Effective Communication in Tough Conversations: Truth, Emotion, and Ethical Strategies
Navigating Challenging Conversations brings together Michael Dodd and Joanne Lockwood to explore the power of truthful and empathetic communication in tough scenarios, from media interviews to workplace discussions.
Hello, everyone. My name is Joanne Lockwood and I'm your host for theInclusion Bites podcast. In this series, I have interviewed a numberof amazing people and simply had a conversation around the subject ofinclusion, belonging and generally making the world abetter place for everyone to thrive. To join me in thefuture, then please do drop me a line tojo.Lockwood@seechangehappen.co.uk,that's S-E-E Change Happen dot Co dot Uk. Youcan catch up with all of the previous shows on iTunes, Spotifyand the usual places. So plugin your headphones, grab a decaf and let's getgoing. Today isepisode 95 with the titlenavigating challenging conversations, and I have the absolutehonour and privilege to welcome Michael Dodd. Michaeldescribes himself as a recovering journalist andmedia communication specialist. When I asked Michael todescribe his superpower, he said, being able to ask toughquestions in real interviews and enabling people to givegreat answers. Hello, Michael, welcome to the show.
Michael Doddguest
G'day, Jo. Great to be here on inclusion bytes.
Joanne Lockwoodhost
Great to have you. We've been planning this for some months. I'm really pleased wefinally got it to happen. So, Michael,you're a covering journalist and you're used to helpingpeople answer tough interview questions. Sohow does one go about navigating the challenge ofhaving challenging conversations with. A bit of
Michael Doddguest
forethought, ideally, rather than just plunging in and sayingwhat pops into your head. So one of thearts of interviewing people, which is what I had to do when I wastrained by the Australian Broadcasting Corporationto put people under pressure, particularly politicians,but business people and others as well, in mediainterviews, is to actually askquestions which they don't really want to answer quiteoften. And these days I'm much more popular because I actually
Michael Doddguest
help people ahead of media interviews or ahead of toughconversations they might have to have with clients, withprospects, with even their own people, let alone taxinspectors. And the idea there is to get themto be thinking about things in advance.So they're thinking about the messages they want to get acrossto the audience, which may be to one asker or it maybe to a massive audience. Beyond that, in the case ofmedia, and it's all about thinking ahead,what are the tough questions they're likely to ask? What wecall in the world of australian journalism, blowtorch on the bellyquestions. And if you think about those in advance, it'soften a lot easier to get acrosswhat's in the mutual interest of you and the asker and anywider audience to keep everyone happy. So
Joanne Lockwoodhost
typically in this kind of the world of work the terms ofconversations, probably around performance,redundancy, reprimanding somebody for something.And a lot of people, when they become amanager, don't think about this peopleside. They're thinking it's all sweetness and light, being in charge and everyone will doas they're told. But the challenging conversations is a learned skill andI'm sure you'd agree with that. Absolutely. And if you're dealing with people on your
Michael Doddguest
own team, taking them with you is not automaticand you've got to make sure you do that. So one of the artsof giving great answers is to get your head in the mindof those who you're dealing with, whether they're asking you questionsor waiting for their reprimand or whatever it is. Andif you can get into the mind of the person whois your target audience, then it's so mucheasier to tell them not what they want to hear, what theyneed to hear and what's in your and their mutual interest for them tohear by thinking it through beforehand. So a lotof my work is to do with media, helping people go onBBC programmes and CNN programmes, and to bethinking ahead rather than just be thinking. I hope theyasked me the right questions, because journalists typicallythink it's their mission to ask you the wrong questions and you need to beready for it. But what I found, the more I've worked, particularly with chiefexecutive organisations, that's organisations whereyou get a bunch of chief executives working together to tryand help improve their own performance. What I found is,for them, it's not so much media, which is theirnumber one concern when it comes to giving great answers to tough questions,they typically think, well, what am I going to tell thisperson who I'm hoping will become a customer? Orwhat am I going to tell the official inspectors? Or if things go wrong,what am I going to tell the official inquiry or the courts?And the same principles apply where it'sreally important to actually get across a messagefor any particular occasion and to get acrosswhat you're planning to say, not what you're just thinking abouton the run. I mean, people who watch great mediainterviewees often say, oh, they're really good at thinking faston their feet, and the truth is, often they're not. Butwhat they are good is at thinking ahead before they dothe interview, what they're going to say, and actually, when the rightquestion comes up, saying that, rather thansaying what I hope I can say, and gettingthemselves in a mess. So planning, preparation and practiseis really important before all importantbusiness conversations. I've noticed when
Joanne Lockwoodhost
I've watched politicians on variousparties over the years and othergreat people who would get interviewed a lot, is that whenthey get asked a question, there's almost like a holding sentenceyou put out first. It's almost like you go, great question. I'm glad you raisedthat. So it's that immediate sound bite that gives yourbrain an extra 5 seconds to process something before yousay the next thing, isn't it? And I think that helps you as well, notrush into the answer. Well, it can if you are taken by surprise.
Michael Doddguest
But ideally I would be training people not to dothat, just to basically have their greatthing they're trying to get across, and to say it up front withoutany sleazy, slimy politician blabber that they've got togo through before they get to it. I mean, there's a great saying in theworld of media training which hopefully won't shock too many of youraudience members, Jo, it's that giving a greatinterviewee performance is the opposite ofsex. The reason being is that whenyou get it right, the climax comes at the start.Now, if any young men listening, don't try this at homein the wrong field. But when it comes to an interview, when you'rewatching on tv, you want the sleazy, slamming politician to cometo the point straight away. You don't want him saying what a wonderful,marvellous question it is and how wonderful you as theinterviewer are looking today, et cetera. You want them toget straight to the point, climax at the front. And that canwork in many non media occasions. They're not all of alloccasions, but certainly a lot of conversational occasions.That's really important for getting straight to the point.
Joanne Lockwoodhost
Okay, I like that. I like the idea of just beingthat prepared. And I confess I've not donemedia training, but I've had people give me advice when I've gone on the radioand done other things. And the best advice I was always givenwas write down next to you on a piece of paper the keypoints you want to get across. And whatever theyask you, you answer the questions you want to answer rather than theirquestion, or you fit in your answer that you want to getacross, not as a direct response to their question, but as tryingto give my message across rather than their message. Is thatsomething you would talk about? It's certainly something I talk about and get asked
Michael Doddguest
about. And the trick is you're trying to doboth answer the question and get across amessage that's on your agenda for that particular audience.And there is a way of doing that, ideally every time,because if you watch BBC's news nightor some other tough question asking programme,an audience member is pretty quick to judge yes, thatperson is honest and reasonable and addressing the questionthat the audience wants to know asked on behalfof a competent interviewer. Andthey don't want a lot of blabber. And they also don't wanta politician setting their own agenda. They wantthem answering the questions that the question asker is askingon their behalf. And so, ideally, whenyou're trying to get it right as an answerer, you shouldbe dealing with the question because people are asking the question for a reason.But when you're really clever, you can getacross the important bits that you've written down, Jo or whoeverelse is talking, you can cover those as well, wherethey're relevant. And so in any particular answer, areally good answer does answer the question, but goeson to get across a message, usually apositive message, on the topic that they're beingasked about. So there's a win win to be had betweenthe person answering the questions and thequestion asker and the wider audience who's listeningin. You mentioned night there,
Joanne Lockwoodhost
the Fiona Bruce question that she asks these days.And you can just tell that the careerpoliticians launch straight into the partymanifesto, don't they? There's kind of this. Here's the facts and figures. This is whatI want to tell you. And you end up with just partypolitics spouting kind of the corporate message, and younever really hear the real truth. And that's what I find.
Michael Doddguest
Well, a good interview is on BBC News Night and other programmesgood at persisting and making surethe politician doesn't just get to say what they want to say. It's not aparty political broadcast as far as they're concerned. There was a guy whowas probably quite a reasonable interviewee, called Simon Hughes. He was a liberalDemocrat. And he once famously said, on theToday programme on Radio Four, which is a seriouspolitical interviewing programme, he said, I can't answerthe question you're asking, but I've got the answer to two other questions that youhaven't asked. And this is what they are, and it's quitea glib statement, quite an arresting statement, but that's notreally what the interviewer and the wider audience want.They want answers to the questions that they are asking about,not ones which a sleazy, slamy politicianor even a reasonable, responsible, honestpolitician wants to do. But the realtrick, and a great answer is effectively to do both.So you are answering what's asked, but you're also givingacross sometimes that extra little bit, which can be yourmessage as well on the topic, whichcan actually be very helpful for the viewers. I mean, what agood interviewee is often saying sometimes is they'll give the answer, but then they'llsay, but what's even more important is this.And providing it's in the territory that's being asked aboutby the interviewer, then that's perfectly reasonable and often veryhelpful. And they can often put things in a newperspective, maybe partly for their own interest, but also for the interestof the viewers. And what a reallygood question answerer is doing is doing that alot.
Joanne Lockwoodhost
Yeah, I certainly watch somereally good interviews, and I know people like Laurel Kunsberg andFiona Bruce on those sort of programmes, Andrew Neal on this week, andthey really are good at asking questions and different stylesand different directness. But as you say, the tenacity,if you're a career politician or you've got ahigh position, high rank in some organisation, when you go ontothose perennials, you really know that you're going there to be in the lion's den.You know you're going to get the tough questions. You're not going there for achat and a coffee, are you? So you are prepared.And I think something comes acrossas this combative type attack anddefence, rather than it being a true meeting ofminds. It's almost toostaged as an audience. That's how I sometimes feel. Well, as an
Michael Doddguest
interviewee, you don't want to be coming across as if you'rebeing staged. There's a nice little expression whichI actually got from the BBC, which isall about saying something, but making itrelevant at the time and making sure that it doesn'tsound like it's pre planned. So the term they use is.It's called planned spontaneity, whichyour astute listeners will know is anoxymoron. It's a contradiction in terms, but theidea is to be saying what you plan to saywhen this topic came up, what you planned to say before the interview,and you're saying it, but you're saying it in such a waythat it just sounds like, oh, right, yeah, I've just thought ofthis plan. Spontaneity is a good thing,particularly for people who are inclined to soundlike they're a bit too. Youknow, a lot of the interview is about having emotional punchas well as giving the facts. And if you get good at plannedspontaneity, then you can be a much morescintillating interviewee. Hopefully I'm doing this with you,Jo. Give me a Michael.
Joanne Lockwoodhost
Very spontaneous. Spontaneous.Where are we now? We're closing out 2023. And I'msure most people who are listening in the UK will have heardRishi Sunak, Boris Johnson, et al. If you like,talking about COVID and the COVID years and theinquiries. And there's been someshocking. I'm going to call them untruthsor misinformation coming out. How doesanyone manage to lose all of their WhatsApp messages every time theychange their phone? You'd think that this was really kindof phone 101, isn't it? This is kind of like the very basics,don't lose my messages, don't lose this. But all of a sudden,conveniently, they've gone.Do they really believe the public? Believe them? Well,
Michael Doddguest
if you ever find yourself giving answers where youdon't think the public will believe you, you're probably going to be right on that.You're probably not going to be believed. And partof what you want to be doing as a person answering questions is to bebelieved, not just because you're telling the truth, but you're sayingit in a way which is credible, it's enhancing yourcredibility. So it's a matter of getting the truthright, getting the structure of how you actually say it,which is why the climax of the front thing is important,because getting to the number of the matter right up front is really important.But it's also a matter of how you look and how you soundas you're giving your answers. And that's wheremedia response training comes in, where you'repractising with people, giving them the tough questions in advance thatthey might get, but playing it back to them so that they cansee themselves and hear themselves as other people hearand see them. And that's a great way to teach, because it's agreat way to learn, if you can actually see on thecamera that you're looking nervous because your hands are shaking, or you're whoppingthe sweat off your brow as you're talking, or you'retrying to project being in control, but yourhands are kind of telling a different story,it's really important to have your body undercontrol and have your voice under controlso that you not just are telling the truth, you aresounding like someone who is telling the truth. Andallied to that, apart from your actual performance, is often Imentioned earlier about getting across a message. When you've got a message to get
Michael Doddguest
across, it's typically an abstract thing,but what you want to be doing as a great communicatoris putting a picture in people's minds, a real picture,so that they can actually see what you mean. Soif you're talking to your mediaaudience, or maybe your own audience inside your own company, and you're an important personin the company, what you want to be doing is getting across,say, you might be saying, well, we're making some changes to make thecompany better. And your people might think, well, heardother people say that it may or may not be true, but if they canthen give a real life example of one of the things that theyare doing that paints a picture in people's minds so they can seeit, then bang, it's believable.So I'm making this up on the spot here. This is not plannedspontaneity, but, I mean, if the company bossis saying, well, we know that workers work betterwhen they're well fed on really nutritious,healthy food, which tastes great as well, andwe're going to be putting this into practise. And in fact, we've already started becauseyou've noticed that our company canteen has cutits prices to make the food available for whoever wants it.And also they've upped the nutritional contentof what they're doing. And we've got top chefs in there making it particularlytasty. And the audience saying, oh, yeah, that's right, lunch yesterday wasfantastic. So what the communicator is doing isideally not just saying a message, but backing it up with areal life example, which what's in communication termsis hitting a resonant chord. Soit's basically activating the brains of the listeners who aresaying, oh, yeah, lunch has been really good this past week with this newchef who's come in, and so, bang, what the personis saying is really connecting effectively with theaudience. Yeah, I get that. So you're
Joanne Lockwoodhost
signposting these messages that you're trying to follow through onand selling a vision, selling a dream as well. But
Michael Doddguest
ideally, it's not just a dream or a vision, but you're backing it up withreal facts. So that's where the painting of real pictures comes in, which maybe real life examples of something which has happened, or it mightbe a real life example of something which is beingimplemented now. And so if we're talking about afantastic new recreation room. Maybethe builders are sort of coming in this morning and you can see them allup there on floor 13 or whatever, who have brought inthe new table tennis tables and the new dartboards and the new excitingelectronic games. And you've probably seen them this morning, all beingdelivered just in time for you lot to play them.So you basically always want to make sure that yourmessages backed up with real life examples whichare happening. Or if you're talking about the vision thing, as President GeorgeBush I in America used to say, the vision thing, which hehad trouble with, it's actually putting that real picture sothat people can actually see the same vision that you're talking about ina way that's real and believable and that makes for goodcommunication. Yeah. One of the things I struggle
Joanne Lockwoodhost
with is having the conversationto tell someone I want to have a conversation, becauseif you're trying to tell bad news or challengingnews, you want to set the scene. Can we have a quiet moment lateror quiet moment in a minute? And of course, the first reactionto that is, so what's wrong? What do I need to know? And you trynot to signpost too much of the conversation and make it sound too bad ortoo good. How can peoplesignpost the need to have a chatand feel comfortable about setting that scene without giving toomuch away and losing the impetus of the conversation?
Michael Doddguest
There's a great professional speaker called AnthonySteers who you may have come across Jo yourself.We're in an organisation where you, I and him are all in it,and Anthony has this great concept of permission tospeak and it's basically like, say, if you're makinga phone call and you're going to have that conversation, it's no good justbursting into it. The climax of the front thing I mentioned earlier has to waita bit because you want to make sure that it's a goodtime for the person. You've got their attention before you'reraising what can be a highly emotional topic.So actually, to be saying at the start of thatis now a good time to talk about your glorious future career inthis company and getting their buy in on that means thatwhen you've got some points to make, a couple of which may beconstructively critical, you've actually got them thereand they've committed to giving you the timeto go ahead and discuss it. So you're not puttingyourself in a position as the instigator of this toughconversation where you're not making it too easy for them to say, sorry,I've got time now, I've got to go home, I've got to pick up mykids or whatever it is you're getting buy in right at thestart, before you're raising the big issues. Andsetting the scene correctly is really helpful for whenyou're getting to the substance of the issue. So
Joanne Lockwoodhost
kind of. We need to have a chat. When would be a good time foryou? Is a good lead. Absolutely, yeah. That's so much better
Michael Doddguest
than you've got to be in my office right now, when they might be workingon something that's massively important for the company or massively important forthemselves and they won't be able to focus on it. So, yeah, gettingthat permission to speak at the right time is a great concept,and so I would recommend it ahead oftough conversations, which could feature blowtorch on the bellyquestions and even brilliant answersif the scene is set right. It's so much easier for a winwin to be established between the two principal people taking partin the conversation. Yeah.
Joanne Lockwoodhost
I've been naughty in my life, as most of us have, and I've beenon the receiving end of challenging conversationsand I've experienced mastery, forwant of a better way of describing it, of people who are able tofit, to be, lead you down this tunnel and there'snowhere to escape from it, basically. They're very good at asking the questions, so they'veobviously got an agenda. They know where they're trying to get the conversation, and allyou can do is tell the truth, or lie, I guess. And there's the twooptions, and if you want to tell the truth, they just keep honing in.And I've noticed this as well. They start by describing a bigpicture and then ask you to sort of reexplain a smaller part of that picture and then a smaller part of that pictureand a smaller part of that picture, and eventually you get to the end andyou're focusing on one tiny detail. But you started massive, andI found it's a really great way of getting me tohone down on the answer they wanted. Well, that's
Michael Doddguest
something that I learned to do as a blowtorch on the belly interview onbehalf of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Often, Imean, supposing you mentioned someone called Boris Johnson, a british primeminister, who is lovable to some, butcritics have said, quite rightly, that sometimes hehas an interesting interaction with the truth.And so when you're interviewing someone in thatleague, it may help to start when you're actuallyinto this conversation by asking that general questionlike, is it important for prime ministers to always tellthe truth when they're dealing with important matters concerninghealth? Right? So typicallywhat might happen next is they'll say, oh, yes, that's important. And thenin that sort of focusing down thing you mentioned there, Jo, you're then saying,well, why was it, when you made thisparticular announcement about the COVIDcrisis of the early 2020s, did yousay this when the truth was that?And so because they're already locked into a general agreementthat, yes, a prime minister should tell the truth when they're dealing withmatters of public health, they're kind ofbound to give you an honest answer rather than tell alie at that point when you're focusing it down. Andif you play your game right as a question asker, you can doit in such a way that you're seeking the truth as aquestioner, and it will become clear to the audience.If someone is not suddenly giving honest answers, thatwill be obvious. And as an interviewer, it's a win foryou. If you can be asking questions in a way where atleast the audience can see that the person is not telling thetruth, that is kind of like a win that you've achieved onbehalf of your audience. I mean, so much better if they do tell the truthand are seen to be telling the truth. But if they're not telling the truth,a good question asker, like a guy who used to work forthe BBC called Jeremy Paxman, who was on that news nightprogramme, and he was particularly good at that,Laura Koonsberg, who you've also identified, she can do that veryeffectively as well. And so there is a skill in asking thequestions in the right sort of order to put the person underpressure to answer. But one of the importantthings from an answerer's point of view is to make sure you're telling the truthat all times. I always say, don't say anythingother than an exact truth, because if you're being led downa path of questions which you've mentioned and yousuddenly find that the person wants to change from their policy of telling the truthto not telling the truth, it will probably be bleeding obvious toeveryone, which is, from the answerer's point of view,not a good thing. So definitely only tell exacttruth. And also, someone once told me, it's
Joanne Lockwoodhost
always easy to remember the truth because it's the truth. Everything elsebecomes a story. And then you have to refabricate andreadjust the story. And no matter how good you are, you can never remember theentire story and all the different nuances and all the different interactions.
Michael Doddguest
Yeah, that's one of the reasons why I'm always pushing people to tellreal life examples, not theoretical examples, real ones.Because when you're telling a story that really happenedto you about maybe an interaction with a customerand where your company got it right and did some fantastic things, and the customerthought you were fantastic by telling it as it reallyis, it's easy to remember because you've got that picture in your mind whichyou're projecting to the minds of your audience.And if you're sticking to the truth, then that's a great thing. And,yeah, giving real life examples is a way of helping to do that, whichis a good thing for the universe. Yeah, I do
Joanne Lockwoodhost
a lot of panels, discussions, a lot of q a stuff, and my approachto that would be if someone asks me something like, which company do you knowthat is doing this the best? And I say, well, I don't have specificexamples of a company doing that myself, but I amaware that these organisations are highly regardedin that sort of sphere. But I don't have personal real life experience. All I'mdoing is giving you hearsay or opinion. So I would tend toframe it in that way rather than tell it as my truth, if you like.
Michael Doddguest
Well, yeah, sometimes you might, on behalf of yourcompany, let's say your company is company x, you might have afantastic, happy customer, which for variousreasons, doesn't necessarily want to put its hand up and be used asan example. And so sometimes you move forwhat's called the specific to the general when you're telling the story.So you can say, let me tell you about a real company where we didsomething fantastic for them. I won't give their name because wedon't have an agreement to do that with them. But what happened wasthis, and you tell the real story as it really was,but you're not invading the privacy of the company. Andso you can be telling truth sometimes ondifferent levels, sometimes you can be telling the truth at a more general levelto protect confidentiality, but sometimes it'snecessary, often when you have got permission to actually tellsome absolute nitty gritty details which givecredibility to the story and meaning thatthe listeners can only be concluding, oh, yes, this has to be true becauseit's so detailed and specific. So there is aplus as a communicator to be telling real life storieswith some really good nitty gritty detailsthat add to the credibility of you, the person trying to get acrossyour message. Yeah, I like that. It's a really good
Joanne Lockwoodhost
technique. One thing I also wonder sometimesis when you're being coached to givegreat answers or competent answers, Isometimes wonder, the echo chamber, if you like, inwhich the people are coaching them in, is everybody caught up in theirown self truth and their own kind of minority view,or they all kind of talk themselves into. Yeah, this sounds believable. Whenyou actually take out to the light of day, a member of the public wasthinking, how could anyone ever believe that? So did the circle of advisorssometimes create this problem and this myth of. Belief, if you
Michael Doddguest
like, I think there's potential for that. I mean, if you takesomeone who by sort of universal agreementwent on television, I think it was that programme, news night you mentioned earlier,BBC programme, it was a guy called Prince Andrew, known aroundthe world, and he was asked some very tricky, very clever, very specificquestions. And I think, and this isDob's theory, I don't know this for a fact, but that he hadsome kind of coaching, but it wasn't very good and I suspect itgot locked into that circle. So at one moment, Iwon't give your listeners all the details,but it's still there, I've checked. It's still there on the Internet. If you wantto google it, put in Prince Andrew, Emily Maitless, BBC NewsNight interview. And it's all there. But there's one time where he's tryingto show that a witness who's beengiving evidence against him in the court of public opinion wasn't tellingthe truth. And she was saying that when
Michael Doddguest
she was dancing with him before various activitieswhich as a prince, he shouldn't have been engaging inwith her, happened. She was saying he was sweatyand he was saying because of his heroic actions in the falklands,that he couldn't sweat. And there are pictures all overthe media of showing Prince Andrew looking very sweaty indeed in certaincircumstances, and it just didn't quitering, you know, the truth needs toguide you. And if getting back to your circle ofadvisors, if they did that in practise withhim and they say, oh, Andrew, that sounds great, it didn't pass the courtof public opinion. So what I typically do when I'm working with a companyis say I'm working with the sales team who are obviously trying to make thecompany's products look great and sound great, but also credible,I will typically get by agreement, the chiefexecutive to pop in at, say, we've been working on it all day,get the chief executive to come in at 330 or 04:00 in the afternoonand have a look at the answers they've been giving. And that's a really goodkind of reality cheque, which sometimes doesn't happen. Sohe might be saying, listen, George, what you're saying there soundsgreat, but you've got to remember that that particular producthas got this particular flaw that you need to be honest aboutand you're getting that kind of reality cheque to stop that group thinghappening. So when you do hear someone givinganswers that you think a reasonable person would justsay, that can't possibly be true, that circleof sort of incestuous advisors who have gotinto a group think stage could be happening. So my aimis to typically work with a videographer who plays stuffback and the person themselves can see it and they're often pretty good at saying,yeah, I need to improve that answer, I need to change what I'm saying onthat, to make it more credible and to show it to outsidepeople within the circle, but not there for the advice,to give an objective reaction, and that canmake them all the sharper and all the better when they have to do itfor real. Yeah, I get very
Joanne Lockwoodhost
frustrated at people who fail to recallconversations or detail or things that have happened or I don'trecall, or I'm not sure about that, I don't remember.And I wonder whether I really trust a prime minister or acabinet member who can't remember what they dida year ago in terms of a big decision. You think, well, hang on aminute, you can remember this, this and this, but you can't remember that. It's likePrince Andrew. He can remember exactly where he had that pizza,which town it was, who he was with, the shoes the waiter waswearing and how much the bill was, but he couldn't remember certain otherdetails. So it's almost like this specific learntstory and everything else is kind of justvague, isn't it? Yeah. And as
Michael Doddguest
a media trainer, you've just got to be aware of that.And I generally find most people, and it'spartly influenced by the fact that they might be going on tv,where everybody can see what they're saying, including peoplein their own team who know where the bodies are buried, and thatnormally concentrates the mind. And generally, when I'm training people, I findthem overwhelmingly veryhonest, which is very good, which is what you're trying to get to, honestand credible. Sowhat you want to be doing in the training is to be subjectingthem to when they've got the thrust, or what they're going tosay worked out, to be throwing in as the trainersurprise questions which they weren't exactly expecting.And typically, if they're talking straight,they find that you will find they will be telling the truth. Theymay have to make some adjustments on some occasions, which is important beforethey get out there and do it for real. Generally, I find peopleare sort of concentrated by the occasionand the actual process of recording,playing it back, critiquing it, actually helps the truth process andhelps them to be very comfortable and confident when they're doing it for
Michael Doddguest
real. But I will tell you one story wherehappens to be from the real estate industry, where I was training a group ofpeople in a real estate company, all butone, who seemed to be scrupulously honest, and theyrealised that they knew there was going to be some interviews about somethingdodgy that the company had done, which the company agreed was wrong,and they were being trained to say how it was wrong, why it was wrongand why they'd be committing never to do it again. And wehad one person on the training andI think he was a person who just couldn't tell the truth. And there arepeople like that out there. And the sort of climactic moment of theday was our press conference at the end, where they had to.If this story got really big, which there was a danger of, thata number of them had to appear together and face the press, whichmeans getting questions, not just from one journalist, but a whole bunch of journalists.And so we actually planned a bunch of journalists askingquestions and everyone stuck to the script, whichwas the truth, which was, yes, they'd made this mistake and they'ddone it wrong, but this one guy just couldn't bring himself to do it. Andthere he was at the press conference and he was denying that the whole thinghad ever happened, which made everyone else look like liarsand didn't work. So the day ended. Normally, immediatetraining day ends on a real high, where people are thinking, yes, we know whatwe're to say, we know how to tell the truth in a way that standsup to scrutiny. But this one was very different because they just all ended uphating on him. And it was quite clear that thehigher ups in the company were not going to get let this guy loose beforethe media, because he just couldn't do it. That's extremelyrare, but as a trainer, it's your job is tomake a company aware of that. If they've got someone on the team who's likethat, make sure they're never put anywhere near the mediaor in any other occasion where truth matters, which is a lot ofoccasions. In government or
Joanne Lockwoodhost
somewhere like that, maybe. Yeah. That person
Michael Doddguest
in real estate, as far as I know, he's not in government, not in politics.But if the occasional person does get into politics, islike that, it's up to their peers toscrutinise them and make sure they're not put in a position wherethey can be let loose to say whatever truth they manufacturethemselves at the time. Beware. Yeah,
Joanne Lockwoodhost
we see this recently. I mean, there's a couple of other carcrash interviews that I can recall in the recent times. One isthe Captain Saton Moore foundation,the building of the Aquaspa, aka aswimming pool, and the misappropriation of lots of moneyand syphoning off expenses, for a better word.And then we had the Baroness moan PPEinterview, which, again, was another car crash. Andfor me, both of those had an element of privilege andarrogance and inhibition around them, wherethey believed their own pr and they believed thatpeople would believe them. Andclearly, the public opinionwas completely opposite. And I think you mentioned earlier abouttelling this story and painting these pictures of thetruth, and they're filling that in. And these people didn't do that, did they?
Michael Doddguest
Yeah, clearly not. And in the case of Baronessmode, during the course of the interview, therewere remarkable moments of honesty, which I believe, whichwas that she was saying that she had repeatedly toldlies to the media,which give her some marks for honestyabout being dishonest. But in terms of thewhole context of how the public viewed that, theyabsolutely turned on her. I know this for a fact, because I put up acouple of posts on social media at the time, and my aim isalways to just. In those sorts of posts is, I'm aprofessional communicator. I want to focus in this poston the communications issues, not anything beyondthat. And in her case, I couldn't controlit, as the poster. And while I was saying, I want to sort ofdiscuss how well she did in the interview and what lessonscan be drawn from it. It was an amazing amount of vitriol fromordinary members of the public who were wanting all sorts ofterrible things to happen to her as a result. Now, it probably wasa result of her communication strategy, but fundamentally,they were wanting her to be taken out of the House of Lords, for example,which a right thinking person might well, think. But for me, trying tomarshal the conversation on just the communications issues was a bit of afail. And the test she didn't passwas the social media test in terms of people believing her.And I suppose, having set it up, saying, well, yes, I told all these liesto the media, and then she made a point which wasn't really very endearingabout, it's not a crime to lie to themedia. The court of a public opinion may agree with that.That's not a crime on the books, but, yeah, you can't besent to jail for that specifically. But what does it do toyour own credibility? In her case, not very much. Anda price has to be paid for that. Yeah. As
Joanne Lockwoodhost
a baroness, as a peer of the realmresponsible in the House of Lords for law settinggovernance, arbitration of right and wrong,lying to the media is actually lying to the people.
Michael Doddguest
Yes, absolutely. Not the media. That's a really
Michael Doddguest
important point to make. And that's one of the virtues of media training,where ideally, you can play it back on a big screenand, like, we're a very modern big television set and people can sortof see that. Well, if I said that and I didn't get itquite right, it's there on the big screen for everyone to see, andeveryone I know will be telling me that what I said wasn'taccurate. And the shame of that, andit's a great process in a way, because it actuallyencourages this fundamental principle of only sayingexact truth. If Baroness moan had been through thatprocess properly, and maybe I don't know what she had in the way of advisors,they clearly weren't collectively very good. Yeah, shemay well have taken a different approach. And as you say, sometimes there is akind of arrogance in people who haveput a false picture in their head and they think, well, if I believe it,I can make everyone believe it, and it tends to come unstuck.So a good media training process picks that up and helps thembefore too late it is.
Joanne Lockwoodhost
I did a tv documentary several years ago onChannel four and we spent a lot of time being interviewed.And always in the back of my head was, I call it kind of likethe mum test. Would my mum be proud of me? Would I be proudif my mum was watching this? So that was kind of my moralcompass around telling the truth. Not oversharing, sharing the right amount, but knowing my mum was going towatch it was always my kind of benchmark ofunderstanding of the world, if you like. It's probably a very healthy
Michael Doddguest
approach. So, yeah, I might beguilty of using the same principle with people that thinkabout someone who is in the company who knows really wellbecause they've been in the company for as long as you have and they knowall about the good things the company's done and a few of the bad thingsas well. And I suppose if I go back tothe real estate person who wasn't telling the truthif you could get them to be thinking, well, what would person x in thecompany be thinking when he sees you on that tv screensaying something that he knows is not true and you know isnot true? Wouldn't it be best not to say that? That may prove to bepersuasive. So think about this hypothetical
Joanne Lockwoodhost
company. So something's gone badly.PR disaster. We can call it a kind ofa me too moment. Some sexual misappropriation. TheCBI. Sorry, let's dive into the CBI. There something so
Michael Doddguest
theoretical, but yeah. No, no, it's not theoretical. Their entire
Joanne Lockwoodhost
reputation was. Incredibility wasundermined in an instant. Sodid they do well? Did they do badly? I mean, what's your interpretation ofwhat the correct step should have been to limitrisk, manage the communications and deal with that aftermath? Becauseit seems to me they got it wrong as well. The fact that you're
Michael Doddguest
mentioning it quite some time afterwardsprobably underlines the point that they didn't do everything right.And I think people now at the top of theCBI would probably be tending to agree with you that they didn't get itall right. So often you go beyond intraining about a particular situation and you're dealingwith the fundamental principles of a company.And people who talk about values, values of peopleand values of companies. Quite when they do itwell, they're typically doing it well for the companybecause if the fundamental values are there and they'reingrained in the dna of the organisation then the kindof situation that you mentioned there is much harder to happen.And, I mean, when it does happen, absolute honesty isimportant, as is whensomething happens. And people, the questionaskers are aggrieved because they've been hurt insome way, maybe physically, maybe reputationally. Oneof the important principles in that kind of situation is to make sure thatpeople talk to the heart before they talk to the head.
Michael Doddguest
So often mixed in that islike a real apology that's effective isvery early on introduced into the conversationand the sorrow that the person speaking onbehalf of the company is feeling because of the way they got somethingwrong in the company and realising that people have been adverselyaffected by that and acknowledging that thecompany needs to do things to make up for that, whether it's payingcompensation or whatever it's doing, is reallyimportant. So when I'm teaching people to answertough questions, I've typically got two formulas, or formulae,as we say in Latin, and the first formula you can usein most cases, which are cases that are not especiallyemotional, and then there's a second formula for when they'rereally emotional. And in the second formula, whichsometimes needs to be incorporated into the first, needs toacknowledge that you're talking to real human beings, some of whomhave been hurt or they're professionally angry, if they're lawyers, perhapson behalf of people who've been hurt. And it's really importantto get people to talk about to other people. Talk fromthe heart first, before they get into all the technicalcomplications of the situation. Soheart before the head, when something's gone wrong, is a really important communicationsprinciple, because you're talking to real people and they will reactlike real people do, and you've got to be aware of that.
Joanne Lockwoodhost
So pathos before logos.
Michael Doddguest
Yes, I was going to say, I was talking Latin there, but not for oneword. The Greeks probably had that.Right. Yeah. Perhaps we should bow to a greek scholarsuch as yourself. So you want to define audience. Thepathos is with empathy and sympathy, is that right?
Joanne Lockwoodhost
Empathy and sympathy are different sides.
Michael Doddguest
Is a logic element. Yeah. You're saying talk to
Joanne Lockwoodhost
the heart, not to the head? Yeah. So you
Michael Doddguest
do need to get around to talking head. But typically, if someone is worked upabout, and they're questioning you about something which has affected them, maybe they'vebeen injured in a company explosion, which should have been prevented on the productionline or something, and they're really angry that they haven't been properlycompensated and they're in a discussion with the managing director, probably the newmanaging director, then the new managing director needs to talkto their heart first, before the head, because oncethey've actually got across the emotional points they're trying to make,then the human brain, on behalf of the aggrieved person, canthen cope with the logos, as you say, the logic of the situation,and listen to it in a more calm, peaceful state ofmind, having had their emotions touched first. That
Joanne Lockwoodhost
can be difficult, though, when you got litigation and lawyers and people like that.Radical candle. Absolute honestyis admitting liability. It's saying sorryis admitting liability, and many organisations,probably their chief executive, is probably not empowered by theshareholders or by the board to make a statement like I'msorry. Without. And then the COVID up is. It just reeksof a cover up. And I think what we find sometimes is thatthe immediate apology to the heart takes the heat out ofit, rather than a holding position,which sometimes you end up creating a lie or creating a story. And peopleare more upset and more angry about being lied to than they probablywere about the original act. You can diffuse a lotby being open straight away. Absolutely. It's
Michael Doddguest
so long ago. I haven't got the details at the top of my head, butI can remember enough about a company called Thomas Cook,which was a very successful travel company for a long time.And they had. Something went wrong on one of their holidays, and there wasa child who was, let's say, adversely affectedby something that they did. And they didn'ttalk to the heart before the head, they didn't sort it out. And they hadto wait until the old boss got kicked out and a newboss was brought in who was prepared to tell the truth and talk to peopleemotionally as well as logically, and acknowledge what the company hadgone wrong. A lot of bad stuff happenedto the company between the two bosses, because the firstone, just as you say, wasn't getting the companyto admit to the truth and to the sort of emotionalimpact of what their bad holiday haddone. And they paid the price. Sohaving chief executives who are empowered by their shareholders, orwho make sure they're empowered by their shareholders when they've got something to say,that's important for the public to hear beyond just the company shareprice, that's really important. And sogetting it right in terms of human interaction,as well as in terms of the rights and wrongs of the situation,is very important right at the outset. And you can build goodcommunication on that foundation if you get it right.
Joanne Lockwoodhost
It's so much easier for the new person to come in andjust dump all of the problems on the person who just left, isn't it? Whenyou think about football management, the football manager leaves, newperson comes along. All the reasons everything was bad was that other person.So you can just demonise, throw them under a bus andbury all the communications issues, all the problems you ever had, andsaying, I'm the new person, it's different under me. They were the badperson. I guess that's why we see companies hanging peopleout to dry sometimes, because it's easier to lose that news that way, isn'tit? Absolutely. And shockingly enough, Jo,
Michael Doddguest
it even happens in politics. I mean, there was a british prime minister fora couple of weeks called Liz Truss. And, yeah,she made some very bad decisions in her limited time inoffice. And exactly what happened to the football manager there happenedto. Well, she ultimately saw that it was timefor her to go and she went very quickly. And then the new prime minister,a guy called Rishi Sunak, who at the time we're speaking, is still the britishprime minister, he's come in as the new person totry to sort of fix up some of the economic problemscaused in those chaotic two weeks of trust primeministership. So it happens in politics, happens in business, andmaking sure things pass the truth test early on for anyorganisation, political or business wise or other, isreally important when you're trying to communicate your way to success.
Joanne Lockwoodhost
Yeah, I don't know if it's canny by design or justby coincidence that the trustintervention of, what, 45 days or long, less than 50days, created a firebreak between Rishiand Boris. So if Rishi had taken straight overfrom Boris, he couldn't haveescaped that regime because he was part of it. But thetrust created all that confusion which allowed Rishi to come along,buried everything under trust and almost ignore Boris andcome out the other side as being a new think. I don't know whether thatwas design or just good luck for Rishi. Yeah, well, if there was
Michael Doddguest
a great machiavellian mind in the british conservative party who actually plannedthat, with hindsight, you might be saying, well, that set them up better thanthey would have been without those chaotic trustdays as prime minister. ButI suspect politics being what it is, it wasn't quite as planned,deviously as that, and hasn't been quite assuccessful when you're trying toreplace one regime with another, having a short interventionfrom someone else in the meantime can be successful. I mean, you'll noticesometimes in the business world, sometimes you'llget the chair of the company, will become the chief executivefor a short period of time before handing over to someone else. I think thathappened with BP once and they got themselves in a media mess overa massive disaster to do with leaked oilon the beaches of the coast of America.And the chair stepped in and was bossed for a littlewhile before handing over to someone else. And that samekind of firebreak effect, which I'm not sure how well that was planned, it probablywasn't, but it did ultimately get the company in a better positionand a better position to tell the truth to the public.Having got a sort ofa not so credible person at the top, out of the way, not in onebite, but in two. I think it's
Joanne Lockwoodhost
probably true to say that the ideal candidateto take the business forward is not necessarily the ideal personto deal with the problem you've got right now. So that fire break,putting an interim in to deal with that situationbetter at talking to the press, better at being in that environment,is not necessarily the person who's going to take over. And I think that's probablya very good strategy to find the person you really want for the future andthen deal with the problem now differently. Yeah, I mean, just
Michael Doddguest
in individual terms. There's a saying which you hear a lot these days, which isvery. You hear it a lot because it's true. I think what got you herewon't get you there. And so your skills as anindividual, which got you to your standing today, maynot be great for you for the next 20 years. So you need to improveand learn and change. And I think we can apply the same thing tocompanies in a way where what got the company successand the people who mastered that success may not be thepeople to take it into the future. And sometimes you need that interim littlechange in order to put you on the right track. Michael, it's been
Joanne Lockwoodhost
absolutely fascinating talking to you, and I know we could keep talking and talking,and no doubt we'll bump into each other at PSA meetingsometime in the next month or so. So thank you so much. It's been anabsolute honour to have this conversation with you and learn a bit moreabout challenging conversations in the mediaor elsewhere. Thank you. That's great. Well, hopefully in your next media
Michael Doddguest
conversation, Jo, with the mainstream media, it'll work out. Allfor the good. Yes, I hope so. I hope
Joanne Lockwoodhost
so. Well, thank you for listening. You, thelisteners out there, thank you for tuning in. Thank you for getting to the end,and hopefully you've taken lot to it of inspiration from this. Ifyou're not already subscribed, please do subscribe to keep updated on futureepisodes of the Inclusion Bites podcast. That'sB-I-T-E-S. Please share the love, tell your friends, tell yourcolleagues, because I've got a number of other exciting guests lined up over the nextfew weeks, months and hopefully even years. And of course, if you'd like to bea guest, I'd love to hear from you or any suggestions or feedback. So,jo.Lockwood@seechangehappen.co.uk andfinally, my name is Joanne Lockwood and it's been an absolutepleasure to host this podcast for you. Today. Catch you nexttime. Bye.
In this episode of The Inclusion Bites Podcast, Joanne Lockwood and guest Michael Dodd delve into the intricacies of navigating challenging conversations. Michael, an expert in media communication, emphasises the need to back up dreams and visions with real-life examples for effective communication. Joanne shares her experiences of leading conversations while Michael offers techniques for extracting honest responses during interviews.
Michael was trained by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation to put people under pressure in media interviews. He has a knack for asking tough questions and helping people prepare for difficult conversations with clients, prospects, and even tax inspectors. His focus is on getting people to think ahead and consider the messages they want to get across to their audience, as well as preparing for the tough questions they might face. With his expertise, he aims to help both the interviewee and the interviewer achieve mutual satisfaction and keep everyone happy.
Both Joanne and Michael stress the importance of truth-telling and acknowledge the emotional aspect before diving into technicalities during difficult discussions. They delve into the challenges faced when dealing with litigation, lawyers, and admitting liability, while also highlighting the significance of powerful leaders communicating truth and emotional impact.
Michael and Joanne discuss strategic advantages of short intervening leadership periods, citing BP's successful chair transition as a prime example. Joanne, as the podcast host, and Michael reflect on the tendency to blame predecessors in business and politics, as well as the potential advantages of using interim leaders to address current issues when searching for a future candidate.
The episode concludes by underscoring the importance of honest communication, media training, and aligning with company values, particularly in crisis situations. They encourage individuals to subscribe and provide feedback to foster ongoing engagement with the podcast.
A key takeaway from this episode is the emphasis on honest, strategic communication during challenging conversations, both in the workplace and in the public eye. Listeners will gain valuable insights into effectively handling tough questions, communicating with credibility, and addressing emotional concerns to resonate with their audience. Whether in business, politics, or personal interactions, this episode offers practical guidance for navigating challenging conversations with authenticity and impact.
The views and opinions expressed by guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of Inclusion Bites, SEE Change Happen Ltd or Joanne Lockwood. This episode is shared for general interest and discussion; we accept no responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of any statements made.
