The Chief Psychology Officer

Ep19 The Art of Radical Candour (Candor)

• Dr Amanda Potter CPsychol • Season 1 • Episode 19

Share episode

Send us a text

Radical Candour (Candor) can be used to help facilitate courageous conversations, give difficult feedback and create an environment of trust and psychological safety. It is a management philosophy, originally coined by Kim Scott built on the concept of how to give feedback constructively by challenging directly, whilst also caring personally.

As a boss, leader, or aspiring professional, Radical Candour is a relationship-building tool that can be used to help navigate feedback conversations so that they are more effective. In this podcast we give real examples of where Radical Candour has worked, and what happens when it is lacking. We also explore the link between Radical Candour and psychological safety, and how to give feedback and deal with particularly strong or dominant personalities within an organisation.  In this episode, Amanda is being interviewed by Angela to explore the concept of Radical Candour.

The Chief Psychology Officer website is now available https://www.thecpo.co.uk/

To contact Dr Amanda Potter via LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/amandapotterzircon and Angela linkedin.com/in/angela-malik-zircon

To contact Amanda via email: TheCPO@zircon-mc.co.uk

For more information about the BeTalent Strengths questionnaire and cards mentioned in this podcast please go to www.betalent.com

Timestamps

Radical Candour

·       00:00 – Introduction to Radical Candour

·       00:44 – What is Radical Candour?

·       02:14 – Keeping it Radical

·       03:26 – Between Caring Personally and Challenging Directly

·       04:19 – Conscious Leadership

·       05:07 – Empathy vs. Narcissism

·       06:23 – How it works in practice

·       08:18 – I first heard about it…

Would you like to have a conversation?

·       08:46 – Some have it, some don’t

·       10:52 – Get senior leadership to do it!

·       12:36 – People can change and some absolutely should!

·       13:40 – Self Radical Candour

·       14:26 – People in business lying?

·       15:39 – Trust is key

·       17:10 – The Ostrich Effect

·       19:00 – What does Radical Candour solve?

·       20:02 – When you need to be radical

It’s story time!

·       21:46 – You’ll want to hear about this…

·       22:26 – A Tail?!

·       24:09 – Humour lightens the mood

·       24:49 – A story about *£/! on a shoe, and I’m not referring to the toilet paper…

From top, to bottom

·       25:33 – Creating a culture of Radical Candour

·       27:36 – Let those at the bottom be noticed by those at the top

·       29:19 – We’re all in the same boat

·       29:53 – QBID revisited

·       30:54 – It’s okay to receive feedback

Delivery options

·       32:30 – Where you are in the business, determines your feedback

·       33:52 – Everybody, just be calm!

·       34:32 – Are you receiving this?

·       36:32 – Those who listen, and those who don’t

·       37:05 – How to deliver Radical Candour

·       38:32 –

Episodes are available here https://www.thecpo.co.uk/

To follow Zircon on LinkedIn and to be first to hear about podcasts, publications and news, please like and follow us: https://www.linkedin.com/company/zircon-consulting-ltd/

To access the research white papers mentioned in this and other podcasts, please go to: https://zircon-mc.co.uk/zircon-white-papers.php

For more information about the BeTalent suite of tools and platform please contact: TheCPO@zircon-mc.co.uk

SPEAKER_00:

Welcome to this episode of the Chief Psychology Officer with Dr. Amanda Potter, Chartered Psychologist and CEO of Zircon. I'm Angela Malik, and today we'll be looking at the topic of radical candor.

SPEAKER_01:

It builds on the conversation we've been having in a number of our podcasts and I think it's very timely to be talking about radical candor right now because so many people who have been listening to our podcasts have been saying that they would like some help dealing with those tricky conversations and building on the work that we have already done in Courageous Conversations.

SPEAKER_00:

So Amanda, what is radical candor?

SPEAKER_01:

Radical calendar is about giving feedback, engaging in conversation and having meetings in a transparent way. It's about being clear and specific, yet sincere in your dialogue and the way in which you conduct yourself in meetings. Fundamentally, it's about caring enough to be prepared to tell people directly when things need to change, but doing so in a compassionate, thoughtful and considerate way that takes care of and considers the needs of the other person before your own needs.

SPEAKER_00:

So that seems to link nicely, not only with episode 12, I believe, on courageous conversations, but also with psychological safety.

SPEAKER_01:

Yes, it builds on both of those topics. And I find that with many of the podcasts that we're researching and publishing, that actually all the topics are connecting and the story is starting to build. So many people feel that it's really quite tricky to have those tough conversations and therefore they miss out the opportunity to be radical, to be honest, to be upfront or to speak with candor. And we found with the research that radical candor helps people move from having those difficult conversations towards being courageous. It helps you navigate the conversation so the outcome and the experience is more positive for both parties.

SPEAKER_00:

If speaking with candor already implies being direct, what makes the candor radical? It's radical

SPEAKER_01:

because it goes against the norm or the status quo. We all have preferred ways of interacting and behaving and we fall in line with those preferences most easily because it's comfortable for us to do so and we're not challenging ourselves. But when we speak with radical candour, we are going against the norm of the team, of the organisation or even in terms of our own preferences. So we're challenging ourselves to be different.

SPEAKER_00:

That makes sense because regardless of the environment and situation, everyone does speak in code.

SPEAKER_01:

We comply with the unwritten rules of the organization or the team. And we've talked already in multiple podcasts about the concept of functional stupidity, which is when we overly rely on rules or standards or culture without thinking. And radical candor is the opposite to that. It's challenging it and saying, actually, I'm prepared to be different and to question whether this is the right approach, but do it with consideration for others.

SPEAKER_00:

So radical candor is that intersection between caring personally, but also challenging directly. It is

SPEAKER_01:

completely that. It's about sharing humble opinions and also being direct, but thinking about other people's putting their success first ahead of your own, which is very much about the caring part, but also being prepared to go against the consensus or the status quo. So the most effective leaders balance being constructive and compassionate. They're prepared to engage in courageous conversations to help their teams improve, but they do it in a way that ultimately enables their team and their people to succeed, and they put their feelings first. And so they are prepared to speak honestly and openly, but with compassion and with candor. That sounds like conscious leadership to me. I agree. I think radical candor is part of conscious leadership because we need to have radical candor to have courageous conversations, both of which is critical for effective leadership. Conscious leadership is all about understanding how you feel being attentive to your own needs, but also being aware and considerate of the feelings of others and thus adapting your style and your approach accordingly. So when we have radical candor, we care enough to put other people's feelings and their successes first and we are prepared to make personal sacrifices or to take personal risk in order for the team to collectively succeed, even if it means you personally do not succeed.

SPEAKER_00:

This idea of personal sacrifice seems at odds with the fact that we need leaders who are forward thinking, who are inspirational and who drive the business towards success.

SPEAKER_01:

I agree, Angela, because I was reflecting over the weekend and I was thinking about the dimension of empathy versus narcissism. And we can see sometimes through some of the work and research on dark sides of leadership, that there is a predominance of leaders becoming quite narcissistic. I know we talk about psychopathy in leadership and actually leaders who are radical in their candor and are conscious as leaders are less likely to be narcissistic because they have to have empathy. They have to put other people first and they need to consider and understand other people's feelings before their own.

SPEAKER_00:

That's interesting because I think that links to accountability as well you're establishing trust by making yourself vulnerable and being empathetic

SPEAKER_01:

all of this is the cornerstone for creating an environment of accountability It's a real hot topic, the concept and area of accountability.

SPEAKER_00:

So can you give me an example of radical candor in practice?

SPEAKER_01:

I have a great example. I've been working with a client for the last eight years, and there was a real tension between the chief strategy officer and the global sales director in this client. They had pretty much a mutual dislike of one another. But the reason why was that they just didn't understand each other. And I didn't know about the concept of radical candor at this time. So I unwittingly was helping them to be more radical and be more upfront and be more honest by using the strengths card sort exercise. So we ran some team development workshops and we use the strengths cards in the appreciation exercise. And as a result of that appreciation exercise, the two leaders that I'm talking about spent some time together articulating what they appreciated about one another through the strengths and what they found frustrating from one another through those strengths and the lack of certain strengths. As a result of that facilitation, both of them had so many aha moments where they at last realised the value that each of them were bringing to that team and why they frustrated each other. and what challenged each other. They had a very radical, upfront and honest conversation at last as a result of this exercise. Now, I met that client for a drink last week and she mentioned the trust and understanding that they now have as a result of really understanding one another. They had to be honest. They had to air their frustrations and explain to one another what they appreciated, yet what was irritating in order for them to get beyond those emotions that they experienced. That's

SPEAKER_00:

a great example. It really brings it to life. And I think it shows that we all need radical candor. It's not just about leaders with their teams. So radical candor is a really attention grabbing term. How did you hear about the concept?

SPEAKER_01:

Sarah first mentioned it to me having read the Kim Scott book on radical candor a few years ago, and it really piqued my interest. As a result, I've spent time investigating the implications of radical candor. So what happens

SPEAKER_00:

if you haven't got radical candor as a leader or as a team or organization? What if you lack the insight?

SPEAKER_01:

I've got a really good example of this. And the organization I'm thinking about has a significant lack of radical candor. The CEO is a passionate, charming, committed ambassador. for the organization. He has a great external brand and persona, but the reality is his internal brand and his profile is very different. He struggles to make decisions, to be assertive or to be directive. He's highly consensus-driven and collegiate, and he avoids challenging or tricky conversations or any type of conflict. What's the impact of this? The main impact is that the senior leadership team accommodate, manage, navigate, and work around his gaps. They cajole, they encourage him, but fundamentally they get frustrated and annoyed. And mostly, as I said, they just navigate. They are deferential to the CEO and to his style of leadership and try to make it work.

SPEAKER_00:

Why haven't they taken a tougher route? What has stopped them from being more direct with him and with each other?

SPEAKER_01:

I think it's those unwritten or unspoken messages because they know he has gaps. He knows he has gaps. And the HRD and one of the board members in particular are tougher than the rest, but fundamentally it's tolerated. He brings a great deal of good to the organisation. He's typically spiky in our strengths terms. He has a number of gaps, though, that outweigh the strengths. And what we're seeing with the senior leadership team is bystander apathy. A few have tried and he's had a coach and for a short term while he had a coach, there were some changes that were being made, but he's fallen back into his habits, his comfortable areas. And so the strategy has continued for the rest of the SLT to accommodate and navigate those gaps.

SPEAKER_00:

So in that situation, who exactly needs to be radical in their candor? Is it the CEO learning to be more direct or is it the senior leadership team? It's

SPEAKER_01:

the senior leadership team. They need to be consistently addressing the problem with the CEO. A coach cannot do this alone. They need to stop accommodating, tolerating and navigating and they need to be more radical and speak up about it. They need to speak with candor. They don't need to do it in a blunt or brutal or unkind way. They can be compassionate because he is a great CEO in many ways, but they do need him to be directive, assertive and decisive as well. They need to give clear feedback about what is not working and why, but balance this with compassion because his style is impacting the culture of the organization. This is starting to sound like an intervention. Well, that's really what radical candor is. It's about being prepared to speak up and challenge it in a compassionate way for the needs of other people and for the organization, despite interpersonal risk. And so people need to feel psychologically safe in order to do so. What happens if they don't intervene? Well, if they don't intervene, what's going to happen is habits we're going to see some long-standing bad habits start to grow in the organization because of the accommodation and the allowances that we make for those senior people we end up compensating for the gaps and what i can see in this particular organization is it's creating an apologetic culture and also a culture where there's micromanagement and a lack of trust

SPEAKER_00:

And I suppose leaders without this honest and compassionate feedback, they may not realize the need to change.

SPEAKER_01:

I think sometimes... They know deep down that they need to change, but they don't realize the impact they're having on their team or their organization. They think that their deficiencies or their gaps might be having some short-term impact for their own team or for their own career, but they don't necessarily think about the implications on culture or those subliminal messages that are sent through the organization about how they do business and how you conduct yourself. And leaders justify their behaviour, I have seen, by saying, well, what got me here made me successful. Why should I change? I think most leaders want to change, want to develop, want to grow, but they don't realize the fundamental impact they have across the organization by not addressing their gaps or their failures and other people accommodating, tolerating and navigating.

SPEAKER_00:

So is it possible to have radical

SPEAKER_01:

candor with yourself? Totally. It's about being honest with yourself. When we have radical candor, we are prepared to speak to ourselves in a direct yet compassionate way. And we don't make excuses, which is fundamental attribution error. If you remember from the previous conversation, we gave the example of the driving example. So when we have radical candor, we overcome those biases of fundamental attribution error, and we don't compromise our values or standards or take advantage of of any situation or make any excuses. And we hold ourselves to account, which is not language I like, but we are doing it. We're holding ourselves to account.

SPEAKER_00:

It's interesting that you mentioned fundamental attribution error and making excuses because it's all about narrative, isn't it? It's amazing how often we lie to ourselves and we don't even realize it sometimes. I mean, speaking of lying, I read a survey of 40,000 people and the results were that 93% of employees lie at work. Oh my goodness, that's shocking. 93%.

SPEAKER_01:

I

SPEAKER_00:

don't think it's malicious. I think it's often to avoid embarrassment, conflict, or to preserve self-interest. Some organizations have a culture that just doesn't support honesty and psychological safety.

SPEAKER_01:

That's the point I'm trying to make completely, which is if we are not prepared to be honest and upfront yet compassionate and to make sure that we give people feedback and help them understand the impact their behavior is having in the team and across the organization, We are going to undermine that person's success and undermine the organization's success. And we're not giving people a chance. We owe them that. We owe them the opportunity to improve and to learn. And we're holding that back from somebody if we don't give them that feedback.

SPEAKER_00:

I guess the main takeaway is that trust is still key to enterprises and collaborations and psychological safety. It doesn't pay to abuse that trust.

SPEAKER_01:

Trust is fundamental for everything. It is the core to psychological safety. It's the starting point for creating a culture of accountability. And the research shows that as truth-telling declines, what we see is increased cost, increased bureaucracy, higher levels of redundancies, and fundamentally a lack of confidence in the organisation. Trust is the foundation for so many things that we talk about.

SPEAKER_00:

Trust is also the backbone of having courageous conversations. So we all need to have these courageous conversations. And I guess the philosophy of radical candor is a great way to get there.

SPEAKER_01:

I agree, but we know that we don't always have those courageous conversations or speak with radical candor because of our own personal fear and anxiety, or we worry about how we might feel in those conversations, which is often the reason for bystander apathy, because we don't believe that we have the skills or the competence to engage in those conversations, to navigate those conversations successfully and put ourselves and the other person in the best place for success. people take is to avoid and to keep their head down, we have the ostrich effect instead. So we bury our heads in the sand.

SPEAKER_00:

So how prevalent is that ostrich effect amongst

SPEAKER_01:

leaders? It's very prevalent. In an article in Coaching at Work in 2018, they cited that 90% of leaders do not address poor performance or difficult behavior effectively, and 70% are either unable or unwilling to have courageous conversations. conversations to address the issue. And so actually only a very small number, only 10% of leaders are having conversations with clarity and purpose and compassion. In other words, they're speaking with radical candor.

SPEAKER_00:

Such a shame that the numbers are so low, but I can imagine that as a leader, it's hard to strike the balance between compassion and confrontation.

SPEAKER_01:

Confrontation is a really interesting word because Thank you so much. strategy officer and the global sales director they had a vehicle through using the strengths cards to actually just speak openly and honestly and to share the things that they appreciated and the things that frustrated them we just need to give people the tools and the permission and the skills that they can navigate this and speak more openly and more honestly

SPEAKER_00:

So what is radical candor the real solution for? What problem does it solve?

SPEAKER_01:

Ultimately, we need to find ways of managing people and interacting with people more effectively. We see executives as they grow and develop and create their careers in organizations becoming quite fixed in their ways of interacting. If you think about the concept of situational leadership, which is the Blanchard approach to leadership, I love that model and I use it in all of my coaching conversations, talking about the need for leaders to tailor their style of leadership depending on the confidence, competence and motivation of their employees. That need for agility is so key because we get more fixed or more rigid as we get older and we get a little bit more set in our ways. And so it's a good reminder that we need to tailor our approach and our style to meet the needs of those who work with us.

SPEAKER_00:

So can you help me understand a situation when you might need to be radical in your candor?

SPEAKER_01:

So imagine, Angela, we had to give feedback to someone in the team who wasn't meeting deadlines or wasn't keeping us up to date with progress. There's a number of ways we could go about this, according to Kim Scott, who defined radical candor. The first one could be aggressive. So we could be obnoxious and we could be aggressive. So we would just jump in and tell them, you've missed the deadline. It's not good enough. So it's upfront and frank. But arguably, it could be obnoxious or aggressive.

SPEAKER_00:

Confrontational without the compassion. Correct.

SPEAKER_01:

The next one, you might be manipulative or feel insecure. You might talk about that person behind their back. You might say, oh, I bet that person's going to be late again. They're always late. They never really deliver on time. They're so frustrating to work with. And so it doesn't feel great, but they would never say it to the person. They would always say it about the person. So passive aggressive. Correct. The next one is that because you care so much about that person, you don't want to hurt their feelings. So you sugarcoat it. You either remain silent or you just tell them, I know it's hard. It's really tough for you. So I understand it from your side. You never really deal with the issue.

SPEAKER_00:

So now we have compassion without the confrontation.

SPEAKER_01:

Yep. Without the honesty. And the one we want is, is radical candor. This is when you talk to somebody privately, you explain the situation, the impact, you ask them questions, you understand the barriers to delivery, and you use empathy and try to understand the situation from their side and give feedback whilst offering support.

SPEAKER_00:

I like that list because there's three examples of what not to do.

SPEAKER_01:

Well, I have a very embarrassing example of someone who spoke to me with radical candor. And it was about 25 years ago. I was working for a company, a client called MFI, and I'd been stuck on the M1 and I was really late for a board meeting I was presenting to the board. And I was very nervous and I'd been on the M1 for hours because I'd been coming from meeting in the north and then I was coming down to the Midlands to that organisation, to MFI. And I nipped the loo, quickly went the loo, washed my hands, dashed out, ran down the corridor to the meeting and got stopped by somebody who said to me, stop, you've got a tail. What? Sorry. A tail. And I said, what? And I didn't understand. And what had happened was I had toilet roll hanging out of my skirt. No. And I would have gone into the meeting, this board meeting with toilet roll hanging out of my skirt. It would have been horrendous. And so they were honest enough to stop me now they didn't say toilet roll they said tail which at first I didn't know what they were talking about but they were prepared to put their own embarrassment aside and stop me and thank goodness I did I obviously sorted myself out washed my hands and went back to the meeting took a deep breath and then presented having a little chuckle under my breath thinking oh my goodness I've literally had the opportunity to I've just been saved by this person who I'll always thank who I don't even know who they are it was a guy he just he saved me that day and so thank goodness for him oh I know I just really yeah and there's so many situations I could think of where people have just given me just in time in the moment feedback just to save me I just feel really grateful and I think we all fall into those four categories depending on how we are personally feeling in our state of mind or our level of energy or depletion or frustration or our bio for a personal situation but in that situation they put their own embarrassment aside and they were upfront and they were honest and they were timely and they just stopped me and they helped me from being stopped me from being hugely embarrassed in front of a whole load of people I was just embarrassed in front of one person so thank you to that guy

SPEAKER_00:

that you have a tail comment as well it's an interesting strategy for having these types of conversations to inject a little bit of humor not at some someone's expense, but just to lighten the message so it can be received and everyone saves face. Must

SPEAKER_01:

say I was super, super embarrassed for weeks afterwards. It was just one of those cringe moments where you just think, oh my goodness, I just horrendous. But I've had many, so I'm sure they will all pop up over the coming episodes of these podcasts. I'll continually share all my near misses and embarrassing moments of the last 30 years in

SPEAKER_00:

consulting. It sort of reminds me of... an episode in 2018 when in the US, President Trump was walking to Air Force One and he had Lou Roll stuck to his shoe and not a single person in his entire entourage stopped him to warn him before he went in front of all of these cameras to board the plane. Well, there's bystander

SPEAKER_01:

apathy for you. And what a brilliant example. I was there with one person, with Lou Roll again, and that person stopped me and they took responsibility and the and help me. And then you've got a situation with the president. I mean, everybody should be taking accountability for him and not one person felt maybe safe or secure enough to speak up thinking someone else would do it. Gosh.

SPEAKER_00:

So how can we create a culture of radical candor from the top down then? So

SPEAKER_01:

We need to ask permission before we're radical and upfront and honest. You know, the example I gave earlier where the organization, the CEO has a style that's not working, that leadership team need to have a facilitated conversation about radical candor in order to create permission to speak up and to challenge each other to say it's not working and why it's not working and what needs to change. But I've got a lovely example of when it has worked well. I've got a new client that I'm working with, with Sarah. They've got a new female CEO and she strikes a brilliant balance between compassion and candor. She sometimes has too much compassion. She puts everybody before herself, but this has been really needed as the CEO to create a sense of trust with her leadership team and with the organization. And she's incredibly honest and very clear with the organization in terms of where they are against She sounds like an excellent CEO. There are

SPEAKER_00:

quite a few leaders who don't manage to strike that balance very effectively. And they can be brutal, you know, honest without the compassion.

SPEAKER_01:

A culture of candour doesn't just develop on its own. Leaders need to take steps to create and nurture transparency, but they also need to show that they care and that they are compassionate as well. So they need to be role models and they need to create that psychologically safe environment where they admit their own errors and they behave in a way that they want other people to behave so that everybody is accountable for their actions. So

SPEAKER_00:

how can we amplify the voices from the bottom of the organization, from the people who are most impacted by these bad habits at the top? So we need to

SPEAKER_01:

give opportunities for feedback. We need to train them to be courageous in their conversations. We need to think about and talk about creating an environment or culture of psychological safety and also, of course, create an environment of accountability so that people feel like the problem is their problem that needs solving so they speak up in the first place.

SPEAKER_00:

And how can we give feedback to very senior or very dominant personalities?

SPEAKER_01:

Well, we've got to start with trust again So in order to give feedback to those very strong personalities or senior leaders, the best way is to start with praise and public praise because it builds that credit bank. If you praise a leader and they know that you believe in them and that you are aligned with them and that you value them, that helps to start with trust. Sounds crazy, but really you start by recognizing what you value in that leader and what works well. second thing is to make sure it's genuine and that you don't just give the terrible term apologies for swearing but the shit sandwich approach to feedback which is the positive negative positive approach because it doesn't feel genuine and you can see it coming the third thing is to make sure it's evidence-based and make sure that there's real examples and finally to talk about impact so what will the impact be if things didn't change what's the detriment impact of the behavior that can be seen.

SPEAKER_00:

So essentially, you're starting out by showing the other person that we're on the same team. This is collaborative and cooperative, not you against me. And I guess by making it genuine, it's a genuine compliment never goes unnoticed. We've got such a good radar, don't we, for when it's a load of

SPEAKER_01:

BS. Angela, you articulated that beautifully so much better than me. And you're absolutely right. Ultimately, we need to be humble because they will recognize if we're trying to say something that we think they need to hear or want to hear.

SPEAKER_00:

What do you do when the person you're giving feedback to has no insight at all and they just cannot see their part in it and they're pushing back?

SPEAKER_01:

The model I've referred to previously, which is the QBID model, works very well in this situation. The four letters are Q, which is question, B, behavior, I impact and D differently. And what we do in this situation using Qubit is that we ask questions, we reflect back the behavior, we talk with the person about the impact, and then we agree what needs to change, what do they need to do differently. And that model is fantastic when a leader or anyone in the organization cannot see the role and the part they have to play and the impact of their behavior. So ask questions, talk about the behavior, talk about the impact and agree what that person should do differently.

SPEAKER_00:

So how can we be more open to that feedback if we're the ones who need

SPEAKER_01:

to hear it? Well, that's interesting, isn't it? And I know I've personally struggled with receiving feedback for many years and I particularly struggle when the feedback feels unfair or emotional or a little bit pointed. And I have to try and remember that all feedback is valuable. And I have to try and really listen to the feedback. My natural defense is to close my ears and hum and just try and block out the noise because I find it so desperately uncomfortable. So personally, I have to really force myself to listen when someone's giving me feedback because there are some messages in here. I might not agree with everything, but there are some real messages that I clearly need to hear because someone is taking the time to share that feedback with me. So I owe it to myself and to that other person to listen. And I need to take a step back and stop being defensive and try to understand what are the things that I appreciate from this feedback, if anything, and then what am I prepared to change? What micro habits can I put into place? The small things that might start to make a difference. I've answered that question relating to me. And that's because I know I'm personally not great at receiving feedback or haven't been for many And I've had to work very hard to feel less emotional and to not have that very strong fight or flight response when someone offers to give me feedback.

SPEAKER_00:

I suppose as well, it's a very natural defensive response to disregard information that you don't want to hear. But maybe one thing to keep in mind is that the more senior you are in an organization, if someone is taking the time to give you feedback that's difficult, there's got to be more to it.

SPEAKER_01:

I mean, they've really invested, haven't they? I mean, if they're taking the time to give you feedback, they're really invested in you and they care enough to put themselves through that pain and that interpersonal risk. So, yeah, we absolutely owe it to them to listen.

SPEAKER_00:

And they're also not going to stop and give you feedback on something that's minor at that level.

SPEAKER_01:

No, or trivial. No, they won't. It would have to have meaning. I agree. But I think you've got to be in the right frame of mind to use radical candor. There's no point in jumping in or being emotional. You've got to have almost a still or calm mind in order to approach the conversation in a way that's going to create success. So it should come from a place of compassion and concern. You need to ask permission to engage in the conversation because that other person may not be in the headspace to have that conversation and check with that person whether it's the right time to talk and if they got the space or the time to have the conversation right now.

SPEAKER_00:

Absolutely. Both people have to be calm and receptive.

SPEAKER_01:

Absolutely. And it only really works if that person feels like you care personally and that you're prepared to invest and that you are sensitive to the context that they are in. If you go in and it's all about you delivering the message and you just want to get it across in a very impulsive way. then that undermines your ability to create that trust. And that then will come across as the type we talked about earlier, that obnoxious, aggressive, or manipulative, insecure ways. We need to consider the other person first.

SPEAKER_00:

So how do we know if the person we're giving feedback to is listening to us?

SPEAKER_01:

It's a great question because we've been talking in this podcast about giving people the tools and the techniques to speak up, to challenge, to question, and to do so in a compassionate and considerate way. We're saying that we need to check in with the individual to make sure it's the right time and to consider the context in which you're giving that feedback. But actually whilst we're giving that feedback or whilst we're engaging that conversation, we should also attend and check that someone is listening. And we can do that through a number of things. So we can look at their body language and their nonverbal signals. So are they attentive? Are they nodding? Is their body language mirroring yours, which is a sign of listening? But interestingly, we can also look at their pupil dilation as well. So this is more subtle and it's a signal whether someone's paying attention. So if they have larger pupils, that means that they are paying attention. And this happens outside of our conscious awareness that we're When we're listening to someone and we're alert, our pupils dilate. But when we are not concentrating quite so much, the pupils are not as large. So if you look at someone's pupils and if they're dilating and they're enlarging, that means they're really concentrating and they're focusing.

SPEAKER_00:

This is starting to sound like an FBI truth teller lie detector conversation.

SPEAKER_01:

Well, we're certainly not going that far, but it is interesting because I can really see now when someone is fake listening. So this is when someone is smiling too brightly or for too long, or they might be repetitively nodding and smiling at the same time. And their posture might be very alert and very fixed, but they're not natural. And so they're just literally going through the motions and looking like they're listening, but they've actually switched off. So it's when you get that very natural mirroring. that you can really see someone actively listening.

SPEAKER_00:

So are there certain types of people that are less likely to be good listeners? compassionate but also direct?

SPEAKER_01:

So we need to think about our body language as well as being attentive to the other persons. We need to think about the tone of our voice. We need to think about our posture. So as well as making sure that it's the right time and we're in a confidential and quiet place to have the conversation, we also need to think about how we show up from the non-verbal perspective and in terms of the way we speak as well. What's really interesting interesting is that when we address people who are more senior than ourselves, we tend to speak in a higher pitch and higher pitch voices are perceived to be less dominant and could signal subservience. So to show radical candor, to show that you care deeply, but actually that you're speaking with confidence, the key is to have a lower tone. So you don't speak in a really high pitch voice. You speak in a lower tone. You speak slightly slower more confidently and the goal is to speak with impact and so the idea is that you speak clearly confidently and not too slowly but with that kind of real belief and assertion but not too high or too fast

SPEAKER_00:

with gravitas

SPEAKER_01:

with gravitas indeed

SPEAKER_00:

so if there's one final takeaway that you would want our listeners to have from our conversation today amanda what would that I

SPEAKER_01:

think it's a question really for listeners to think about. And the question is, how does your behavior and how do your actions impact your colleagues preparedness or willingness to speak up? Is there some feedback that you should be receiving that you haven't yet received? How open are you to those messages? How open are you to feedback?

SPEAKER_00:

It's interesting because by revealing our own willingness to hear feedback, we not only invite our colleagues to give that feedback, but we create an environment where we are able to have those courageous conversations and be radical in our candor ourselves.

SPEAKER_01:

Yes, and if we go back to the very first example I gave where there is an organ that are not particularly radical. To that point, that CEO is not considering how his behaviours and actions impact his colleagues or how prepared they are as a result to speak up, nor is he understanding or recognising the impact his behaviour is having on the culture and the ways of working within that organisation.

SPEAKER_00:

Well, thank you, Amanda, for this fascinating conversation as always. I

SPEAKER_01:

think it's an interesting topic. I hope that people find it useful because there are books published on radical candor by Kim Scott and others. And it seems like a really nice, interesting topic, but actually it's quite simple, really. It combines honesty and compassion. and understanding the impact that we have on other people's preparedness to speak up and to challenge us with honesty and compassion.

SPEAKER_00:

So I'd love to take this opportunity now to thank Caitlin Cooper and Attila Sumoni, who supported the preparation of this podcast episode. And if you like our podcast, please click the follow button on your podcast platform so you know when a new episode is out. Please also like the Zircon page on LinkedIn to hear more about our products, our podcast research, our other insights and accreditation news. Thank you so much, Amanda. Thank you, Angela. And thank you,

SPEAKER_01:

everyone, for listening. I hope you have a lovely day.

People on this episode

Contributor

Dr Amanda Potter

Host
Contributor

Tim Hepworth

Host
Contributor

Caitlin Cooper

Co-host