going to impact me? So if you and I have to share the ice cream and you get to decide because you have the decision rights and you're gonna dictate what kind of ice cream I eat for the rest of my life, well now something is on the line for me.

[00:29:06] And I think that's why when power comes into the picture, meaning who has what levers of influence over outcomes? And if the outcome of this is gonna have really important consequences for me, now that's the hardest place to feel, to step into a conversation where I know that we disagree. Now, you asked for three ingredients. Those are three levels of difficulty. They might be spices on the cake. As the degree of difficulty gets higher, it's more and more important that I develop the capacity to have those conversations because whether or not we talk about it, you will make a decision that will impact me or say something about me or matter to me.

[00:29:48] And so my opportunity to influence that decision and to understand it and fill in blanks where you maybe are missing something is lost if I don't develop the capacity to live in that space and to use the skills that I've spent time developing, but that can go out the window when I'm under stress. So that's the place where I think leadership goes from good to great, if we're gonna use an old phrase which is that not only can I have the conversations that matter, but as they get harder, I can stay in the place where I am showing up as my best self to have them and using all those skills that I've worked so hard at. 

[00:30:30] Matt Abrahams: So insightful that while many people focus on macro ingredients, these are really micro ingredients that make a big difference. I love that they all start with the letter I, importance, identity, and impact. And this notion of being able to stay with this as you're having the conversation and being able to navigate through these degrees of difficulty, really important advice, and I'm gonna have to spend some time thinking about how I personally can help myself and help those I interact with navigate through these. Sheila, this has been absolutely fantastic. When we started the conversation, I thought it was going to be mostly best practices for how we engage others, and not only did we talk about that, but we really talked about how do we engage ourselves so that we can have these types of challenging conversations and negotiations. Thank you.

[00:31:27] Sheila Heen: Thank you.

[00:31:30] Matt Abrahams: Thank you for joining us for another episode of Think Fast, Talk Smart, the podcast. Among the many ideas Sheila shared, the one that stands out to me is miscommunication and hurt feelings occur when a person giving feedback and the person receiving it are not aligned on what is actually needed. To ensure feedback is constructive rather than critical, explicitly clarify which of the three types of feedback is expected, appreciation, coaching, or evaluation. This will help you ace your feedback. To learn more about managing conflict and difficult conversations, tune in to episode 250. This episode was produced by Katherine Reed, Ryan Campos, Alex McCarthy, and me, Matt Abrahams. Our music is from Floyd Wonder, with special thanks to Podium Podcast Company. Be sure to check out our full transcripts for each episode at fastersmarter.io.