Head On Read online

  Latoya’s M-brain was dominant in her assessment. The second brain is the mammalian brain, or M-brain. It is the region of the brain that houses the limbic system. It is the brain of instinct and emotion. It records memories and powerful experiences, whether positive or negative. It houses the regions of the brain that are responsible for learning and memory as well. The M-brain is at the heart of the value judgments we make, often unconsciously, and influences our behavior tremendously. This portion of the brain also provides flexibility in behavior so that we are able to adapt to changing circumstances. Finally, this portion of the brain integrates messages from both inside and outside the body and is thus central to our sense of personal identity.

  As it relates to communication in general and difficult conversations in particular, the M-brain plays a very important role. Emotional bonding between people, whether it is parent-to-child or co-worker-to-co-worker, originates from this part of the brain. This is what Latoya felt as she interviewed the professor for the management position: an emotional bond, the flexibility to hire a non-traditional candidate, and a connection between how the decision felt in her head and her body.

  When one person feels the emotional bond and another doesn’t, or when one person is able to demonstrate flexible behavior and another isn’t, conditions are ripe for a difficult conversation. Another way that the M-Brain is can create conditions for a difficult conversation is when there is a threat to personal identity. It may happen, as in the opening story with Heather and Jason, that one person’s seemingly innocuous comment opens a disparity in another person’s self-concept or personal identity. That leads to defensiveness and the context for a difficult conversation is set.

  Neocortex

  Kristen had a difficult choice ahead of her. An employee she’d hired 12 months ago, Sarah, wasn’t quite measuring up to expectations. On paper and in the interview process, the new employee looked great. But a year into the role, Sarah was meeting only minimum expectations when performing her job duties. Kristen had addressed this as the 90-day probationary period came to an end, again in one-on-one meetings, and most recently at her first annual performance evaluation. Now Kristen was faced with the tough decision whether to let Sarah go or double down on coaching her to perform at and above the expected levels. Kristen took out a piece of paper and began to make a pro/con list.

  Kristen was using her third brain. The third brain is the neo-mammalian brain. It consists primarily of the neocortex, which is the center of higher-order thinking, sometimes referred to as the executive function of the brain. The neocortex interprets complex stimuli such as sights and sounds into coherent messages. This portion of the brain is primarily concerned with what is happening in the external world and keeping us safe. For example, it is more concerned with accurately judging if it is safe to cross the street at a busy intersection than it is with what temperature it is. (Although, if it were 20 below zero and we weren’t dressed for the weather, this part of our brain may be more concerned with finding warmth than crossing the street safely.)

  It is in this region of the brain that reasoning, logic, and learning take place. This is where our day-to-day decision making occurs: what to wear, whom to hire, how many hours to allocate for work on a project, or whether to apply for a promotion. It is also where what we commonly think of as the activities of “consciousness” occur: introspection, self-awareness, planning, and language. This part of the brain worries, gets self-conscious, and carefully considers word choices when communicating.

  Clearly, this part of the brain is of critical importance as it relates to decision making and communication on difficult topics. As Kristen prepared to talk with Sarah about next steps, she knew she had to bring her best critical thinking and analysis to both the preparation and the conversation itself. Anything less than optimal performance from this part of the brain would lead to suboptimal results. When we are tired, sick, or engaged in a fight or flight response, this portion of the brain is not fully functioning, and during a full-on fight or flight response, the neocortex can essentially go offline. When the neocortex is offline, language, abstract thought, imagination, and curiosity become all but inoperable. These are just the skills we need when facing a difficult interpersonal situation.

  Prefrontal Cortex

  Maria was irritated with her colleague, Sanjay. Sanjay’s habit of interrupting her during meetings was bothering her almost to the point of her not being able to participate. She hesitated to bring her best ideas to the table only to have Sanjay cut her off in mid-sentence. Maria worked with me as her coach to help her get some emotional distance so she could respond assertively in those situations, without withdrawing (usually seething at Sanjay in her head). She also wanted to be able to respond without becoming overly aggressive and unprofessional with an outburst fueled by anger. I shared with her some techniques for controlling her emotional response to the situation (you’ll find them in the next chapter) so that she could identify the situation, the consequent reaction, and accompanying thought pattern that emerged, and then finally, actively choose how she wanted to respond.

  Maria was working on developing the power of her fourth brain. The prefrontal cortex, or the fourth brain, located in the front of the brain, inside the neocortex, is associated with the more abstract and uniquely human practices such as creative thinking, making music, and inventing things. The prefrontal cortex is engaged when we exercise creativity, innovation, and imagination. It is also the part of the brain that is involved in the expression of personality, complex decision making, and moderating social behavior. This is where we grapple with conflicting thoughts, evaluate choices, predict outcomes, work toward complex goals, and explore the potential consequences of our actions.

  The prefrontal cortex is particularly important at work. Innovation, creativity, complex problem solving, controlling emotional responses, and communicating with sensitivity are all critical in today’s workplace. These were the areas where Maria was working toward gaining more mastery. As she knew, being able to communicate ideas, express creativity, and reason with others when solving complex problems all require astute communication skills.

  When our four “brains” function in harmony in the workplace – that is, when our R-brain is dutifully keeping us alive while our M-brain is accurately distinguishing threats from opportunities, our neocortex is applying reason and logic, and our prefrontal cortex is allowing ideas to comingle and creating new connections-then, and only then, are we able to communicate optimally at work. Recall the arousal continuum discussed in the previous chapter. When the brain is aroused moderately, it is at its most alert and high functioning level. We can express our best ideas, learn and retain new information, be of social and emotional support to others, reason and solve problems, create and innovate, and discern which of all the available responses is most appropriate in a given situation. Accordingly, what comes out of the mouth is more fully informed by the brain (or, in another sense, all four “brains”).

  When a person suddenly explodes in an emotional outburst, it is the R-brain in the lead. Meanwhile, the more advanced thinking of the neocortex is hindered during this outburst. The person may be fully conscious of the behavior but incapable of immediately changing the behavior or bringing it under control. Oftentimes, people report that they feel like two different individuals in such circumstances: the one who is doing the acting, or having the emotional outburst (R-brain and M-brain), and the one who is observing the behavior (neocortex).

  In sum, each of these regions of the brain is responsible for differing functions, all of which contribute to communicating optimally. The regions allow for more abstract thinking over time, moving from simple to complex. The R-brain’s responsibility is in the realm of survival. The M-brain distinguishes threats and alerts you to them. The neocortex reasons and applies logic. The prefrontal cortex connects ideas and enables creativity.

  Figure 2: Communication responses and the parts of the brain

  STIMULUS-RES
PONSE

  Nicole was embarrassed and frustrated. Whenever she was in the presence of senior leaders and she was asked a question (which was frequent, since she was their finance liaison), she would grow nervous and stammer. She thought back to the first time it had happened. It was after she’d taken a lateral transfer from another division. Her title and role remained the same, and she mistakenly thought expectations would be the same as well. When she attended her first meeting with the new senior leadership team, she’d come unprepared. No one briefed her that she would be asked questions or was expected to participate. She was asked budgetary questions that she was unprepared to answer and she stumbled and stammered rather than answering cogently.

  Her stammering at the first meeting was something she couldn’t seem to shake. Nicole had developed a stimulus-response pattern in which the stimulus was being asked a question in a meeting by a senior leader and her automatic response was to get nervous and stammer-even when she knew the answer! As we discussed in Chapter 1, the stimulus-response cycle is difficult to break. The more intense the threat, the more likely we will be to respond instinctually and with intensity.

  In the short term, when you experience a threat, you can train yourself to manage it more productively. The R-brain and the M- brain are responding to the threat instinctually and there is no stopping the stimulus from triggering the brain. The perceived threat may be a false positive, meaning your brain is making a mistake in interpreting an event as a threat. For Nicole even in later meetings when she was prepared, a two-fold response pattern was still triggered automatically. The first response manifested in her body (think rapid heartbeat, sweaty palms, etc.). The second part was the reaction she had in response to the stimulus. Here is where there is an opportunity to put some space between stimulus and response. One of the exercises at the end of this chapter will assist with that. It will not entirely break the stimulus-response cycle, but with conscious effort you can learn to manage it better. Next, we turn our attention to undesirable stimulus-response patterns that repeat themselves.

  UNWANTED REPETITIVE PATTERNS

  Brandon and Kate were at it again.

  Another staff meeting where Kate and Brandon were on the opposite sides of the same coin: Kate, advocating for an engineering schedule that was realistic and didn’t compromise the health or safety of her crew and Brandon, fiercely arguing for a faster delivery to their clients. This pattern was a near weekly occurrence in the project management meeting.

  Morgan, the project manager, had spoken to each of them privately just before the meeting. They each shared a genuine desire to be more amicable and see the situation from the other person’s point of view before reacting. But publicly in the meeting, their behavior was nowhere near amicable. It was the same pattern repeating itself again and again. Their pattern was not one of sharing respectful differences. Rather, their behavior was unprofessional and ego bruising, their words like daggers.

  Frustrated, Morgan spoke to each of them privately again after the meeting. She had to get to the bottom of this disagreement before it put the project in jeopardy. How could they have earnestly promised to comport themselves more professionally and then act like small children throwing sand during the meeting?

  Brandon and Kate were caught in an unwanted repetitive pattern (URP), a sequential and recurring episode of conflict that is considered unwanted by those in the conflict (not to mention those around them!). This phenomenon was first named by researchers at the University of Massachusetts who were curious about why a particular pair of other faculty members routinely became polarized on the professional topics they discussed in the course of their job duties. Although both colleagues who sparred wanted to be amicable and professional, they quickly escalated “into extended, hostile and ego-scarring duels.”15

  URPs are a classic combination of the R-brain and the M-brain sensing a threat and the neocortex and the prefrontal cortex responding efficiently, executing the response it has habitually enacted in similar situations in the past. For many who begin to recognize their URPs, they often feel like two separate people, as discussed earlier in this chapter: the R-brain and M-Brain doing the acting and the neocortex watching the scene unfold.

  URPs develop because two people have fallen into a pattern or script that demands each of them behave in a conflicting manner. Often, the pattern one person follows serves to fuel the negativity of the other and that person responds negatively in turn. Then, rinse and repeat.

  Brandon and Kate each told Morgan essentially the same thing in their private meetings: “I couldn’t help it, I had no choice but to stick up for [the customer/the engineering team].”

  Brandon and Kate will continue to enact their URP until the unwritten scripts they are following get interrupted. Either one of them could deliberately choose to behave differently of their own accord or Morgan, the project manager, could choose to structure the meeting and the conversation in a way that won’t let the URP get a chance to take hold.

  When a URP is detected, it is important to understand first, that the person or persons involved feel like they have no choice. Their experience in the moment is that there is no possible alternate response. The second aspect that is important to understand is that there indeed is another choice. In fact, there are myriad ways in which to respond. It requires deliberate action to think of one of those other ways to respond and to enact it. Exercise Six at the end of this chapter will assist with breaking URPs.

  We know we can’t easily control the R-brain. We know that when it perceives a threat, it creates a reaction in our bodies. We can listen closer to the response of our M-brain and tap into our intuition and flexibility. And we can build in a space between stimulus and response so that what comes out of our mouth (or keyboard!) is influenced as much by the prefrontal cortex and the neocortex as it is the R-Brain and the M-brain.

  CONCLUSION

  The four evolutionarily distinct regions of the brain are responsible for different functions. When the R-brain, M-brain, neocortex, and prefrontal cortex are working together, we are not only able to respond in the manner most appropriate to the situation, we are also able to bring our best thinking to the interaction.

  In the next section, you will learn a step-by-step process for facilitating a difficult conversation in a manner that keeps defensiveness at bay, in you and also in the other person.

  EXERCISES

  #5: Retrospective Analysis

  Unfortunately, it isn’t likely that we will “catch” our brain in the act of performing a communication pattern that doesn’t positively serve our workplace relationships. In fact, it is far more likely that the R-brain and the M-brain’s intent activity on survival will preclude us from stopping nearly any intense reaction to a threat as it happens. However, later when the adrenaline, cortisol, norephedrine, and other stress hormones have subsided, it is possible to do a retrospective analysis of a communication situation gone bad.

  Follow the steps below to conduct a retrospective analysis on communication gone awry and determine what you can do differently next time you are in a similar situation.

  What happened? List the facts, being as objective as possible.

  What was your reaction? Specifically, how did you behave, what did you say or do?

  What triggered you to have a defensive (or otherwise undesirable) response?

  What physical response did you have (pounding heart, clenched fists, etc.)?

  What response would you have rather taken?

  Use your response from question #4 to catch yourself and slow down next time so that you can put some distance between your stimulus and response and choose the response you listed in question #5.

  # 6 : Breaking Unwanted Repetitive Patterns

  If you have identified a URP that you would like to discontinue, you will need to examine the belief that you are obligated to react in a certain way. If you find yourself thinking, “I had no choice. I had to react that way,” you have mostly likely identified a U
RP. Follow the steps below to break the rules that govern the URP so that you can get a different outcome.

  Who is the other party in this URP?

  Under what circumstances or conditions does this URP present itself?

  What would you like to have happen instead of the URP?

  What do you need to say or do differently in order for that to happen?

  Try that new behavior the next time you are in a similar situation with the person who triggers the URP.

  Record your reactions. What specifically did you say or do differently? What was the other person’s reaction? Were you able to break the URP? What will you do in the next similar situation?

  Part 2

  Difficult Conversations: Step by Step

  CHAPTER 4

  PREPARING FOR THE CONVERSATION

  ”Some days you can’t win for losing,” I thought as I parked my car and headed into the office. It was a rough morning and it wasn’t even eight o’clock yet.

  I was in a corporate job, and in those days it wasn’t uncommon for me to have a morning that went something like this, and in fact, I once had a morning that went exactly like this: I woke up, showered and ate breakfast, got the kids ready for school, argued briefly with my husband over something inconsequential, and left for work with two kids in tow. I dropped my daughter off at preschool, only to discover that we’d left her spare change of clean clothes at home (she’d worn them the previous day and her regular clothes had come home “soiled”). I then dropped my middle-schooler off at his school just as he realized his homework folder was on the breakfast table at home.