How to Talk Behind People’s Backs
Recently I was working with a leadership team in which members talked about each other behind their backs. They acknowledged it was eroding trust and hindering the team from executing their organizational strategy. At one point a team member suggested that they should stop talking about each other behind their backs. I disagreed.
I suggested that they should continue to talk behind each others’ backs. In fact, I suggested that they would be better off if they did talk about each other when they weren’t there. But they needed to change how they talked.
The problem with talking about someone when he isn’t present is that the people you are talking to don’t get to hear the views of the person you are talking about. Instead they hear only your negative views about the person. It may seem like an easy way to build your case with the people you are talking to, but it has unintended consequences. It erodes your relationship with the person you are talking negatively about, it sends a message to others that this behavior is acceptable, and it leaves the people you are talking to wondering if you talk about them when they aren’t present.
I suggested to my client that they follow these guidelines when talking about someone who isn’t present:
Represent the person’s views that you disagree with.
If you want to be a leader who brings people together rather than creates divisiveness, tell the people you are talking with what the other person’s views are. For example, after you have explained why you think it’s important to speed up the product launch date, you might say, “Kay sees it differently. She wants to wait until Q3 to launch.”
If you find yourself thinking, “I don’t understand what her problem is,” do some homework. Ask Kay not only what her view is, but how she came to that point of view. If you can’t represent Kay’s reasoning to others, then you can’t really lead.
Explain the source of your disagreement.
It is even more helpful if you describe the cause of your different views. For example, you might say, “Kay and I have different assumptions about the timing of the launch and how it will affect our new products. She thinks that if we speed up the launch date, we’ll confuse customers with the products we launched last quarter. I think we’ll actually speed up our new product line identity.” Again, if you find yourself thinking, “I don’t know why she disagrees with me,” do some more homework. Talk with Kay.
Explain the person’s views without tearing him or her down.
Telling people that Kay doesn’t understand the business, is generally clueless, or is out to make your part of the organization look bad only reinforces organizational silos. It’s fine to say that you disagree and why you disagree, but don’t do so by questioning her motives or simply dismissing her as clueless.
Give yourself the “would they consider it fair?” test.
You know you’ve done a good job of talking about Kay if, having heard what you said about her, she can say, “You’ve represented me accurately.” So next time you’re about to talk about someone you disagree with, first try this thought experiment. Listen to what you plan to say and ask yourself, “If the person heard what I am about to say, would she say I have represented her fairly?” If your answer is “yes,” you’re leading by building better relationships. If the answer is “no,” what do you need to change to pass your test?
Originally published November 2008
