CAT
Dealing with "Difficult" People Paul Preston, Ph.D., professor of management, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, Florida
l i n ifficult" is a label that people often apply to those with whom they have a U conflict or those who may display resistance to an idea. It is based on perception, not reality. Part of a healthcare executive's job is to persuade and inform highly intelligent and highly trained men and women who are engaged in some of the most complex and important tasks in the world. Because of their profession (whether they are in clinical or nonclinical roles), most healthcare professionals are driven to succeed, are single minded about their goals, ask a lot of questions, are dedicated to their practices, and have a strong work ethic. Cetting their attention is often a challenge because of their busy schedules. Persuading them is even harder, as they tend to be unwilling to compromise or be flexible. These are characteristics that cause executives to label these professionals "difficult." The first step in handling these types of people is to drop the view and the label that they are "difficult." Change brings out difficult behavior. Otherwise personable people can become causes of confiict and can attack if they do not agree with or feel threatened by the change. Thus, you must temper your use of the word so as not to cloud your judgment about others. The term is used here merely for convenience, but it should never be used when making a direct reference to another person. The following tactics will guide executives in interacting or communicating with people who may be considered difficult. GIVE BACK WHAT YOU TAKE Difficult people may not admit they are difficult, but they tend to respect only those whom they deem to be as tough as they are. Tough subordinates are best managed by a hard-nosed, autocratic manager. Such managers do not give such subordinates much slack, expecting them to state their wishes and needs in explicit, direct language and to perform and produce by specific standards. On the reverse side, difficult or tough superiors must be given tough respect—that is, the subordinate must maintain an honest, direct, and uncompromising stance. The employee of the tough boss must do his or her homework to support his or her opinions, position, and work. Generally, difficult bosses respect and rely on those subordinates who know how to keep-up with their high-level demands. Of course, diplomacy suggests that even when dealing with the toughest of bosses there is a time to agree, to fall into line, and to cease opposition. Many managers I have interacted with report that they prefer a tough boss over one who is tentative or
367
JOURNAL OF HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT 50:6
NOVEMBER/DECEMBER
2005
collaborative. Their reason is that the difficult boss will show and give respect when challenged.
MASTER THE DETAILS Most difficult people are detail oriented; they are equipped to argue their points. Imagine yourself in a confrontation with such a person without preparation or inadequate information. That is purely and simply foolish on your part. The only effective counter in this situation is to prepare just as diligently as you must assume the other person is preparing. Cut no corners. Leave nothing to chance.
BE A W A R E O F E M O T I O N A L
RESPONSES
At one time or another, everyone has succumbed to an emotional appeal. Difficult people often exploit others' emotions to render these people off balance and vulnerable. For example, an employee with a negative attitude may share a sympathetic story with another coworker to gain approval and support for himself An argumentative board member may use silent treatment during a decision-making meeting to pique other board members' anger or empathy and thus cause disturbance and delay. In these cases, knowing your personal emotional triggers may be your best defense and preparation—that is, other people cannot use emotional tactics on you if you are aware of how you respond and how you can control your response. Using emotional tactics to subdue a difficult person is problematic, as it can cause a confrontation and can quickly escalate out of control.
NEVER ADMIT TOHAVING THE FINAL
AUTHORITY
Difficult people will frequently try to get their "opponent" to make a premature commitment. They are helped along when the other person announces that he or she is the final authority on an issue. Despite the fact that you may actually be the final authority, you should never share that information, especially with someone who can use it against you. Doing so can help you maintain flexibility, especially when a negotiation with a difficult person is the only way out of a heated conflict. LISTEN ACTIVELY AND CAREFULLY Listen with empathy to the other person's point of view, and look for ways to show him or her that you understand this perspective even if you do not agree. Pay close attention to the other party's objections and concerns, and remember that words (whether used in seriousness or in jest) do have meanings. Remain honest and worthy of trust, even if the other party shows no signs of either trait. Your actions with this individual will send a powerful message to others with whom you deal, suggesting to them how you may be expected to behave toward them on other issues. Show of respect does not obligate you to modify your position or your mind {Atlanta Journal-Constitution 2001).
368
COMMUNICATION
EXPECT P L E A S A N T CONFLICTS Challenging people can be charming, polished, and persuasive. However, do not be misled, as such people are also very determined to get an advantage over you. A pleasant difficult person is more enjoyable to deal with than a bitter, offensive opponent, but both groups have the same agenda: to get what they want at your expense. BE PATIENT Time can work for you in conflict situations. By delaying a confrontation, you create pressure for the other party while demonstrating your control over the situation. Waiting also allows a volatile situation to depressurize.
CHECK YOUR RESPONSE T O NEGATIVE
FEEDBACK
Lashing back at negative feedback only escalates conflict with a difficult person. Instead, step back, listen, and watch that your facial expression is not giving away your real reaction. When you have received the extent of the feedback, thank the person for expressing his or her views and calmly state whether or not you agree. If the other party is not willing to listen to your response, then the best next step is to end the exchange and decide to pick it up again at another time. This way, neither party can prolong the attack nor contribute even fiarther to the damage that the conflict has already done to the relationship. Raising your voice to regain control or defending your position by matching the negative feedback is not useful, although doing so may make you feel better for a short time. If the negative feedback is coming from someone with whom you will only deal once, then there's no harm in letting that person know of your frustration. However, most healthcare relationships are not a once-only interaction. People who criticize our decisions and are compelled to give us negative feedback are as vested in their work as we are and are often those with whom we must work day after day. Thus, a momentary "flash-out" can cost months (even years) of recriminations. An emotional response to feedback will only serve to convince the other person that his or her negative perception of you is correct.
P R E V E N T " L O S S OF F A C E " Showing respect for the other person's opinions, even if you do not agree, is often enough to stem "loss of face"—that is, embarrassment from either not convincing the other party to back down or not achieving the intended goal. Your acceptance of the difficult person's arguments does not suggest agreement. Rather, it provides the person an avenue for a graceful retreat, at least for the time being.
CONCLUSION The pressures of caregiving; limitations of operating and managing under tight budgets and strict regulations; and emotional components of medicine, illness.
369
JOURNAL OF HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT 50:6
NOVEMBER/DECEMBER
2005
workplace politics, and basic human interaction are the sources of healthcare conflicts that in turn fuel problematic or difficult behavior. The effective leader is able to deal with this behavior professionally, not personally. By doing so, the leader encourages high level of commitment and performance from all the stakeholders of the organization. Reference Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 2001. "WorkSmart." Atlanta Journal-Constitution (June 24): Rl.
For more information on the concepts in this column, please contact Paul Preston at
[email protected].
370
