Comment from Seth Simonds
Time February 4, 2009 at 3:45 pm

So, had you been more sensitive to how people respond to your topic as it relates to workplace politics, you might have had more people sign up for your workshop on the very same?

“Communicating for a sustainable work environment” is boring jargon…but it’s about workplace politics and isn’t nearly as terrifying to forward to a coworker!

I can’t believe we have to fit another elephant into that closet. We might have to pull out the “sexism in the workplace” elephant and let it dance for awhile? Oooh!

=)

Comment from Grace
Time February 4, 2009 at 3:51 pm

Seth – I know, I know, cruelty to animals!

I like your re-titling. I was thinking about how to reframe it – Anita has asked me to reschedule the workshop later this year, with a new title. You may have solved that problem for me – thank you!

Comment from Char
Time February 5, 2009 at 9:40 pm

What’s taboo in my world of self employment is dealing with difficult people without identifying them to be difficult to their faces. So, what’s in is to “be cool” when you really want to scream obscenities at them.

For me personally, being reactive instead of just observing myself and others is an acquired skill – and so I suppose what is more apt to say here is that my growing edge is dealing with difficult people and remaining true to myself while also being empathic to them.

I don’t look at it as another elephant in the closet – I look at it more as re-defining what and how I want to deal with work relationships and am confident that I’ll continue to learn as I grow.

Fortunately for me, I enjoy making mistakes as that is how I learn and remember what works and what doesn’t. And I love learning. . . . sometimes the same thing over and over again. . . . and sometimes I get it the first time.

It’s fun being me.

Comment from Char
Time February 6, 2009 at 8:45 am

I had thought of something else about your workshop Corporate Politics. Is it that corporate politics itself is so taboo or is it the name of your workshop? And is it taboo or is it controversial? Or maybe the phrase Corporate Politics is heavy and uninviting?

I’m reminded of Romeo and Juliet. . . “what’s in a name? a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.”

So, corporate politics by any other name is still corporate politics I know. But, there may be a more inviting way to phrase it where you’re still talking about the same content.

I don’t know what that name is but something like “Increasing Clear Communication in the Workplace” – this works much better for me than Corporate Politics and I’d be more inclined to come even if you covered the same content.

Comment from Grace
Time February 6, 2009 at 9:39 am

Char – Renaming the workshop is definitely in the plans, and I like Seth’s suggestion in his comment.

As for dealing with difficult people, I think there’s always something to be said for examining what it is that makes you feel like they’re so difficult. When you talk about “screaming obscenities at them” – well, that’s a pretty strong reaction! My experience is that whenever my reaction to someone is that strong, it probably means there’s something in me, more than in them, that I’m reacting to. In other words, I know it’s not about them at all – it’s about me.

That’s not always something I enjoy looking at, but it is always true!

Comment from Char
Time February 6, 2009 at 2:33 pm

For me personally, I have never experienced anything that is always true – so I question whether a strong reaction per se means that I’m reacting to something about myself totally as opposed to something in them. I don’t believe that a strong reaction is any more all about another person than it is all about them.

I believe there are many layers to dealing with others – being angry is just one of them, looking at what’s true for me is another, looking at where the other person is coming from is another – and on and on.

I liked this article very much and your commment was especially helpful. Thank you.

Comment from Char
Time February 6, 2009 at 2:36 pm

For me personally, I have never experienced anything that is always true – so I question whether a strong reaction per se means that I’m reacting to something about myself totally as opposed to something in them. I don’t believe that a strong reaction is any more all about another person than it is all about me.

I believe there are many layers to dealing with trying to “be cool” as I described above in my initial comment – being angry is just one of them, looking at what’s true for me is another, looking at where the other person is coming from is another – and on and on.

I liked this article very much and your commment was especially helpful. Thank you.

Comment from Grace
Time February 7, 2009 at 8:56 am

Char – Of course anger is sometimes simply anger, and simply needs to be expressed. And I didn’t mean to imply that any reaction is 100% “my stuff” versus the other person’s behavior. It’s always a mix, if only because the behavior is the trigger.

However, even an unexpressed impulse to “scream obscenities” at someone – especially at a client, no matter how difficult – strikes me as an out-of-proportion reaction that, yes, would always merit self-examination.

If the client’s behavior is completely out of line, one has a choice to (a) try to find a mutually acceptable resolution, (b) swallow it, or (c) inform the client that you’ll no longer be working together. It’s very difficult for any of those options to be calmly considered or effectively followed if one is coming from a place of obscenity-screaming rage.

So the value of examining what’s being triggered is dual, because it allows you to explore what’s going on for you in this experience (what really is your stuff), and it also allows a much clearer and more productive resolution within the relationship.

I know there are no absolutes. However, I stand by my statement that there is always something going on that’s just my stuff, albeit triggered by the other person, when a reaction is as strong as what you describe.