Poor Bedside Manner
In the movie 50/50, a doctor speaks to the family after performing surgery to remove a cancerous tumor on their 27 year old son and recites everything that went wrong during the operation, bloody detail after detail, never mentioning until much later in the conversation, the possibility of full recovery.
Do Doctors Really Talk That Way?
A few film critics have put down this film for the way it deals “poorly” with the medical profession, but what they fail to see is the film’s satire of doctors, who, let’s face it, don’t always have the best communication skills.
So what could the doctor have done differently? He could have shown some empathy first, stated the core message (Adam’s going to be just fine), and then detailed what it’s going to take to get Adam healthy again.
Placement Matters
In business, a doomsday approach to problem situations can be equally troublesome.
Imagine a manager talking like this:
“Everything went wrong with the project. We missed deadlines. We didn’t get the package from India on time. The information was not translated correctly, and I got in a big fight with Mr. Neruda over the invoicing. Yet, despite these setbacks, the project was finished on time and our customer is happy.”
Thanks for putting me through that torture first.
Why not reverse the order and start with the happy ending?
“ The project was finished on time and our customer is happy. The road there, however, was rocky. Here’s what happened.”
Motivate – Don’t De-motivate Your Reader
For me the issue is the “rocky” road – and how to avoid it. If I overwhelm the reader right at the beginning with all the horrible details, without putting them in a context, it’s punitive. The reader feels beat up.
My favorite example of this – that I see far too often – is the HR manager who rattles off a list of performance issues to an employee, anything from being late to missing deadlines to having little rapport with team mates, to coming to meetings unprepared. By the end of the message the recipient stops reading this litany of errors and feels like jumping off a bridge.
At the end of the document, the writer says – “BUT I’m sure you’ll work on these areas, and we’ll discuss your progress in six months.”
What would Fox Entertainment say about this?
I call this psycho-inductive reasoning. It works great on TV. We hear it on shows like American Idol or X Factor all the time.
A whole roomful of participants are waiting to hear if they’re on or off the show, and Paul Abdul comes forward, her voice full of sadness and disillusionment, and rattles off all the things they did wrong, and then –Surprise! She announces that they’re all safe. “You made it to Hollywood! “
As TV drama, it works wonders! It keeps us on the edge of our seat. Makes it exciting. Creates a huge surprise.
But in the office? It’s demoralizing.
What comes first? Bad News or Good news?
Employees want information instantly, but if you play this I’m-going-to -torture you-first game, employees not only become de-motivated, but they lose respect for their bosses. The trust level dwindles, even disappears
So if you’re firing someone – the direct message comes smack up front.
“John, we’ve decided to let you go for the following reasons.”
Or,
If John’s job is safe, say that first. That way John will understand the purpose of the criticism:
“We’re not firing you. We’re asking you to do these three things so that you stay on target and meet your goals.”
The issue is not whether you place the good news or the bad news first.
Let me make that perfectly clear. Because sometimes BAD news does come smack up front. The real issue here is not to let the reader wait until the end of the email for the ultimate core message that puts everything in perspective.
Remember your reader asks these questions:
What is it that you want from me?
Why am I reading this?
Give me a context for this information.
Don’t make me wait at the edge of my seat to find out what you want! Don’t waste your reader’s time. Be a visionary. State the core at the start.
A Revision of the Doctor’s Script
So if you’re in the medical field, I’m not asking doctors to cushion the news or camouflage the truth.
Uh uh.
The preferred version might go something like this.
Instead of the surgeon starting off with a description of what went wrong with the operation, bit by bit, she could say:
“Adam is going to make a full recovery (Yea!) but while we were in surgery we had to do this and this and this and that is going to force him to do some serious physical therapy. Here’s what he can expect.”
It’s not a question of cushioning the bad news. It’s a decision to hit the core FIRST – so the reader can put the bad news in the right context. People who have a knack for this will get yelled at less frequently and earn the reputation for being a real communicator.