Think Fast Talk Smart: Communication Techniques

"The first negotiation is actually a negotiation I have with myself about my own story."
Before you can have hard conversations with others, you need to have an honest conversation with yourself. That's the counterintuitive advice from Sheila Heen, a Harvard Law School lecturer and co-author of Difficult Conversations: How to Discuss What Matters Most, who says our own internal narratives often derail our attempts at negotiation and conflict resolution. In this episode of Think Fast, Talk Smart , Heen joins Matt Abrahams to explore effective communication in high-stakes situations. From giving and receiving feedback with her “ACE” framework (Appreciation, Coaching, and Evaluation) to recognizing the "degrees of difficulty" in disagreements, she offers practical strategies for having productive conversations even when emotions run high.

Key Takeaways:
  • Difficult conversations start with understanding yourself. Before trying to change someone else's mind, examine your own assumptions, emotions, and goals to create space for a more productive dialogue.
  • Curiosity turns conflict into collaboration. Replacing blame with genuine questions and focusing on understanding rather than convincing helps build trust, reduce defensiveness, and move conversations forward.

Activity:
  • Decode feedback. The next time someone asks for feedback, don't answer immediately. Implement the ACE framework. First ask: "Are you looking for appreciation, coaching, or evaluation?" Then tailor your response to match what they actually need

Episode Reference Links:

Connect:

 Chapters:

  • (00:00) - Introduction
  • (01:40) - Facing Difficult Conversations
  • (03:53) - The Feelings Beneath Conflict
  • (07:02) - The Stories We Tell Ourselves
  • (08:19) - Start with the Third Story
  • (09:59) - The Power of Questions
  • (12:36) - Breaking an Impasse
  • (16:15) - The Language of Curiosity
  • (17:12) - Feedback That Lands
  • (20:18) - Asking for Better Feedback
  • (22:38) - Looking Beneath the Surface
  • (24:15) - The Final Three Questions
  • (31:30) - Conclusion

********
Thank you to our sponsors.  These partnerships support the ongoing production of the podcast, allowing us to bring it to you at no cost.

Unleash your Superhuman potential with AI that meets you where you work. Learn more at superhuman.com

Join our Think Fast Talk Smart Learning Community and become the communicator you want to be. 

Creators and Guests

Host
Matt Abrahams
Lecturer Stanford University Graduate School of Business | Think Fast Talk Smart podcast host
Guest
Sheila Heen
Author | Educator | Public speaker

What is Think Fast Talk Smart: Communication Techniques?

One of the most essential ingredients to success in business and life is effective communication.

Join Matt Abrahams, best-selling author and Strategic Communication lecturer at Stanford Graduate School of Business, as he interviews experts to provide actionable insights that help you communicate with clarity, confidence, and impact. From handling impromptu questions to crafting compelling messages, Matt explores practical strategies for real-world communication challenges.

Whether you’re navigating a high-stakes presentation, perfecting your email tone, or speaking off the cuff, Think Fast, Talk Smart equips you with the tools, techniques, and best practices to express yourself effectively in any situation. Enhance your communication skills to elevate your career and build stronger professional relationships.

Tune in every Tuesday for new episodes. Subscribe now to unlock your potential as a thoughtful, impactful communicator. Learn more and sign up for our eNewsletter at fastersmarter.io.

Matt Abrahams: The secret to mastering
difficult conversations, delivering

effective feedback, and resolving
stubborn conflicts actually begins

with a tough negotiation with yourself.

My name is Matt Abrahams, and I
teach Strategic Communication at

Stanford Graduate School of Business.

Welcome to this special Rethinks episode
of Think Fast, Talk Smart, the podcast.

We all struggle when having challenging
conversations, be they arguments,

negotiations, or constructive feedback.

When I find myself in these difficult
situations, I often return to the

excellent advice of Sheila Heen.

Sheila provided so many practical, useful
tips that I wanted to provide you with

an extended version of her insights.

So you know, you can hear more
extended episodes when you

join our premium offering.

So let's dive right in
and learn from Sheila.

Most advice on conflict resolution,
negotiation, and feedback is

to focus on the other person.

And while important, it is more
important to focus first on yourself.

My name is Matt Abrahams, and I
teach Strategic Communication at

Stanford Graduate School of Business.

Welcome to Think Fast,
Talk Smart, the podcast.

Today I look forward to
speaking with Sheila Heen.

Sheila is a lecturer at Harvard Law School
and co-founder of Triad Consulting Group.

She's also the co-author of the
best-selling books Difficult

Conversations and Thanks for the Feedback.

Welcome, Sheila.

Sheila Heen: I am delighted to be here.

We're gonna have fun.

Matt Abrahams: Shall we get started?

Sheila Heen: Let's.

Matt Abrahams: Many people avoid
difficult conversations out of fear.

What advice do you have for overcoming
the anxiety that often accompanies

these types of interactions?

Sheila Heen: I think overcoming the
anxiety is maybe better framed as getting

honest with ourselves about the anxiety.

Some of that anxiety is well-placed,
particularly if my purpose in the

conversation is to convince you that
you're wrong or to convince you that

I'm right, 'cause obviously I'm right.

It is probably not going to go well.

So when I'm negotiating with myself
about having the courage to take the

risk to have a conversation, the two
things that help me are, number one,

to remember that worrying about the
potential costs of raising something

important to me is only half the ledger.

The other half of the ledger is
what are the potential costs of

avoiding it and letting it fester?

And those are slower, they're
less Technicolor in my imagination

because they're not going to happen
in the moment that I raise it, but

they're still very real, and I think
we discount the cost of avoiding.

The second thing is to negotiate
with myself about what am I trying

to achieve in this conversation?

And if I can shift my purpose from
convincing you of something to instead

just understanding how you see it
and why we might see it differently,

that actually is more likely to
generate a good conversation with

less defensiveness for both of us.

And at the end, we don't have to agree.

I can achieve my purpose simply by asking
a lot of questions and then sharing how

I think about it differently, and that'll
push the conversation forward, and then

we can go away and think about what we've
heard and what might make sense next.

Matt Abrahams: So this notion of reframing
it as an opportunity to get understanding

can take a lot of the pressure off.

Sheila Heen: It can take
a lot of the pressure off.

When I invite you into a conversation
about why I'm right, I'm basically

saying, "Hi, I'm casting a play.

In this play, I am the hero,
and you are the problem.

Would you like to be in my play?" And
you're like, "No, I don't want to be in

your play 'cause it's completely miscast."
If I can shift my purposes, "Hey, I'm

casting a play where two characters try
to understand what's up," and you're like,

"That sounds like an interesting play.

Let's try it out."

Matt Abrahams: So make it an invitation

Sheila Heen: Make it an invitation
that somebody would want to say yes to.

Matt Abrahams: I like
your analogy of the play.

And thinking about the cost of avoiding is
really important, because I know in my own

life and in the lives of many I know, we
focus on the other side of that equation,

and not focus on what are the costs of
avoiding the interaction, instead of

just fixating on the interaction itself.

In your book Difficult Conversations,
you emphasize the importance of

understanding the underlying emotions
and assumptions in tough conversations.

What tactics can we use to stay calm and
focused as emotions escalate, and how can

we reflect on those emotions in advance?

Sheila Heen: One of the things
that I've found really interesting

about difficult conversations
is that by the time something

becomes a difficult conversation,
we've got at least two problems.

We've got whatever we're disagreeing
about on the surface, should Mom stay

in rehab, or is she ready to come home?

Is this the right strategic decision
and investment for us as a board?

But if it's a difficult conversation,
typically there's a deeper issue,

which is how we each feel treated in
how we're navigating this together.

Because you never listen,
because you always think you're

right and need to get your way.

And that's really a feelings question.

Or, why am I never consulted about this?

Or when I am consulted,
you never take my advice.

Part of the feelings piece is, let's
talk about the real issues here.

And if we can actually talk a little bit
about those deeper issues, then we're

actually addressing more of the root of
the problem that's gonna make the surface

issues easier for us now and over time.

Ironically, the instinct for us is to try
to keep feelings out of the conversation.

Let's not open that whole can of worms.

Stay calm, rational, business-focused.

When we do that, we're not
getting to the deeper issue.

Part of what causes people to yell, cry,
or get sarcastic when emotions burst into

the conversation is because we're trying
to tamp them down and keep them out.

So they come out as being emotional.

There's a big difference between being
emotional and handling feelings well.

Paradoxically, naming or describing
the emotion I'm feeling can

be a release valve for it.

So if I say, "I feel confused, I just am
frustrated 'cause I feel like we're going

in circles," then my physiological feeling
of being frustrated can ease a little bit.

And if we can narrate and just name what
we're feeling, it can help us acknowledge

that this isn't easy, and then refocus on
what we're trying to understand or unpack.

Matt Abrahams: So it takes a moment
to reflect on how we are feeling.

And then once that happens, just
sharing that can be a way of bringing

them to the conversation without
them just bursting onto the scene.

They also lay the groundwork to
have a discussion about them.

Sheila Heen: I think that's right.

And in doing so, I'm also inviting yours.

One mistake it's easy to make is that
I'm either so preoccupied with my

own feelings that I forget that you
often have many of the same feelings.

You also feel frustrated
and impatient and whatever.

Or I'm so preoccupied with your reaction
that I am neglecting thinking about how

I'm gonna manage myself, and really,
we need to be paying attention to both.

Matt Abrahams: And you said something
earlier that I think is really important.

It's the story that we
bring to the situation.

So we have in our minds a story about
this interaction that we're about to

have that may or may not be accurate.

Sheila Heen: So we have a story about
what has happened, what is happening right

now, and what we think should happen.

In Difficult Conversations, we
talk about that story itself

having three key components.

One is, I'm preoccupied with what
I'm pretty sure I'm right about.

The second is, whose fault is it
that we're having this problem?

And the third is, why
are you acting this way?

What are your intentions or
motivations or character that are

causing you to be so difficult?

That story drives how I
pretend to listen to you.

The first negotiation is actually
a negotiation I have to have

with myself about my own story.

To shift from being focused on what
I'm right about to being curious about

why it is, given it's so obvious that
I'm right, that you see it differently.

To shift from blame to thinking about
what are we each contributing to the

problem, and to shift from focusing
on your intentions or character to,

can I describe the impact on me?

I don't know why you're doing what
you're doing, but what's important to

me is that you understand the impact
it's having, either on me or on the team

or on the business or the community.

If I can make that shift in my own
mind, then it's actually a more

inviting conversation for both of us.

Matt Abrahams: Teasing out
those different components of

the story is really important.

I can imagine for myself in a situation
where I have to have a difficult

conversation, maybe with one of my kids
or a coworker, I would have to damp

down some of my emotions first to get
to that place where I could actually

do that introspection about my story.

And then how do I actually kick off that
conversation about the deeper level?

I've invited you here to have a
conversation about some topic,

but really it's the underlying
issue that's the challenge.

How do I start that conversation
about the underlying issue?

Sheila Heen: The natural place
to start is within my own story.

In my story, you're the problem.

The mistake we sometimes make is we
think, "Well, I've been told, and I've

heard on this podcast a lot, that I
should listen and ask lots of questions,

so now I'm gonna try to start by asking
questions about your story." There's

not something necessarily wrong with
that, but if I'm not dealing with my

own story and including it, it can
feel false or forced, or I'm asking

questions, but they're not real questions.

So the key from our point of view is
to try to step to the third story.

As an observer who understood
what we each think, how would they

describe the difference between us?

I can do that myself.

So it might sound something like,
"I'm guessing we have really different

preferences for how this should
be handled," or, "I'm guessing we

have really different predictions
about what the risks are here, and

I'm curious to talk about that.

I'm happy to share mine, and I'm
particularly interested to hear what

you're worried about." That is what we
call starting the conversation from the

third story, and it's one that includes
both of our stories as part of the

purpose of the conversation, and that's
an invitation that they're likely to take.

Matt Abrahams: You mentioned
this notion of questions and how

questions can actually be misused.

But I know, and I've heard you
speak about, the power of questions.

Can you share with me a little bit
about how questions can be helpful

in managing conflict and negotiation?

Sheila Heen: Yeah, a question should be an
invitation to understand the other person.

When you are the other person and someone
wants to, genuinely, wants to understand

you, that's a tough invitation to turn
down because feeling understood by

others is such a fundamental human need.

So genuine curiosity is something
that is hard for other people

to resist being responsive to.

And then because reciprocity is
such a strong social norm, so if you

attack me, I'm gonna attack you back.

If you're genuinely curious about
me, once I feel understood, I may be

able to then turn to be more curious
about why you would possibly disagree.

So questions can move us toward
understanding and finding some things

that we have in common, even if it's
just we both agree this is a problem,

even if we disagree about what kind
of problem it is, or who's causing

it, or what we should do about it.

But that common ground can help us
think about, if we both agree it's

a problem, where do we go from here?

The other thing that questions can
do, and I've both had this experience,

and I periodically get asked about
this experience, which is, how long

do I have to listen to someone who
just monologues the whole time?

Because I don't want to
ask them more questions.

They're not listening.

I can hardly get a word in edgewise,
and they're not going to even pause.

At the end of the conversation,
they believe it went really

successfully, and they leave the room.

I think that questions can actually
be really helpful because people will

monologue about whatever comes into
their head, and you can use questions

to direct their monologue toward
the things that actually would be

helpful for you to hear more about.

And I think we're taught not to interrupt
people, but, and if I'm interrupting

you to cut you off to say what I want
to say, that gets a bad reaction.

But if I'm interrupting you
to better understand you,

that is usually well-received.

So saying, "Okay, hang on one second.

Just, can I get a word in edgewise here?

Because I just am not sure I'm
tracking what you mean by this.

Help me understand that first." I'm
helping to shape the conversation

about things that are helpful.

And then I can paraphrase back, "Before
we go too much further, I wonder whether

it would be helpful for you to hear
how I think about those things." So

I can be more assertive about asking
for reciprocity, that my perspective

needs to be part of the conversation.

Matt Abrahams: So questions can do a lot,
especially when paired with paraphrasing,

to move a conversation in the direction
that you think it needs to go.

And it's a way of asserting yourself
without shutting the other person down.

And questions, by their very nature,
as you mentioned, are invitations,

and reciprocity drives us to respond.

So it's a way of bringing
people to a conversation.

I want to talk about when these
types of interactions get stuck.

Negotiations, conflict gets stuck.

We're, we're cycling or
circling on the same issue.

We're not able to get
out of our own worldview.

How do you get unstuck without sacrificing
your position or your self-worth?

Sheila Heen: So I think the first question
to ask is, why do I think we're stuck?

To do some diagnosis.

Is it because we're not understanding
why we each feel so strongly about it?

Is it because we're trading positions?

This is the outcome that I need.

In negotiation, people typically take
positions and then say, "We must have

X, Y, or Z," and, "We can't give you
X, Y, or Z, but we can give you A, B,

or C." If we're trading positions, then
maybe we need to dig underneath for

the underlying interests and concerns
that we each think our solution will

meet, and we need to talk about those
deeper concerns that lead us to think

that's the only thing we can accept.

It might be that we're at impasse because
we have the wrong people at the table.

So every time we think of an
idea that might move us forward,

then, well, we can't do that.

We would need higher-ups or
collaborators or whatever.

And we don't think they'd agree to that.

Maybe we should find out.

For me, the impasse question has 10
or 15 possible answers, and if you're

not asking that question first,
you're gonna misdirect your energies.

And one thing you can do
is just observe, name.

It feels like we're going in
circles and we feel stuck, and

I wonder why that's happening.

What's your sense of why it's happening?

And then I'm happy to
share what I'm noticing.

And now I've made it a joint problem
to do the diagnosis together, and

that alone can help us come together
to understand why we're stuck.

I'll say one more thing, which
is occasionally we're stuck

because it doesn't make sense
for me to move forward with this.

I should say no, but a lot of people have
trouble saying no and walking away 'cause

they don't wanna let other people down.

It's usually rooted in identity.

I'm very loyal.

I don't want to abandon you.

I feel it might be rude, but that
means I'm not being upfront about,

I just am thinking this doesn't make
sense for me to move forward with.

I like you, and as things play
out, if we check in in a month,

we might be at a different place.

But right now, I don't think it
makes sense for us to move forward.

Matt Abrahams: So it sounds like
the way to manage an impasse or

being stuck is to reflect in terms
of what is causing that impasse.

And in some cases, it might be
your unwillingness to just cut

bait and say, "We're done."

Sheila Heen: Yes.

Matt Abrahams: But much like you talked
about when you were talking about

emotion, we have to look deeper and
understand what might be causing this

and have the conversation at that level.

Sheila Heen: I think that's right.

Yeah.

And we often skip that and just try
a bunch of different things, or we

try the same thing over and over,
thinking we'll get a different response.

Matt Abrahams: Again, it can be very
hard to take that step back and reflect

and see what's going on, but reminding
ourselves that by getting to perhaps

the root cause can remove, in this
case, the impasse, in the case of

emotions, can allow us to have the
real conversation that needs to be had.

I wanna highlight something I've
noticed in many of your answers.

When you give examples, you
use words like wonder, curious.

Those are very inviting words.

Those are words that bring
about connection and a, a

sense of we're collaborating.

Talk to me about your thoughts of,
down to the linguistic level, what

are your thoughts about the importance
of language in conflict management?

Sheila Heen: So I'm giving
my internal voice a job.

My internal voice believes that its job
is to protect me and defend me and fight

back on my behalf when someone says,
"That makes no sense at all." But if

I can give my internal voice the job,
not turn it off, but the job of figure

out why they see it in that way, which
doesn't make sense, then my internal

voice is actually on my own side.

Needs to be curious in
order to give me answers.

And so I think some of it is just
negotiating with your own internal

voice to give it the right job.

Matt Abrahams: I often think of conflict
management, negotiation, feedback as

things that are happening outside of
myself with someone else, and they

obviously are, but a lot of what you
were talking about is the dialogue I have

with myself, and that is really powerful.

And a lot of us, I think, just jump
right into the interactive piece

without the self-reflection piece first.

I want to switch to feedback
because I know you have a

lot of thoughts on feedback.

What are some common mistakes
people make when giving feedback,

and how can we avoid them to ensure
that our feedback is received as

constructive rather than critical?

Sheila Heen: Probably the first question
is, does this person want my feedback?

And unsolicited feedback can
be some of the hardest feedback

to be on the receiving end of.

Now, that said, sometimes we are
responsible for providing feedback.

We're a manager, we're a parent, we're
a colleague that sees that what's

happening right now, actually, I have
a responsibility to say something.

One of the things that has helped
me is just to understand that there

are really three types of feedback.

And often, as a giver, I'm not clear
on which kind I'm offering, or my

receiver is hoping for a different
kind than what I am offering.

So the three kinds, the easy way
to remember them is ACE, A-C-E.

So the first is appreciation.

Just, "I see you, I get you, I'm noticing
what's valuable about what you're doing,

how hard you're working at it," et cetera.

The C is coaching, and by coaching
I mean anything that helps someone

else become more effective or
efficient or knowledgeable.

If my goal is to help you get better,
it counts as coaching So that's the

engine for learning, but it bumps into
the third type, which is evaluation.

And evaluation rates or ranks
you about whether you're meeting

expectations, about whether you
are exceeding or falling short.

Part of what's hard, and from my point
of view, the term constructive criticism

comes from this cross transaction where,
as a giver, I think I'm offering you

coaching, but as a receiver, what you
hear is judgment, evaluation, right?

So I'm super clear that I give my
kids, three of them, all kinds of

brilliant coaching that is really
helpful to them, and yet they hear

that they're not measuring up.

Part of it is just naming
it and getting an alignment.

So when someone says to me, "Hey, could
you give me some feedback about this

draft?" I've learned to ask, "What would
be helpful to you right now?" Maybe

it's just appreciation 'cause you're
not sure there's even any value here,

so do I see anything worth pursuing?

Which is a combination of
appreciation and evaluation.

Or, "What do you like about this
draft? What speaks to you about this

draft?" Might be helpful at this stage.

Another would be, "I can't figure
out this story. I don't think it's

working, and I'd love your input."
So they're asking for coaching.

And a third might be, "We think this is
ready to send out. Do you think it's ready

to go?" And that's an evaluation question.

Does it meet expectations, or do
we each think it's good enough?

And so just getting aligned on that
as a giver and a receiver can really

straighten out what we're each hoping for.

Matt Abrahams: It is important to
delineate the type of feedback, and I

appreciate the ACE, the appreciation,
the coaching, the evaluation.

It seems to me that we, as the
person giving feedback, can ask,

what is it that you're looking for?

But it also, I believe, could
be really helpful if those of us

seeking feedback could be very clear.

A lot of times we'll just say, "Can
you give me feedback?" Or, "How'd that

go?" Instead of being more specific.

Do you have specific guidance around
the actual phrasing of feedback that

can actually help it be beneficial?

Sheila Heen: As a receiver, one
question that I've found useful is,

what's one thing that if I changed
it, you think would make this

better or make this meeting more
effective, or whatever the context is.

The other thing that I try to keep in
mind is that getting clear so that as

a receiver, I can see what my giver
is trying to say, or as a giver trying

to help my receiver understand what
I mean, is really a joint endeavor.

And there's no avoiding the
fact that you've got to start

with a sort of label or topic.

Like, I think one of the things that would
be helpful is if you were more responsive

or if, yeah, I think you're too nice.

That's incredibly vague and frustrating.

And because as a receiver, I have a
reaction to it, I'm so like, "Okay,

thanks for your feedback. Goodbye."
Rather than saying, "Wow, I don't

know what to think about that. Help me
understand what you mean." And we can,

as givers and receivers together, we can
ask questions in a couple directions.

One is backward-looking.

Where is this coming from?

You must have noticed some things
that concerned you, or you had some

expectations about how I would handle
something, and I did something different.

Like, there were a bunch of specific
things that happened that have

led you to offer me this feedback.

So that's backward-looking.

The other thing that we can do
is ask questions forward-looking.

If I were to take your advice,
what would I do differently?

What specifically would I do differently?

Or it might be, look, if there was one
thing you were going to do tomorrow

or change to experiment with, it would
be when you get an email, just send

back a note that says, "On it. Back
to you soon." 'Cause we can't tell

whether you're getting our emails.

That's a very specific thing that matches
being more responsive, but is less global

maybe than you thought it was before,
and I'm getting clearer about what I

actually am picturing you would change.

More concrete.

Matt Abrahams: It clearly seems that
effective feedback is a dialogue

where there's a communication
and questioning and, and clarity

that is sought and delivered.

And as a feedback giver, I need to
remind myself that I need to be specific.

It seems to me that feedback, negotiation,
and conflict management are all circling

around some of the same key ideas.

If you were to give one or two practical
bits of advice to help people in

each of those areas what would it be?

Sheila Heen: For me, the thing that
has made the biggest difference is

to have a few analytical tools that
just help me see beneath the surface.

'Cause on the surface, whether it's
conflict or difficult conversations or

negotiation or feedback, on the surface
it just feels like a mess, and why do

I wanna get any closer to that mess?

And if you look underneath the
mess, there are a handful of things

going on that if we can understand
them, we have our first win.

We don't know what to do about them
yet, but we better understand them.

So for me, thinking, what is
this about for each of us?

Often we're talking past each other.

One of the things that happens is that
what we each think this conflict is about

is different, so we keep saying what's
most important to me, and then you say

what's most important to you, and we're
not actually responding to each other.

I think just as a first step,
understanding what is this about, what's

most important about it to each of us,
can at least help us name the different

topics that we should talk about and get
aligned on which to talk about first.

Matt Abrahams: Thank you.

I think that's a very
powerful starting place.

And then I think the second step
you already mentioned as well, which

is to reflect what's the story I'm
bringing, or what's my take on this.

Very helpful.

Sheila, this has been fantastic.

Before we end, I'd like to ask
three questions of all the guests.

One I create just for you, and
then the other two are similar.

Are you up for that?

Sheila Heen: Sure.

Matt Abrahams: So my first
question is quite self-serving.

I find myself in several
challenging situations, often in

my personal life with my family.

What advice do you give to people
who have to negotiate and manage

conflict in a situation where
you know it will be continual?

We're gonna have another
family meal, we're going to

take another family vacation.

What advice and guidance do you
have to help take some of the edge

off and effect change in a way so
we don't feel like we're having

the same fight over and over again?

Sheila Heen: We are having the same
fight over and over again, aren't we?

Matt Abrahams: Yes.

Sheila Heen: And partly because
we're each bringing such, I'll

call it rich family experience
with us into those relationships.

And also the beauty of being in a family
is that you hopefully have the sense that

people accept me for who I am despite
my flaws, and that means that we're

less careful And we're more reactive.

I think the thing that I regret looking
back is early on not taking a beat to

decide how I want to respond, and instead
just reacting where my internal voice

thinks, "Okay, that's ridiculous." So
I just say, "That's ridiculous," and

dismiss something that someone's trying to
actually raise with me that's important.

Matt Abrahams: That notion of reflexively
responding and not taking a beat certainly

plays out in my life, and I'm easily
triggered to respond in the ways I have,

and I think taking that beat will help.

Question number two, who is a
communicator that you admire and why?

Sheila Heen: Oh boy, there are so
many communicators that I admire for

different reasons, but one of the ones
I've been thinking about a lot lately

is, oddly enough, Anderson Cooper.

His new podcast series, All There
Is, it's a podcast about grief.

And one of the things I really
have appreciated about it

is how honest and raw it is.

It's beautifully edited, but it also
just invites us into his internal

experience of grappling with
grief, which then connects us all.

And I also love the way
that he invites others in.

Matt Abrahams: Thank you for sharing that,
and he's certainly a master communicator.

I am not surprised that you would
be drawn to a communicator who

addresses emotion and who is all
about inviting others to collaborate

or experience something together.

Those are two themes that came
through in much of what you said.

Final question, what are the first
three ingredients that go into a

successful communication recipe?

Sheila Heen: Your guests have named
just wise and insightful ingredients.

So I found myself, in thinking about
this question Thinking about what are the

seasonings or spices you would add that
other people might not be thinking about?

Matt Abrahams: All right.

Sheila Heen: So we're gonna assume
that the cake is baked and, and is

beautiful from your other guests.

One of the things that I've
been thinking a little bit about

is just degrees of difficulty.

Because I think we hear a lot these days
especially about how, boy, disagreement

is good, and disagreement should be
out on the table, and that's where we

really learn from each other, and that's
where we can connect with each other.

And I think what we're maybe not talking
about enough is degrees of difficulty.

So there are three things that I think
increase the degree of difficulty.

One is, is it about a
topic that matters to me?

So if I ask you what kind of ice cream
is your favorite, do I care whether

you eat different ice cream than I eat?

But if it's about a topic that isn't near
and dear to my heart, it's not that hard.

And of course, disagreement is
interesting and fun to talk about.

Now let's take it to the next level,
which is, is it about me in some way?

If it's something that we disagree
about and that has implications

on who I am, well, now that ups
the level of difficulty here.

Or should you be here?

Do you deserve to be here?

Are people like you supposed to be here?

Well, now we're upping the difficulty
because it's about identity.

And the third level of difficulty, is
the outcome of this going to impact me?

So if you and I have to share the ice
cream and you get to decide because

you have the decision rights and you're
gonna dictate what kind of ice cream

I eat for the rest of my life, well
now something is on the line for me.

And I think that's why when power comes
into the picture, meaning who has what

levers of influence over outcomes?

And if the outcome of this is gonna
have really important consequences

for me, now that's the hardest place
to feel, to step into a conversation

where I know that we disagree.

Now, you asked for three ingredients.

Those are three levels of difficulty.

They might be spices on the cake.

As the degree of difficulty gets
higher, it's more and more important

that I develop the capacity to have
those conversations because whether

or not we talk about it, you will make
a decision that will impact me or say

something about me or matter to me.

And so my opportunity to influence
that decision and to understand it

and fill in blanks where you maybe are
missing something is lost if I don't

develop the capacity to live in that
space and to use the skills that I've

spent time developing, but that can go
out the window when I'm under stress.

So that's the place where I think
leadership goes from good to great, if

we're gonna use an old phrase which is
that not only can I have the conversations

that matter, but as they get harder, I can
stay in the place where I am showing up

as my best self to have them and using all
those skills that I've worked so hard at.

Matt Abrahams: So insightful that
while many people focus on macro

ingredients, these are really micro
ingredients that make a big difference.

I love that they all start with the letter
I, importance, identity, and impact.

And this notion of being able to stay with
this as you're having the conversation

and being able to navigate through
these degrees of difficulty, really

important advice, and I'm gonna have
to spend some time thinking about how I

personally can help myself and help those
I interact with navigate through these.

Sheila, this has been
absolutely fantastic.

When we started the conversation,
I thought it was going to be mostly

best practices for how we engage
others, and not only did we talk about

that, but we really talked about how
do we engage ourselves so that we

can have these types of challenging
conversations and negotiations.

Thank you.

Sheila Heen: Thank you.

Matt Abrahams: Thank you for joining
us for another episode of Think

Fast, Talk Smart, the podcast.

Among the many ideas Sheila shared,
the one that stands out to me is

miscommunication and hurt feelings
occur when a person giving feedback

and the person receiving it are not
aligned on what is actually needed.

To ensure feedback is constructive rather
than critical, explicitly clarify which of

the three types of feedback is expected,
appreciation, coaching, or evaluation.

This will help you ace your feedback.

To learn more about managing
conflict and difficult conversations,

tune in to episode 250.

This episode was produced by
Katherine Reed, Ryan Campos, Alex

McCarthy, and me, Matt Abrahams.

Our music is from Floyd Wonder, with
special thanks to Podium Podcast Company.

Be sure to check out our full transcripts
for each episode at fastersmarter.io.