Blog
The Three Words That Changed How I Handle Every Difficult Conversation at Work
Look, I'm going to tell you something that might make you uncomfortable. After 18 years of cleaning up workplace disasters and training everyone from CEOs to apprentice sparks, I've discovered that most people would rather chew glass than have a difficult conversation. And you know what? That's exactly why your team is probably dysfunctional.
Related Articles:
Three years ago, I was consulting for a mid-sized engineering firm in Brisbane – brilliant technical minds, absolute trainwreck when it came to communication. The project manager hadn't spoken directly to his lead engineer in six weeks because of some unresolved tension about overtime expectations. Instead, they were communicating through Post-it notes. I'm not making this up.
That's when I learned the three words that changed everything: "Help me understand."
Now before you roll your eyes and think this is some touchy-feely nonsense, hear me out. Those three words have prevented more workplace meltdowns than any fancy conflict resolution framework I've ever taught. They're magic because they do something most people forget in heated moments – they make the other person feel heard instead of attacked.
Here's what I wish someone had told me when I was a hot-headed project coordinator 15 years ago. Most difficult conversations fail before they even start because we approach them like we're preparing for battle. We rehearse our arguments, gather our evidence, and march in ready to prove we're right.
Wrong approach entirely.
The best difficult conversation I ever witnessed happened in a Bunnings warehouse office. The store manager needed to address a team leader who was consistently arriving late and affecting morning briefings. Instead of the usual "You're always late and it's unacceptable" approach, she started with: "Help me understand what's happening with the morning starts. I'm seeing some patterns and I want to make sure I'm not missing something important."
Turns out the guy was dealing with a sick parent and school drop-offs that had changed due to his ex-wife's new job. Within ten minutes, they'd worked out a solution that actually improved the morning briefings for everyone.
Here's my controversial opinion that might annoy some managers: Most workplace conflicts aren't actually about the thing you think they're about. That person who keeps missing deadlines? Probably overwhelmed and too proud to ask for help. The team member who seems defensive in meetings? Likely feels their expertise isn't valued.
I've seen this pattern hundreds of times across industries. The electrician who's "difficult" is usually the one with the most experience who's frustrated watching shortcuts being taken. The admin assistant who seems obstructive often knows about systemic problems that management isn't seeing.
The framework that actually works
After stuffing up more conversations than I care to admit early in my career, I developed what I call the GPS method. No, not the one in your car – although it's just as useful for navigation.
G - Get curious first. Before you say anything, genuinely try to understand their perspective. Ask questions like: "What's your take on this situation?" or "How are you experiencing this?" Most people have never been asked this in a work context.
P - Pause before you react. This is the hardest part. When someone says something that triggers you, your brain wants to respond immediately. Don't. Take a breath. Count to three. Ask yourself: "What outcome do I actually want here?"
S - Speak to the behaviour, not the person. This is where most people mess up spectacularly. Instead of "You're always interrupting people," try "I've noticed some interruptions happening in our meetings. Can we talk about how we manage discussion flow?"
Look, I'll be honest with you. I used to be terrible at this stuff. Absolutely shocking. I once told a warehouse supervisor that he had "the communication skills of a brick wall." Yeah, that went well.
But here's the thing about difficult conversations – they're like exercise. The more you avoid them, the harder they become. And the more you practice them properly, the easier they get.
The Melbourne Metro incident that taught me everything
About five years ago, I was on a Metro train heading to a client meeting when I witnessed something that completely changed how I think about workplace communication. A ticket inspector was dealing with a passenger who clearly didn't have a valid ticket and was getting increasingly agitated.
Instead of the usual authority approach, this inspector said: "I can see you're stressed about this. Help me understand your situation so we can figure out the best way forward." The conversation completely shifted. Turns out the passenger had lost his wallet and was trying to get to a job interview.
That inspector displayed more emotional intelligence in five minutes than most managers show in a month. And yes, the passenger still got a fine, but he also got information about financial hardship provisions and left the train saying thank you.
This is what I try to teach leaders: You can be firm on standards while still being human in your approach.
The stuff nobody tells you about difficult conversations
Here's what the textbooks don't mention. Sometimes, even when you do everything right, the conversation still goes sideways. People have bad days. Personal stuff bleeds into work. Some individuals are just going through things that make rational discussion challenging.
When I was training supervisors for a major mining company last year, one participant asked me: "What do you do when someone just refuses to engage?"
Great question. Sometimes you have to accept that one conversation won't solve everything. Sometimes you need to schedule a follow-up. Sometimes you need to involve HR or a mediator. And very occasionally, you need to accept that some people aren't ready for the conversation you want to have.
But here's what 73% of managers get wrong – they treat this as failure instead of information. If someone won't engage in a constructive conversation, that tells you something important about either the timing, the approach, or the deeper issues at play.
I remember working with a facilities manager in Perth who was struggling with a maintenance worker who seemed to reject every attempt at feedback. After several failed attempts, we discovered the worker had been passed over for a promotion twice and was feeling completely undervalued. The difficult conversation wasn't about his performance – it was about recognition and career development.
The conversation you're probably avoiding right now
Most leaders have at least one conversation they've been postponing. You know the one. That team member whose attitude is affecting everyone else. The client whose expectations have become unreasonable. The colleague who keeps taking credit for other people's work.
Every day you delay that conversation, the problem compounds. Not just the original issue, but the resentment, the workarounds, the impact on team morale. I've seen small communication issues turn into massive HR investigations simply because someone waited too long to address them directly.
Why "nice" managers often make things worse
Here's another opinion that might ruffle some feathers: Being overly nice in difficult conversations is actually cruel. When you hint around problems instead of addressing them clearly, you're denying people the opportunity to improve and grow.
I worked with a team leader in Adelaide who spent six months trying to "gently encourage" better performance from a struggling team member. Six months of vague feedback and indirect suggestions. When we finally had a direct conversation, the employee said: "I wish you'd told me this clearly months ago. I had no idea it was this serious."
That's not kindness – that's avoidance disguised as consideration.
The follow-up that most people forget
Here's something that separates good leaders from great ones: They follow up on difficult conversations. Not in a threatening way, but in a "how are we tracking with what we discussed?" way.
Most people have a difficult conversation, feel relieved it's over, and then never mention it again. Wrong move. The real work happens in the weeks following the conversation.
I always tell clients to schedule a follow-up within two weeks. Something simple like: "I wanted to check in on our conversation about project deadlines. How are you finding the new approach we discussed?"
This shows you're serious about solutions, not just problems. It also gives people permission to raise concerns or ask for additional support.
The technology trap
Quick tangent here, but I have to mention this because it drives me absolutely mental. Stop trying to have difficult conversations over email or Slack. Just stop.
I recently worked with a company where two department heads had been engaged in a six-week email argument about resource allocation. Six weeks! By the time I got there, they'd both copied in half the executive team and it had become this massive organisational drama.
We sat them down for a 20-minute face-to-face conversation and sorted it out immediately. The whole thing was based on a misunderstanding about budget timelines that could have been clarified with one question.
Digital communication is fantastic for many things. Difficult conversations aren't one of them.
What actually works in Australian workplaces
After thousands of hours observing Australian workplace dynamics, I've noticed we have some unique challenges around difficult conversations. We're generally pretty direct people, but we also have this cultural tendency to avoid conflict in professional settings.
This creates a weird paradox where we'll complain about issues extensively to colleagues but struggle to address them directly with the people involved. I call it "pub problem-solving" – everyone knows about the issue, everyone has opinions, but nobody talks to the actual person who can fix it.
The most successful leaders I work with have learned to channel our natural directness into constructive conversation. They're honest without being harsh, clear without being aggressive.
Companies like Atlassian have built entire cultures around "uncomfortable conversations" being normal and necessary. Their teams have difficult discussions regularly because they've made it safe and expected, not dramatic and rare.
The conversation starter that works every time
When you're ready to stop avoiding that difficult conversation, here's the opener I recommend: "I'd like to talk with you about [specific situation]. I'm hoping we can figure out a way forward that works for everyone. When would be a good time for us to sit down together?"
Notice what this does:
- It's specific, not vague
- It suggests collaboration, not confrontation
- It respects their schedule
- It frames the conversation as problem-solving
I've used variations of this opener hundreds of times, and it consistently sets a constructive tone from the start.
The bottom line
Difficult conversations aren't going anywhere. Technology changes, industries evolve, but humans will always need to navigate disagreements, performance issues, and conflicting priorities.
The leaders who master this skill – who can address problems directly while maintaining relationships – these are the people who build strong teams and sustainable businesses.
Everyone else just hopes problems will solve themselves. Spoiler alert: they don't.
So whatever conversation you've been avoiding, stop making it more complicated than it needs to be. Start with "Help me understand," focus on behaviour rather than character, and follow up on what you agree.
Your team will thank you for it. Eventually.