Summary & Review: How the Way We Talk Can Change the Way We Work
While the book How the Way We Talk Can Change the Way We Work: Seven Languages for Transformation has one of the most bloated titles I can remember (I will heretofore refer to it is SLT), it provides many potentially valuable insights regarding the power of language to effect patterns of thought and, ultimately, behavior. Some of these are more easily applied than others and understanding this is crucial to benefitting from the ideas SLT presents.
The authors, Robert Kegan and Lisa Lahey, identify seven languages that are common in group and organizational life. These seven are then divided into four internal languages and three social languages. The internal languages are
Complaint
Blame
Resolutions
Truths
These four operate interdependently producing what the authors describe metaphorically as an immune system that defends the status quo against change. The social languages are, in many ways, the substance of that status quo and are identified as being
Prizes and Praise
Rules and Policies
Constructive Criticism
The Internal Languages
Complaint
The language of complaint should be familiar to any humans who might be reading this. SLT suggests that the value of complaints lies in their identification of something we deem important. Thus, it is a manageable reframe to shift the focus from the problem to the point of value we have identified as being impinged upon. This point of value then becomes the focus for a language of commitment.
Complaint: This team always takes forever to get anything done.
Commitment: Timeliness and efficiency are important to me. I'm committed to improving them.
Blame
Another well-known entrant in our pantheon of poor internal communication habits. In that blaming is unlikely to produce much (if anything) that is positive, SLT prescribes what basically amounts to an extreme ownership-style rework of your perspective. They are less… well… extreme in their position, but the method is similar enough. Consider the dynamics that are producing the undesirable behavior until you are able to identify how you are contributing through action or inaction.
Blame: Steve didn't respond to my message quickly enough for me to complete the project on time.
Contribution: I didn't make my timeline clear to him in the message.
Resolutions
This is the language of good intentions and poor results. The authors argue that, instead of jumping to a drastic proclamation of personal change from here on out, it is better to spend some time identifying the 'why' behind your prior acts of self-sabotage. Take an inventory of your commitments in order to reveal which are in competition.
Resolution: I’m committed to building relationships, so I'm going to be nicer to everyone.
Competing Commitment: I am committed to feeling respected.
Truths
This is the language of what we know to be true, often to the extent that it need not be made explicit. The trick to dealing with such truths, however, is precisely to make them explicit by dredging them up from wherever they dwell, identifying them, and then stepping outside of them just enough to frame them as (big) assumptions rather than unquestionable truths. While identifying the target of your reframe can be challenging, once you have it in your sights the hard work has already been done.
Truths: I have to respond to message quickly or people will see me as unprofessional.
Assumptions: I assume that if I don't respond to messages quickly people will see me as unprofessional.
Often these assumptions are so deep and encompassing that a simple reframe will not free you from their clutches. This is where low-investment, low-consequence experimentation proves useful. Try something that violates your assumption. Based on the results, conduct another experiment. Rinse and repeat.
In combination, these four languages form our immunity to change system and, according to the authors, when proficiently translated into their more intentional counterparts can serve as a delivery system for purposeful change as an individual. This, in turn, can be the key to catalyzing systemic change in groups and organizations. In my own opinion and experience, interventions such as these that are to be made first at the level of internal dialogue are more easily enacted than those that are intended for use in interactions. In the case of the latter, the introduction of other parties increases the complexity and time pressure making it difficult for all but the already-well-practiced or remarkably detached to actually use any of these linguistic tactics. More often than not, trying to start using them with others just results in a string of frustrating spirit-of-the-staircase moments where you recognize your opportunities only once they have passed. Internal interventions, however, permit do-overs.
The Social Languages
Prizes and Praise
These commonly employed incentive mechanisms can certainly be welcomed, but they are also inefficient at promoting the behaviors to which they are attached. They can also reinforce unhealthy power dynamics and contribute to alienation and dehumanization. In lieu of these, the authors suggest a language of ongoing regard comprised of direct, specific, and subjective acknowledgment.
-Direct: Avoid the third person, even when praising in meetings. Instead say, “Brian, you really helped me…
-Specific: Identify which behaviors had a positive effect on you. “…by giving me feedback about my presentation style.”
-Subjective: Focus on your experience rather than labeling the other person as good, helpful, etc. “It has helped me become a better communicator.”
Rules and Policies
The major problem with these is that, though agreement to abide by them may be tacit in the decision to be involved with the group or organization in question, this does not necessitate buy-in from those concerned. Rules and polices and the processes that formulated them are frequent targets of frustrated questions and eventually of resentment. The alternative is engaging in a process of mutual agreement whereby those to be effected have a hand in creating the rules and policies that will govern them. They also have an opportunity to agree to follow those rules and policies as the group collectively affirms them. Behavioral interventions based on those rules and policies subsequently take on a different character.
Rules and policies: Are you aware of the department’s policy on this?
Mutual Agreement: Do you remember what we agreed to?
Constructive Criticism
The major issue with criticism as it is conventionally practiced is that it often implicitly assumes a lack of sufficient knowledge and/or rationality on the part of the party being criticized. As opposed to presuming that this party can benefit from your superior understanding, SLT suggests a deconstructive approach to feedback wherein the provider begins by making a genuine effort to understand the motivations and epistemic context that produced the behavior(s) in question.
Such an approach boasts multiple benefits, foremost among which is the rapport you will build with the other person. The metaphor of a chasm spanning between two people is useful for understanding communication strategies. You cannot start by expressing what you want them to know. The distance is too great and your message will not be heard correctly. You must first build a bridge. This is accomplished by understanding the other person’s perspective and thought process. Once the bridge is complete, your message has a much greater chance of being well-received.
Another clear benefit is that, without understanding the other person, you likely will not understand what the problem is. Attempting to forge ahead regardless will, in many cases, result in a worsening or multiplying of the problem.
Overall Impressions & Takeaways
This book offers a number of valuable principles and practices for better communication. Were it possible to transplant the communication habits of your organization for those detailed here, you would likely find yourself working in a new way as advertised. Unfortunately, until you have thoroughly ingrained them, these are cognitively demanding strategies. You have to remember to use one, and then how to do so properly on enough occasions and across enough contexts that you build a habit. Expect this to be difficult, particularly if it is at odds with the current culture of your organization.
Some tips for applying these languages are
Take them one at a time, focusing on identifying opportunities and employing that language to accumulate repetitions and build familiarity
Use them when writing. Do not edit only for grammar and content, but for the nature of the language. When writing journal entries, choose one and be sure to include it.
Identify candidate interactions prior to their occurring and choose one or two languages to work in.
Use them in low stakes interactions in order to build familiarity and automaticity
