Podcast Pick: Negotiating with a Liar (Harvard Business Review Ideacast)

Have you ever thought someone might be lying but just couldn’t quite prove it?  Leslie John, of the Harvard Business School, reveals some very practical tips on how to navigate through an interaction with a liar during her interview on the Harvard Ideacast entitled How to Negotiate with a Liar.    

 In my experience, people that are usually honest become ‘liars’ when the stakes are high.  This is especially true when two people are trying to resolve a conflict.  Each person is negotiating the facts with the other to arrive at a resolution that suits their interests.   Think back to the last real conflict you had with someone important to you.  Be honest, did you fib just a little to get your way?  We all lie.   Lies of omission, white lies, boldface lies.  You’re lying to yourself if you think you don’t lie.

To begin, John says to stop trying to catch the liars.  We are not as skilled at catching a liar as we think we are and when we guess right, catching someone in a lie, we have actually moved further from our desired resolution. 

So do I deny myself the rush I get when I triumphantly right the scales of injustice by pointing out the liar in the room?   John would say catching the other person in the lie will only exacerbate the conflict rather than move towards solving it.  

So if I can’t point out that their pants are on fire, what can I do?  

Start by creating a safe space.  If people feel they are safe, they are less likely to lie.   Within that safe space you may get things started by disclosing something about yourself, prompting the other person to reciprocate.   Reciprocal self-disclosure fosters trust and therefore you are less likely to lie to them and they are less likely to lie to you.  It eases both participants into a conversation that has the potential to move them towards a resolution.  

However, there are times in which the other person refuses to participate in disclosures.  If this occurs, John says to try giving the other person a choice between two options of which you are personally impartial. The option they choose will be a disclosure in itself.  Understanding what they need will signal what you can trade with them to arrive at a resolution.

John also tackles the obvious, persistent, recidivist liar.   When confronted with the person addicted to lying, she says to use contingencies.  Allow the lie to pass undetected and instead tie contingencies to a resolution based on their falsehood.  (If you turn out to be wrong, then you will have to work overtime to meet the deadline.)  Usually, the person lying will step back from their lie to avoid the repercussions of a contingency.  It neatly sidesteps the need to be right by placing the emphasis on what happens if the other person is wrong.   

John has a few other tips in the podcast so I encourage you to give it a listen.  

In the interim, for those readers following my Liminal Thinking series, are you able reconcile John’s ideas about lying with Gray’s ideas on beliefs?  

Liminal Principles in Practice

One thing I’ve noticed about myself is that I like ideas that can be incorporated into my practice….with minimal effort.  I don’t have great success when I’m given a 350 page textbook and need a degree in advanced science to decipher its contents.  Instead I like books that are accessible and practical.  Gray’s book has been a joy to read and I encourage all of my readers to try to locate a copy. 

My past few posts have explored the first part of the book outlining the six principles of Liminal Thinking.  The second part of the book explores the nine practices of a liminal thinker.  Below are three I found most compelling.

Create safe space.  Have you ever been confronted by a behavior you couldn’t even begin to understand?  Gray would say it’s because the person has an unmet emotional need they don’t feel they can share because it isn’t safe.  To get others to reveal their needs and beliefs (true motivations for their actions), we need to create a safe space in which people are able to break from their self-sealing logic and belief bubble.

Triangulate and validate.  Have you ever been so sure of something that later turned out to be wrong?  Practicing Liminal Thinking means investigating as many differing perspectives as possible regardless of how obviously wrong they may seem.   “If you think something is obvious, that’s an idea that bears closer examination.” (P.95, Liminal Thinking)

Make sense with stories. I’ve always believed in the power of the narrative but just never had the words to explain it until now.   Asking someone to share their story is a way of telling them that their experiences are worth learning from.  “When someone tells you a story, they are sharing an experience and expressing their beliefs about that experience at the same time” (p.125, Liminal Thinking).

This brings my series on Liminal Thinking to a close.

The Disgruntled Mentee

The Edmonton Region Immigrant Employment Council (ERIEC) administers a mentorship program for immigrant professionals unfamiliar with the skills required to acquire professional employment in their fields of expertise in Alberta.

I mentor in this program as often as my schedule will allow because I selfishly enjoy hearing about the journeys people take to arrive in Edmonton.  For mentees, access to mentors can expedite their job search by helping with their resumes, cover letters, interviews and networking.  However, one skill that consistently causes resistance and distress amongst mentees, is the need to differentiate themselves by cultivating a personal brand.   

I had one mentoring experience in which the mentee repeatedly dodged activities related to personal branding.  After a few conversations, I found that he was not comfortable differentiating himself from everyone else.  He told me “the nail that sticks up is the one that gets hammered down”. It simply felt wrong to him.

Although there are informative intercultural lenses from which to explain his feeling of ‘wrongness’, using the liminal thinking lens, Gray would say personal branding challenges his governing belief about how a reputable, credible, honourable, and professional person should act.  

“A belief that is deeply tied to identity and feelings of self-worth is called a governing belief” (p.53, Liminal Thinking)

But it still leaves the problem.  To increase the likelihood that my mentee would get a job in his field of expertise in the Canadian labour market, he would need to understand the importance of ‘being the nail that sticks up‘…..at least a little.

This would require altering his governing belief that personal branding activities were shameful, changing how he sees himself and inevitably how all the people in his life see him.  If it sounds formidable and transformational, it’s because it is.  But it helps explain why, even in the face of overwhelming evidence, people refuse to change.

In liminal thinking terms, governing beliefs are the foundation for the bubbles of belief a group uses to navigate and survive reality together.  Being the member of the group to challenge a governing belief can jeopardize relationships, making them risky to discuss and very difficult to change.  But being a liminal thinker means having the awareness to identify your governing beliefs and the courage to confront them.  

Over time my mentee began building a personal brand because he was seeing that he was having limited success without it.  No matter how many resumes he sent, he still received few requests for interviews.  Circumstances forced him to challenge his governing belief. Ultimately, it lead to forging new relationships while letting others go.  He was co-creating a new reality with a new group.  

To shed light on your governing beliefs Gray has an excellent exercise   Begin by writing down the beliefs that make you the person you are and form the foundation for all the choices (large and small) in your life. Then sit down with a person you trust, and ask them to tell you what they think your governing belief(s) are.  Comparing notes will lead to a lively and revealing conversation.

 

Liminal Thinking Principle #6:  “Beliefs are tied to identity.  Governing beliefs, which form the basis for other beliefs, are the most difficult to change, because they are tied to personal identity and feelings of self-worth. You can’t change governing beliefs without changing yourself.” (p.57, Liminal Thinking)

The Way We’ve Always Done It

How do you feel when you start a new position with a new team?   For me it has always been a mix of excitement and awkwardness.  Mostly awkwardness. Because I don’t know the unwritten rules of the place and I don’t want to make an embarrassing faux pas on my first few days.

To explain this, Gray would say the team I am joining has a shared set of beliefs they use to navigate their work relationships called the bubble of belief.  Beliefs I do not yet possess because I don’t have their shared experience of working together.  The kitchen is a perfect example.  On one occasion before attending a meeting,  I had gone to the kitchen to make a cup of tea.  I picked a cup from the cupboard and boiled water like I have thousands of times.   Unfortunately I turned up to the meeting using the boss’s favorite cup.  I could feel a tremor of discomfort when I entered the room because everyone else knew not to use that cup.

Bubbles of belief exist in every corner of our lived experience.  They are shared maps that groups use to navigate relationships in the reality they co-create.  Unfortunately, they are maps that occasionally lead us over a cliff too.

Have you ever heard this phrase at work “Because that’s the way we’ve always done it”?  

It’s always been done that way and continues to be done that way because “….new information from outside the bubble of belief is discounted, or distorted, because it conflicts with the version of reality that exists inside the bubble” (p.45, Liminal Thinking).  Gray calls this self-sealing logic.  There are many examples of how this type of thinking has had disastrous effects. Blackberry couldn’t see past the keyboard design while Apple gobbled up their market share with the touchscreen.  In 2000, the Blockbuster CEO passed up the opportunity to purchase Netflix for $ 50 million saying it was a niche company.  Netflix is now worth more than $30 billion. I wonder how many times these words were uttered in the Northlands boardroom while Katz busily outmaneuvered them.

Why is it so difficult for people to see past their self-sealing belief bubbles?

Gray points out that people evaluate a new idea in two ways; internally (does it make sense?) and externally (can I test it?).  Most new ideas fail to get past the internal test because they challenge the bubble of belief and so they automatically do not make sense and therefore do not need to be tested.  A video streaming service must have seemed impossible to the CEO of the most successful video rental business so therefore there is no need to test what it’s potential could be.

Think back to a time when you came forward with a fantastic, innovative, can’t miss new idea that was dismissed by the group.  Was the groups defending its’ bubble of belief?  Do you think your new idea challenged group identity?

Conversely, take a minute and think about what happens when your beliefs are challenged.  How do you defend them?

 

Liminal Thinking Principle 5:”Beliefs defend themselves.  Beliefs are unconsciously by a bubble of self-sealing logic, which maintains them even when they are invalid, to protect personal identity and self-worth.” (P. 49, Liminal Thinking)

How Our Beliefs Limit Us

Last Friday, my wife and I ventured into downtown. You could tell it was game night.  People were clad in their orange and blue on the LRT, in the streets and in the restaurants.   As it happened we would be joining the crowds as the Oilers took on the Nashville Predators.  When describing the experience of attending the game to friends and family I find myself saying “It was exciting for an Oilers game”.  Which really means “In the past, most of the excitement at an Oilers game came from the concession stands, so I’m not ready to believe they have a legitimate chance at winning a game”.

It’s a strange belief to maintain.  The Oilers have a new Stanley Cup winning General Manager (Peter Chiarelli), a tested, stable coaching staff (Todd McLellan), the brightest player to enter the game since Sidney Crosby(Connor McDavid), numerous other amazing young players (Ryan Nugent-Hopkins, Jordan Eberle, Adam Larrson, Darnell Nurse, Leon Draisaitl), quality free agent signings (Milan Lucic), a reliable goaltender (Cam Talbot) and a fabulous new arena. The Oilers have a chance to make the playoffs this year rather than being mathematically eliminated by December.   However, in the face of such evidence, I continue to believe they have a greater chance of losing then they do of winning.

Gray calls this a limiting belief.  It’s a belief that limits my ability to see other possibilities.  I can’t believe the Oilers could be a winning team because I still believe they are a losing team.

Being a liminal thinker requires us to identify our limiting beliefs and look beyond them to the possibilities they obscure from our view.

What beliefs do you have about yourself that limit your potential?  What beliefs do you have about others that could be limiting their potential?

 

Liminal Thinking Principle 4: Beliefs create blind spots.  Beliefs are tools for thinking and provide rules for action, but they can also create artificial constraints that blind you to valid possibilities” (p.39, Liminal Thinking)

It’s Not You. It’s Both of Us!

As part of our kitchen renovation, we needed to replace our dishwasher.  I checked all the usual places (Home Depot, Costco, Trail Appliances, Leons, and The Brick) but couldn’t find the quality I wanted for the money I had left in my budget.  One day I was on my way home and came across a local independent appliance store and decided to see what they could offer even though I was certain I wouldn’t risk buying anything from them. My belief, based on my past experiences and the experiences of others, is that local independent appliance stores are dodgy disreputable businesses that take advantage of unsuspecting innocent customers.  

But they offered an affordable price on the model I wanted so I took the risk.

When I opened the door to load the dishwasher for the first time, I pulled out the top rack and it fell out of its rails nearly breaking the dishes below. So I called for service which was surprisingly prompt but the repairman came with the wrong piece to fix it so he would have to come back.  After scheduling and rescheduling service for nearly three weeks, we finally set the date for the following Thursday morning.  

On Thursday morning the repairman calls to remind me that he will be at my house in the afternoon.  My first thought was “See, this is why you don’t buy from local independent appliance stores!  You get what you pay for!”

But then I remind myself that I am embarking on the Liminal Thinking journey and recall Gray’s story web.

“When two or more learning loops interact, they form a system of belief or behaviour I call a story web; a shared world that is co-created by the people who participate in it.  This shared world can seem as if it is just ‘the way it is’ but really it is just one of many possible realities.” (p.27, Liminal Thinking)  

In this story web there are two learning loops interacting; mine and the repairman’s (for a reminder of the leaning loop, look at The Liminal Learning Loop).  At this moment on the phone I have a choice between two possible learning loops; the doom loop or the delight loop.

Doom loop; repair dishwasher (need) – appliance store is trying to avoid my requests for service because they are dodgy (belief) – speak abruptly/harshly expressing my frustration to the repairman (action) – referred to the appliance store/dishwasher is not fixed (result).  

Delight loop;  repair dishwasher (need) – credible appliance store with integrity (belief) – ask questions to help them solve the scheduling snafu (action)  – repairman offers to come later in the afternoon to accommodate my schedule/ dishwasher is fixed (result).

Keep in mind the repairman is going through his learning loop at the same time and based on my response can choose to experience a doom loop or delight loop.   As we navigate the scheduling problem, we are co-creating our reality.  

Two stories/realities are possible based on the beliefs and actions of both participants.  The doom loop is easier because it reinforces my original belief that local appliance stores are dodgy.  The delight loop is more difficult because it forces me to move beyond the reality I know instinctively (my beliefs) and co-create a reality I have no map to navigate.  

“This is the power of the story web.  Changing stories can change reality” (p.26 Liminal Thinking) 

Thankfully we both chose the delight loop.  It meant I had to end my appointment earlier than expected and he had to stay a bit later than he had expected but the dishwasher was fixed.  Even more importantly, it demonstrated to me how we can co-create the reality we want and that ‘the way it is’ can be changed.

Liminal Thinking Principle 3: “Beliefs create a shared world.  Beliefs are the psychological material we use to co-create, a shared world, so we can live, work and do things together.  Changing a shared world requires changing its underlying beliefs” p.33, Liminal Thinking

The Liminal Learning Loop

A few days ago we ran out of apples.  I went to the store and came home with a bag of apples.  I hardly remember the trip because it happens so often.  I certainly don’t remember making deliberate decisions about the shoes I wore, which store I went to, or even the apples I bought.  The entire process seemed automated.   

I would guess you’ve experienced the same thing in your day already.  Think about it.  Why did you choose to brush your teeth?  Why did you choose the blue shirt and not the yellow sweater?  Why did you use the bus rather than your car for your commute?  Have you ever taken the time to determine the thinking process you use to make everyday decisions?  

Gray explains by saying it begins with a need.  Needs arise all the time and some are more urgent than others.  Hunger can be more urgent than shopping for new socks.  In this example  I needed apples.  

Next, I access my internal ‘guidebook’ for navigating reality; my beliefs (for formation of beliefs in detail look at Unpacking Beliefs).   When I need apples my attention is focused on things that will address that need by constantly cycling through theories and judgments to form beliefs about how to get more apples. They tell me which footwear to use, which store to go to and which apples to purchase.

Next, I take action.  I put on my winter boots.  I travel to a particular store.  I buy a bag of apples.

Finally, I make note of the result. By following my belief, was I able to meet my need for apples?  And by making note of the result, what have I learned?

Gray calls this the Learning Loop.  Need – Belief – Action – Result.  Out of apples – Store has apples – Go to store and buy apples – Don’t need apples. 

Each time I progress through the Learning Loop to address a need, my beliefs are either challenged or reinforced.  If the store had my apples, my belief is reinforced, creating what Gray calls habits of belief. There’s no need to change my behaviour because my need has been served through my belief that the store has the apples I need.

However, when the store doesn’t have the apples I need, my belief is no longer valid.  So I begin the process of building another belief by cycling through the other options for buying apples.   I go to the other store and buy apples.  I make note of the result.  In the end, I may have formed a new habit of belief if the new store addresses my need better (cheaper, tastier apples) than the old store.

In itself, Gray’s learning loop is quite straightforward.  It becomes more interesting when my learning loop interacts with yours which I will explore in my next post.