“They” and “should” often spell trouble.
As noted in these posts, words matter and choosing clear, unambiguous words is fundamental to building teams and achieving goals. “They” and “should” are two words that can undermine your efforts.
Watch for pronoun issues. Who’s they?
They said not to. They changed that. They haven’t given us the information we need to proceed. They don’t involve us in the conversations we should be in. They’re being difficult and not partnering well. The infamous “they,” wreaking havoc and impacting the team’s ability to do its work.
Pronouns are often used when someone is trying to soften a message or when the person informing you of a problem doesn’t want to be seen as a tattletale. This is generally true in most organizations as people try to avoid confrontation. But it’s particularly acute in cultures where it’s considered rude to challenge someone’s behavior. So, team members use ambiguous words like “they” to share bad news without directly implicating someone.
One of a leader’s most important responsibilities is to remove roadblocks, but this is difficult to do without knowing who, exactly, put up the roadblock. When significant problems arise, team members want you to know there are issues and they cannot meet current expectations, but they often don’t want to share the name of the person who is inhibiting progress. They have to continue working with the offending party after you address the issue, so they may not be eager to provide the name(s) you need to resolve the problem. When problems arise and team members are reluctant to share, assure them you will address problems appropriately and will not throw them under the proverbial bus. Share how you will focus on resolving the problem and not admonishing the individual.
When confronting the person impacting your team’s work, reverse the approach and use ambiguity. You don’t have to share the name of the person who informed you of the problem. You can say you are hearing rumblings from the team and noticing impacts yourself. If the person asks who, you can state it is about your observations and not the team’s, thereby taking on the brunt of the conflict and protecting your team. Let the person be angry with you; you can work past it. Keep your team focused and free of the pressure that comes with hurt feelings. You can only do this, though, if they share names and you do not.
Should or shouldn’t you use “should?” It’s unclear.
It should be fine. That shouldn’t be a problem. It shouldn’t have much impact. The team should be able to handle that. Like “they,” the word “should” is unclear and can create problems for leaders.
“Should” allows the listener to interpret and to set her own expectation, which may not be the expectation you want to establish. It’s another word often used to soften a message. Perhaps a senior leader asks you to expand your team’s scope of work but still deliver by a certain date. You don’t know whether it’s possible or not but rather than say, “I’ll look into it. I don’t know whether we can do that or not,” because it’s someone you want to please you say, “We should be able to do it. I’ll talk to the team.” What expectation did she walk away with? Will it be easy for you to follow up and retract your statement later if need be?
The less you use the word should, the greater control you will have over your message and the expectations you set.
Share your thoughts below.
Are there ambiguous words you try to purge from your vocabulary or that of your team?
Leave a Reply