0:00

Hey folks, we have got something really

0:02

exciting to announce and a favor

0:04

to ask, which is that Kim's

0:06

newest book, Radical Respect, How

0:08

to Work Together Better is coming out

0:10

May 7th. While

0:12

it's coming out after Radical Candor,

0:14

it's actually really the prequel to

0:17

Radical Candor. And why this

0:19

is the prequel is because in

0:21

order to practice Radical Candor, we

0:23

really need to be able to

0:25

identify and address all of those

0:27

obstacles to collaboration and creating respectful

0:30

workplaces. And Kim is giving us

0:32

yet again another simple and powerful

0:34

framework that's going to help us

0:36

do that. That is what is

0:38

in Radical Respect. It will be

0:40

a huge help to get

0:43

the word out about this book.

0:45

If you can go ahead, pre-order

0:48

it wherever you get your books,

0:50

pre-order Radical Respect. And

0:52

if you're hearing this after May 7th,

0:54

that's fine. Go ahead, get the book.

0:56

The more we can get this out

0:58

there, the more you can help support

1:00

our shared vision of more

1:02

radically respectful and candid

1:05

workplaces. Thanks so much. Hello,

1:11

everybody. Welcome to the Radical Candor

1:13

podcast. I'm Kim Scott. I'm

1:15

Jason Rosoff. I'm Amy Sandler. And

1:17

today we're answering a question that Kim got

1:20

about how to implement Radical Candor on

1:22

a team where there's two managers and

1:24

only one of them is practicing Radical

1:26

Candor with their direct reports. So

1:28

I'm going to read this question. Kim, I

1:31

suspect you may want to jump in, but

1:33

we'll see how it goes. I'll try to

1:35

stay silent, but as we know, it's hard.

1:37

As we know. So this

1:39

person writes, quote, I'm a co-manager for a

1:41

program. And while I highly recommend the book,

1:44

you're referring to Radical Candor to

1:46

my co-manager, and we have

1:48

developed a really close and radically

1:50

candid relationship, we approach issues with

1:53

very different perspectives and lenses with

1:55

our direct reports. I'm

1:57

very in tune with emotions. Take a

1:59

comparison. passionate and understanding approach to

2:02

issues, relying on my

2:04

communication skills to support folks as

2:07

individuals and not just people who work for

2:09

me. I really enjoy

2:11

supporting and mentoring people and I

2:13

have strong communication skills. At

2:15

the same time, my counterpart is

2:18

very analytical and has

2:20

very big visions and plans for the work.

2:22

Well, sometimes struggling to relate with

2:24

people or see things with compassion

2:27

instead of annoyance when things aren't

2:29

getting done or when people don't

2:31

understand something. So I'm

2:33

wondering how I can effectively work to

2:35

implement the skills and practices laid out

2:37

in radical candor with our

2:40

team when only half of the team is directly

2:42

reporting to me so I only

2:44

have one-on-ones with that half and the

2:46

other half is directly reporting

2:48

to my counterpart. They

2:51

close saying, I don't want to inadvertently create

2:53

a more confusing or resentful environment

2:55

that makes it seem like I'm

2:58

playing favorites when I only have

3:00

those relationship-building meetings with half our

3:02

staff. It's an interesting

3:05

yet challenging structure to navigate,

3:07

especially as I reflect on your book.

3:10

Yeah, this is a hard problem, but

3:14

not an impossible problem. I

3:18

think I've never

3:20

been in this exact situation. I

3:24

don't know, Jason, have you? I haven't

3:27

split a single team

3:29

into two separate managers.

3:33

I'm trying to think of, the closest thing that

3:35

I can think of is when you have, not

3:37

a functional team, but a project or

3:39

a work team where you have

3:42

two people who might be responsible for different aspects

3:44

of the work that that team is doing, but

3:46

that's not quite the same thing

3:48

as they're also their career managers. Yeah,

3:50

yeah. And it sounds like, I

3:53

mean, I wonder, I wanna make sure I'm

3:55

not reading too much into this, but it

3:57

sounds like kind of the subtext is... that

4:01

this other manager doesn't have one-on-ones with

4:03

their direct reports, but the person writing

4:05

in does have one-on-ones? How did you

4:07

all interpret the question? Is that part

4:10

of what's going on here? I interpreted

4:12

the question, to me it seemed almost

4:14

like there were two questions. One was

4:16

the question around how do you effectively

4:19

co-manage with someone, and then the other

4:21

one is how do you practice radical

4:23

candor both with

4:25

your peer, who may

4:27

have a very different approach to these ideas,

4:30

and then also how do you practice radical

4:32

candor with these folks who are

4:34

reporting to this peer. I

4:37

think there was a concern about their

4:39

direct reports, meaning the letter writer's direct reports

4:42

were having more of these radically candid conversations,

4:44

and they maybe weren't getting that from the

4:48

other person. But I mean, it's

4:50

not really playing favorites for you

4:53

to have one-on-ones with your direct reports, but

4:55

not someone else's direct

4:57

reports. I

4:59

think that part of this is they

5:01

need to be very clear about

5:03

who's reporting to whom and

5:06

what that means, right

5:09

or wrong? I think that's right.

5:11

I think this person has really

5:15

internalized radical candor and believes that it's

5:17

the sort of right way to do

5:19

things, and the advice that you give

5:21

in the book are the right things

5:23

to do, and I tend

5:26

to have that worldview also. I

5:29

think there's also potentially an assumption here

5:31

that the people who are not

5:33

being managed with this by the

5:36

person writing the note, being managed

5:38

by the co-manager, are definitionally worse

5:40

off because they're not having... You know what

5:43

I'm saying? They're not receiving the radical candor

5:45

treatment. That may or may not

5:47

be true. I think that

5:49

it's important to recognize that...

5:52

I'm sure some parts of it are true. Other

5:55

people who are reporting to the co-manager may

5:58

want more recognition for their co-manager. contribution or

6:00

to be treated more like a whole person,

6:02

that like those things might be

6:04

true. But there's no data in

6:06

the note that says, oh, I've talked to people and

6:08

they're sort of upset. Yeah. Yeah.

6:12

And then also my

6:15

hunch is that part

6:17

of the issue here is that there are probably

6:19

some people on the team who would

6:21

rather work for the person who wrote in.

6:24

There may also be people on the team

6:26

who would rather work for the

6:28

other person. And so I think

6:31

one of the things that these two co-managers

6:33

need to work out is, are

6:35

they going to decide who reports to

6:37

whom or how much

6:39

say are they going to

6:42

give to the employees

6:44

and who works for

6:46

whom? Right. And

6:49

fundamentally, I don't think every manager needs

6:51

to approach. It

6:54

does not need to be nor should it

6:56

be a cookie cutter approach. Not every manager

6:58

has to manage in the exact same way.

7:01

I think to me, the fundamental agreement is

7:03

like, hey, we're going to treat everybody with

7:05

respect, right? We're going to like respect them

7:08

as individuals, as people. We're

7:12

going to agree to be open to people's

7:14

input and feedback. Like you can set some

7:16

sort of a floor, essentially,

7:18

but then you don't have to say, oh,

7:21

one-on-ones have to have exactly this agenda with

7:23

every director before, because that would also be

7:25

doing the wrong thing. You're overcorrecting in the

7:27

other direction. Yeah. And

7:30

I mean, even there's some

7:32

leaders I know whose leadership

7:34

I really respect enormously who

7:36

don't have regular one-on-ones. I

7:38

mean, I advocate for one-on-ones,

7:41

but some people take a

7:43

different approach. They

7:46

make it very easy to get on their calendar

7:49

when they need to, and then they proactively go

7:51

and talk to people when there

7:54

are issues, but they don't have

7:56

one-on-ones. That's

7:59

not what I would. would do, but I'm not going to say that other

8:01

person's management is wrong. First

8:04

day. Yep. You know, Jason was

8:06

coming up as a recent conversation that

8:08

we had about a situation that

8:11

came up with a client where

8:14

there were two peers, uh, and

8:17

they were talking about sort of,

8:19

let's say, uh, Kim

8:22

and Jason, right? And so Kim and Jason

8:24

are peers. And then there was, uh, Sally

8:26

who works for Jason, but Kim

8:29

had some feedback for Sally. And

8:31

so the question was, you know, we

8:34

were encouraging Kim to go directly to Sally,

8:36

but Kim and Jason needing to

8:38

have a conversation so that Jason was aware

8:40

that Kim was having that conversation with, with

8:43

Jason's direct report, for example. And

8:45

I'm just wondering, are there some

8:47

learnings there that might be applicable?

8:50

Um, this is even more of that because they're

8:52

co-managers, but even just thinking about how do

8:54

we as a team, as a full team

8:56

communicate. Yes. And my, I

8:59

believe that there are some learnings there. And

9:01

I believe that most of this problem is

9:04

solved by a radically candid conversation between these

9:06

two co-managers. Yes. Yep.

9:08

So should we give it a try? Sure.

9:11

You want to role play having that conversation.

9:13

So, but I don't know what we're talking

9:15

about. That's sort of, we've been rambling around.

9:17

So what do, let's pretend like, what,

9:20

let's, let's like, give it something

9:22

slightly more specific like, I

9:24

think Jason, you're not having enough one-on-ones

9:26

with people on your team. Can I

9:28

clarify something? I think that

9:32

they're both having one-on-ones. I think

9:34

the co-manager is not

9:36

having, is not practicing radical candor in

9:39

their one-on-ones. So manager one is like,

9:41

I'm only having one-on-ones with my people.

9:44

Co-manager is not practicing radical

9:46

candor with their direct report. So

9:49

we practice it with each other. I think we're not clear

9:51

on how they're not, yeah, I think we're not clear on

9:53

how they're not practicing radical candor. But we can just make

9:56

it up. You want to make something up? For the sake

9:58

of the role play. have

10:00

something you wanted to know? I just wanted to

10:02

clarify that I didn't think the issue was not

10:04

having one-on-ones it's just that the second

10:07

co-manager is not practicing Radip Kander with

10:09

their direct report. And I

10:12

would add to that to say that I don't think

10:14

the email quite says that

10:16

the author

10:18

of the note that was sent to us

10:21

has data to back that up. The

10:23

email is written in a way where it's like I suspect

10:26

that this is how other people feel. And I

10:29

think that Kim is the issue. It's not so

10:31

much about have the one-on-one or not have the

10:33

one-on-one or generally speaking practicing radical

10:35

candor. I think the conversation

10:37

is about

10:40

the, for example, reacting

10:43

with annoyance when things aren't getting

10:45

done or when people don't understand

10:47

something as an example of not

10:50

practicing radical candor with their team.

10:53

It seems like, in other words, the person

10:55

who wrote in is sort of higher

10:58

up on care personally and the

11:00

other person is further

11:03

over on challenge directly. And

11:05

so that can be confusing for a team.

11:07

Yep, I think so. So that's

11:10

what I think needs to be challenged

11:12

here is, hey, we have

11:14

very different approaches. When something goes wrong, this is

11:16

the way that I respond to the author of

11:18

the note. And when you respond, like, then this

11:20

is the way that I've observed you responding. I

11:23

think that's the conversation that needs to

11:25

be had. All right, so let's

11:27

have kind of a conversation where we're

11:29

seeking out opportunities to figure

11:32

out what's going

11:34

on. And we're just gonna, as we

11:36

have this sort of roleplay, we can

11:38

start making stuff up that's beyond the

11:40

note. Who

11:44

wants to be our compassionate

11:46

communicator letter writer? I

11:49

think Jason should be that person. I always like playing

11:51

the asshole. Not

11:54

that this other person is an asshole. I'm

11:57

impatient. Patience

12:01

is something that I am always working on.

12:04

Here we go. Hey, Kim, thanks for taking a minute

12:06

to chat with me. How's

12:08

your day going? Things are

12:10

good. Things are really good. I mean,

12:13

we're never moving fast enough. There's

12:15

a lot going on, but I'm

12:19

excited about the opportunity ahead. Yeah,

12:22

I hear you. I feel like our

12:24

eyes are always bigger than our stomachs. We're always trying to

12:26

get a lot done. And that's a part

12:29

of what I wanted to chat with you about because

12:31

I feel like we've been working so well together over

12:33

the last few months. And I have

12:35

some observations about some of the interactions that we've had

12:37

collectively with the team. I was wondering if it'd be

12:39

okay if I shared those with you. Sure,

12:42

but I gotta say, our eyes are not bigger

12:44

than our stomach. We're just not moving fast. I

12:46

mean, I think you and I, I

12:51

just wanna put that on the table because I don't

12:53

think we're moving fast enough. And I kind

12:56

of think maybe you're coddling people a little bit too

12:58

much. But I think I'd

13:00

be open to hearing why

13:02

you're feeling that way. In fact, I'm kind

13:04

of curious, is there something that I've done

13:06

recently that makes you, that gave

13:09

you that impression or made you have that reaction?

13:11

Yeah, I mean, the other day James was

13:14

late on a project and I know his

13:16

kid was sick or whatever, but I mean,

13:18

he was late on the project and you

13:20

just gave him a pass and

13:22

it was not okay that he was late on the

13:25

project. Do you think that

13:28

a different kind of reaction in that moment would

13:30

have gotten a better result? Is there something I

13:32

should or could have done differently? Yeah,

13:34

I mean, I think what I was trying

13:36

to say, but you kind of cut me

13:39

off like I was being a jackass, is

13:44

that if he was gonna

13:46

be late, he should have come to us sooner

13:48

to tell us he was gonna be late

13:51

so we could have put someone else to

13:53

help fill his gap. But

13:56

instead we were just late and we couldn't

13:58

recover. Bad news early. That's

14:00

what I say. Yeah. Yeah, and I

14:02

think I actually agree with you on that point. I

14:04

think we should get bad news We

14:08

should get bad news early And I also

14:10

think there are some things that we just

14:12

can't plan for like that in this particular

14:14

case the the issue

14:16

was that The

14:18

the the illness was was unexpected. He

14:21

was sort of out of communication while he was

14:23

taking care of his kid So

14:25

it wasn't I'm

14:27

not saying he doesn't bear responsibility, but I

14:29

am saying that I think that

14:32

there's a moment for for compassion because you

14:34

know James is telling us like his kid

14:36

is dealing with a serious illness and We're

14:39

focusing only on the lateness of the project in

14:41

that public meeting. That's what I was trying to

14:43

counteract I was trying to balance our approach so

14:45

that we were showing some understanding But

14:48

I think we do owe it to James to challenge

14:51

Him to let us

14:53

know that stuff earlier Yeah, because

14:55

James it was like James

14:57

got the diagnosis and like quit working for

14:59

three days before he let us know what

15:02

was going on Like that's three days that

15:04

were lost and gone forever He

15:06

could have called us right away. It's not like

15:09

I would have said oh your kids sick

15:11

tough shit You know keep working. I would

15:13

have said okay, let's get let's get

15:15

Sarah and put her on this project The

15:18

cover for you like like I got his

15:20

back But he's got to tell me that I

15:22

need you know that there's a problem and he

15:24

didn't yeah I

15:27

think that that is like an entirely justified

15:29

reaction And I would add that in the

15:31

moments when we were having that conversation and

15:33

other people were observing It

15:35

was very clear that you were an annoyed With

15:39

James it wasn't exactly clear why and

15:41

so the concern that I have is that

15:43

could come across as you're annoyed because James kid

15:45

Is sick I think yeah,

15:47

I mean I certainly don't want to give that

15:49

impression But like you kind of shut me down

15:51

you're like oh we got to be nice to

15:53

James And then I was like well

15:56

what you know like bad

15:58

news early and now now I

16:00

look like an asshole. Uh,

16:02

yep. I, I could, I

16:04

can see how I could do a potentially do

16:06

a better job in the moment of acknowledging, uh,

16:10

of being clear, like I'm being clear with you now

16:12

that there's two things that we're trying to accomplish. Things

16:15

can be true at the same time. Absolutely.

16:17

Totally believe that. Yeah. Um,

16:19

so what are we going to do? Like James,

16:21

James works for you. Uh, and

16:24

so I kind of think

16:26

it's your job to, to tell James

16:29

this, um, you know, I don't

16:31

know, but I feel like part of the problem

16:33

that we have is I always have to be

16:35

the heavy like you're, I

16:37

don't have great confidence that you're going to make

16:40

this clear enough to James. That's

16:42

something I think you and I need to work

16:44

on because I do feel like I'm giving this kind

16:46

of feedback on a regular basis. And so, uh,

16:48

there's probably something that we can do differently to make

16:50

sure that you feel confident about that. But

16:53

maybe you're giving that feedback, but

16:56

James didn't do what he,

16:58

what he should have known. Like if

17:00

James were working for me, he would have known to call

17:02

me as soon as he got the diagnosis. I

17:05

mean, maybe, or maybe what

17:07

James would have done is he would have like

17:09

worked through, uh, his

17:11

kid being sick to try to meet

17:13

an expectation that is not entirely reasonable.

17:16

Like that's the problem. I am not

17:18

unreasonable. I feel like you're always putting

17:20

me in the box of being the,

17:22

the unreasonable jerk. And I don't think

17:24

that's fair. I honestly think

17:26

you're not helping yourself. Like you

17:29

see it as me putting you in this

17:31

box, but what I observe is how people

17:33

respond to you. And what I'm

17:35

trying to tell you is that you do

17:37

not come across as reasonable. That's

17:40

not, that's not a say

17:42

you're an unreasonable person. Those two things are

17:44

very different. I'm saying that you do not

17:46

come across as reasonable in those moments when

17:48

you are pushing people to hit a deadline.

17:52

Should I just let them miss the deadlines? I

17:54

mean, I sort of feel like it's not reasonable

17:56

to just let it go. Like, because

17:59

it's like not. only for James, but I

18:01

want the whole team to know what to do

18:03

if they have a problem.

18:06

You know, I

18:08

want this to be very clear to

18:10

the team, bad news early. And I

18:12

do not, I feel like people feel

18:14

like there's no consequence for missing their

18:16

deadlines. Yeah. And what I

18:18

would say is I think people do feel like there's a

18:20

sense of consequence for missing their deadlines. It's

18:22

just that things happen where

18:25

people are still missing their deadlines. So, since

18:28

we can't absolutely prevent it, I

18:30

think the thing we need to agree on is

18:32

we need to make it clear, bad news early.

18:35

I'm 100% on the same page. We need to

18:37

make that clear. I will give James the feedback

18:39

that he should have given us this information sooner.

18:42

And I think you need to talk to James and

18:45

say what you said to me, which is to acknowledge

18:47

that this thing was out of control,

18:50

you care that his kid was sick.

18:55

And James, you and I have agreed that the right, this is

18:57

after I talked to him, you and I have agreed that the

18:59

right thing to do is for him to notify the both of

19:01

us if something is going to get in the way, even if

19:03

that thing is out of his control. Okay,

19:05

I'll do that. I would also ask you to deliver

19:08

to the team a bad news early.

19:13

Like, we need a norm of bad news

19:16

early. And I don't think we

19:18

have one. And we have missed 70% of

19:20

our deadlines in the last quarter. And

19:23

that's not acceptable. Yeah, I think

19:25

that's something we should deliver together. I think it's going to be

19:27

important for the two of us to stand up there together and

19:29

say that we have talked about it and we have agreed that

19:31

this is the team norm. What do you think? Okay,

19:33

totally agree. But let's practice it because

19:37

I feel like sometimes when we present stuff

19:39

together, we're

19:41

in this like, mom and dad,

19:43

good cop, bad cop kind of. And

19:46

I don't like being, I don't like being

19:48

the heavy. Okay, sounds good.

19:51

All right, sounds good. All

19:53

right. So, let us know

19:56

what are you saying. Brandi, Nick, feel

19:58

free to chime in. I kept

20:01

waiting to see if I would jump in and I was like,

20:03

no, I think they're going to get to a, I felt like

20:05

you're going to get to a good place. Um, yeah. And

20:08

there was a really important moment, Jason,

20:10

when Kim kind of pushed back again

20:12

about the bad news early and you,

20:14

you really reaffirmed. Yes,

20:17

we have to declare that. And

20:19

you actually kind of summarize next steps. And

20:22

at least for me, there was a, that was

20:24

a really, well, there were a lot

20:26

of effective things you did. And I think it was

20:29

that you, you really heard what

20:31

she said and you really acknowledged the importance

20:33

of bad news early. And

20:35

you were actually very clear on what you were

20:38

expecting from her, like go back and, you know,

20:40

talk to James about what

20:42

you actually just shared with me. And so I

20:44

was curious just as you were coming

20:48

up with that in this spot, like what was it that

20:50

you were trying to do with that followup?

20:52

I think I was willing

20:54

to in the, in this role, I was willing

20:56

to accept that. I, that there was

20:58

more that I could be doing to prevent this kind

21:00

of thing from happening in the future. Um,

21:03

and that what Kim was

21:05

suggesting was that

21:08

we haven't encouraged the team to do

21:10

this, like pretty simple behavior, which

21:13

is to deliver bad news early

21:15

enough where we have been inconsistent

21:17

and or like the messages that

21:19

I've been delivering have somehow counter

21:21

counter-manded the principle of

21:24

bad news early. And

21:26

what I wanted to do was I was trying to address

21:29

the like, you are not

21:31

an unreasonable person, but you can be perceived

21:33

as unreasonable. What I want you to do

21:35

is I want you to talk to James

21:38

and let him know, because I think that that's going

21:40

to go a long way to helping

21:43

to improve, to match

21:45

the reality of the care that

21:48

Kim shows for the people on the team

21:50

with the perception that Kim could be sort

21:52

of unreasonably impatient with,

21:54

with delays. I think I would,

21:56

I think once you asked me to do that, I think I

21:58

was really going to do it. I heard

22:00

it because part of what I was grousing

22:02

about is that I didn't want to always be

22:04

put in the role of the bad cop. You

22:07

were asking me to go in and be the

22:09

good cop. Yeah. So I

22:12

didn't say that explicitly, but that was

22:14

what was going on in my head.

22:16

That is so interesting. Yeah, I definitely

22:18

tonally and emotionally felt that shift. There

22:21

was something also where Kim

22:24

started off by saying, you're coddling them,

22:26

etc. For

22:29

me, Jason, you did not

22:31

rise to that. So

22:34

I'm curious, Jason, when Kim was at

22:37

the top talking about how you're coddling

22:39

the team and not being as direct

22:42

and holding them accountable, did

22:45

you keep that in your mind as something that you

22:47

wanted to be sure to get back to of what

22:49

you are going to be asking from her or how

22:51

did you both manage that

22:53

emotionally, but use that as a

22:55

follow-up to not make the feedback personal? Yes.

23:00

I think the way I respond to that

23:02

was to solicit feedback, to say, that's interesting.

23:05

Tell me what I have done that has

23:07

made you feel that I'm coddling the

23:09

team. From my perspective, Kim

23:11

did a great job. Behaving

23:14

in a radically candid way, she

23:17

shifted from the personality or high-level

23:19

abstract thing to like, specifically, we've

23:21

missed all of these deadlines and

23:24

I didn't actually feel like I needed to come back to the

23:26

coddling thing because in the heat of

23:28

the moment, people don't choose their

23:30

words perfectly and maybe Kim's frustrated.

23:34

If she had continued to vaguely

23:37

insult my management, I probably would have said we

23:39

need to come back to that. But instead, she

23:41

got right down to brass tacks and was like,

23:43

this is the problem, this is what I've seen

23:45

happen, and I don't want this to happen again.

23:48

I think that's a good segue to the

23:50

advice we would give to the person who

23:52

wrote in, which is like, let's go

23:54

back to the radical

23:57

candor order of operations. Unless you

23:59

had a- anything Amy that

24:01

you wanted to well the one thing I'll say

24:03

and I think this is a really good tie

24:05

in is that I Just wanted to name that

24:07

in this conversation. There was a lot of what

24:09

Kim you like to call feedback debt Yeah, there

24:11

was a lot of stuff that had not either

24:14

been heard or addressed around whether

24:17

it was the coddling Assumption or

24:19

whether feeling that you know bad news

24:21

early had not been addressed So

24:23

I think yeah if you want to talk about how

24:25

the order of operations especially can get

24:27

at some of that Feedback debt

24:30

that was really under the surface in that

24:32

conversation. Yeah, I mean that's that's why I

24:34

think it always makes sense to solicit feedback when

24:37

when Jason solicited feedback You

24:41

know, I gave it But

24:43

but and I started out maybe not

24:46

saying it in the best way But

24:48

that's the good news about when when

24:50

you solicit feedback You're

24:53

you're expecting it to come

24:56

at you and it's a little bit easier

24:59

to forgive some sloppy

25:01

delivery If

25:03

you if you've just asked for the feedback I

25:06

think to try to to try

25:08

to get curious not furious if somebody says

25:10

something that is Maybe you

25:13

know not not in the best

25:15

possible way The

25:17

other thing that I would say about

25:20

soliciting feedback in this situation As

25:23

I was as we were doing the role play

25:25

I was I was sort of

25:27

having a flashback to a situation where

25:29

I was I had

25:31

co-founded a company. I said I had never been in

25:33

this situation as we're doing the role play And

25:39

and in this situation where

25:41

I was co-founder one

25:44

of my co-founders was extremely

25:47

Extremely impatient and harsh and

25:50

I was always worried about my management

25:52

style that I

25:54

was you know, too nice and and

25:57

so I sort of I I

26:00

let him be the bad cop so that I

26:02

could be the good cop. And that was not

26:04

fair to the team and

26:06

also wasn't fair to him. So I think that

26:09

soliciting feedback in this kind of situation where one

26:11

of you has one style and another has another,

26:13

you wanna make sure that

26:16

the two of you are in

26:18

lock step, that the team

26:20

is not going to one parent

26:25

because they think they'll get a yes from one

26:27

parent and avoiding the other parent and they think

26:29

they'll get a no. I thought

26:31

that was a really great ad at the end when you

26:33

were like, let's practice what we're going to say because

26:36

it also felt like there was some feedback debt

26:38

there too of like, we've had some

26:40

of these things come up before and we haven't

26:42

been aligned. Yeah, yeah.

26:44

Cause I got the

26:46

impression and this may not be fair, but

26:48

in reading the note, I got the impression that

26:51

the person who wrote in didn't fully approve

26:55

the co-managers management style.

26:57

And that may be like, that needs to get

26:59

out on the table,

27:01

maybe I'm reading too much. That was

27:03

how I- Reading myself into the story.

27:06

Well, I felt like there was some

27:08

frustration there. And so I think, and soliciting

27:10

feedback on both sides could be really helpful.

27:13

And when you were talking about soliciting feedback, what was coming

27:15

up for me also was, the

27:18

instruction was to follow up

27:20

with James and actually

27:22

show that care. So

27:24

I'm curious, Jason, when you

27:26

think about soliciting feedback, for

27:30

example, from Kim to James. So how

27:33

would you want Kim to have

27:35

that conversation with say

27:37

your direct report? And what might

27:39

be the difference in soliciting feedback when you're

27:42

doing it kind of peer to

27:44

peer, co-manager to co-manager versus

27:46

soliciting feedback Kim to James?

27:49

I don't know that I have a

27:51

super strong opinion on exactly how I'd

27:53

want Kim to have the conversation. I

27:56

think in part because I actually trust

27:58

that Kim does care about that. the

28:00

people that we work with.

28:03

But maybe it's like my point of

28:05

view going into it in that moment

28:07

was Kim does care, but doesn't always show it

28:09

as effectively as she could. Uh,

28:11

and so I would say like, I would

28:13

trust Kim to be able to, like, she

28:16

just did such a good job of explaining it to me that I

28:18

would trust that she would be able to do a good job explaining

28:21

it to James and my, uh, I

28:24

wouldn't necessarily require that

28:26

Kim solicit feedback from

28:29

James either. Like, I think the most important is

28:31

an acknowledgement of like, Hey, I wanted you to

28:33

know that I care about your kid and, uh,

28:37

that I, that I understand that, that

28:39

that's what caused the delay. And my frustration was

28:41

not about your kid being sick, but it was

28:43

about us missing the deadline without communication. Yeah.

28:46

And I think, I think that when,

28:48

when we're suggesting to this listener who

28:50

wrote, wrote us the note, when we

28:52

say solicit feedback, basically that means

28:54

from that other manager, like solicit, you

28:56

know, cause it's possible that the person

28:59

who wrote in is doing something that's

29:01

really frustrating that other man, that

29:03

other manager. And so before

29:05

the listener talks about what that the

29:07

other manager is doing that is frustrating

29:10

the listener, they should solicit

29:13

from their co-manager. And then

29:15

the next step of course, is to give praise. And

29:18

I think, uh, I think there,

29:21

if the person who wrote in can take a

29:23

beat to think about what

29:25

they appreciate about their co-manager, what

29:28

do they, what do they,

29:30

um, what are they

29:32

really like about the

29:34

way that this co-manager works? What are

29:37

the, what, you know, there's probably some

29:39

utility that this person's impatient, so it

29:41

helps the team achieve better results. So

29:44

that's, that's what I mean by, you know,

29:46

that's why give after soliciting feedback

29:48

and give praise as the next

29:50

step in the order of operations.

29:53

And then of course, before

29:55

you, before you jump onto that, um, you know,

29:58

one of the things that comes up sometimes. as

30:00

questions, you know, we have this

30:02

order. I think

30:05

sometimes people take it actually quite

30:07

literal, right? That it's sort of happening all

30:10

at the same time or is it happening sequentially?

30:12

So I'm curious just even in this specific

30:16

situation, when

30:18

you say give specific and sincere praise. So

30:20

one could be even, hey, I

30:23

love your desire to have us all, you

30:25

know, bad news first or

30:27

bad news quickly. You know, is that

30:29

an example? Yeah. Specific and sincere praise. I

30:31

mean, is that kind of just, I just want to

30:33

get really granular for people. Could be that simple. So,

30:36

and it's a good idea to

30:38

have in mind when you go in

30:40

to solicit feedback, it's a good

30:43

idea to have it. It's just a good idea to

30:45

have in mind at all times and in all

30:47

cases, the things you appreciate about the

30:49

people who you work with. A little

30:51

gratitude goes a long way. So that's

30:54

give praise. Next step is to

30:57

give radically candid criticism. Again, Amy,

31:00

to your question doesn't have to all be in

31:02

the same conversation, but at some

31:04

point, pretty soon, the person

31:06

who wrote in needs to

31:08

let this other person know that

31:11

they think they're being

31:13

too, that they think they're

31:15

being a little bit too aggressive and not high

31:17

enough up on the care personally to mention

31:19

a radical candor. But

31:21

you want to make sure that when

31:23

you do that, when you give that

31:26

radically candid criticism, that

31:28

they're being humble about it. They

31:31

may be wrong. There's

31:33

not one way to manage

31:36

everybody. In fact, it's one of the things I

31:38

really struggled with in writing the book is

31:40

that I didn't want to come across as

31:43

this arrogant know-it-all, here's how everyone should

31:45

be like me. That's not what I

31:47

was trying to say in the book.

31:51

And then of course, solicit feedback,

31:53

give praise, give radically candid criticism,

31:56

gauge how it's landing. I think in the

31:58

role, play Jason and

32:00

I did, we were

32:03

both open to each other. It's good

32:05

that this person has a good relationship

32:07

with their co-manager. I would

32:09

say that Jason in

32:11

the role play, he said

32:14

it was clear that you were

32:16

annoyed and it wasn't clear

32:18

why and that that can come across as you're annoyed

32:20

that James' child is sick. I

32:22

thought that was a really great

32:25

example of providing radically

32:27

candid criticism in

32:30

a way that was actually helpful. Like this is actually,

32:32

it was almost like Jason

32:34

was gauging it for you for the

32:36

group in some way. Yeah. On your behalf.

32:39

Yeah. Yeah. Jason

32:42

was saying it and Jason

32:44

was gauging how I was

32:46

responding. Jason was willing

32:48

to pause and talk

32:50

about some other stuff and acknowledge that

32:53

bad news early is important before he

32:55

went into complain that I was hurt

32:57

to give me some radical iconic criticism.

33:00

Shouldn't say complaint. Yeah.

33:02

It did not feel like a complaint at all. I mean, I think

33:04

it's again, Jason

33:07

with the word coddling and you're

33:09

not sort of going

33:11

down that potential rabbit hole. I

33:13

feel like the conversation went in

33:15

a very different direction. Yeah.

33:20

Look, I was basing that on

33:23

the relationship that was described in the email,

33:25

but also on observation that

33:27

I have from many years

33:29

of trying and

33:32

failing to give feedback effectively, which

33:34

is that there are moments

33:36

where you, as

33:38

the person who wants to give feedback,

33:40

should expect that it is

33:43

normal for people to respond defensively.

33:45

And one common defensive tactic is to

33:48

sort of try to turn the tables

33:51

on you and make it about you. And

33:53

I think that when the relationship is good,

33:55

we should well, we should be very open

33:57

to those moments and say, well, okay. Let's

34:00

talk about me for a second and let's figure

34:02

out like what I could be doing differently If

34:05

the relationship was bad or this person had acted

34:08

in bad faith I probably would have said sorry

34:10

Like I'm not I don't

34:12

think that was like the way they phrase that I don't

34:14

think it was fair Like is there tell me

34:16

what you mean? To some extent

34:19

like I think you have to have enough

34:23

sort of self-management to be able

34:25

to allow Some

34:29

of these things to sort of like roll

34:31

off your back You know what I mean?

34:33

I think I think the more you you

34:35

sort of focus on the unhelpful parts the

34:37

more unhelpful The conversation is likely to become

34:39

if you can instead to try to refocus

34:41

the person on something helpful Then

34:43

I think you can you're you're more likely to like

34:45

to at the end of that to build Being

34:49

a conversation that builds that relationship as opposed to sort of gets

34:51

in the way of it Great

34:54

note And I think just to add the importance

34:56

of being helpful and I really felt that in

34:58

the conversation that you were having with Kim that

35:00

you really were sharing to be

35:02

helpful. So in the spirit of being

35:04

helpful Let's get into our radical candor

35:07

checklist so we can start putting radical

35:09

candor into practice Tip

35:11

number one if you are co-managing a

35:13

team or project with a peer Don't

35:15

force each other in the roles where

35:17

one of you is all care personally

35:19

and the other is all challenged directly

35:23

Practice a radical candor order of

35:25

operations with your co-manager Regularly

35:27

to acknowledge and hear one

35:29

another's perspective and to

35:31

avoid creating feedback depth Tip

35:34

number two if you want to

35:36

practice radical candor with people who don't report to

35:38

you You can do it

35:40

in two minute impromptu development conversations

35:43

For example in between meetings at

35:45

the start of a meeting you can check in with someone and say

35:47

hey I want to see you know, how

35:50

I did presenting this executive summary Do you have a few

35:52

minutes at the end of the meeting? It doesn't have to

35:54

be a big deal and

35:56

I think the biggest point here is that someone does not

35:58

have to report directly to to you in

36:01

order to engage in radically candid

36:03

conversations. Tip number three,

36:05

even if you and your co-manager don't agree

36:08

on everything, which is 100% what's going to

36:10

happen, try

36:13

to find common ground on what you

36:15

do agree on, the norms that you want

36:18

for your team to operate within, and

36:21

share it with each other first, come to

36:23

alignment on those things, discuss any areas of

36:25

disagreement so you both understand why you disagree,

36:28

but commit to a shared course of action so that

36:30

when you go out to the team, you

36:33

don't commit the cardinal sin of confusing

36:35

people by one leader pulling in one

36:37

direction and the other one pulling in the other direction.

36:40

I thought you all did a great job

36:42

on that. I wanted to thank again the

36:44

listener for writing in and their

36:47

commitment to practicing radical candor and

36:49

to being a compassionate and

36:51

clear communicator. Thank you so much.

36:53

Yeah, thank you. We love getting

36:56

people's scenarios. So if you have

36:58

one, send it to us. That's

37:01

right, and you can go ahead and send it to

37:03

us, podcast at

37:05

radicalcander.com. You

37:07

can also send criticism for us

37:09

at podcast at radicalcander.com. Of

37:12

course, if you like what you hear, please go ahead, rate,

37:14

review us wherever you listen to

37:16

podcasts. And finally, for more tips, go

37:18

ahead, radicalcander.com/resources. You'll

37:21

find show

37:23

notes at

37:25

radicalcander.com/podcast. Bye

37:27

for now. Take care. Take care,

37:29

everyone. The Radical Candor Podcast is

37:31

based on the book, Radical Candor,

37:33

Be a Kick-Ass Boss Without Losing

37:35

Your Humanity by Kim Scott. Episodes

37:38

are written and produced by Brandy

37:40

Neill with script editing by me,

37:42

Amy Sandler. The show features Radical

37:44

Candor co-founders, Kim Scott and Jason

37:46

Roza and is hosted by me,

37:49

still Amy Sandler. Nick Perissimi

37:51

is our audio engineer. The

37:54

Radical Candor Podcast, new music

37:56

was composed by Cliff Goldmacher.

37:58

Follow us on LinkedIn. Radical

38:01

Cander the company and visit

38:03

us at radicalcander.com