express what you really want. Communicate with others as clearly as you can to avoid misunderstandings, sadness, and drama.” (don Miguel Ruiz 1997) Get fully prepared for this


conversation. Consider all of the possible shapes and reasons for the problem you’ll address. You’ve just taken control of Reason #10 in Figure 1.


Solution—Savannah Discover and present just how many times you’ve had to correct her work, either via memorandums for record (MFR), error- correction training (ECT), or phone calls from your client about her collections. Try to see if Savannah’s mistakes run along a common theme, as this would suggest a specific training need. Without this step, you’ve assumed that she is aware of her many mistakes (but awareness is not knowing). You can also assume that you know the reason she made those mistakes. At the very least, you have a hypothesis, and this is okay according to Stone et al., 2010, but the actual point of a hypothesis is to test it, to curiously investigate.


Solution—Alexander You just met him. Nevertheless, as the collector, you likely have a hypothesis about why he has presented you with an obviously adulterated specimen. Be clear about the fact that you’ve made some instant assumptions about him. You will need to proceed carefully to separate intent from impact. Maybe his actions caused you to remember the relative or friend you have struggling with drug use. Do you feel as if he just wasted your time? You have confrontation and don’t appreciate the fact that he has fostered one. While you need to follow protocols specifically, you also need to be very strategic with your conversation. Stone et al. advise that we should


follow a very specific patern (Figure 2) to disentangle intent from impact to set up the “What Happened” conversation. Failure to disentangle in this way leads to


defensiveness, Reasons 1 and 8 in Figure 1, and makes conversations unproductive. One more thing in the Assume Nothing,


What Happened stage. What’s your intent for the conversation? If your hypothesis is


www.datia.org


Figure 2 Actions


Impact


What, specifically was done? Are we addressing a pattern, outliers? Savannah is making a lot of mistakes. Alexander has an adulterated specimen.


Savannah is threatening your business. Alexander is requiring a different pathway now.


Assumption What am I, even possibly, thinking about them as a result of the fact that their impact on me is tangible, negative, and frightening?


that Savannah has been sufficiently trained and is rushing or careless, then what do you want to happen next? Obviously, with Alexander, we need to act in accordance with federal regulations and consider the needs of our other waiting patients/donors and his company. But do you want him to sense how you feel personally about his drug use? Be curious about yourself. Don’t assume that Savannah/Alexander


knows or is aware of your purpose for the conversation, especially if you yourself are not aware of the purpose. Be honest and impeccable with your words for them. Do you just want to tell her off? Tis likely means you are feeling very emotional about your actions and have a strong desire for her to be aware of this. Do you want her to take some extra time with each collection in order to ensure they are complete and correct? Do you want her to leave the company? Tese three are different conversations.


The “Feelings” Conversation | The Agreement to Avoid Taking


Anything Personally


Savannah “Tanks for meeting with me, Savannah. If you remember, I want to get your insight on your process for collections of the past month. I’ve been contacted by our largest client about these collections [you spread your data out on the table], and I’m hoping you can help me see what you see. As I mentioned, I’m very concerned about losing this client.” Te above wording doesn’t tell Savannah


that she had made mistakes. You just asked to discuss her collection methods. You needed to discuss her collection issues since this is what Stone et. Al refer to as your story; in that one—she has issues. Your curiosity has


led you to what Stone et al. call “Te And Stance.” You’ve opened the door for a learning conversation instead of an argument.


Alexander “Unfortunately, this specimen does not meet the federal requirements for a specimen. I’ll have to . . .” Nice. Tere is no assumption about


Alexander’s character inherent to this statement. You can’t atest to character like you can with Savannah. Don’t try. His character and your blame can’t change your next steps in the process anyway. Blame is NOT productive, but


according to Stone, contribution is. “In short, contribution is useful when our goal is to understand what actually happened so that we can work together in the future” (Stone et al.). What if Savannah/Alexander cries aſter


your interaction with them? You have a problem. It must be addressed. No, this is not an Earth mother Kumbaya


moment . . . so keep reading. Figure 3


"But it is not what I am saying that is hurting you; it is that you have wounds that I touch by what I have said. You are hurting yourself. There is no way I can take this personally."


don Miguel Ruiz, "The Four Agreements" And, in this meeting/collection, keep


going. Keep going even if it means you grant Savannah and Alexander their moment and return to the conversation aſter a short break. You’re not a bad person because (s)he’s crying. Ruiz would say it’s not about you at all (Figure 3).


datia focus 35


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48