Better Conversations at Work: Building Trust, Clarity and Stronger Outcomes

David: Hello, and welcome to the MF Mac Employment Podcast. I'm David Hossack, and I'm delighted to be joined today by Sarah Hanson from Interactifs.

Sarah: Hello, David. Good to see you again.

David: What we're gonna be speaking about today, well, I think it's probably best described in a big picture as how better conversations can build trust and better outcomes.

And reflecting back on things, I think very few of the podcasts that I've been involved in haven't touched on communication in some way or another, and good communication can really help in employment relationships, and ultimately avoid conflict and even perhaps Employment Tribunals. And that's where you come in here, Sarah.

With an HR background, Sarah's an expert in social intelligence, we'll come to that in a moment, and in coaching people to deal with others more effectively so that the employment relationship is better, and that challenging, difficult, however we call them, conversations can be approached in a more successful way.

So welcome, Sarah, and tell our listeners a little bit about yourself.

Sarah: Thank you, David. Well, I spent 15 years in corporate HR. I went into it for all the right reasons of helping people increase their job satisfaction, their motivation, what they're striving for every day in their workplace. But found myself so often dealing with things that had gone unsaid, where relationships at work had started to become a little more tense, people were finding it difficult to work alongside colleagues, maybe members of their team their managers or their stakeholders because they'd avoided conversations.

And at times that would lead to some of the things that you've just touched upon there, mediation, or in the worst case, people parting company with the organisation that they joined in very good faith. So now I spend my time helping people nip things in the bud, finding easier ways to communicate. By that I mean being able to speak up and say how they really feel or what they really think about a topic with more ease and sincerity at work, rather than being torn between holding the company line and actually expressing what they think personally without overstepping the mark

David: And I think you expressed it so well by saying things left unsaid, and I think that's probably because people don't know how to approach this. So how do people approach things in a more effective way, do you think?

Sarah: Well, the first thing they do is stop making assumptions.

Too often things go unsaid or implied rather than said and explicit, and that's one of the starting points when I'm working with groups or individuals to help people set the context for any conversation that they need to have, whether that's internal or with somebody outside their organisation, and get on the table the reason not only for the meeting, but what they want to achieve as a result of it.

It might be, again, as I think of the context you set up at the start, it might be that they want to clear the air with somebody. It might be that they want to apologise and draw a line under what's happened in the past. Or it might be to level with them and say, look, they've inherited a situation, and they're trying desperately to find a way out of it so that the desires they've got become clear and can be spoken about constructively, rather than avoiding grasping the nettle, as we'd say up here.

David: Yes. I suppose it's a bit like everything, that preparation is really vital to all of these things, and understanding how you're going to approach these things. I think often people would think about a conversation that ought to be had and are concerned about how they approach that. Are they direct? Are they empathetic?

How do they approach it?

Sarah: Well, using some of your words there, by being able to say to someone, "Look, this is a conversation I feel we ought to have, and I'd really like to do two things today. I want to be direct about what I think, and I'm keen to hear what you think too, but I also want to be empathetic to the situation we find ourselves in."

And if I pause there, saying these things out loud at the start of the conversation, in my view, is going to save so much of that tension that can be created when people avoid saying the tough stuff. Because the tone of your voice, the words that you use, sort of being overly careful so that you avoid putting your foot in it, as soon as people notice that you're really starting to be guarded about what you're saying, I sense people start looking for that balance between, well, can I trust this person? How sure am I that what they're actually telling me is the full story, is their version, their understanding of this? And once people are more clear, direct, honest about what they're saying, with human behavior being contagious, the other person's more likely to be more clear, direct, and honest about their side of the story or the way that they see a particular situation.

David: I'm wondering, following on from that, about how you set up these conversations. Sometimes there will be a natural point at which these conversations would take place, say, in the context of an appraisal or a management meeting. But if not and you want to have a conversation with somebody about the sort of thing you've been chatting about, Sarah, what's the best way to lead up to that?

Sarah: Well, in my experience, too often things get left. The tricky stuff gets left to the end of the one-to-one. And I found myself in that position in the past thinking, "I'll find the right way to broach this topic tomorrow. I'll give it some more thought, and then I'll find the way to bring it up." But flipping that around, being able to say to someone, "I'm not sure when I'm gonna have a chance to bring this up, so I'm being bold or I'm, I'm gonna take a risk and bring something up with you now if you're open for me to share my view here on something that I've noticed."

What I'm trying to say is while it's tempting to leave things till the appraisal where usually emotions are running even higher because there's more at stake, actually if you can find a way to say in this one-to-one rather than waiting till the end of the conversation, "There's something I want to get on the table in these first couple of moments so that I can help you with the project that I know you're working on right now," that is going to be a lot healthier for the relationship, and it's going to earn you more respect from the other person.

But we've spoken a lot about preparing and the stuff that you can do in advance. Often when I work with people and they say, "Well, I've not brought it up despite people encouraging me to say something, the problem is I don't know how the other person's going to react." And again, in my view, I feel that fear Is a great excuse to avoid some of these conversations.

Fear of us putting our foot in it, saying the wrong thing, saying something that can't be taken back or that will then be held in a record or in minutes. And that's where I work with people to really help them listen far better and do something with the responses that they get so that they can flex their style, react in the moment, think on their feet, fall back on their feet at times during the ebb and flow of any negotiation, conversation, meeting that they're having at work.

David: When I introduced you, I touched on the question of social intelligence and said we'd come back to that. And that kind of underpins a lot of what you're saying. So do you want to say a little bit about what social intelligence is? 'Because I suspect a lot of people don't understand that or maybe have misconceptions about it.

Sarah: Yes. Social intelligence is a combination of two things. For us to be credible at work, we need a degree of experience and expertise, often technical expertise in a particular skill. Whether you're a quantity surveyor or you're a program director or an HR business partner, you need the credentials of being competent technically at what you do.

But that's not enough. This is where the other aspect, emotional intelligence, or EQ, comes into the equation. To be relatable, to be collaborative with people, to be able to bring others round to your point of view, you need to have some really vital interpersonal skills. And though we've been taught how to read and write, we're rarely taught how to listen and demonstrate to others that we've reflected on what they've said, doing something with what we've heard.

We're rarely taught how to take a position, to be able to say yes to somebody while maintaining our own boundaries, or say no and maintain the relationship, and how to move conversations on in a productive way, away from dealing with the past and why something may have happened to, okay, what we're gonna do as a consequence.

So in our view, social intelligence is the combination of both of those things. Having sufficient technical expertise to be credible in what you do, while also having that human element of being able to deal with people equal to equal, treat people with respect and treat them like equal human beings.

David: So that's the ideal.

Sarah: It is, yes.

David: And just challenging on this, Sarah, do you think it's something that can be taught to everyone, or are there some people that will really never manage to do the social intelligence bit well?

Sarah: I believe everyone can improve their interpersonal skills and demonstrate more social intelligence, in particular in the workplace.

Absolutely. I've worked with every level of role across an organisation, from international CEOs to customer service advisors, and every type of job in between. And people are people at the end of the day, and they like to be dealt with according to the golden rules of dealing with others the way you'd want to be treated yourself.

But at times we've been socialised to believe that we need to put ourselves in other people's shoes, or be mindful of what other people might think or consider how it might sound, and that stuff gets hard. What I focus on when exploring social intelligence with people is what they can do, what skills they can apply to themselves so that more often they find a way to express their own point of view, what they're looking for. Essentially talking from the first person rather than being tempted to read a situation or put words in someone else's mouth.

David: So there's always room for somebody to improve their social intelligence.

Sarah: Yes, and I'm still learning myself. Certainly thinking about, well, what are the consequences of this conversation? Where do I want this to go? What's the outcome beyond expressing what I'd like or how I'm feeling? What do I want this other person to do as a result? What am I hoping they'll say? And often we're working alongside other people, often now at the same level as them, but the success of us being able to fulfill our own work objectives, get stuff done, relies on being able to move our priority up somebody else's inbox or to-do list, and finding a way to be able to say that without turning to Copilot or AI.

How do we encourage people now simply to have the courage to pick up the phone or approach somebody at work and have that face-to-face conversation? That's really one of the blockers that I'm helping break down with people at every stage of their employment life cycle.

David: I'm curious, Sarah, we did touch on this earlier as to what led you to this position?

Sarah: Well, a few things. I found myself in a very senior HR role. I'd often be standing shoulder to shoulder with senior leaders making announcements, big changes about the direction of a, a function, a business, and often that was going to affect people's lives and their livelihood. And I found myself torn. I was trying to hold the company line and say what had to be said, but at times I found myself very alone in doing that.

I needed other people to speak up so that they either reinforced the message or took a degree of accountability there. But when I'd go into the meetings beforehand, often I could tell folk didn't want to speak about it. They wanted to leave it at somebody else's door. And likewise, I didn't particularly fancy breaking this bad news myself.

But if I'd only found a way to articulate my emotions in the moment- To say something like, "Look, announcements like this are the worst part of my job, but I assure you I'm going to handle this as professionally as I can. If I don't know the answer to the question that you pose to me, by the end of the day, I promise I'm going to come back to you. Before we go any further, I just want to know that I've got your full attention, and to reassure you others who are affected by this change are going to be met later this afternoon." Looking back, I feel that would've been a far more comfortable experience, not only for me, but for the audience listening, and ready to receive whatever it was that was going to be said.

And I do this now because I think there's countless people struggling with those conversations, the stuff that they need to bring up with people they really like, that they spend a lot of time with, that they care about at work, whether they're colleagues in their team or perhaps clients or suppliers that they need to talk to.

And perhaps break bad news, have those difficult conversations, as you say, or simply stop hiding behind the email. At times you need to still have these very personal interactions, which okay, might be over a very cold environment like Teams, but still handling these in a very considered and personable way.

David: I think that's right. And reflecting on a lot of my experiences over the last so many years, problems have emerged because of the way that people express things in writing and fail to engage in verbal communication. Of course, writing's important. Of course, you need to have records of what you've said, and sometimes things do need to be said in writing But I think problems are often exacerbated or even caused by the fact that people don't pick up the phone or they don't go and speak to somebody. It's the email or the text that's sent rather than the conversation.

Sarah: I so much agree. I was guilty myself. If there was a difficult task, often I'd end up dealing with it on a Friday afternoon. I'd stay late, I'd craft the perfect communication in my view, and send that out on a Friday night to the senior team I was supporting.

What I wish I'd done differently was go to them in the meeting that would happen earlier in the week and say, "Look, there's something I need you all to act upon in order for us to be compliant or in order for us to meet this particular commitment, et cetera. But it's not gonna be easy unless we find a way to talk about this openly with each other, to find a way to be transparent about how we feel and what we want, and then to take a position together that we can stand behind. So with that in mind, how do you feel about spending the next 10 minutes on the topic of this particular restructure or how we're going to make this particular saving?" And so often now, if I'm working with individuals and they say, "Well, I need to get back in touch with this person. Usually, I'll send them a note," I'll really encourage them to pick up the phone or find a chance for the conversation first so that they can say, "Look, I'm about to hit send on an email. I want to talk you through what it says because in my view, it reflects the conversation we had Friday afternoon." Then you know that you've a better chance that somebody is going to be in a frame of mind where they're going to pay attention to what you're asking and more likely to receive that message with a degree of openness, if not empathy or sympathy for your situation.

David: I'd like to chat with you about some practical steps that people might take to enhance the way in which they approach conversations and so on. But before we do that, just a question that's going round my mind, and that's about the very diverse cultures that we might find in workplaces, and could it be said that it's more difficult because of different cultural backgrounds, or are common approaches going to work for everything?

Sarah: We've more in common than differences. So one of the reasons I say this is Interactifs have been around for about 35 years now, and over that time, we've asked over 140,000 people one simple question: "If you're at work And someone needs you to do something, a task, , they need you to act on a request. In order for you to be open to do it and accept, how do you like to be spoken to by other people?"

We have asked this the world over, and consistently we get the same response. In terms of the message, people tell us, "Please be clear, direct, and to the point about what it is you need me to do." They'll also say in terms of the manner, "Please be respectful, warm, polite." And treat me as an equal when you've got something to say.

But too often people feel condemned to make a choice in either being very direct or very polite. But you asked the question around diverse culture. We've asked this question to people of almost every nationality, and regardless of gender, country, position, function, level of seniority within a business, they give us the same responses.

However, being clear and direct, and warm and respectful may sound quite different in Glasgow compared to Geneva or compared to Perth, Australia, or even to Mumbai. But at least if you're demonstrating the intent to deal with people in a way that is kind, warm, friendly, respectful, but also straight to the point, clear and direct, you're going to have a much better chance of being heard and people being open to enter into that dialogue.

As I said before, human behavior is rather contagious, and if you like being dealt with that way, if you treat others that way, they're more likely to be clear, direct, kind, and friendly with you.

David: So the overarching principles apply irrespective of the culture. The core remains the same.

Sarah: Precisely.

David: So I did say we'd touch on some practical things.

When we spoke before you had some really useful tips, and I wonder if you can just talk our listeners through a couple of tips that might take them forward with better conversations.

Sarah: Well, to have better conversations, I urge everybody to take a moment before they pick up the phone, before they join the Teams meeting or even draft the email, to ask themselves, "What do I want this person to say or do by the end of this conversation?"

Ultimately, where do I want this to end up? What do I need to hear from them? What do I want to get or gain or share? And if I share information with them, what is it I want them to act on?" We draw a lot of parallels with lean manufacturing, which resonates with my past experience, but really thinking, "Look, at the end of this production process, where's it going?"

What is it that I want to create? What is it that I want to walk away with? What's gonna make me feel right? Okay, this is satisfying the need I've got for progress." And often that focus is around, okay, how do we get there rather than why are we here. I think before when we spoke, David, the one thing I said we can't change is the past.

We're in a situation together, but what I want to do or what I'd like to do is find a way out of this so that we can both feel better as a result, and that we've kept our working relationship intact. Because communication isn't only about delivering the message, it's about improving that relationship that you've got with the other person so that they are more inclined to hit reply to your message or call your number back when they've got those moments between their meetings and conversations and the other stuff they need to get done.

David: So in a sense, it's back to the preparation again, and what I'm taking from what you've said is very much you need to be forward-looking rather than backward-looking. Although clearly everything is informed by the past in some way.

Sarah: It's using that past to inform your next steps, and again, in the moment, listening to what you actually think about what the other person has said.

So as you said, when it's going back to the preparation, absolutely. But that's the easier part really to prepare, and when we're training and coaching people in groups or in one-to-one sessions, quite quickly we can help them prepare with a useful framework to kick things off. The real skill of being able to build and maintain the trust I spoke about and keeping the relationship intact is how you navigate, conduct, and conclude those conversations in the most efficient way, being able to get a result, but also do so with the right level of ease and effort so that it's comfortable for you and the other person to talk between yourselves.

But then also conclude and decide, okay, well where from here?

David: So talk me through the sort of language that, that you would recommend using in these conversations.

Sarah: The first thing that comes to my mind in terms of language is to use "I". We tend to use "We" and "Us" a lot at work, but it really makes things less personal.

So I can think of hiding behind the brand or the employer brand in some cases, or "We" are looking for more, for example. Actually, I want you to stay, or I want you to finish this project up before the end of the month. Being more precise about what I'd like to see is going to be one thing that will help move the conversation almost from the conceptual level to a more personal level with people.

David: That's really interesting because you do hear these conversations where the manager might say, "Well, the organisation needs this to be done, and we've got to do it." And what you're suggesting is a complete shift from that. It's the manager saying, "This is what I would like."

Sarah: Yes. And that message can still be shared.

Again, I do this stuff all day every day, so when I hear messages like, "The organisation is looking for this," as I'm listening, playing the role of the employee, I can't help but think, "Aye, but you're my boss. What do you want? You know me. You know what I'm capable of." That's all well and good that the organisation wants this, but there's only so many hours in the day.

And being able to level with the other person comfortably and say, "I recognise the effort you're making, and I also recognise there's constraints of how many hours we've got in the day, but I want to work with you to find a way for you to habitually "record your hours, submit your expenses on time", do these things, whatever the desired behavior is.

That is going to help humanise these conversations and nurture and maintain these relationships rather than switch the other person off thinking, "Oh, here they go again talking about what the organisation wants," and closing down, creating that distance at work.

David: And if we're thinking about moving things forward what sort of language should be used to try and look at the future?

Sarah: I can think of a couple of things. Sometimes when I'm coaching people, I'll hear them say, "I need to get to a consensus on this." And I often think, well, good luck with that, because as soon as there's more than one other person in the room, in your personal or professional life, at times it's difficult to get to a consensus.

But I can think about, well, what's it going to take for people to be sufficiently comfortable to agree on this point, to move forward, to communicate this to the wider organisation, et cetera. Small changes like that. Just as I have a similar reaction to the word convince, like, "Oh, the only thing we need to do now is to convince our clients that they need this additional service."

And again, I think, well, "good luck." Because the word, I need to convince them implies a pressure, and it's not that you want to apply the pressure to the client, it's that you want them to be sufficiently interested and keen to explore what that might look like or what that pilot scheme or how a trial could work.

So it's going beyond the consequence of the conversation to find ways to verbalize the future as you envisage it and what you want the outcome to be. And again, I'll often say this with people that I'm working with, often it's to build their confidence. That word can mean lots of different things to different people, but at the end of the day, I feel far more satisfied when people say, "Do you know, I now feel more comfortable going into a conversation without a script."

Or, "I feel now I can present without having to rely on my slides. I feel that I can start the conversation by really asking what it is that the person needs to know, what they need to learn as a result of this conversation." And opening up these dialogues rather than it being simply an act of plowing through a monologue and hoping that there's something that the audience hears that appeals.

David: When we spoke before, I loved the way that you focused on the use of the word "how" as a constructive word in these conversations rather than using "why".

Sarah: Oh, definitely. And I'm laughing because often when I work with engineers, on construction projects, the "why" has been hardwired into a lot of us. We need to find the root cause in order to solve the problem. But actually starting with those people who are closest to the problem and being able to say, "This is something I want us to deal with and resolve. In your view, how do we do that?" Is a very different conversation to one that says, "Right, we need to get to the bottom of why this has occurred." Those ones, I fear, are going to lead to long discussions without much chance of a swift solution. Rather than starting with, "Look, I want to resolve this. How do we go about it?

David: Defensiveness rather than being constructive.

Sarah: Exactly. And justifications as well, because the question why will typically lead to people justifying the action they took with the best information they had at the time.

And in truth, I'm often trying to solve a different problem. I simply don't want it to happen again. And being able to say that up front to clear the air, we're in a situation now that I want to avoid. "How do we avoid this? What do I need to do instead? And with that in mind, what will you do differently next time?"

That's going to move on to perhaps an explanation or a more informed conversation about action that can be taken either in the present or in the future

David: Shifting the topic slightly Sarah, as with everything these days, AI is beginning to have a bearing on conversations at work, written and verbal.

What, if any, role do you think AI might have to play in conversations within the workplace?

Sarah: I've a love-hate relationship with this because while AI can do a remarkable job of giving a revised version of what somebody may want to say, need to say to somebody else, I can't help but feel when you're on the receiving end of something that seems to be created by an AI tool, it affects the relationship with the person who's sharing the message or writing the post or sending the email. And I've had a number of conversations recently with people, HR directors, who've even felt at times conducting an interview through Teams, for example, for an early stage screening of a senior appointment, that even at that level there may be something running that's a prompt for what the other person might say or how they might answer the question.

And that creates this discomfort, and particularly if you're on the receiving end, and there's a disconnect between what you're seeing and what you're perhaps interpreting from the other person's behavior, what I said to them in that case is, "Look, in those moments, how do you find a way to check your reading of the situation?" which again comes back to that human interaction, expressing to somebody that you really want to know the person and their views, their personal views on a particular situation, in this case talking about themselves and their suitability for a particular role. But going back to what you said about any rules for AI, while it may have a role to play in helping people get the thoughts or that jumble out of their head and onto the screen, in terms of being able to navigate reactions and what people might say, for me that comes back to that question you asked around people's emotional intelligence and how you stay true to who you are and react to the non-verbal emotions that you see at times, either on someone's face, in the tone of their voice, or in that shared glance or across the room or that awkwardness on the screen.

David: There's a lot that can be done to improve conversations, and I can see that you can do a lot to help people with that, Sarah. If people want to find out more, how do they contact you? How do they find you?

Sarah: The easiest way is to find me on LinkedIn, Sarah Hanson, H-A-N-S-O-N. I am based here in Scotland, but we've an office down in London.

We run group training predominantly within organisations, but we also work with individuals from any organisation because we do, and I certainly feel there's so much to gain in being able to feel more confidence, have more impact, have more influence through the spoken word, through your verbal communication skills, and those do play into written communication skills as well.

But I'd love to continue the conversation with any of your listeners. Thank you, David.

David: I suppose final question for you, Sarah is if you were approached by a company, by an employer, and they say, "We want to move forward with this," what's the one thing that you would tell them to do as a first step?

Sarah: The one thing I'd suggest if they wanted to move forward is a pilot group to really decide on what it is that's challenging them at the moment.

Is it the collaboration? Is it the negotiation? A classic one is people being promoted to grow the business, but seeing sales as a rather dirty word, and being far better at maintaining the relationships that they've got. But a lot of work that we do, say, with consulting firms or people who need to generate business once they get to that director/partner level, is to really be more curious, be more explicit, say what they actually want from those business development conversations that are going to grow the accounts when we're all being challenged to do more with less.

David: Well, thank you so much, Sarah. It's been a pleasure to have you on the podcast today. And just a reminder for our listeners that we send out a free employment law e-news every month. And if you don't already subscribe, please email us at employment@mfmac.com and we'll get you added to that list. And as always please remember to subscribe to our podcasts and leave reviews in the usual way.

So thank you very much again, Sarah. A pleasure meeting you and a pleasure having you on the podcast.

Sarah: Thanks, David.