How The Way We Talk Can Change The Way We Work PDF Free Download

Negative self-talk can result in unnecessary stress, anxiety, depression, self-doubt, etc. Positive self-talk encourages self-confidence, effective coping, achievement, and a general feeling of well-being. So, ask yourself, “Is my self-talk building me up or tearing me down?” “Is my way of thinking helping me or is it hindering me?”. Jul 02, 2001 And not just generally, or in the abstract. They help each of us arrive at our own particular answers that can solve the puzzling gap between what we intend and what we are able to accomplish. How the Way We Talk Can Change the Way We Work provides you with the tools to create a powerful new build-it-yourself mental technology. How the Way We Talk Can Change the Way We Work by Robert Kegan and Lisa Lahey. Do you flee from employees who are complaining? Do you know what to do with their own work related complaints? Kegan and Lahey provide a framework, a technology of change, using language structure as both the diagnostic tool and the solution. But that solution is problematic because we associate ways of speaking with moral qualities: The way we speak is who we are and who we want to be. Veronica, a senior researcher in a high-tech. Behaviors need to be challenged. We tend to pay attention to and inventory thoughts. Language, and actions to see if they are consistent with our newly recognized beliefs. Or if they need to be dismantled. We may discover that we need to educate ourselves: read more, talk to people, bounce ideas and views around with others, begin listening to the.

Great communication is an art. Honing it to a keen edge is a science.

The way you talk to customers has a big impact on your brand, and nothing delivers customer satisfaction quite like consistently delightful communication.

When you’re thoughtful about the way you convey information to (and receive feedback from!) customers, that yields better results than any splashy new logo or 20 percent off coupon ever could.

But what does “thoughtful” communication mean when you’re talking to a customer? What’s the strategy behind successful conversations?

World-class customer service begins with treating humans like humans. Follow the tips on how to talk to customers in this guide, and we guarantee you’ll be on your way!

Download the ebook

Download this free guide by filling out the form below.

Maintaining a consistent tone

Just as in music, if your tone is off, the whole piece falls flat. For example, “Anything else?” and “What else can I help you with?” ask the same question, but they are wildly different in terms of tone.

As you define your support team’s collective voice, develop a set of standards for personal and human conversations. This allows each member to maintain their unique voice without sounding like they’re talking from a script.

1. Think of tone on a spectrum

Take the examples above: “Anything else?” and “What else can I help you with?”

One is clearly sliding into bitter-sounding territory, while the other feels friendly but still professional. That’s where you’ll want to be for the large majority of customer interactions.

For Example

Conversation reply thread from Help Scout

2. Use positive language

Positive language keeps the conversation moving forward and prevents accidental conflicts due to miscommunication. Words like can’t, won’t, and didn’t — and phrases like “you have to” or “you need to” — are usually interpreted as negative.

Focus on how you’re going to fix the problem, and avoid words that cause knee-jerk reactions.

For Example

  • Bad: “No, we don’t have that.”
  • Less bad: “I can see how that would be useful, but I’m afraid we don’t have plans to add that functionality.”
  • Good: “While there’s currently no way to do that, we appreciate you taking the time to let us know what you’re looking for — most of the improvements we make come from ideas and suggestions like yours, so thank you for reaching out!”

Say one of your products is backordered for a month and you need to relay this information to a customer immediately. Consider the following responses:

With negative language

I can't get you that product until next month; it's back ordered and unavailable at this time. You'll have to wait a few weeks, but I'm happy to place the order for you right now!'

With positive language

It looks like that product will be re-stocked and available next month. I can place the order for you right now and we'll make sure it's sent to you as soon as it reaches our warehouse!'

Redirecting the conversation from negative to positive places focus on the proposed solution. When the outcome takes center stage, it reduces the odds that customers will be upset.

Customers don’t care about what you can’t do; they want to hear what’s going to be done.

For those tricky situations where customers “have to” do something, you can use positive language to remind them (and yourself) that this is a team effort:

With negative language

  • First, you'll have to check...
  • Now, you'll need to set up...
  • After that, I need you to...

With positive language

  • First, let's verify...
  • Now, we can set up...
  • After that, the best solution is if we..

Positive language keeps the door open for future interactions, and the customer won’t feel as though it was a waste of time to get in touch.

3. Be brief but not brusque

It doesn’t matter how amazing your reply is — most customers are going to ignore a 1,000-word email. Keep both sentences and paragraphs short. Large blocks of text will get skipped right over.

Use images, videos, and links to knowledge base articles to keep your replies concise. Bonus: When your knowledge base is integrated with your help desk, the process is easy because you can pull in articles without leaving your reply!

The goals of a support reply are to answer the customer’s question and to make them feel heard. You might be able to answer a question with a link to an article in your knowledge base, but couching that in a sentence or two is more human.

4. Reply in a timely manner

When you can modify your saved reply with the customer’s name and an acknowledgement of their specific issue within 30 seconds, it can make some people wonder if their email even got read. It’s okay to let non-urgent emails sit a few extra minutes.

Of course, customers who are in a “pulling my hair out” situation want a resolution yesterday. Make responding to them a priority.

Try setting up a folder separate from the main support queue where you can filter less-than-ecstatic messages. Here, the team can see immediately which emails are from customers who need help right away.

5. Always use your customer’s name

If you’re not using the customer’s name in your greeting, you’re missing an opportunity to use the psychology of consumer behavior to your advantage. Dale Carnegie advised readers to “Remember that a person’s name is to that person the sweetest and most important sound in any language.”

Your help desk should allow you to automate using the customer’s name.

Just be sure to get it right — use the name they use! Sérgio is Sérgio, not Sergio. Katie is Katie, not Kate. If you don’t have the person’s name, go with a friendly, generic greeting: “Hey there!”

6. Talk their talk

Mirroring your customer’s tone lets them know you’re on their side. If a customer is formal, for example, hold back on the LOLs. If they’re more casual, relax your tone. Adjust based on the tone of the customer’s email. If they’re clearly angry, don’t be a chipper do-gooder — take it down a notch. If they’re excited about something, bring the energy.

For a majority of interactions, the sweet spot is almost always “somewhat like your customer” but not a caricature of your customer.

Mirroring builds rapport and puts your customer at ease, reducing the amount of interpretation needed to understand what you’re trying to communicate.

7. Be careful with jokes

Gauge your rapport with the customer before attempting any jokes, sarcasm or irony — they don’t translate easily through text, so your intent can easily be misunderstood. While emoji and GIFs certainly help, there’s still no sarcasm font, so choose every word with thoughtfulness and care.

If your customer comes in cracking jokes, though, mirroring their humor is a surefire way to make their day!

8. Create a support style guide

Style guides document all the unique elements that make up your brand so everyone on your team can provide a consistent experience across the board. It should provide guidelines but not stifle creativity. Focus on the dos and don’ts of tone and language, and outline the sort of customer service you admire.

The customer support section in Help Scout’s style guide, for instance, covers everything from what to call emails from customers (“conversations,” not “tickets”) to words to avoid (“inconvenience,” “unfortunately”) to how to format telephone numbers.

Creating a distinct language or using specific phrases reflects and instills the values of the company across every team member, reminding them of what they represent and the standards by which they must abide.

Pro Tip: Develop your own vocabulary

Consider creating a “support lexicon” of phrases for your team to live by, such as “My pleasure” and “Right away.” A support lexicon is like wearing your team’s colors. It signals, “This is who we are; this is how we do things.” When those values and beliefs are fostered at the start, helping the employee form an identity around these beliefs and behaviors, remarkable service ensues.

9. Build templates for saved replies

A living database of saved replies that your team can actively build on saves time by streamlining how you answer common questions.

Saved replies can be used to reduce the number of conversations that are not valuable to your company. A new customer who needs to know how to reset her password still deserves help, but this is a conversation that warrants a template. You’ll gain more time to have high-value conversations, which result in real insights.

Establishing a relaxed set of guidelines encourages the team to use their gut to decide when a new saved reply needs to be added; “I feel like we get this question a lot” is often all the justification you need.

Pro Tip: Don't hold back on saved replies

Be liberal with adding new saved replies. There is little downside to having a large library of replies other than getting somewhat trigger-happy and ending up with replies you rarely use. However, it’s easy to access them via your shared inbox's search feature, so this won’t generally be a problem.

10. Give directions chronologically

If you can do something for a customer, by all means, do it. The lower their perceived effort, the better they’ll rate your customer service.

When you really do need a customer to carry out a lengthy set of instructions on their own, use numbers or bullet points. Say, for instance, you need the customer to perform a traceroute to help you troubleshoot why a certain page is loading slowly, and you’ve already exhausted the other possibilities, you can advise the following:

Customer response from Help Scout

11. Cross-check whole-company support replies

Whole-company support is fantastic for a number of reasons, but don’t let people who aren’t trained in the art of support fire off replies without the sign-off of a seasoned pro.

Have non-support folks use your help desk’s @mentions feature in an internal note to a support team member so they can quickly review your draft reply before shipping it. Remember, customer support is challenging, specialized work — not just anyone can do it.

Taylor Morgan of SurveyGizmo on the value of customer support.

12. Offer to help further

Avoid ending conversations so bluntly that the customer feels you are hurrying them out the door. Instead, invite them to continue the conversation.

“Let me know if there’s anything else I can do for you. I’m happy to help.”

Make sure you customer knows you’re happy to assist with any lingering concerns or answer questions they may feel are “silly.” There are no silly questions in support.

13. Show, don’t just tell

When possible, take a quick screen recording to show customers what to do versus typing it out in steps. This tip comes from Denise Twum, Customer Support at issuu:

“Instead of telling customers what to do, show them! I use Recordit for screencasts — it’s free and generates a link, instead of having to attach a bulky file to your responses.

Now when someone writes in asking how to find a particular page in their account, I can log into the account and record the steps, versus typing out “1. Go here, 2. Click here, 3. Click this green button.”

It’s fast and doesn’t need to be super polished since it’s not for your knowledge base or a blog post. It saves a lot of back-and-forth and has made all the difference!”

Denise Twum, issuu

14. Clarity, clarity, clarity

Use accessible, candid, precise, plain language. Avoid using passive-aggressive or didactic language (“actually,” “ought to,” “should”), slang, colloquialisms, and technical jargon. For a refresher on clarity, we recommend The Elements of Style or these writing guides.

15. Steer clear of customer service clichés

Which one of the following statements do you think is more appropriate?

“You are being transferred. Your call is very important to us.”

“Hi Angela, I’m going to introduce you to Tim, our customer success specialist who will be better able to answer your question!”

Easy. One is a trite platitude that people are sick of hearing. The other explains to customers why the transfer is to their benefit. Wording makes all the difference.

16. Talk to your customers like people

… because they are. Consider the following disappointing example:

Hi,

We just received your inquiry. We'll get back to you about your order as soon as possible. For your records your support ticket number is #1234567. Include it in any future correspondence you might send.

— The App Team

How The Way We Talk Can Change The Way We Work PDF Free Download

The customer is literally treated like a number. The overly formal tone doesn’t engage the customer at all — is this an “inquiry” or a conversation with a real person?

Be friendly, personable, and casual. A follow-up email like this works better:

Hi there!

Thanks for your order with us! This is an automatic email just to let you know I've received your email. I'll get you an answer shortly.

Thanks!

Rick Smithson, Customer Support

Customers want to be treated with respect. The day you stop talking to them like regular people is the day you lose touch and relevance. After that, you start losing customers.

How The Way We Talk Can Change The Way We Work Pdf Free Download Windows 10

17. Simplify for foreign-language customers

When a customer contacts you in another language, use a translation tool (such as Google Translate), and write for translation by using active voice and simple words. Skip the idioms. Lean on visuals more heavily than text. If anyone on your team speaks the customer’s language, ask them to check your reply!

18. End on a high note

Make sure you always get to a place where, “Yes, I’m all set!” rings loud and clear. Try ending your conversation with a phrase like this:

“Excellent! I’m glad we were able to get that sorted out for you. Before you go, is there anything else I can assist you with today? I’m happy to help.”

Believe it or not, some customers might not mention that they have another problem if you don’t ask them about it. Adding “I’m happy to help” shows the customer that answering another question isn’t a burden; in fact, you’d be happy to do it.

Mastering difficult conversations

Feature requests that aren’t on the roadmap, items you don’t have in stock, rules that can’t be bent — you can’t always say yes, but you don’t have to be a meanie about it.

Whether you end up with a satisfied customer or an unhappy one might come down to how you phrase your response.

Difficult support situations aren’t easy (or fun) to handle, and there’s rarely a “perfect” solution to any problem. But with a little preparation, you can approach challenges with tact and grace, allowing you to keep standards high and make better decisions no matter what comes your way.

These techniques will help strengthen your personal relationships with customers as well as your reputation as a company who cares.

19. Apologize sincerely

As the ambassador of your company, you accept responsibility for the customer’s unhappiness. This doesn’t make you “at fault,” nor does it give the customer leeway to demand whatever they want. But it does give them someone to talk to instead of being angry at a faceless company.

“I’m sorry” is mandatory even in situations that aren’t your fault. Consider your “I’m truly sorry about that” a personal apology to the customer that the experience wasn’t up to their expectations — not that you are to blame.

20. But don’t linger on the apology

Focus your reply on action. Acknowledge the problem the customer is reporting, but spend most of your time focusing on what you’re going to do about it.

Say you’re sorry when it’s genuine, empathize, then move on to solving the problem or giving them context to their issue.

21. Be direct

When a customer reports a bug, they’re likely pretty frustrated. For both the initial report and your follow-up, cut to the chase and don’t waste their time.

Overtures, no matter how well intentioned, just delay the message, so keep your communication focused before adding any warm fuzzies.

22. Admit when you’re in the wrong

Whoops! Say a bug deletes some of a user’s settings or your site is under a DDoS attack. Excessive technical details won’t placate many customers or make the inability to use your product or access your site any less annoying. Instead, do the following:

  • Apologize outright

  • Explain the game plan

  • Let them know how you’ll be in touch

  • Follow up when it’s fixed

In 2016, Help Scout faced some uncharacteristic downtime. It was a terrible feeling, but we knew we couldn’t just stick our heads in the sand and hope people wouldn’t notice. We sent our customers the following email:

Nearly all the replies we received were along the lines of, “That’s okay, folks; we know how it goes sometimes! Keep up the great work!” Own up to your mistakes, follow up promptly, and take steps to ensure it doesn’t happen again. You’ll find your customers are a forgiving bunch.

23. Get personal

Great support is defined by genuine compassion. Use the first-person pronoun to demonstrate yours: “I completely understand why you’d want that,” or “I know how {blank} that can be.”

What you use in that {blank} will greatly affect the tone of your message — one that is obviously being used with an upset customer. Read the customer’s mood and relate with how he or she feels.

24. Admit what you don’t know

Don’t beat yourself up for not knowing an answer. A support rep’s responsibility is to have the tenacity to make things right, not to be perfect (especially true if you’re new).

Being speedy is never as important as communicating with accuracy. If you need time to dig into an issue, simply state that you’re going to find out the exact answer they need, and do just that.

The important thing is that you communicate. If your average response time is 30 minutes, don’t leave a customer hanging for hours just because you don’t know how to answer their question. Reply to let them know you’re looking into it and you’ll be in touch as soon as you know more.

Should you need to assign the conversation to another team, they may realize the issue could take a while. Have processes in place for situations like this. Allow other teams to reply to the customer directly to tell them they’re working on it, or flip the conversation back to support so the customer isn’t left hanging.

25. Ask for their “why”

When customers are vague about why they’re upset, they’re handing you the opportunity to request specifics.

Customer:Your update looks terrible. Make it more like it was before!”

Customer Support:“Oh no, sorry to hear that! Would you mind telling me a little more about what you liked better about the old version?”

You may do something with that intel and you may not, but it’s a win either way: They walk away pleased someone is listening and flattered someone cares enough to want their opinion.

People will complain about your product no matter how well it’s built, so just make sure your language is level-headed and professional.

26. Thank them for the heads up

People who offer detailed information about a bug they encountered are the unsung heroes of your product’s quality control.

Most customers don’t speak up, so you should cherish those who do.

Show them your gratitude by replying with a “Thanks so much for the heads up!” or preferably, “Hey, I really appreciate you taking the time to bring this to our attention!”

If they went above and beyond to help you fix something, send a handwritten thank-you note, or perhaps even a gift.

27. Let customers know they can hold you personally accountable

This tip comes from Matt Hunter, Technical Support for Evisions:

“When you need to forward a conversation to another department, include the phrase ‘Let me know if they don’t get back to you’ in your reply to the customer. It shows them you’re their ally in case someone else drops the ball.

Once I started making sure the customer knew it was okay to hold me accountable, it ended any bad feedback when the other department forgot to follow up. Customers feel like they can contact support and get instant results, which is great.

When the customer does reply to tell me they haven’t gotten a response, I always thank them for the follow up, so they know it’s mutually beneficial. Making the customer feel like they are part of the troubleshooting process and solution is huge.”

28. Feel free to “sandwich” bad news

When you can’t give a customer what they want, try to sandwich the bad news between two hopeful pieces of bread:

“Hey, that’s a great idea! I’m sorry we can’t do that right now because XYZ, but we’ll keep you posted if anything changes!”

“Good catch on that bug; you have an eagle eye. It might be a while before we can get that one fixed. We’re keeping an eye on other reports and will let you know if we have news!”

Never stop at no. Instead, offer a workaround, explain the reasoning behind why you’re not working on a certain issue, or suggest another product or service that might be a better fit.

29. Take a breather

When you feel a strong negative emotion, make sure to double and even triple check what you’ve written to a customer before you send it. No matter how their message made you feel, it’s your job to keep the conversation productive, so go back and read what you’ve written to make sure your emotions didn’t end up in your reply.

Would you use those same words in a conversation with a friend? If not, find new words.

Use your team for gut checks — ping your teammate in a note and ask them to review your draft reply to see if they catch anything you might have missed or have suggestions for framing your message more positively.

30. Let the customer know you’re their advocate

Showing customers how you’re advocating for their needs can lead to a 77% reduction in their perceived effort.

Clearly align yourself with them in favor of getting their problem solved without deferring blame or muddying the situation by over-explaining what you can’t do. Instead, reiterate your commitment to solving the problem by describing the following:

  • What you’ve just done
  • What you will do
  • How your actions are in support of their desired outcome
  • Why you genuinely sympathize with any frustrations they may have faced

“I can’t replicate your issue” is a good example here. It may be true, but without context, this reply feels flippant and lazy. You can accidentally leave the customer with the impression that you’d rather blame them instead of investigating the problem.

Quickly explaining the paths you already explored shows your thought process so the customer knows what you’ve tried and can see what lead you to suggest the non-ideal solution.

31. Focus on the end, not the means

The best solution you can provide isn’t always a solution the customer asked for. Getting to the bottom of what a customer is trying to accomplish can help you solve the problem in a way they haven’t considered.

With a little back-and-forth, you might discover that the customer asking for sub-projects really just needs a way to organize different teams sharing the same account, and hey, your product can do that!

Once you know what their real goal is, suggest that “it may take a bit of an adjustment to your current workflow, but there’s still a way to do what you’re ultimately trying to do!”

Customers care more about the end than the means. If you’re aware of the customer’s desired outcome and speak to that, your alternative might not look so bad after all.

32. Explain what’s going to happen next

When customers make requests you’re unable to fulfill right away, you can still give them something — often, just knowing someone is listening is enough.

“I’m so sorry there’s no way to do that at this time, but I’ll share your request with the product team! They’ll review it and scope it in relation to other initiatives. They also share how approved requests are placed on their road map, followed by coding and testing to ensure a smooth integration with their existing product.”

As a customer, it’s comforting to be assured your request won’t disappear into the ether — there’s a process for handling requests, and you’re being taken seriously.

33. Honesty is always the best policy

It’s better to say no and potentially disappoint a customer than hedge with falsehoods such as “hmm, good idea, let me check with the product team and get back to you.” If the answer is really no, it’s best to be upfront about that.

People can generally spot insincerity when they see it, so if you don’t think it’s a good idea to add yet another checkbox on the settings page, don’t make them think you do. Dishonesty will always come back to bite you.

34. Make your customers feel heard

The next best thing to giving customers what they want is showing them you take their ideas seriously.

Often, people just want to know you’re listening. Small touches like using the customer’s name and phrases such as “I understand” or “I can see why you’d want that feature” go a long way.

Thank customers for telling you what they’re looking for. Whatever their issue, it was important enough to take time out of their day to contact you. Acknowledge the effort and your gratitude for it.

Angry customers are often just as interested (if not more interested) in hearing that someone empathizes with their situation over getting the actual problem fixed. When you have to refuse a request, show your empathy and willingness to find an alternative solution. It is one of the best ways to lessen the sting of saying no.

35. Offer alternatives

You want to create happy customers, not marginally satisfied ones. When you don’t have what they’re looking for, you still have the opportunity to generate goodwill by pointing them toward a workaround or even a competitor.

Zappos, for example, refers customers elsewhere when they don’t have an item in stock — CEO Tony Hsieh has said that while they may lose the sale, in the long run it’s best for Zappos because “the customer appreciates the help and tells their friends the story.”

The resulting long-term loyalty and word-of-mouth advertising outweigh any short-term loss.

36. Explain the reasoning behind the issue

When people understand the “why,” they’re more likely to be forgiving. Say, for example, a customer wants to change another user’s email address but can’t. Don’t just tell them no; explain why.

It may not be the answer the customer wanted to hear, but an honest explanation and workaround is often enough to make them forget they didn’t get what they originally asked for.

37. Resist the temptation to mirror negativity

Here’s where “mirroring” doesn’t apply. Even when the customer is being unreasonable, apologize outright and ask how you might help resolve the issue.

“We’re sorry that you are having this problem” is an infuriating phrase for a customer to hear. It is nothing more than the deferment of blame.The attempt to apologize comes off as dismissive, all thanks to a misuse of tone.

If you come across a lost cause, keep it friendly, keep it professional, and keep it moving.

38. Transfer quickly, but explain why

Handing people off should be handled with care — never miss an opportunity to briefly explain to a customer why this movement will be to their benefit. It’s nearly impossible to get anyone excited about being transferred, but consider the two choices you have:

“I’ll have to transfer you for that.”

“I’m going to set you up with our specialist, Laura, who will get that squared away for you right away.”

Without this brief but relevant insertion, customers won’t know that you are actually doing the best thing, and second only to doing the best thing is letting people know you are.

39. Don’t drag out a lost cause

If a customer wants to cancel their account, do it right away. Nothing makes for a bitter departure quite like running your customers through the gauntlet when all they want to do is leave.

Winning customers back with exceptional service is fundamental, but when they already have one foot out the door, you’re better off reducing friction as they part. Learn what you can, see if there is a way to resolve the issue, and accept the outcome if there isn’t.

Customers aren’t necessarily gone for good just because they cancel their account. Hassling upon exit, however, will ensure they never return.

40. Remain firm when security is at stake

Support professionals’ natural inclination to help can leave team members open to social engineering if they aren’t careful. If your product has different permissions that deal with security or payment responsibilities, for example, you’ll have customers ask you to switch their roles, such as transferring account ownership.

You’ll want to assist right away, but you’ll need approval from the current account owner.

Email that person (separately, so the reply can’t be spoofed), and let the person making the request know you’ve done so and that it’s all about keeping their account safe. When the owner responds, check to make sure the original message you sent is included in the reply. No detail is too small when it comes to security.

You may still run into something like, “But the account owner is on vacation/has been fired/is very busy and important!” There’s always something, isn’t there?

For these situations, it helps to have a policy you can point to on your website. That way, they know you’re not being obstinate; rather, you’re serious about security and unable to make exceptions. That isn’t always easy for people to stomach, but you’ve still got to do the right thing.

41. Don’t pass the buck

If you messed up, pass the conversation on (with context) to your supervisor to figure it out from there together. Mistakes happen.

The buck should stop with you, however, if a customer requests “the manager” just to get around an accurate, honest response. When you’re acting with certainty, speak with kind authority:

“I’m afraid management would have to tell you the same thing. I’m really sorry we don’t have a better answer for you!”

It can also work to hand off the conversation to a teammate, who reiterates the message in different words:

“I’m afraid June is right — we currently don’t have a feasible workaround. I’m so sorry about that!”

Often, a second opinion is enough to convince the customer there’s nothing more to be done.

42. Don’t tolerate outright abuse

Should a customer cross the line and mistreat a team member, shut it down. The team needs to feel safe and like leadership has their backs.

Your reply to the customer should point out the abusive language and state that while you wish to be their advocate, that requires mutual respect. In most cases, that’s enough to de-escalate the situation. If not, you’re within your rights to cancel the account.

It’s hard to come up with a perfect solution for a customer in this state, and know that even if you handle things perfectly, some people simply cannot be appeased. Don’t let that stop you from making your best effort.

Delighting your customers

Beyond providing basic friendly service and turning bad situations around, how you talk to your customers also goes a long way in creating a delightful experience for them. These techniques will help you delight every customer you talk to.

43. Ask questions to get to the bottom of what they’re really trying to accomplish

Often, your customers will come to you asking if you carry the proverbial quarter-inch drill bit when what they really need is a quarter-inch hole.

It’s the principle behind the jobs-to-be-done framework: When a customer asks whether you have a specific solution, take some extra time collect insights and ask what they’re ultimately trying to do.

Ann Goliak, who moved into quality assurance from a support role at Basecamp, began her career as a librarian in a physics and astronomy library. She recalls speaking with a group of undergrads who showed up looking for a basic book on astronomy.

They weren’t, however, really interested in the physical and chemical properties of the cosmos. “It took a lot of back and forth but in the end, what they really wanted was a star chart because they wanted to go stargazing and make out.”

Aside from helping you better understand your customers’ use cases, asking questions and receiving input from your customers builds relationships and generates trust.

That trust will allow you to guide them toward better solutions they haven’t considered, even when it means going through the pain of making a shift in the way they work. If these conversations ultimately lead to a shift in how your product works, then all the better.

44. Boost happiness with GIFs, exclamation points, and emoji

Concerned that using “fun” elements in your customer support correspondence will come across as frivolous or unprofessional? Don’t be! Research shows that subject-matter experts who use emoticons are perceived as more “friendly and competent” than those who don’t.

Contractions, exclamation points, emoticons/emoji and even GIFs are great ways to convey meaning with humanity. In text communications, cues like exclamation points and emoticons can help the sender convey a positive tone the recipient may not otherwise assume.

Remember to modulate your tone for the situation. When a customer initiates the conversation with a greeting like “Hey folks!” that’s a good indication you can exclaim and emote to your heart’s content in your reply.

And GIFs aren’t only fun and games: They can also help you deliver better customer support. If a picture is worth 1,000 words, then animated GIFs are worth millions in instructional wisdom.

45. Fix problems that aren’t your fault

Forces outside your control — email clients not playing nicely, your customer’s IT department delaying a company-wide upgrade from Internet Explorer 8 — are going to conspire and make doing business with you harder than it should be.

But if you don’t want to lose business, you can’t throw your hands up and blame those external forces — you won’t win any positive word-of-mouth about your support by treating the symptom rather than the cause.

Sometimes, you need to fix problems you didn’t create. You have a responsibility to help your customer even when the issue is with a tool you don’t support.

It may mean working with third-party tools; it may mean stopping to teach less savvy users about how saving to a PDF works. You can at least answer their immediate questions, then direct them to resources to help them learn.

Your customer doesn’t care whose fault the problem is. They just want it fixed.

46. Build relationships by picking up on personal details

Even when you think you can anticipate the customer’s core need because you’ve seen it before, think twice about shutting down the conversation with a single reply. Take the opportunity to build a relationship.

Basecamp CEO Jason Fried says the thing he envies about brick-and-mortar businesses is the opportunity to engage face-to-face with customers.

Customer service teams don’t have as many opportunities to connect personally over the phone or via email, so when the opportunity arises, seize it! When you can pick up on a detail in their email signature or Twitter bio (“Oh, you’re from Tucson? I went to school at ASU!”), take advantage of connecting like humans.

47. Give thanks in the real world

Time to bring the personal touch back to the real world — send your customers handwritten thank-you notes.

What other 5-minute task creates as much ROI as thanking your customers? You won’t have time to hand-write every customer, but if there is one activity that should never get lost in the shuffle of building a business, it’s thanking the people who make it possible.

One last word

“I just want to speak to a real human!” is one of the most common complaints customers have when dealing with customer support.

Selecting one for this and two for that, listening to tinny hold music, being transferred to another department and accidentally hung up on … years of dealing with that kind of insensitive, robotic, inhuman customer service has hardened us all.

We can (and should) do better. As we say in our customer support style guide,

“Clarity and humanity (your own and the recipient’s) above everything else.”

When the choice is between speed and humanity, choose humanity. When the choice is between closing a huge deal and humanity, choose humanity. When the choice is between meeting some key performance indicator and humanity … you got it.

Always err on the side of humanity. The rest will take care of itself.

Leer en español
Ler em português

The head of a large division of a multinational corporation was running a meeting devoted to performance assessment. Each senior manager stood up, reviewed the individuals in his group, and evaluated them for promotion. Although there were women in every group, not one of them made the cut. One after another, each manager declared, in effect, that every woman in his group didn’t have the self-confidence needed to be promoted. The division head began to doubt his ears. How could it be that all the talented women in the division suffered from a lack of self-confidence?

In all likelihood, they didn’t. Consider the many women who have left large corporations to start their own businesses, obviously exhibiting enough confidence to succeed on their own. Judgments about confidence can be inferred only from the way people present themselves, and much of that presentation is in the form of talk.

The CEO of a major corporation told me that he often has to make decisions in five minutes about matters on which others may have worked five months. He said he uses this rule: If the person making the proposal seems confident, the CEO approves it. If not, he says no. This might seem like a reasonable approach. But my field of research, socio-linguistics, suggests otherwise. The CEO obviously thinks he knows what a confident person sounds like. But his judgment, which may be dead right for some people, may be dead wrong for others.

Communication isn’t as simple as saying what you mean. How you say what you mean is crucial, and differs from one person to the next, because using language is learned social behavior: How we talk and listen are deeply influenced by cultural experience. Although we might think that our ways of saying what we mean are natural, we can run into trouble if we interpret and evaluate others as if they necessarily felt the same way we’d feel if we spoke the way they did.

Since 1974, I have been researching the influence of linguistic style on conversations and human relationships. In the past four years, I have extended that research to the workplace, where I have observed how ways of speaking learned in childhood affect judgments of competence and confidence, as well as who gets heard, who gets credit, and what gets done.

The division head who was dumbfounded to hear that all the talented women in his organization lacked confidence was probably right to be skeptical. The senior managers were judging the women in their groups by their own linguistic norms, but women—like people who have grown up in a different culture—have often learned different styles of speaking than men, which can make them seem less competent and self-assured than they are.

What Is Linguistic Style?

Everything that is said must be said in a certain way—in a certain tone of voice, at a certain rate of speed, and with a certain degree of loudness. Whereas often we consciously consider what to say before speaking, we rarely think about how to say it, unless the situation is obviously loaded—for example, a job interview or a tricky performance review. Linguistic style refers to a person’s characteristic speaking pattern. It includes such features as directness or indirectness, pacing and pausing, word choice, and the use of such elements as jokes, figures of speech, stories, questions, and apologies. In other words, linguistic style is a set of culturally learned signals by which we not only communicate what we mean but also interpret others’ meaning and evaluate one another as people.

This article also appears in:

  • HBR’s 10 Must Reads on Women and Leadership
    Leadership and Managing PeopleBook

Consider turn taking, one element of linguistic style. Conversation is an enterprise in which people take turns: One person speaks, then the other responds. However, this apparently simple exchange requires a subtle negotiation of signals so that you know when the other person is finished and it’s your turn to begin. Cultural factors such as country or region of origin and ethnic background influence how long a pause seems natural. When Bob, who is from Detroit, has a conversation with his colleague Joe, from New York City, it’s hard for him to get a word in edgewise because he expects a slightly longer pause between turns than Joe does. A pause of that length never comes because, before it has a chance to, Joe senses an uncomfortable silence, which he fills with more talk of his own. Both men fail to realize that differences in conversational style are getting in their way. Bob thinks that Joe is pushy and uninterested in what he has to say, and Joe thinks that Bob doesn’t have much to contribute. Similarly, when Sally relocated from Texas to Washington, D.C., she kept searching for the right time to break in during staff meetings—and never found it. Although in Texas she was considered outgoing and confident, in Washington she was perceived as shy and retiring. Her boss even suggested she take an assertiveness training course. Thus slight differences in conversational style—in these cases, a few seconds of pause—can have a surprising impact on who gets heard and on the judgments, including psychological ones, that are made about people and their abilities.

Every utterance functions on two levels. We’re all familiar with the first one: Language communicates ideas. The second level is mostly invisible to us, but it plays a powerful role in communication. As a form of social behavior, language also negotiates relationships. Through ways of speaking, we signal—and create—the relative status of speakers and their level of rapport. If you say, “Sit down!” you are signaling that you have higher status than the person you are addressing, that you are so close to each other that you can drop all pleasantries, or that you are angry. If you say, “I would be honored if you would sit down,” you are signaling great respect—or great sarcasm, depending on your tone of voice, the situation, and what you both know about how close you really are. If you say, “You must be so tired—why don’t you sit down,” you are communicating either closeness and concern or condescension. Each of these ways of saying “the same thing”—telling someone to sit down—can have a vastly different meaning.

In every community known to linguists, the patterns that constitute linguistic style are relatively different for men and women. What’s “natural” for most men speaking a given language is, in some cases, different from what’s “natural” for most women. That is because we learn ways of speaking as children growing up, especially from peers, and children tend to play with other children of the same sex. The research of sociologists, anthropologists, and psychologists observing American children at play has shown that, although both girls and boys find ways of creating rapport and negotiating status, girls tend to learn conversational rituals that focus on the rapport dimension of relationships whereas boys tend to learn rituals that focus on the status dimension.

Girls tend to play with a single best friend or in small groups, and they spend a lot of time talking. They use language to negotiate how close they are; for example, the girl you tell your secrets to becomes your best friend. Girls learn to downplay ways in which one is better than the others and to emphasize ways in which they are all the same. From childhood, most girls learn that sounding too sure of themselves will make them unpopular with their peers—although nobody really takes such modesty literally. A group of girls will ostracize a girl who calls attention to her own superiority and criticize her by saying, “She thinks she’s something”; and a girl who tells others what to do is called “bossy.” Thus girls learn to talk in ways that balance their own needs with those of others—to save face for one another in the broadest sense of the term.

Boys tend to play very differently. They usually play in larger groups in which more boys can be included, but not everyone is treated as an equal. Boys with high status in their group are expected to emphasize rather than downplay their status, and usually one or several boys will be seen as the leader or leaders. Boys generally don’t accuse one another of being bossy, because the leader is expected to tell lower-status boys what to do. Boys learn to use language to negotiate their status in the group by displaying their abilities and knowledge, and by challenging others and resisting challenges. Giving orders is one way of getting and keeping the high-status role. Another is taking center stage by telling stories or jokes.

This is not to say that all boys and girls grow up this way or feel comfortable in these groups or are equally successful at negotiating within these norms. But, for the most part, these childhood play groups are where boys and girls learn their conversational styles. In this sense, they grow up in different worlds. The result is that women and men tend to have different habitual ways of saying what they mean, and conversations between them can be like cross-cultural communication: You can’t assume that the other person means what you would mean if you said the same thing in the same way.

My research in companies across the United States shows that the lessons learned in childhood carry over into the workplace. Consider the following example: A focus group was organized at a major multinational company to evaluate a recently implemented flextime policy. The participants sat in a circle and discussed the new system. The group concluded that it was excellent, but they also agreed on ways to improve it. The meeting went well and was deemed a success by all, according to my own observations and everyone’s comments to me. But the next day, I was in for a surprise.

I had left the meeting with the impression that Phil had been responsible for most of the suggestions adopted by the group. But as I typed up my notes, I noticed that Cheryl had made almost all those suggestions. I had thought that the key ideas came from Phil because he had picked up Cheryl’s points and supported them, speaking at greater length in doing so than she had in raising them.

It would be easy to regard Phil as having stolen Cheryl’s ideas—and her thunder. But that would be inaccurate. Phil never claimed Cheryl’s ideas as his own. Cheryl herself told me later that she left the meeting confident she had contributed significantly, and that appreciated Phil’s support. She volunteered, with a laugh, “It was not one of those times when a woman says something and it’s ignored, then a man says it and it’s picked up.” In other words, Cheryl and Phil worked well as a team, the group fulfilled its charge, and the company got what needed. So what was the problem?

I went back and asked all the participants they thought had been the most influential group member, the one most responsible for the ideas that had been adopted. The pattern of answers was revealing. The two other women in the group named Cheryl. Two of the three men named Phil. Of the men, only Phil named Cheryl. In other words, in this instance, the women evaluated the contribution of another woman more accurately than the men did.

Meetings like this take place daily in companies around the country. Unless managers are unusually good at listening closely to how people say what they mean, the talents of someone like Cheryl may well be undervalued and underutilized.

One Up, One Down

Individual speakers vary in how sensitive they are to the social dynamics of language—in other words, to the subtle nuances of what others say to them. Men tend to be sensitive to the power dynamics of interaction, speaking in ways that position themselves as one up and resisting being put in a one-down position by others. Women tend to react more strongly to the rapport dynamic, speaking in ways that save face for others and buffering statements that could be seen as putting others in a one-down position. These linguistic patterns are pervasive; you can hear them in hundreds of exchanges in the workplace every day. And, as in the case of Cheryl and Phil, they affect who gets heard and who gets credit.

Getting Credit.

Even so small a linguistic strategy as the choice of pronoun can affect who gets credit. In my research in the workplace, I heard men say “I” in situations where I heard women say “we.” For example, one publishing company executive said, “I’m hiring a new manager. I’m going to put him in charge of my marketing division,” as if he owned the corporation. In stark contrast, I recorded women saying “we” when referring to work they alone had done. One woman explained that it would sound too self-promoting to claim credit in an obvious way by saying, “I did this.” Yet she expected—sometimes vainly—that others would know it was her work and would give her the credit she did not claim for herself.

Even the choice of pronoun can affect who gets credit.

Managers might leap to the conclusion that women who do not take credit for what they’ve done should be taught to do so. But that solution is problematic because we associate ways of speaking with moral qualities: The way we speak is who we are and who we want to be.

Veronica, a senior researcher in a high-tech company, had an observant boss. He noticed that many of the ideas coming out of the group were hers but that often someone else trumpeted them around the office and got credit for them. He advised her to “own” her ideas and make sure she got the credit. But Veronica found she simply didn’t enjoy her work if she had to approach it as what seemed to her an unattractive and unappealing “grabbing game.” It was her dislike of such behavior that had led her to avoid it in the first place.

Whatever the motivation, women are less likely than men to have learned to blow their own horn. And they are more likely than men to believe that if they do so, they won’t be liked.

Many have argued that the growing trend of assigning work to teams may be especially congenial to women, but it may also create complications for performance evaluation. When ideas are generated and work is accomplished in the privacy of the team, the outcome of the team’s effort may become associated with the person most vocal about reporting results. There are many women and men—but probably relatively more women—who are reluctant to put themselves forward in this way and who consequently risk not getting credit for their contributions.

Confidence and Boasting.

The CEO who based his decisions on the confidence level of speakers was articulating a value that is widely shared in U.S. businesses: One way to judge confidence is by an individual’s behavior, especially verbal behavior. Here again, many women are at a disadvantage.

Studies show that women are more likely to downplay their certainty and men are more likely to minimize their doubts. Psychologist Laurie Heatherington and her colleagues devised an ingenious experiment, which they reported in the journal Sex Roles (Volume 29, 1993). They asked hundreds of incoming college students to predict what grades they would get in their first year. Some subjects were asked to make their predictions privately by writing them down and placing them in an envelope; others were asked to make their predictions publicly, in the presence of a researcher. The results showed that more women than men predicted lower grades for themselves if they made their predictions publicly. If they made their predictions privately, the predictions were the same as those of the men—and the same as their actual grades. This study provides evidence that what comes across as lack of confidence—predicting lower grades for oneself—may reflect not one’s actual level of confidence but the desire not to seem boastful.

Women are likely to downplay their certainty; men are likely to minimize their doubts.

These habits with regard to appearing humble or confident result from the socialization of boys and girls by their peers in childhood play. As adults, both women and men find these behaviors reinforced by the positive responses they get from friends and relatives who share the same norms. But the norms of behavior in the U.S. business world are based on the style of interaction that is more common among men—at least, among American men.

Asking Questions.

Although asking the right questions is one of the hallmarks of a good manager, how and when questions are asked can send unintended signals about competence and power. In a group, if only one person asks questions, he or she risks being seen as the only ignorant one. Furthermore, we judge others not only by how they speak but also by how they are spoken to. The person who asks questions may end up being lectured to and looking like a novice under a schoolmaster’s tutelage. The way boys are socialized makes them more likely to be aware of the underlying power dynamic by which a question asker can be seen in a one-down position.

One practicing physician learned the hard way that any exchange of information can become the basis for judgments—or misjudgments—about competence. During her training, she received a negative evaluation that she thought was unfair, so she asked her supervising physician for an explanation. He said that she knew less than her peers. Amazed at his answer, she asked how he had reached that conclusion. He said, “You ask more questions.”

Along with cultural influences and individual personality, gender seems to play a role in whether and when people ask questions. For example, of all the observations I’ve made in lectures and books, the one that sparks the most enthusiastic flash of recognition is that men are less likely than women to stop and ask for directions when they are lost. I explain that men often resist asking for directions because they are aware that it puts them in a one-down position and because they value the independence that comes with finding their way by themselves. Asking for directions while driving is only one instance—along with many others that researchers have examined—in which men seem less likely than women to ask questions. I believe this is because they are more attuned than women to the potential face-losing aspect of asking questions. And men who believe that asking questions might reflect negatively on them may, in turn, be likely to form a negative opinion of others who ask questions in situations where they would not.

Men are more attuned than women to the potential face-losing aspect of asking questions.

Conversational Rituals

Conversation is fundamentally ritual in the sense that we speak in ways our culture has conventionalized and expect certain types of responses. Take greetings, for example. I have heard visitors to the United States complain that Americans are hypocritical because they ask how you are but aren’t interested in the answer. To Americans, How are you? is obviously a ritualized way to start a conversation rather than a literal request for information. In other parts of the world, including the Philippines, people ask each other, “Where are you going?” when they meet. The question seems intrusive to Americans, who do not realize that it, too, is a ritual query to which the only expected reply is a vague “Over there.”

It’s easy and entertaining to observe different rituals in foreign countries. But we don’t expect differences, and are far less likely to recognize the ritualized nature of our conversations, when we are with our compatriots at work. Our differing rituals can be even more problematic when we think we’re all speaking the same language.

Apologies.

Consider the simple phrase I’m sorry.

Catherine: How did that big presentation go?

Bob: Oh, not very well. I got a lot of flak from the VP for finance, and I didn’t have the numbers at my fingertips.

Catherine: Oh, I’m sorry. I know how hard you worked on that.

In this case, I’m sorry probably means “I’m sorry that happened,” not “I apologize,” unless it was Catherine’s responsibility to supply Bob with the numbers for the presentation. Women tend to say I’m sorry more frequently than men, and often they intend it in this way—as a ritualized means of expressing concern. It’s one of many learned elements of conversational style that girls often use to establish rapport. Ritual apologies—like other conversational rituals—work well when both parties share the same assumptions about their use. But people who utter frequent ritual apologies may end up appearing weaker, less confident, and literally more blameworthy than people who don’t.

Apologies tend to be regarded differently by men, who are more likely to focus on the status implications of exchanges. Many men avoid apologies because they see them as putting the speaker in a one-down position. I observed with some amazement an encounter among several lawyers engaged in a negotiation over a speakerphone. At one point, the lawyer in whose office I was sitting accidentally elbowed the telephone and cut off the call. When his secretary got the parties back on again, I expected him to say what I would have said: “Sorry about that. I knocked the phone with my elbow.” Instead, he said, “Hey, what happened? One minute you were there; the next minute you were gone!” This lawyer seemed to have an automatic impulse not to admit fault if he didn’t have to. For me, it was one of those pivotal moments when you realize that the world you live in is not the one everyone lives in and that the way you assume is the way to talk is really only one of many.

Those who caution managers not to undermine their authority by apologizing are approaching interaction from the perspective of the power dynamic. In many cases, this strategy is effective. On the other hand, when I asked people what frustrated them in their jobs, one frequently voiced complaint was working with or for someone who refuses to apologize or admit fault. In other words, accepting responsibility for errors and admitting mistakes may be an equally effective or superior strategy in some settings.

Feedback.

Styles of giving feedback contain a ritual element that often is the cause for misunderstanding. Consider the following exchange: A manager had to tell her marketing director to rewrite a report. She began this potentially awkward task by citing the report’s strengths and then moved to the main point: the weaknesses that needed to be remedied. The marketing director seemed to understand and accept his supervisor’s comments, but his revision contained only minor changes and failed to address the major weaknesses. When the manager told him of her dissatisfaction, he accused her of misleading him: “You told me it was fine.”

The impasse resulted from different linguistic styles. To the manager, it was natural to buffer the criticism by beginning with praise. Telling her subordinate that his report is inadequate and has to be rewritten puts him in a one-down position. Praising him for the parts that are good is a ritualized way of saving face for him. But the marketing director did not share his supervisor’s assumption about how feedback should be given. Instead, he assumed that what she mentioned first was the main point and that what she brought up later was an afterthought.

Those who expect feedback to come in the way the manager presented it would appreciate her tact and would regard a more blunt approach as unnecessarily callous. But those who share the marketing director’s assumptions would regard the blunt approach as honest and no-nonsense, and the manager’s as obfuscating. Because each one’s assumptions seemed self-evident, each blamed the other: The manager thought the marketing director was not listening, and he thought she had not communicated clearly or had changed her mind. This is significant because it illustrates that incidents labeled vaguely as “poor communication” may be the result of differing linguistic styles.

Compliments.

Exchanging compliments is a common ritual, especially among women. A mismatch in expectations about this ritual left Susan, a manager in the human resources field, in a one-down position. She and her colleague Bill had both given presentations at a national conference. On the airplane home, Susan told Bill, “That was a great talk!” “Thank you,” he said. Then she asked, “What did you think of mine?” He responded with a lengthy and detailed critique, as she listened uncomfortably. An unpleasant feeling of having been put down came over her. Somehow she had been positioned as the novice in need of his expert advice. Even worse, she had only herself to blame, since she had, after all, asked Bill what he thought of her talk.

But had Susan asked for the response she received? she asked Bill what he thought about her talk, she expected to hear not a critique but a compliment. In fact, her question had been an attempt to repair a ritual gone awry. Susan’s initial compliment to Bill was the kind of automatic recognition she felt was more or less required after a colleague gives a presentation, and she expected Bill to respond with a matching compliment. She was just talking automatically, but he either sincerely misunderstood the ritual simply took the opportunity to bask in the one-up position of critic. Whatever his motivation, it was Susan’s attempt to spark exchange of compliments that gave him opening.

Although this exchange could have occurred between two men, it does not seem coincidental that it happened between a man and a woman. Linguist Janet Holmes discovered that women pay more compliments than men (Anthropological Linguistics, Volume 28, 1986). And, as I have observed, fewer men are likely to ask, “What did you think of my talk?” precisely because the question might invite an unwanted critique.

In the social structure of the peer groups in which they grow up, boys are indeed looking for opportunities to put others down and take the one-up position for themselves. In contrast, one of the rituals girls learn is taking the one-down position but assuming that the other person will recognize the ritual nature of the self-denigration and pull them back up.

The exchange between Susan and Bill also suggests how women’s and men’s characteristic styles may put women at a disadvantage in the workplace. If one person is trying to minimize status differences, maintain an appearance that everyone is equal, and save face for the other, while another person is trying to maintain the one-up position and avoid being positioned as one down, the person seeking the one-up position is likely to get it. At the same time, the person who has not been expending any effort to avoid the one-down position is likely to end up in it. Because women are more likely to take (or accept) the role of advice seeker, men are more inclined to interpret a ritual question from a woman as a request for advice.

Ritual Opposition.

Apologizing, mitigating criticism with praise, and exchanging compliments are rituals common among women that men often take literally. A ritual common among men that women often take literally is ritual opposition.

A woman in communications told me she watched with distaste and distress as her office mate argued heatedly with another colleague about whose division should suffer budget cuts. She was even more surprised, however, that a short time later they were as friendly as ever. “How can you pretend that fight never happened?” she asked. “Who’s pretending it never happened?” he responded, as puzzled by her question as she had been by his behavior. “It happened,” he said, “and it’s over.” What she took as literal fighting to him was a routine part of daily negotiation: a ritual fight.

Many Americans expect the discussion of ideas to be a ritual fight—that is, an exploration through verbal opposition. They present their own ideas in the most certain and absolute form they can, and wait to see if they are challenged. Being forced to defend an idea provides an opportunity to test it. In the same spirit, they may play devil’s advocate in challenging their colleagues’ ideas—trying to poke holes and find weaknesses—as a way of helping them explore and test their ideas.

This style can work well if everyone shares it, but those unaccustomed to it are likely to miss its ritual nature. They may give up an idea that is challenged, taking the objections as an indication that the idea was a poor one. Worse, they may take the opposition as a personal attack and may find it impossible to do their best in a contentious environment. People unaccustomed to this style may hedge when stating their ideas in order to fend off potential attacks. Ironically, this posture makes their arguments appear weak and is more likely to invite attack from pugnacious colleagues than to fend it off.

Ritual opposition can even play a role in who gets hired. Some consulting firms that recruit graduates from the top business schools use a confrontational interviewing technique. They challenge the candidate to “crack a case” in real time. A partner at one firm told me, “Women tend to do less well in this kind of interaction, and it certainly affects who gets hired. But, in fact, many women who don’t ‘test well’ turn out to be good consultants. They’re often smarter than some of the men who looked like analytic powerhouses under pressure.”

Those who are uncomfortable with verbal opposition—women or men—run the risk of seeming insecure about their ideas.

The level of verbal opposition varies from one company’s culture to the next, but I saw instances of it in all the organizations I studied. Anyone who is uncomfortable with this linguistic style—and that includes some men as well as many women—risks appearing insecure about his or her ideas.

Negotiating Authority

In organizations, formal authority comes from the position one holds. But actual authority has to be negotiated day to day. The effectiveness of individual managers depends in part on their skill in negotiating authority and on whether others reinforce or undercut their efforts. The way linguistic style reflects status plays a subtle role in placing individuals within a hierarchy.

Managing Up and Down.

In all the companies I researched, I heard from women who knew they were doing a superior job and knew that their coworkers (and sometimes their immediate bosses) knew it as well, but believed that the higher-ups did not. They frequently told me that something outside themselves was holding them back and found it frustrating because they thought that all that should be necessary for success was to do a great job, that superior performance should be recognized and rewarded. In contrast, men often told me that if women weren’t promoted, it was because they simply weren’t up to snuff. Looking around, however, I saw evidence that men more often than women behaved in ways likely to get them recognized by those with the power to determine their advancement.

In all the companies I visited, I observed what happened at lunchtime. I saw young men who regularly ate lunch with their boss, and senior men who ate with the big boss. I noticed far fewer women who sought out the highest-level person they could eat with. But one is more likely to get recognition for work done if one talks about it to those higher up, and it is easier to do so if the lines of communication are already open. Furthermore, given the opportunity for a conversation with superiors, men and women are likely to have different ways of talking about their accomplishments because of the different ways in which they were socialized as children. Boys are rewarded by their peers if they talk up their achievements, whereas girls are rewarded if they play theirs down. Linguistic styles common among men may tend to give them some advantages when it comes to managing up.

All speakers are aware of the status of the person they are talking to and adjust accordingly. Everyone speaks differently when talking to a boss than when talking to a subordinate. But, surprisingly, the ways in which they adjust their talk may be different and thus may project different images of themselves.

Communications researchers Karen Tracy and Eric Eisenberg studied how relative status affects the way people give criticism. They devised a business letter that contained some errors and asked 13 male and 11 female college students to role-play delivering criticism under two scenarios. In the first, the speaker was a boss talking to a subordinate; in the second, the speaker was a subordinate talking to his or her boss. The researchers measured how hard the speakers tried to avoid hurting the feelings of the person they were criticizing.

One might expect people to be more careful about how they deliver criticism when they are in a subordinate position. Tracy and Eisenberg found that hypothesis to be true for the men in their study but not for the women. As they reported in Research on Language and Social Interaction (Volume 24, 1990/1991), the women showed more concern about the other person’s feelings when they were playing the role of superior. In other words, the women were more careful to save face for the other person when they were managing down than when they were managing up. This pattern recalls the way girls are socialized: Those who are in some way superior are expected to downplay rather than flaunt their superiority.

In my own recordings of workplace communication, I observed women talking in similar ways. For example, when a manager had to correct a mistake made by her secretary, she did so by acknowledging that there were mitigating circumstances. She said, laughing, “You know, it’s hard to do things around here, isn’t it, with all these people coming in!” The manager was saving face for her subordinate, just like the female students role-playing in the Tracy and Eisenberg study.

Is this an effective way to communicate? One must ask, effective for what? The manager in question established a positive environment in her group, and the work was done effectively. On the other hand, numerous women in many different fields told me that their bosses say they don’t project the proper authority.

Indirectness.

Another linguistic signal that varies with power and status is indirectness—the tendency to say what we mean without spelling it out in so many words. Despite the widespread belief in the United States that it’s always best to say exactly what we mean, indirectness is a fundamental and pervasive element in human communication. It also is one of the elements that vary most from one culture to another, and it can cause enormous misunderstanding when speakers have different habits and expectations about how it is used. It’s often said that American women are more indirect than American men, but in fact everyone tends to be indirect in some situations and in different ways. Allowing for cultural, ethnic, regional, and individual differences, women are especially likely to be indirect when it comes to telling others what to do, which is not surprising, considering girls’ readiness to brand other girls as bossy. On the other hand, men are especially likely to be indirect when it comes to admitting fault or weakness, which also is not surprising, considering boys’ readiness to push around boys who assume the one-down position.

At first glance, it would seem that only the powerful can get away with bald commands such as, “Have that report on my desk by noon.” But power in an organization also can lead to requests so indirect that they don’t sound like requests at all. A boss who says, “Do we have the sales data by product line for each region?” would be surprised and frustrated if a subordinate responded, “We probably do” rather than “I’ll get it for you.” Examples such as these notwithstanding, many researchers have claimed that those in subordinate positions are more likely to speak indirectly, and that is surely accurate in some situations. For example, linguist Charlotte Linde, in a study published in Language in Society (Volume 17, 1988), examined the black-box conversations that took place between pilots and copilots before airplane crashes. In one particularly tragic instance, an Air Florida plane crashed into the Potomac River immediately after attempting take-off from National Airport in Washington, D.C., killing all but 5 of the 74 people on board. The pilot, it turned out, had little experience flying in icy weather. The copilot had a bit more, and it became heartbreakingly clear on analysis that he had tried to warn the pilot but had done so indirectly. Alerted by Linde’s observation, I examined the transcript of the conversations and found evidence of her hypothesis. The copilot repeatedly called attention to the bad weather and to ice buildup on other planes:

Copilot: Look how the ice is just hanging on his, ah, back, back there, see that? See all those icicles on the back there and everything?

Pilot: Yeah.

How The Way We Talk Can Change The Way We Work Pdf Free Download Free

[The copilot also expressed concern about the long waiting time since deicing.]

Copilot: Boy, this is a, this is a losing battle here on trying to deice those things; it [gives] you a false feeling of security, that’s all that does.

[Just before they took off, the copilot expressed another concern—about abnormal instrument readings—but again he didn’t press the matter when it wasn’t picked up by the pilot.]

Copilot: That don’t seem right, does it? [3-second pause]. Ah, that’s not right. Well—

Pilot: Yes it is, there’s 80.

Copilot: Naw, I don’t think that’s right. [7-second pause] Ah, maybe it is.

Shortly thereafter, the plane took off, with tragic results. In other instances as well as this one, Linde observed that copilots, who are second in command, are more likely to express themselves indirectly or otherwise mitigate, or soften, their communication when they are suggesting courses of action to the pilot. In an effort to avert similar disasters, some airlines now offer training for copilots to express themselves in more assertive ways.

How The Way We Talk Can Change The Way We Work PDF Free Download For Windows 7

This solution seems self-evidently appropriate to most Americans. But when I assigned Linde’s article in a graduate seminar I taught, a Japanese student pointed out that it would be just as effective to train pilots to pick up on hints. This approach reflects assumptions about communication that typify Japanese culture, which places great value on the ability of people to understand one another without putting everything into words. Either directness or indirectness can be a successful means of communication as long as the linguistic style is understood by the participants.

In the world of work, however, there is more at stake than whether the communication is understood. People in powerful positions are likely to reward styles similar to their own, because we all tend to take as self-evident the logic of our own styles. Accordingly, there is evidence that in the U.S. workplace, where instructions from a superior are expected to be voiced in a relatively direct manner, those who tend to be indirect when telling subordinates what to do may be perceived as lacking in confidence.

People in powerful positions are likely to reward linguistic styles similar to their own.

Consider the case of the manager at a national magazine who was responsible for giving assignments to reporters. She tended to phrase her assignments as questions. For example, she asked, “How would you like to do the X project with Y?” or said, “I was thinking of putting you on the X project. Is that okay?” This worked extremely well with her staff; they liked working for her, and the work got done in an efficient and orderly manner. But when she had her midyear evaluation with her own boss, he criticized her for not assuming the proper demeanor with her staff.

In any work environment, the higher-ranking person has the power to enforce his or her view of appropriate demeanor, created in part by linguistic style. In most U.S. contexts, that view is likely to assume that the person in authority has the right to be relatively direct rather than to mitigate orders. There also are cases, however, in which the higher-ranking person assumes a more indirect style. The owner of a retail operation told her subordinate, a store manager, to do something. He said he would do it, but a week later he still hadn’t. They were able to trace the difficulty to the following conversation: She had said, “The bookkeeper needs help with the billing. How would you feel about helping her out?” He had said, “Fine.” This conversation had seemed to be clear and flawless at the time, but it turned out that they had interpreted this simple exchange in very different ways. She thought he meant, “Fine, I’ll help the bookkeeper out.” He thought he meant, “Fine, I’ll think about how I would feel about helping the bookkeeper out.” He did think about it and came to the conclusion that he had more important things to do and couldn’t spare the time.

To the owner, “How would you feel about helping the bookkeeper out?” was an obviously appropriate way to give the order “Help the bookkeeper out with the billing.” Those who expect orders to be given as bald imperatives may find such locutions annoying or even misleading. But those for whom this style is natural do not think they are being indirect. They believe they are being clear in a polite or respectful way.

This article also appears in:

  • HBR’s 10 Must Reads on Communication
    CommunicationBook

What is atypical in this example is that the person with the more indirect style was the boss, so the store manager was motivated to adapt to her style. She still gives orders the same way, but the store manager now understands how she means what she says. It’s more common in U.S. business contexts for the highest-ranking people to take a more direct style, with the result that many women in authority risk being judged by their superiors as lacking the appropriate demeanor—and, consequently, lacking confidence.

How The Way We Talk Can Change The Way We Work PDF Free Download 64 Bit

What to Do?

I am often asked, What is the best way to give criticism? or What is the best way to give orders?—in other words, What is the best way to communicate? The answer is that there is no one best way. The results of a given way of speaking will vary depending on the situation, the culture of the company, the relative rank of speakers, their linguistic styles, and how those styles interact with one another. Because of all those influences, any way of speaking could be perfect for communicating with one person in one situation and disastrous with someone else in another. The critical skill for managers is to become aware of the workings and power of linguistic style, to make sure that people with something valuable to contribute get heard.

It may seem, for example, that running a meeting in an unstructured way gives equal opportunity to all. But awareness of the differences in conversational style makes it easy to see the potential for unequal access. Those who are comfortable speaking up in groups, who need little or no silence before raising their hands, or who speak out easily without waiting to be recognized are far more likely to get heard at meetings. Those who refrain from talking until it’s clear that the previous speaker is finished, who wait to be recognized, and who are inclined to link their comments to those of others will do fine at a meeting where everyone else is following the same rules but will have a hard time getting heard in a meeting with people whose styles are more like the first pattern. Given the socialization typical of boys and girls, men are more likely to have learned the first style and women the second, making meetings more congenial for men than for women. It’s common to observe women who participate actively in one-on-one discussions or in all-female groups but who are seldom heard in meetings with a large proportion of men. On the other hand, there are women who share the style more common among men, and they run a different risk—of being seen as too aggressive.

How The Way We Talk Can Change The Way We Work PDF Free Download For Pc

A manager aware of those dynamics might devise any number of ways of ensuring that everyone’s ideas are heard and credited. Although no single solution will fit all contexts, managers who understand the dynamics of linguistic style can develop more adaptive and flexible approaches to running or participating in meetings, mentoring or advancing the careers of others, evaluating performance, and so on. Talk is the lifeblood of managerial work, and understanding that different people have different ways of saying what they mean will make it possible to take advantage of the talents of people with a broad range of linguistic styles. As the workplace becomes more culturally diverse and business becomes more global, managers will need to become even better at reading interactions and more flexible in adjusting their own styles to the people with whom they interact.

How The Way We Talk Can Change The Way We Work PDF Free Download Windows 10

A version of this article appeared in the September–October 1995 issue of Harvard Business Review.