Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole

charity.wtf

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 304 posts

Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole

#41

Post by jcul »

akomtu wrote: post #36
ketzo wrote: post #18

> TRY TO SOUND FRIENDLY. > Say "please" and "thank you"... use emojis... I'll add to this one -- use exclamation points! It's actually ridiculous how effective all these little things are. In my experience, men, engineers, and especially engineers who are men tend to think of this as unnecessary fluff. They often decline to add these little social niceties because to them, they sound inauthentic. That's not a charact…

How do lawyers, doctors and actual engineers communicate? Do they use emojis?

I would say a lot more verbal conversations and a lot more verbose longer form written communication, where the tone is formal anyway.

I don't see many doctors and lawyers using real time IM like slack etc., which is generally a lot more conversational.

I use emojies in slack, but I wouldn't use them in emails.

Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole

#42

Post by redhale »

dilyevsky wrote: post #13

From experience CC advice and other similar corp bs techniques are like “self defense class” techniques of communication meaning they only work if the other party is well meaning and actively cooperating. Which is to say they rarely work even if properly executed.

I'd say it's more like defensive driving techniques. They are not guaranteed to save you from a wreck in all situations, but they maximize your chances of getting the best outcome possible. But still, sometimes you just get t-boned by a lunatic.

Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole

#43

Post by screye »

testfoobar wrote: post #16

This is all well and good advice. But sometimes you have to work with people who demonstrate traits of Narcissism Personality Disorder or Borderline Personality Disorder. E.g. someone who never accepts responsibility or someone frequently demonstrating emotional lability. I am not sure the best course of action in these situations.

Good will has to be rebuilt. If someone has exhausted all goodwill, then your relationship should take a transactional form. Transactional relationships don't have to be malicious. They're just all 'over the table'. I ask you to do X, have you done X ?

Mental illness is just 1 cause for breakdown of goodwill. It's better to ignore the cause, and focus on the optional communication mode for the level of goodwill you're operating from.

just to be clear, trust != good will.

Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole

#44

Post by tayo42 »

ketzo wrote: post #18

> TRY TO SOUND FRIENDLY. > Say "please" and "thank you"... use emojis... I'll add to this one -- use exclamation points! It's actually ridiculous how effective all these little things are. In my experience, men, engineers, and especially engineers who are men tend to think of this as unnecessary fluff. They often decline to add these little social niceties because to them, they sound inauthentic. That's not a charact…

Surprised to see emoji. I feel like those almost always come across insincere when they're not expected. Idk why, maybe I'm the odd one.

Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole

#45

Post by tayo42 »

OJFord wrote: post #39
tptacek wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I unreservedly love this article and found a lot of it valuable despite decades of career experience stepping in it with coworkers (and vice versa). But I agree with you about up-front acknowledgements of hard conversations. They're the workplace equivalent of "we need to talk". I'm an anxious person by nature, so "we need to talk" is about the most painful thing you can say to me: my mind will immediately project ou…

I didn't misread it, at least I did read it as 'or', I just don't like that either. Yes I will reply Hey no sweat yeah just doing your job cheers whatever - but it's definitely making me feel even worse than I already was about whatever the negative thing was you had to say to me in the first place. The whole thing is just making it more about the counterparty, like they're the real victim for having unfortunately to…

You're the asshole

Everyone sucks here

Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole

#46

Post by tptacek »

tayo42 wrote: post #45
OJFord wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't misread it, at least I did read it as 'or', I just don't like that either. Yes I will reply Hey no sweat yeah just doing your job cheers whatever - but it's definitely making me feel even worse than I already was about whatever the negative thing was you had to say to me in the first place. The whole thing is just making it more about the counterparty, like they're the real victim for having unfortunately to…

You're the asshole Everyone sucks here

(There's a whole, very popular, subreddit dedicated to adjudicating "NTA", "ESH", "YTA", and "NAH" in a variety of user-submitted scenarios. It's a hoot.)

Re: How to communicate when trust is low without digging yourself into a deeper hole

#48

Post by tptacek »

OJFord wrote: post #39
tptacek wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I unreservedly love this article and found a lot of it valuable despite decades of career experience stepping in it with coworkers (and vice versa). But I agree with you about up-front acknowledgements of hard conversations. They're the workplace equivalent of "we need to talk". I'm an anxious person by nature, so "we need to talk" is about the most painful thing you can say to me: my mind will immediately project ou…

I didn't misread it, at least I did read it as 'or', I just don't like that either. Yes I will reply Hey no sweat yeah just doing your job cheers whatever - but it's definitely making me feel even worse than I already was about whatever the negative thing was you had to say to me in the first place. The whole thing is just making it more about the counterparty, like they're the real victim for having unfortunately to…

Team members should reflect on interactions and give a quick sanity check to whether they may have come across rude, condescending, or aggrieved. And, if they have to ask, they should ask. You, as someone who shares the role of "team member", should be prepared to hear those check-ins in the spirit they're intended: as acknowledgements that everybody agrees that it's not OK to be rude or passive-aggressive. You don't have to absolve people: if they were rude, you can say "thanks, I did take that comment as a little hostile, and I'm glad it wasn't just me."
Post reply on HN