Why do project meetings go wrong? Why do we feel like we are not getting our views across? And what can we do to understand others and bridge the linguistic divide?
Virginia Satir is a name we don't hear much about in software development. That's because she's actually a therapist, to be more precise, one of the most influential people in family/group therapy. What does it have to do with software projects?
Satir's approach to couples therapy involved translating one person's words to another. She realized that most couple problems were actually communication problems, with people saying things to each other but talking to each other.
It happens very often, project meetings that last hours, little or no consensus is reached, everyone leaves exhausted and a little lost. The decision maker is not sure what the developers are doing and at the same time they are not sure what the decision maker wants. If only we could have our own Virginia Satir…
Understanding Communication
Satir’s work is extensive, but the main lesson is “we don’t speak the same language”. Even though we both speak English, my English is not the same as your English. So even though we both understand the words we use, we are conveying very different messages.
For example, imagine a meeting where a project manager is about to present a new technology for the project. For them, the word “new” conjures up images of something exciting, of setting new trends, of something important.
For one of the junior developers, who has had sudden changes go wrong in the past, “new” is a hassle, having to learn another tool, spending time adapting instead of focusing on building the project.
For the decision maker, “new” is a code word for cost, both in time and resources. Will they meet the deadline? Isn't this project already close to going over budget?
When the questions begin, the manager focuses on opportunities, developers focus on effort, and the decision maker focuses on costs. “Won’t this cost a lot?” asks the decision maker. “Maybe, but it’s better suited to our goals,” the frustrated manager responds.
I'm exaggerating, of course, but the point remains the same: communication breaks down when we have differing opinions and don't realize we're speaking for each other.
The obvious solution is to express in the most honest terms what we mean by something and then listen carefully to others. Unfortunately, sometimes even we are unaware of our own process, so it can be difficult to find the right words.
This is when others can help us understand ourselves by asking the right questions. This is another aspect of Satir's approach. She realized that we need someone to act as a mirror so that we can see our inner world reflected and learn.
The language of decision makers
Decision makers come in all shapes and sizes, some of them are investors, some are project managers, and in some cases they are users. Sometimes we have more than one decision maker and other times we have to go through gatekeepers to get to the right decision maker.
Be that as it may, everyone shares the same goal, they want the project to succeed, the problem is figuring out “how” it will succeed.
While there are as many motivations as there are decision makers in the world, researchers have managed to group decision makers into five broad types, according to: Hubspot :
The Charismatic
Imagine an extrovert that everyone likes, full of ideas, energetic, always on the move. The charismatic decision maker is an action-oriented individual who likes to see things in motion. They are emotional and dynamic, which is great for coming up with new ideas, but not so good for long-term commitments.
Developers who work with a charismatic decision maker are at their best when they connect with that motivation and energy, but at the same time act as an anchor that keeps the decision maker's ideas in check. It's easy to get carried away by excitement, which often leads to unrealistic goals.
The deep thinker
As the name implies, deep thinkers are decision makers who value reason and forethought. They seek information, are constantly learning and make informed decisions. Deep thinkers are highly logical and, as such, more receptive to accurate, well-thought-out information than emotional arguments.
Developers who work with deep thinkers will find that they tend to be risk averse and are more concerned with the well-being of their company than innovation. These decision-makers are influenced by logic and security, preferring the status quo or the path most traveled.
Thinkers like to connect the dots and draw conclusions for themselves, they are the perfect decision makers for presenting abstract and difficult arguments. He's the kind of person who feels at home with a difficult puzzle to solve.
The skeptic
If you've ever worked with someone who raises every objection, then you've worked with a skeptic. These decision-makers value their own opinion, knowledge and experience above all else and will fight tooth and nail to find flaws in proposals that go against their view of the world.
Skeptics are not afraid to speak their mind to the point that they seem rude or difficult to deal with. This is actually a good thing, you can be sure that a skeptic is being the most honest person in the room at any given time.
Once you gain the trust of a skeptic, you will find yourself in the company of a great ally. Skeptics tend to defend and support those they trust with the same energy with which they protect their worldview.
While reviewing a project can be exhausting, you can be sure that once a skeptic is satisfied with your answers, there will be no more objections on the table. Developers who learn to speak from the decision maker's worldview are perfect for skeptics.
The follower
Like the deep thinker, the follower is risk averse. They are quite passive in contrast to other decision makers and prefer tried and true methods over innovative approaches. You won't see a follower adopting new trends until they become the norm.
Sticking to what works, showing testimonials, and using well-documented, statistically-based results will often get a positive reaction from the decision maker. If innovation is necessary, then the developer should try to support their ideas with as much data as possible.
Instead of showing the big picture, developers should stick to small, concrete goals, talk about security, testing, and feedback loops to avoid problems. The trick to getting a follower on your side is to show them that you are well prepared.
The controller
Controllers like to be in charge, and for good reason. They are organized, sensible and precise. These types of decision-makers are very susceptible to uncertainty, and the less they can control their environment, the more likely they are to withdraw.
That said, controllers are not risk averse, they just don't like taking risks they are unaware of. They want to be informed and they want their answers to come from an expert. For example, if they have a question about the interface, they would rather talk to the UX designer than the project managers.
Like the deep thinker and the follower, controllers take time to make a decision; It's better to give them space while they process the information than to try to pressure them for a quick response. The more control you give them, the happier they will be.
Don't forget the individual
If you are a decision maker, I hope these types help you define your personal style, which will help you express your idea in clearer terms. If you're a developer or project manager, I hope this helps you be more thoughtful about your approach when talking to the decision maker.
Remember that these broad types are just stereotypes, each person has their own set of values and understanding them is key to learning to speak your own personal language.
Source: BairesDev
