Farming for dissent – how to have tough conversations at work

What makes some people willing to speak up about a concern or risk, while others hesitate? What does it take for people to challenge a decision without fear of retribution? And what contributes to a work culture where people can engage in healthy debate...does it naturally emerge or is it intentionally created?​

Some work cultures are designed to make it safe to speak up, challenge a decision, and be open about opposing ideas or even outlandish, wild options. As someone with an organization design background, I am a systems-thinker, and I know there are many facets to this issue. One of them, to be sure, is communication skills—especially the type needed to navigate a tough conversation at work.
​
This month’s CliffsNotes Book Club discussion on Supercommunicators by Charles Duhigg. Per Duhigg, a ‘supercommunicator’ is someone who learns to recognize what kind of conversation is happening and match it. What’s more, they tend to ask more questions than others (10-20 times more), share what they have heard, and share about themselves in order to connect more deeply with others. They also don’t shy away from the toughest conversations, at work and beyond.

ICYMI, check out the notes on the CliffsNotes Book Club portal.

It’s a great read with pointers we all can learn from, but the section on conflict in the workplace was especially interesting to me.

---

A Case Study about Netflix
In a chapter that outlines Duhigg’s key recommendations for ‘how to make hard conversations safer,’ he shares a case study from Netflix. To set the stage, here’s some context about Netflix’s unique company culture…

In their lengthy “Netflix Culture Deck,” the expectation is set for “amazing amounts of important work” in an organization that “demands excellence.” In return, Netflix staff can take freedoms such as unlimited vacation and virtually all purchase requests are authorized. In other words, you’ll be taken care of, but you must work very hard.
It’s a high-performing organization with highly sought-after top talent and there’s transparency around performance. When someone is fired, employees receive a “Why Jim was fired” email that is a full tell-all. These emails serve to promote transparency and openness, and are a clear reinforcement of expectations for employees.

However, as Duhigg shares, a decade or so ago at Netflix, there were not enough tough conversations happening. This became apparent in 2011 as the company announced it planned to split into two divisions, one focused on mail-order DVDs and another focused on online streaming. The announcement caused Netflix stock to fall by 77%. Netflix changed course on its plans, but the lesson learned was that there was “insufficient internal skepticism” and, while leaders in the organization may have questioned the decision, they did not feel safe to challenge company executives openly.

Farming for dissent
As Duhigg explains it, this very high-profile, expensive, and high-stakes situation made Netflix’s leaders realize that they needed to shift the culture. They needed to allow for—and encourage—open dialogue, for debate, and for candor. Duhigg refers to the need to “farm for dissent.” Staff were encouraged to challenge others, and truly no topic was off limits.

Duhigg provides several important additional details in presenting the case study, and I encourage you to read the book, but the key issue, in the end, was that something was missing... It was not enough to say that we need internal debate. While Netflix asked staff to speak openly and challenge others, they did not provide guardrails or teach people how to do this. Duhig explains that the shift gave people permission “to be savage.”

Guidelines for tough conversations
Ultimately, Netflix managed to set guardrails for the conversations. They taught employees how to be respectful and candid. Their guidelines for tough conversations include these tips:

• Embrace the discomfort. Acknowledge it. Go slowly. Pause is okay.
• Start conversation by talking about guidelines. What’s okay? What’s out of bounds? E.g., no shaming, blaming, attacks.
• Goal is not perfection. Goal is curiosity and understanding.
• Goal is sharing your experience not persuading / convincing someone.

Have you worked in an organization that embraces candor and dialogue? What would you add to the list?