While it is true that sticks and stones may break your bones, but words will never hurt you…there are some words that we use in our professional lives that just sends people over the edge! Here’s an example of what I mean. I was on a call with a Salesperson, Product Manager, and Engineer discussing an issue a client was having with their software. The jury was out on whether it was a problem with the application or user error. However, the salesperson was adamant on using terms such as “crash”, and “bug”, and “defect”. The result? You could immediately hear the walls go up and the cooperation go down between the two groups.
It was ultimately found out to be both an issue with the application in conjunction with user error. However, it took longer to resolve just because of the poor choice of words out of the gate.
Have you experienced something similar? I’d love to hear some of your examples of ‘words that hurt’ when used from one group to the next. Is there an appropriate time to use such language or should you always take the high road? Saving Changes...
Sort By:
Wai Mun KooPMO Director| Intergraph PP&MSingapore, Singapore
I hate people saying "You're not listening!!!". Most of the time, duing a discussion, people will use the above sentence to in an attempt to regain the dominance or control of the conversation. Ironically, people who are trying to do this are those that usually will go all the way and do whatever they can to win the battle in the argument, forgetting that the key objective of a discussion is to come up with something everyone agrees on and not trying to force your way through and get everyone to accept your point reluctantly.
By accusing people that they are not listening, you are implying that they are stubborn and not open-minded. Quite often, you are trying to force your point through to them. If they try to explain for themselves or protest against your blind accusation, they will straight away fall into your trap giving you a chance to immediately raise this as an example of them being stubborn (e.g. you may say - "Look, here you go again. Keep talking and protesting without really listening to me").
Telling people "You're not listening!" is a good trick to force people to lower down their defence wall (they have to, they have no choice against your lame accusation, else they will fall into your trap). The problem is, there are too many people abusing it these days to help them win their battle. It has become so common that it is as good as shouting "Checkmate!" in a game of chess. Saving Changes...
William WiliamsProject Manager| W3src ConsultingCanyon, Tx, United States
The example used is common enough and certainly causes a bit of angst. However, there are times when it's appropriate even if the root cause jury remains "out." It depends on the point or end game of the conversation as well as the history of the relationship whether or not to wave a red flag in front of the bull.
There may be no greater motivator in elevating the urgency of a situation than screaming "bug," "crash," "defect" in a software shop. Just like screaming "fire" in a crowded theater, it must be done with discretion and only under appropriate circumstances.
In this sense, it is negotiation tactic rather than root cause analysis. Saving Changes...
Alex JohnstonDirector & Project Consultant| Project Box LtdTauranga, Bay Of Plenty, New Zealand
I don't like folk using the term 'Hack' as in 'Registry hack'. No client wants to know that we are hacking their systems (as true as it is). We 'Tweak registries' not HACK.
But to anwser your question...
I tick folk off by using the work folk (I just made that up) Saving Changes...
Wai Mun KooPMO Director| Intergraph PP&MSingapore, Singapore
Well said William. There are indeed certain words that are taboo in any discussion. I once heard a high position executive shouted "Crap!" and all of a sudden, the room was filled with silence for a minute or so. Maybe we should have a lesson on ethics in meeting. Saving Changes...
"That you've not included some functionality that had been part of your project requirements is unfortunate." Those words will haunt me to my grave.
Not that I was wrong. Not that I included anyone other than intended person on the email. Not that I had a bad working relationship with that person. My boss went ballistic when the recipients boss went ballistic. The recipient was cool with it and didn't respond badly. He knew where I was coming from. One Project Manager discussing an issue with another Project Manager. 2 years later I was personally tasked to provide the missed funtionality.
Another one, "When can I expect it?". In one of my corporate lives it was an expectation that even after a first meeting about an issue or effort that we would walk away with an expected completion date. Resistance to providing an expected completion date was very unwise. Providing a bad date was also unwise. Coming in too early was worse still.
What I've found is that the secret to not ticking people off is knowing where they are coming from. I know, I've ticked off my share innocently. Understanding that bosses, project manager wannabies, and the uninformed executives are the ones to watch out most for. Saving Changes...
Peter CraigTechnical Leader| Yorkshire WaterBradford, United Kingdom
Interestingly, I read this in a break in a 'Softer Skills for Project Managers' session! Massively important - it's always people that cause projects to fail, if they do, not the technology (I'm an IT Project Manager).
You have to have done your project stakeholder analysis thoroughly and understand what words or phrases are likely to 'tick people off''. The technique is to use them wisely and only when you want people to really sit up and take notice.
In my organisation it's any phrase that implies you think someone isn't working as part of the team. Saving Changes...
Wayne MackRetired| RetiredSouth Riding, Va, United States
One of the my key approaches to communication is to speak gently, but develop a thick skin when listening. One should try to craft his own words so as not to offend, but be willing to ignore poorly chosen words by others and focus on the intent.
In the original exchange, I see the company representatives trying to tell the client, "Yes, we understand that there is a problem," and "Yes, we will commit some of our resources to address the problem." This should make the client amenable to the next question, "Will you provide some assistance in identifying and analyzing this specific issue?"
This communication should be focused entirely on the client, and it should be recognized that it is very difficult to acknwoledge the issue to the client and pledge to work together on the solutions without the use of terms such as "defect" and "bug" and without losing the client's trust by using very precise terms that come across as "weasel words."
In communications, it is best to focus on the message being communicated and less on the specific terms being used. It is always challenging to work with someone who goes off on a tangent because of a specific term and misses the message that was intended. When speaking, try to avoid hot button terms when expressing the intended message, and when listening, try to ignore hot button terms and focus on the intended message.
The culture of the organisation usually determines the language it speaks! not suggesting they should use offending language but there is jargon words that can be so confusing to say the least. It is about the style of communication the words used and how it is being stated that makes all the difference. Words such as crash, bug and defect in the context of software errors are acceptable! meaning eg software bug, or software apps crashed! or coding is defective! it really does depend what the topic or issue is all about. Without being disrespectful the worst jargon words used is by techies do they make any sense, well yes once we comprehend and understand their language. Saving Changes...
Hans RobbersSenior Director| SalesforceVlissingen, Netherlands
I hear what you say is one of the phrases which will tick me off Saving Changes...
