To solve problems both big and small, let’s practice Radical Candor

Rochester Business Journal by Abigail McHugh-Grifa

When I first became an Executive Director, I had no previous management training or experience, nor any skills related to finance, HR, operations, etc.,* so I read dozens of leadership and management books to learn how to do my job. Most of those books were quickly forgotten, but of the small handful that stuck with me, only one profoundly shaped how I operate in the world today:Rochester Business Journal “Radical Candor” by Kim Scott.

The basic premise of her book (and accompanying website, TED talk, Masterclass, etc.) is that (1) we need honest feedback to be able to do our best work, and (2) that feedback will be most effective and helpful (for the individual and the organization) if it is delivered kindly. She depicts her framework as a simple four-quadrant square, with “Challenge Directly” on the XRochester Business Journal-axis and “Care Personally” on the Y-axis, resulting in four possible feedback styles:

• “Ruinous Empathy” (caring without challenging)

• “Manipulative Insincerity” (not caring and not challenging)

• “Obnoxious Aggression” (challenging without caring)

• “Radical Candor” (directly addressing problematic behaviors and ideas, but in a way that demonstrates genuine care and concern for the other person)

So the basic question that Scott invites readers to explore is “How can you say what you mean without being mean?” I have opportunities to ask myself this question and practice using radical candor on a daily basis, because (1) my work requires that I regularly communicate with people about emotionally fraught topics that they might prefer to ignore, (2) I don’t want to be a jerk, and (3) I don’t have the time or energy for beating around the bush and playing games. Though I’m not always successful, this framework has significantly improved my ability to have hard conversations while staying grounded in my values and maintaining respectful, open, caring relationships with other people.

Now it’s important to note that the first step in implementing radical candor is to solicit feedback, or as Scott advises, “Don’t dish it out until you prove you can take it.” So I regularly and explicitly ask my colleagues for constructive criticism and intentionally create opportunities for them to tell me what I’m doing wrong. Unsurprisingly, they have valuable suggestions for how I can improve and appreciate the invitation to share their critiques.

After providing feedback, it’s also important to gauge how that feedback was received, since “radical candor gets measured not at the speaker’s mouth, but at the listener’s ear.” In other words, don’t assume that just because you think you’ve been radically candid, the other person experienced it that way. I was reminded of this recently when a professional peer reacted very negatively to an email I had painstakingly crafted with the intention of making him aware — as kindly and diplomatically as possible — that he had created some problems for me and my colleagues. Upon reflection, I realize that providing this feedback in writing may have been a poor choice, because it stripped out the body language and tone of voice that could have more effectively communicated my genuine care and concern for him. That said, it was disheartening how he assumed there were ulterior motives and harsh feelings behind my gentle words, even though we know each other fairly well and are (from my perspective) friends. It was a painful reminder that we live in a culture where honest/candid communication is unusual and best intentions are rarely assumed.

Given the vast political divide in our country, and the fact that misinformation, disinformation, and AI are making it hard for pretty much everyone to figure out what is true and what is not, I’ve been thinking about how radical candor might serve us on a broader scale and help us stay grounded in reality. I think it’s fair to say that our democracy is very fragile right now and our basic freedoms are under threat. I don’t have a simple, straightforward solution to this, but thanks to two books I recently read, I’m sure that truth and freedom must go hand-in-hand.

In Timothy Snyder’s book, “On Freedom,” he argues that to be free people, we must maintain a firm grip on reality and insist on factuality. To support this point, he cites historical and present-day examples of how authoritarian leaders and excessively powerful corporations have intentionally misled and confused the public to advance their self-interested goals, ultimately stripping individuals and communities of their freedom. He also explains how effective government and fact-based journalism enable our freedom, rather than restricting it, as some people claim.

In bell hooks’ book, “All About Love,” she explores how dishonesty is used as a means of exerting power and maintaining oppressive hierarchies in personal relationships. She describes how this alienates us from each other and our own feelings, leading to a culture of lovelessness. As she succinctly puts it, “Trust is the foundation of intimacy,” and “widespread cultural acceptance of lying is a primary reason many of us will never know love.”

So the stakes are high. If we want freedom and we want love — not to mention the opportunity to develop professionally — we need truth and honesty. When it challenges our beliefs and expectations, receiving candid feedback can be deeply uncomfortable, so we’ll also need to build our tolerance for discomfort. If you are a person who struggles with truth-telling, even in seemingly insignificant or innocent ways, I invite you to check out Sam Harris’ brief book, “Lying,” which totally convinced me that honesty is always the best policy (except in very rare circumstances that most of us will never encounter). We can develop our capacity for honest, open, compassionate communication by practicing radical candor in the workplace and developing workplace cultures where radical candor is the norm. And, of course, radical candor is helpful in other situations as well, so as we process the election results together over the coming weeks, I hope you’ll give it a try.

*If you’re wondering how I got my job with so little relevant experience, there’s a simple explanation: I was already leading the organization as a volunteer and was willing to continue doing it for very little pay, so hiring me was really our Board’s only viable option. Fortunately, it seems to have worked out well enough.