Culture
Pin It

By Rick Russell

How do things get done in organizations?

If you think about it, work tends to move forward conversation by conversation. The quality determines what happens next, and may have lasting consequences for the relationship between the parties.

There are three conservation types that typically take place in organizations:
• Conversations that blow off steam
• Conversations that blow up
• Conversations that go around in circles

However, there is a fourth alternative. Interest-based conversations (ICAs) move work and relationships forward together. The ICA has a logical flow, creating a path of least resistance from issue to intention; choice to commitment; and action to accountability.

The ICA conversation

ICA is a mnemonic, based on the nine steps of the following path.

1. Issue: What is the issue?

The first step of the conversation is to frame the issue you’re talking about. Frame too narrowly and you exclude possibilities. Too broadly, and you lack focus. Inaccurately, and you end up solving the wrong problem. Frame as blame and trust is broken before you begin.

Powerful framing sets up a mutual problem statement, where both parties share a common interest in resolving the issue.

Effective framing:
How can we manage our purchasing process to get the best pricing and reduce time and effort?

Ineffective framing:
How do we get your people to do what they need to in order to comply with our purchasing process?

2. Insight: What’s important about that?

It’s important that each party communicate their important needs, wants, concerns and fears, and demonstrate that they are trying to understand the problem from the other perspective as well.
Ask not only about results, but how the solution should be arrived at and what the issue has come to represent for you. Listen carefully to how each of you define respectfulness, legitimacy and acceptance.

3. Intention: What do we want to accomplish?

Explore what it is you each hope to achieve in this conversation. Once each gains an appreciation of the others’ interests, you may uncover new and innovative ways to get there.

4. Choice: What are our choices?

How do you each view your options? Sharing your thinking allows you to reframe the situation based on this new information and may even open new possibilities. It also gives the opportunity to learn at an emotional/psychological level where the “good reason” lies for the resistance we may be experiencing from the other.

5. Criteria: How will we choose?

What are the relevant criteria by which the choices will be evaluated? Are your criteria all subjective (your interests)? Consider whether objective criteria exists (organizational policy, statutory or industry standards) that ought to guide any decision, and whether you are taking into account the interests of others involved (their subjective criteria).

An effective problem-solver pays close attention to the criteria that the other person finds persuasive.

6. Commitment: What are we committed to?

Even when the attendees believe they have arrived at an understanding, very few people are rigorous in setting out what each has agreed to do, how and when. You want to address any reservations upfront and not leave the meeting with false hope that will later cause resentment or distrust.

Ask, “On a scale of one to 10, how committed are you?” Anything less than 10 is not a commitment. It is an opportunity to identify the “yeah, buts” lurking under the surface waiting to torpedo your agreement. Ask, “What are you willing to commit to?”

7. Action: What will we do?

This is where the conversation moves from, “Well, we could do this or we could do that,” toward the purposeful, “I will take this step within this timeframe and I expect to find that you will have done that.”

Within organizations, we are inter-dependent. We rely on others to help create the conditions that will allow both our plans to succeed. Asking, “What help do you need?” invites your partner tell you how you can help them to help you.

8. Accountability: How will we track progress and measure results?

A good accountability structure gives both parties confidence that what has been agreed will be enacted. It should include a timeline, a process for tracking and reporting progress and the objective criteria by which success will be evaluated.

A relationship that is accountable and has procedures that demonstrate fairness is inherently stable and demonstrates to outside stakeholders the value of the work.

9. Acknowledgment: Whom did we have to be to make this happen?
·
Relationships are hard work. Too often, the leverage we gain through relationship goes unrecognized and unrewarded.

Noticing matters. When we are genuinely seen and acknowledged, we experience this in a visceral way. In noticing one another’s strengths, and remarking upon who we need to be together, we develop the heart, the courage that allows us to take risks together and to become greater than the sum of our parts.

Success factors for implementing ICA in organizations

ICA has an excellent track record for moving work and relationship forward together. It shifts the thinking and capabilities of those who use it over time. However, success is highly contingent on the way it is implemented.

ICA should be introduced with a clear purpose and measures for success. It should be sponsored, modeled and reinforced by a respected leader. Training should give equal attention to the framework and the assumptions that underlie it. Sufficient practice must be included to achieve competence and confidence in its use.

Darlene Chrissley is an executive coach and organizational development specialist. She encourages her clients to adopt ICA as an organization-wide best practice.

Rick Russell is a conflict management professional who conducts workplace assessments and remediation and offers a range of conflict management services. He recently applied the ICA framework to improve communication making and decision making between levels of managers within a municipal government.

Pin It