Difficult conversations rarely begin at the point they feel difficult. Often, unclear expectations, missed check-ins or unresolved misunderstandings have been building beforehand. A Conversation Framework gives managers a simple sequence of conversations to build clarity, connection and accountability earlier, before an issue becomes a formal performance matter.
Key takeaways
- Difficult conversations are often the result of earlier conversations being missed, avoided or left unclear.
- The Conversation Framework helps managers move through four stages: foundation, check-in, how did we get here, and, where needed, a formal performance conversation.
- Setting clear expectations and regularly checking on the person and their understanding helps prevent small gaps becoming assumptions about someone’s ability, motivation or attitude.
- When expectations are not met, understanding how the process shaped the outcome before judging the person can lead to a more useful conversation leading to longer term benefits.
How to have difficult conversations is a staple training topic for many organisations – and for good reason.
Communication is the basis for how work gets done. So the conversations that involve high emotion can make or break working relationships. Being able to step into a conversation when needed and stay focused on a productive outcome is an invaluable skill, not just at work but in life.
However, there’s a risk in focusing our efforts only on the difficult conversation. If the conversation has become difficult, earlier conversations could well have changed the path.
In our last two newsletters, we explored the layers that shape culture and the leadership skill of observing, making sense and not defaulting to what feels familiar. This month, I want to look at how those ideas show up in everyday leadership conversations, especially for managers trying to set expectations and accountability.
We all know that avoiding slightly uncomfortable conversations can lead to needing more difficult ones. From little things, big things grow.
We understand this, but if it feels uncomfortable, we defer, reframe, or hope it resolves itself. Yet, when there’s a gap between what was expected and what has been delivered, it doesn’t just go away. It repeats, and then we start to make a judgment about someone’s ability, motivation, or attitude.
A common scenario looks like this: a manager shares frustration about a team member who is not delivering what’s needed. The team member senses the unspoken tension and starts to go quiet or protect themselves by pointing fingers. The situation now revolves around not only the expectation gap but also the behaviour.
And when you ask managers, “Has this been raised with the team member before?”, the answer is often no.
People leadership isn’t always a natural instinct for managers, and under pressure, it’s easy to get busy with process and workflow. Sometimes we think we are clear, but haven’t checked properly for understanding. It’s easy to assume that if someone was hired for the job, they should be able to work it out – right? Leaving expectations open to interpretation can lead to misunderstandings, like a game of Chinese whispers.
The impact on team members being left to interpret expectations is not insignificant. When people are unclear on what matters, what good looks like, or how to raise questions early, stress and frustration build. Recent research points to a lack of role clarity causing higher workplace stress than having too much to do.
Right now, in workplaces everywhere, there is a perfect storm leading to more difficult conversations. The sheer volume of work means connection can become secondary to delivery. There’s limited time or budget to develop managers, and hybrid work, if not managed well, can make interactions feel disjointed and small misunderstandings can escalate.
So, in our manager training we talk about approaching conversations as a set of phases that helps make the difficult ones a little easier. These are the conversations that build a foundation of connection, trust and mutual expectations, through to exploring an expectations gap before it becomes a formal performance issue.
These conversations work in sequence, then loop back through the check-in and ‘how did we get here?’ conversations to keep the working relationship and expectations aligned.
The Conversation Framework
Foundation conversation
This conversation is ideal for a new employee, as a reset with an existing team member, or when the focus of work or a role changes. The intention is to align expectations early:
- What is the team responsible for?
- What are the main priorities?
- What does good look like?
- How will feedback flow between you and within the team?
This conversation might include building shared understanding and agreement around:
- What is the team responsible for and working towards, and why the team member’s work matters.
- What is the team member’s understanding of their contribution to the team and larger objectives.
- Where does the team member feel most confident and where do they want to develop or stretch.
- What support do they want from me?
- How do they best receive feedback and how can they give feedback to me?
Feedback relates to positive and negative feedback. Some people enjoy public recognition; others prefer a well-worded email. To set up a feedback culture, managers need to also invite team members to share feedback and have the ability to receive it with curiosity and humility.
Check-in conversation
This is not the same as a regular workflow meeting. It is a 1:1 conversation that is about the person, reaffirms the foundation conversation and at the very least, creates connection.
- What feels positive and motivating?
- What’s impacting them at the moment?
- What’s unclear or creating frustration?
- What do they need support with?
- Is there any feedback for me?
It’s a regular meeting, but the cadence depends on the individual team member and current environment. Weekly, fortnightly or monthly may all be appropriate. Talk to each individual team member about how often feels useful. Consider increasing the cadence during periods of high pressure or major change.
The check-in conversation shouldn’t be an add-on to the WIP meeting, as you are talking about two different things: the work vs them as a person. The check-in should never be rescheduled if it can be avoided.
This meeting creates space to acknowledge positives and raise things you may notice. It also gives the team member space to share what’s going on for them. This is where small frustrations can be resolved, misunderstandings caught, and misguided perceptions explored before they become an ingrained perception.
Coaching skills are valuable here. A manager needs to be curious about what’s being shared, get to the crux of situations, and have the confidence to reframe or challenge when needed.
How did we get here conversation
This is the conversation when expectations haven’t been met. The first task is to understand why it has happened. It might stem from a lack of information sharing or feedback, unclear delegation, inadequate tools, low motivation, or misaligned capability. So unpacking what’s underlying requires time and focus.
- What was missed?
- What was unclear?
- What is needed to close the gap or ensure it doesn’t happen next time?
You may discover you had different ideas of what good looked like. It might be that they didn’t know how to use the system fully, who to ask, or when to escalate. Recognising a breakdown in communication might necessitate redesigning how information is shared, how understanding is checked, or how the project is scoped.
This conversation is not yet the formal performance conversation. It is the opportunity to understand the gap before making a judgement about what process may need to change before focusing on the person. Key features of this conversation are:
- Frame your thinking to have an open, non-judgemental conversation
- Choose your entry point to focus the conversation and ask for their input
- Share the evidence of the expectation gap
- Get curious about how it’s come about. What’s happened in the process rather than the person
- Respond to defensiveness rather than react
- Recognise what is needed to avoid it in the future
- Agree next steps
If you’ve agreed what good looks like and built connection and trust, this conversation can feel more like you’re working together through constructive feedback than harsh criticism.
Performance conversation
This is the formal conversation when the issue continues to repeat, and you need to initiate a performance improvement process.
If you’ve set expectations, checked understanding, ensured they had the resources, development and information they needed, and given adequate time, you may be able to avoid the formal process. Or, if the formal process is needed, it’s less likely to come as a shock and can be supported by the manager’s notes and email confirmations from previous ‘how did we get here’ conversations.
Investing in early conversations often means less energy is needed for the hard conversations. The hard conversation may still be necessary, but the first three conversations create the clarity, trust, and accountability before the situation becomes formal.
If you are supporting leaders who avoid the small conversations until they become bigger ones, we can help them build the confidence, structure and judgement to have the right conversation earlier.