Should Have Said

 

Difficult conversations become difficult because of crossed channels.  Unlike machines that just upload and download data human conversations includes feelings, and identity[1]. Everyone has experienced the regret of replaying failures in difficult conversations. What can we do to get it right on the first take?

 

Professor Liz Magill, the recently ousted president of U Penn had to face her difficult conversation on the global stage. Here is the excerpt central to her defenestration.

 

A)   ELISE STEFANIK: Ms. Magill, at Penn, does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Penn’s rules or code of conduct, yes or no?

B)   LIZ MAGILL: If the speech turns into conduct, it can be harassment, yes.

C)   ELISE STEFANIK: I am asking specifically. Calling for the genocide of Jews, does that constitute bullying or harassment?

D)   LIZ MAGILL: If it is directed and severe or pervasive, it is harassment.

E)    ELISE STEFANIK: So, the answer is yes?

F)    LIZ MAGILL:  It is a context dependent decision, Congresswoman. 

G)   ELISE STEFANIK: It’s a context dependent decision? That’s your testimony today? Calling for the genocide of Jews is, depending upon the context, that is not bullying or harassment? This is the easiest question to answer yes, Ms. Magill. So, is your testimony —

H)   LIZ MAGILL: If it — if it —

I)     ELISE STEFANIK: That you will not answer yes?

J)     LIZ MAGILL: If it is — if the —

K)   ELISE STEFANIK: Yes or no?

L)    LIZ MAGILL: If the speech becomes conduct, it can be harassment, yes.

 

In the “facts” conversation, the congresswoman asks a yes or no question two times, and the professor answers yes two times.  That should have settled it. Keep saying yes. But that did not happen.  At the worst moment, Professor Magill mentally teleported from congressional hearing to college seminar. She became a  professor of moral reasoning lecturing to a student.   Prof wants her student to know that moral judgments about speech need to be contextual (line F).  That pivot undid her.

 

A hostile congressional hearing is marathon for the brain. Congresswoman Stefanik and her allies were a production company bent on coming up with the sound bite that they could trade for clicks and likes and accolades from their supporters.  The pressure was relentless.

 

Worn down and faced with high stress, it is natural to fall back on what we are good at.  The comfort zone for many, especially for academics, is to have conversations about facts and theories.  But everyone needs to find a way to stay grounded in the present moment. 

 

In Liz Magill’s mental do-over, I bet she pounded the table with her fist to offer a resounding Yes.  But nobody gets do-overs.  We get one chance to tune in to each encounter. We all have to develop the habit of mindful listening to be always aware of all three conversations: facts, feelings and identity.


[1] Heen, Sheila and Doug Stone Difficult Conversations. Viking Press 1999 from the Harvard Negotiation Project

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Final Score on Who Handled COVID-19 Best

Image
  There is no perfect way to measure which government did best in managing the COVID-19 pandemic.   But with 48 full months of data from January 20, 2020 to January 27, it is now possible to score which area did best across the whole marathon.   For example, Hong Kong was an early sprinter getting an A+ and then faltering in vaccinating seniors and withstanding Omicron variant.   Other jurisdictions fumbled the exit ramp from Zero Covid-type policies to opening their economies.     Because testing rates varied, a measure like COVID cases, hospitalizations, or deaths could cover up a lot of hidden illness and deaths in places that could not or did not test as much as others.   This post uses Cumulative Excess Mortality numbers drawn from Our World In Data   (OWID) which were drawn from The Economist .   OWID published data for all jurisdictions regardless of how good the estimates were. I advise against making distinc...
Read more

Asset-Demiology: Public Health's Best Old Idea is the Key to Rebuild Trust

Image
Asset- demiology is a neologism that does not come up in Google (yet) 1 .  Sound it out—the “ ology ” of peoples ’ assets and strengths.  It is the logical comp anion , but neglected anti-thesis of the usual approach to health.     Health care work is all about deficits .  The work of a doctor, whether human or robot, is to transform a living breathing human into a diagnosis, problem list and treatment plan. Medical s tudents and interns are socialized to walk out of the treatment room and recite to their supervisors all the deficits and problems they uncovered.  There is no place in a standard medical record to actually list a patient’s strengths and capabilities.   The AI-training sets for robot ic medical algorithms have no way to learn the clinical relevance of patients’ strengths. To a doctor , patient=problem list .   Public health has the same pessimistic vibe.     A deficit focus has rubbed off on public healt...
Read more

Watched but Not Seen

  Among the Zulu people of South Africa the traditional greeting is “Sawubona” literally “I see you”.   Contrast that to the English, “How are you?” -- literally a demand for an evaluation.  Evaluations, peer reviews, and performance reviews can be friendly or not.   Jeremy Bentham deserves partial credit for their dark side. Jeremy Bentham thought prisons should be designed around a central panopticon , a tower that would allow the guards to watch every prisoner around the clock to deter mischief.    Modern philosophers like Michel Foucault see panopticons as pervasive in modern society–we are all under the surveillance of others and we all stay on guard to conform. Performance is quantified on scales that are tied to carrots and sticks. The numbers have a hard time saying full sentences about who we are and how we matter.   Throughout the year the sense that one is constantly being watched by a corporate evaluator leads to the stress of chronic...
Read more