If there’s one thing I’ve had a lot of practice at over my career as both a senior finance professional and a general manager, it’s difficult conversations.
Most of them went poorly in the early days of my career.
Not because the topics were impossible, not because the people were unreasonable, but because of one common factor. My mouth. And specifically, the words that came out of it.
When you’re young in finance, you think being “right” is enough. You’ve got the facts, the policy, the data, the budget – the full arsenal. You line it up, you walk in, and you drop it on the table like a winning hand of poker.
And then you’re stunned when the other person doesn’t just fold and agree.
What most of us don’t consider is that words matter. And how you enter a conversation is a huge factor on how you leave it.
For me, it took a few misses to realise that we can actually choose our words with purpose before we enter the room. We can frame them in a way that changes how the whole conversation feels.
And once I started doing that, the difficult conversations didn’t always feel like a brawl. In fact, some of them became productive, even enjoyable.
Which is especially important in organisations, where by design there is natural tension across departments.
The marketing director doesn’t care that their spend doesn’t reconcile to the approved cost centre. The sales lead doesn’t lose sleep over the accrual policy. The head of operations doesn’t lie awake thinking about capex vs opex classifications. They’ve got their own set of pressures, their own perspective, and in many cases, their own conflicting goals.
And that’s by design. Organisations are built that way. Sales is meant to grow. Marketing is meant to spend. Operations is meant to produce. Finance is meant to constrain. Throw constrained resources into the mix and you’ve basically engineered permanent tension.
That’s why being “right” isn’t enough. If all you’re trying to do is win, you’ll likely walk out with a hollow victory – or more often, no victory at all. Because while you might have landed your point, you’ve damaged the relationship. And the next time you need to have a conversation, good luck getting them to take your call.
As my first coach told me, the aim isn’t to be the smartest, it’s to be the most effective.
The trick? It’s all in how you enter the conversation.
Enter it combatively and you trigger defensiveness. You look like a threat, and people either fight back or shut down.
Enter it carefully, and you create the conditions for a conversation that’s safe, constructive, and – dare I say it – potentially positive.
The technique I stumbled across that is great for this is the Don’t/Do Frame. It’s ridiculously simple, which is probably why it works.
Here’s the problem with how most of us start tricky conversations. We barrel in with the “Do.”
We say things like, “The purpose of this meeting is to talk about your budget overrun,” or “I need to discuss a problem with your team’s process.” Sounds clear, sounds professional, sounds like finance.
But what it actually does is set off alarm bells. The other person’s shields are up before you’ve even finished the sentence.
In the Don’t/Do Frame, you start with the “Don’t.”
You defuse the negative story in the other persons head before it has a chance to take root. You tell them what you don’t want from the conversation, and only then do you tell them what you do want.
Take marketing budget cuts. The classic. If you walk in and say, “Mike, we need to talk about ways we can cut spend,” Mike is already drafting his defence. He’s running through brand building theories, ready to argue ROI, and mentally sharpening the knife for procurement.
Now try it with Don’t/Do. “Mike, I want to talk to you about the marketing budget. What I don’t want to do is undermine the brand or stop all the good work your team’s been doing. What I do want to do is see if we can find some ways we can cut spend.”
Exact same last four words. Different outcome
You’ve removed the hidden accusation. You’ve shown him you’re not out to kill his work. You’re out to solve a problem together.
When people feel safe, they listen. When they feel threatened, they defend.
The Don’t/Do frame is about creating safety at the very start, so you have half a chance of being heard.
The key is to keep it short and genuine. If you waffle on, it sounds fake. If you say it like a robot, it sounds manipulative. And if you don’t actually mean it, you’ll be exposed in seconds.
The Don’t has to be something they actually fear, and the Do has to be something they actually want. Get that right, and you’re halfway there.
So, here’s the checklist the next time you have a tough conversation coming:
1. Before the conversation, write down what you don’t want the other person to think or feel. That’s your Don’t.
2. Then write down what you do want them to think or feel – the positive intent you’re bringing. That’s your Do.
3. Say “What I don’t want to do is <Insert your don’t>. What I do want to do though is <insert your do>…..would that be ok?”
That’s it. Three steps. Sounds obvious, but it changes everything
I won’t pretend every conversation becomes smooth sailing. You’ll still get pushback. People will still disagree. But the chances of turning a fight into a collaboration go up dramatically when you enter the conversation with a Don’t/Do statement