Ed Batista

Glass, Metal, Rubber

A phrase that comes up often in my coaching practice is "keeping a lot of balls in the air." Most of my clients are technology company CEOs, and most of the rest are senior leaders in similar organizations, and all of them are juggling a large number of professional and personal responsibilities. They tend to thrive in fast-paced, dynamic environments--that's why they took the job (or founded the company) in the first place, and they're not afraid to get out of their comfort zones and push themselves in order to grow.

But we all feel overwhelmed at one time or another, even people who generally love their work and work as hard as my clients do. And I know when I hear someone talking about "a lot of balls in the air," they're feeling stressed not only (or even primarily) about the difficulty of keeping all these projects aloft, but also about the possibility of dropping one and letting people down. In these situations it can be helpful to remember that not all the balls we're juggling are made out of the same material.

Some are glass. We can't drop these, because they will break. Maybe they can be put together again, but probably not, and certainly not without time, anguish, and painstaking effort. People will be hurt, our reputations will suffer, and there will be serious consequences, personal or professional. 

Some are metal. We don't want to drop these, because they’ll make a lot of noise, and people will know we’ve dropped them, and we’ll be embarrassed. And they may get dented up a bit in the process, and we’ll feel guilty. People will be annoyed or disappointed, but nothing's broken.

Some are rubber. We don’t want to drop these either, but when we do we realize that they bounce. There's no damage, no noise. People may not even notice that anything's changed, and if they do, they care less than we thought they would. Our pride may be wounded, but that's the worst of it.

So whenever we feel that we're juggling too much, it's important to determine what things are really made of. This often uncovers the assumption that everything is glass, and nothing can ever fall, and if anything does it will be disastrous. This is rarely true, but it can be comforting to think this way, because it prevents us from having to deal with the cringe-inducing feelings that result from dropping metal and rubber balls--the embarrassment, the guilt, the annoyance, the disappointment, the wounded pride.

But cultivating comfort with discomfort is a critically important skill for many reasons, not least because it enables us to recognize when we need to stop trying to juggle everything, let some things drop, and deal with the emotional consequences, in order to insure that no glass gets broken.

 

---

I certainly didn't come up with this metaphor, nor do I know who did, but I believe I first heard it from Joel Peterson many years ago.

Photo by Orin Zebest.

Better Working Relationships

An issue that comes up frequently in my work as a coach and teacher is how to improve a working relationship in which one person feels disappointed, irritated, or upset with the other. In my coaching practice this typically involves a pair of co-founders or two members of an executive team, and it occasionally occurs with my MBA students at Stanford. (And I've had plenty of experience with colleagues, clients and students who feel this way about me.) While my comments here are by no means comprehensive, they lay out a set of steps you can take to begin to address a working relationship that's faltering or didn't get off to a good start:

An Invitation to a Conversation

Consider the points below as you reach out to the other person to, first, invite them to hold a conversation via a brief message, and then hold the conversation itself. Note the value of conducting this process in two steps. It can be tempting to try to address substantive issues in the initial message, but it may be difficult to insure accurate communication and avoid misunderstandings. And it can be equally tempting to launch right into the discussion the next time you encounter the other person, but that can cause them to feel unprepared and surprised, resulting in defensiveness rather than openness. Be sure that the other person feels some agency and control in the process; it should feel like an invitation, not a command. While you do want to insure that the conversation occurs, and this may involve employing some light pressure, if they agree to talk only out of a sense of duty or obligation they're less likely to be open to your message. You might gain their compliance, but you won't win their commitment.

The Medium Matters

It's important to select the right medium for the interaction. These choices will be determined by the culture in which the relationship exists and should reflect both parties' preferences, but I recommend email for step one. In contrast with texts or chat, email is more likely to be asynchronous, slowing down the exchange and allowing more time for reflection and for emotions to cool. But in subsequent steps it's preferable to connect via higher-bandwidth, synchronous channels: phone, video or, if possible, in-person. (Note that video is not necessary superior to phone, and there are a number of reasons why the phone might be better.) Conversations via higher-bandwidth channels not only allow for more nuanced communication via tone of voice, facial expressions and body language, but also convey a heightened commitment to the relationship.

Set the Table

Before you actually meet, give some thought to the conditions that will best support a productive conversation. These always include the meeting's timing and duration, and, if in-person, also include not only the location, but also such details as your physical proximity to each other. It's easy to overlook factors like this, but a little planning and foresight can have a significant impact on a conversation's effectiveness. At the very least, be sure that you'll both be in the right frame of mind for a potentially difficult interaction--trying to force it when one of you is distracted or stressed may make things worse.

Your Motivation

In both your initial message and at the outset of the conversation, start by expressing your own motivation. The other person may not even be aware that there's a problem, in which case they may be confused or even misinterpret your motives. Be explicit about your investment in the other person, your hopes for the relationship, and your desire to make the most of the opportunity to work together. When we're unhappy with someone, we can jump very quickly to feedback about their behavior, but that may be less useful than conveying your own goals (and may even be counterproductive if it's perceived as criticism.)

Curiosity and Empathy

It’s essential to be curious and empathetic about what the other person might be experiencing, rather than leaping to any assumptions and judgments about the motives for their behavior. We possess a powerful "narrative engine" that compels us to quickly make sense of any situation we don't understand--we're betting that it's safer to have an explanation, even a highly speculative one, than to wait for more information. As a result it's easy for us to make assumptions that explain behavior we don't understand or dislike, but it's also easy to be wrong, particularly because it's so difficult for us to envision missing data.

Intent vs. Impact

With this in mind, note the difference between intent and impact. Give the other person the benefit of the doubt and assume that their intentions are good and they also want the relationship to succeed, but they’re unaware that the impact of their behavior is having the opposite effect. Also, note that you can only speak to their behavior and its impact on you--not their intentions, which you can guess at but can't know for certain. (This is why leading with curiosity is such a helpful stance.)

Feedback and Stress

Given our increasing emphasis on the value of interpersonal feedback, we can fail to appreciate what a stressful experience it can be to receive feedback, and it’s important to take this into account. Feedback is useful only to the extent that it's welcome, either because it's been explicitly requested, or because it's a tacitly acknowledged aspect of the relationship. Even under these circumstances be mindful of the potential for your feedback to raise the other person's stress levels and derail the conversation. And in the absence of a mutual agreement to exchange feedback, it's advisable to establish one before simply diving in. This need not require a separate conversation, but even just a few minutes discussing the role you both want feedback to play in your relationship can set the stage for a more productive exchange.

Go Slow

Finally, remember that there's no need to resolve all of your concerns in this one conversation. The necessary first step is simply letting the other person know that there's a problem; once you're both aware of this you can begin to diagnose the causes and consider solutions, but it may take several conversations to get into alignment. Succumbing to the pressure to reach closure now is likely to cause you to push too hard, too fast and miss the signs warning you to slow down and yield. Think of it as an ongoing dialogue rather than a one-shot effort, and aim to end each conversation eager to have the next one.

 

---

To be clear, by no means have I perfected the art of developing productive working relationships, and given the number of people I interact with, the odds are that at any given moment someone's unhappy with me. But a benefit of this dynamic is that I'm continually practicing the steps above and expanding my comfort zone in the process.

For Further Reading

Posts referenced above:

The Communication Funnel

Pick Up the Phone

Setting the Table (Difficult Conversations)

Seeing What's Not There (The Importance of Missing Data)

Intent vs. Impact (When Communication Goes Awry)

How to Deliver Critical Feedback

Make Getting Feedback Less Stressful

Learning to Yield (Navigating Difficult Conversations)

Additional resources:

Making Feedback Less Stressful (Harvard Business Review Webinar)

• HBR webinar (1-hour video)

• HBR's summary of my remarks (8-page PDF)

• Webinar slide deck

Resolving a Protracted Conflict

Work Style Differences

Updated February 2021.

Photo by Ruth Hartnup.

Pema Chödrön on Being Thrown Out of the Nest

I've drawn support from the work of Buddhist author Pema Chödrön in many different ways over the years, but I find myself returning to a passage from When Things Fall Apart over and over again:

We think that if we just meditated enough or jogged enough or ate perfect food, everything would be perfect. But from the point of view of someone who's awake, that's death. Seeking security or perfection, rejoicing in feeling confirmed and whole, self-contained and comfortable, is some kind of death. It doesn't have any fresh air. There's no room for something to come in and interrupt all that. We are killing the moment by controlling our experience. Doing this is setting ourselves up for failure, because sooner or later, we're going to have an experience that we can't control: our house is going to burn down, someone we love is going to die, we're going to find out we have cancer, a brick is going to fall out of the sky and hit us on the head... To be fully alive, fully human, and completely awake is to be continually thrown out of the nest. [1]

One of the greatest gifts Chödrön has to offer us--in this passage and throughout her work--is her recognition and acceptance of the inevitable limits on our agency and control. This perspective can pose a stark contrast with the upbeat, can-do message of positive psychology and its emphasis on the power of our agency and control. But rather than locate these schools of thought in opposition to each other, I see them as complementary.

We can and should seek out opportunities to take action and influence our circumstances, particularly given what psychological research tells about the power of reframing, i.e. our interpretation of a given situation deeply shapes our emotional experience of that situation. [2] But the tools of positive psychology aren't magical amulets that ward off calamities. Despite our best efforts, houses will burn, people will die, tumors will grow, and bricks will fall.

And yet even while we employ those tools to help us cope with such disasters, it's worth bearing in mind that disasters are intrinsic elements of the human experience. Try as we might to build the perfect nest and seek shelter there, we will be thrown out, and that's an inevitable consequence of being alive, being human, being awake.

 

---

Footnotes

[1] When Things Fall Apart, page 70 (Pema Chödrön, 1997)

[2] For more on reframing:

• Emotion regulation: Affective, cognitive and social consequences (James Gross, Psychophysiology, 2003)
• "Appraisal Theory: Overview, Assumptions, Varieties, Controversies," pages 6-8 (Ira Roseman and Craig Smith, Chapter 1 in Appraisal Processes in Emotion: Theory, Methods, Research, Klaus Scherer, Angela Schorr and Tom Johnstone, editors, 2001)

Photo by Henry Burrows.

Dusty Baker on Self-Esteem

When Dusty Baker became the San Francisco Giants manager in 1993, I wasn't critical, but I was skeptical. Yes, he'd been a coach for the team for five years, but before that he'd spent eight years (in a 19-year career) playing as a Los Angeles Dodger. Could a Dodger really lead the Giants? Well, this one could.

And Baker's leadership made a significant impression on me during the ten years he managed the Giants. I came to deeply appreciate his candor, his determination, and his calm intensity. He was an adult in the often juvenile world of professional sports. His teams made the playoffs but fell short in 1997 and 2000, and their failure to close out the 2002 World Series when they were just eight outs from victory ultimately led to Baker's firing.

This pattern would repeat itself in subsequent managerial stints in Chicago and Cincinnati, where Baker would enjoy just enough success in the regular season to raise expectations, only to have those hopes dashed in the playoffs. After 20 years as a manager, it seemed Baker had finally found the perfect opportunity to compete for a World Series title when he took over the Washington Nationals in 2016 and led them to first-place finishes in their division for two years running.

But Baker was fired by the Nats after last season, a move that probably marks the end of the 68-year-old's major-league career, meaning that he won't win a World Series ring as a manager to match the one he earned as a player with the Dodgers in 1981. Given that his 1,863 wins as a manager ranks him 14th on baseball's all-time list, it was assumed that a World Series victory would assure his elevation to the sport's Hall of Fame, but now his candidacy is uncertain.

Baker was recently interviewed by Dave Sheinin of the Washington Post, and the piece concludes with a bracing bit of advice:

"You don’t judge yourself. I’ll let other people do that," [Baker] said. "Ain't nobody ever given me nothing in the first place. So if [the Hall of Fame] happens, fine. If it don’t happen, hey, what can I do? I did my best with what I had. I’m at the point, I really don’t care what you say. Why should I let other people control my self-esteem? My dad taught me you don't have anybody to satisfy but God, family and yourself. They’re the only entities you can't fool if you’re an honest guy."

"So I tell my son that. People gonna always say what you can't do. People been telling me what I can't do my whole life. And guess what? Fifty years later, they still telling me. And I. Don't. Give. A. [Expletive]."

I don't know what expletive Baker used, because the Post deleted it. That's fine, I'll imagine it. And I'll repeat it to myself whenever someone tells me what I can do and what I can't.

Photo via NBC Sports Bay Area.