Dear Democrats: Seeing Is Not Believing

Posted on November 12, 2019 by Kathleen Kelley Reardon

As televised hearings in the impeachment of President Trump commence, Democrats are pinning their hopes on “seeing is believing.” Is that true and is it enough?

Persuasion is not merely a matter of providing information or even seeing something for ourselves. People cling to the status quo, often seeking to think and act in ways consistent with what they’ve said or done before or with the views of people important to them. We observe through “lenses” born of beliefs we harbor even if we can’t remember their origin. We’re creatures of habit – some of us more than others. So, to actually change our opinions, and certainly our actions, requires more than hearing that we might be wrong.

Then there is the problem of hearing something once. Among the perspectives on attitude and behavior developed over the last fifty years is one articulated in the 1970’s by then Yale University social psychologist William McGuire. The view stresses that people have many needs which attitudes must gratify. In other words, people hold certain attitudes because doing so brings about valued consequences. This is the case even when another attitude might make more sense. Our attitudes, which guide our actions, are rooted. One tug at them is rarely enough. If you’ve ever tried to yank a large weed from the ground, you know that roots can make extraction pretty tough.

So, what’s the takeaway here? Effective persuasive messages address habits of thought and the extent and reason for entrenchment. It’s not enough to present new information, no matter how compelling. The information must make uprooting an attitude a better means of gratifying high priority needs than leaving things as they are. Helping people come to this conclusion is crucial. This means actually knowing what matters most to the people whose attitudes and actions you wish to change. It isn’t how they should think that matters in persuasion, but how they actually do think.  That’s the core of your message.  Otherwise, you miss the mark.

Then there is the importance of clarity. Democrats have muddled about over terms like quid pro quo, bribery and extortion when describing the reason for impeaching the president. Which is it? And which term is the public likely to clearly understand? Once that’s decided, it needs to be repeated and repeated. Not because people are stupid, but because they’re busy and often can’t study hours and hours of televised hearings and articles in credible sources. Repetition can be annoying if not done right, but ambiguity is the kiss of death in bringing about change. Confronted with it, people retreat to the status quo.

The ball is in the Democrats’ court. They can show the world hours and hours of testimony, but their choice of words as a party, clarity regarding how the president’s actions were both illegal and dangerous violations of what Americans truly care about – state-by-state, county-by-county, as well as their willingness to repeat, repeat and repeat will decide if their efforts will make a difference.

Posted in Influence, Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , | 2 Comments

How To Keep A Woman From Leadership

Posted on September 12, 2019 by Kathleen Kelley Reardon

There are many ways to achieve this goal. And we saw one of them in a Washington Post article written by Ed Rendell, former Democratic governor of Pennsylvania. He insists that he likes Elizabeth Warren — a lot. Then goes on to label her a “hypocrite.” The article is an example of how women’s careers can be, and often are, stalled by supposed friends praising them before they cut the legs out from under their advancement. Here is the response I posted to the article:

How do you keep a qualified woman from reaching the top of her field? I’ve addressed that question in my research and writing, particularly in The Secret Handshake. One way is to pretend you like her, even praise her, but juxtapose that with an undercut. “I like Barbara – a lot. Unfortunately, not everyone agrees” and “Laura is a star. We all know that. Some people worry that she’s even too nice” are examples of the subtle ways women’s career can be stalled. The prevalence of this type of compliment-based (“I like her”) derogatory communication is why so many women remain in pipelines to leadership – in part why there has never been a female U.S. president. It’s clever in a way. While you’re embracing a candidate, you’re smirking over her shoulder. Rendell has employed this technique. It’s a tried-and-true method for getting your guy the job. In this case Rendell’s guy is Joe Biden. I like Joe Biden – always have. I’ve blogged about that on Huffington Post. Like Warren, Biden has faults. Rendell could have said that about Warren and continued with his criticism. After all, he supposedly likes her. Instead, he went for an attention-grabbing headline – right before tonight’s debate. It’s a cheap shot which he hopes will stick. I hope we’re smarter than that.

Posted in Gender Issues, Leadership, Politics, Tutorials for Women, Uncategorized | 2 Comments

How Many Rapes Make a Wrong?

Posted on June 25, 2019 by Kathleen Kelley Reardon

E. Jean Carroll’s allegation of rape by Donald Trump has once again brought the issue of how much is too much to the fore.  She is the sixteenth woman to accuse President Trump of sexual misconduct.

In response to Carroll’s allegations, the president described her as “not my type,” which is supposedly a reason why he wouldn’t have raped her.  It’s part of his general demeaning of women, which, unfortunately, has come to be accepted – Just Donald being Donald.

Carroll said she has grown sick of women sharing their experiences of sexual misconduct by the president with no lasting repercussions.  Will her revelation finally grip and hold the attention of the American public?  Or have women and men become so numb to Trump’s incivility to women, even rape, that Carroll’s allegation will fall on deaf ears?

Carroll’s timing may be suspicious.  After all, she is marketing a new book.  But let’s assume that her story is true. In fact, it’s possible that it took a book for Carroll to finally share a secret she’s carried for twenty years? She would not be the first woman to suppress such a horrific experience, sharing it with only two friends in her case, and she surely won’t be the last, especially given how few sexual predators pay a just and lasting price.

And why is that? Until we find the answer, change is unlikely.

Jia Tolentino wrote in The New Yorker:  Women’s speech is sometimes wielded, in this #MeToo era, as if it were Excalibur—as if the shining, terrible truth about the lives of women will, by itself, vanquish the men who have exploited and controlled them; as if speech were a weapon that protects those who wield it from hurt. Supporters of #MeToo have, on occasion, adhered to this idea in a sort of delusive optimism.”

The powerful don’t fear victims.  They fear power greater than their own.  To date, women have expected that the unfairness and immorality of letting a president get away with demeaning and even raping women would naturally lead to change.  But as I explain when speaking or coaching on the topic of persuasion and negotiation, fairness is not a powerful argument when it doesn’t matter to the people you seek to influence.  

Ephrat Livni wrote in Quartz, October 14, 2018 that powerful men have coopted the rhetoric of victims and have rewritten the narratives.  Referring also to Tolentino’s observations, Livni explained that powerful men have created scenarios in which they’ve been wronged by accusers who are hysterical, malicious or hopelessly befuddled. They have defined themselves as targets, creating a kind of strategic ambiguity to weaken women’s claims of being the primary victims of sexual assault.

Then there are the quiet detractors.  According to The Economist, October 20, 2018, Americans have grown increasingly skeptical of sexual misconduct claims.

“American adults responding that men who sexually harassed women at work 20 years ago should keep their jobs has risen from 28% to 36%. The proportion who think that women who complain about sexual harassment cause more problems than they solve has grown from 29% to 31%. And 18% of Americans now think that false accusations of sexual assault are a bigger problem than attacks that go unreported or unpunished, compared with 13% in November last year.”

So, what’s the answer? How do we turn this numbness toward sexual violence around?  It must involve power which the perpetrators understand.  In democratic governments, representatives must be pressed to attend to sexual misconduct in their midst, and certainly conducted by their president.  Those who condone particularly serious sexual misconduct must be voted out of office.  And they need to know now that such an outcome is just over the horizon.

Only power can change the culture of sexual misconduct acceptance so prevalent now.  It’s not enough to be appalled.  Even occasional marches cannot sustain change. We need to band together, women and men, and make people in power listen no matter their political affiliation.  Either they bring about change, or they can pack their bags.  

Posted in Gender Issues, Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Did Joe Biden Do Something Wrong? And What Have We Learned?

Posted on April 2, 2019 by Kathleen Kelley Reardon

Neither of the women who have said that former Vice President Joseph Biden was essentially too familiar with them some time ago, in one case kissing the back the head and the other holding her face and rubbing noses, appears to consider him a person oblivious to the concerns of women. In his own words, Biden said quite the opposite:

In my many years on the campaign trail and in public life, I have offered countless handshakes, hugs, expressions of affection, support and comfort. And not once – never – did I believe I acted inappropriately,

He added,

But we have arrived at an important time when women feel they can and should relate their experiences, and men should pay attention. And I will.

I advised Joe Biden through two surrogates prior to his vice-presidential debate with former Governor Sarah Palin, particularly about behaviors that might be misconstrued as too chivalrous, familiar or even superior. For example, I suggested that he not place a hand on her back to guide her to the podium. Men, particularly of a certain age, often guide women in this way.  They were socialized to do so.  It’s a habit.  Now days, it’s better to avoid it altogether.  But is it sexual misconduct?

Using the Spectrum of Sexual Misconduct for Women (SSMW) that I developed to distinguish among types of gender offense (see in blog below), let’s look at Biden’s kiss on the back of former Nevada Assemblywoman Lucy Flores’ head five years ago. I’m inclined to place it in the “generally not offensive” category given how much hugging and effusive behavior goes on at political gatherings. At worst, in the MeToo era, for some it might fall into the “awkward/mildly offensive” category.

There appears to have been no intent on Biden’s part to convey anything other than enthusiasm and warmth. But as some have rightly pointed out, intention is not the only criteria when determining if certain behaviors toward women are inappropriate. Also, Biden is running for the U.S. presidency. The bar should be high.

In SSMW low-level offense cases, however, it’s important that women learn how to handle such issues in private or at least with as few people present as possible. This is especially the case for isolated events that can be nipped in the bud at work.

There are private ways to convey anger or chagrin about uncomfortable behavior – even years later. I’ve described many of these in Comebacks at Work and particularly for women in a Thrive Global article and another for The Harvard Business Review online. A simple, “Don’t do that anymore” or “I found that very uncomfortable” often suffices. If the situation occurred some time ago, comments like these might suffice: “I realized later that you shouldn’t have done that” or “I’ve never forgotten when you did that. It made me uncomfortable.”

The Spectrum of Sexual Misconduct is a flexible taxonomy. It has to be. There are relational and situational differences to consider. All the more reason why we need guidelines regarding degrees of gender related offenses. Without them serious forms of sexual misconduct can be treated as mistakes or having a sense of humor, while low-level offenses will ruin the careers and reputations of good, well-meaning people.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Are Some in the Press Guilty of Covert Sexism? Again?

Posted on December 9, 2018 by admin

You really should read this opinion piece by Paul Waldman published in the Washington Post. And not because you’re an Elizabeth Warren fan. The author is agnostic about who will make the best Democratic Party presidential candidate. But he sees how the press can focus on something that has nothing to do with the capacity to fill that spot and beat it to death — ruining a candidate’s chances.

In this case, Elizabeth Warren’s DNA testing is being treated by some members of the press as a fatal flaw.  Waldman argues that this is equivalent to the Hilary Clinton email fiasco. Hence, the opinion piece is entitled, “Welcome to ‘But her emails!’, version 2020.”

Latching on to small, irrelevant actions or traits and making them appear to be major faults is how women, in particular, are made to look inferior.  It’s a clever way of keeping them out of high-level positions in organizations and politics.

We should all look up “idiosyncrasy credits.”  Some people get to be complete jerks and we stay their friend or vote for them.  They have more social “credits” to spend, so to speak. “Oh, that’s just Joe. He does that all the time. It doesn’t mean anything.” But along comes Mary doing something far less offensive or idiotic and it sticks to her despite all she has going for her.

This doesn’t happen only to women.  But it happens to them a lot.

In The Secret Handshake, I’ve written about how damning comments can be cleverly inserted among seeming compliments.  “Julia is very smart.  She gets a lot done.  I don’t get why so many people dislike her.”

The press needs to police itself with regard to hammering a candidate on largely irrelevant issues  — especially women and minorities who tend to lack extensive idiosyncrasy credits. What are the up to?  If they’re taking advantage on purpose, shame on them.  If they’re not, they should WAKE UP!!

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Laughed at by a President, Patronized by Senators – How Low Can They Get?

Posted on October 6, 2018 by admin

Dr. Christine Blasey Ford has opened our eyes.  It wasn’t her intention to do so in the way that has occurred, but her testimony wasn’t for nothing.

We have seen senators on the one hand say that they believe her, but on the other that they don’t.  They conveniently patronize her as a pawn.  After all, a woman who is credible can’t be so on her own — she must be a puppet of adversaries.  Even Senator Susan Collins is one of these believers who doesn’t believe – a woman who thinks that Blasey Ford was assaulted but not by the man she is 100% sure did it.

Maybe Collins simply enjoyed all the public attention because we have no evidence to the contrary — far less evidence than the world has regarding the unfitness of Bret Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court.  Blasey Ford opened our eyes to the real Senator Collins.

Blasey Ford helped reconfirm the crudeness, “low life” as he likes to say, of President Donald Trump.  After the hearing, he considered Blasey Ford credible and a few days later mocked her unmercifully.  What kind of person does this?  What kind of people follow his lead?

Then there’s the even-if-he-did-it-so-what club whose members believe even if he did assault Dr. Blasey Ford, it was 36 years ago.  Even if he lied under oath, the man was upset, they reason.  So, we might ask, why not leave him where he is?  Instead, they prefer to elevate him to the Supreme Court.

Dr. Blasey Ford  did her civic duty.  In the process, she reminded us that women cannot rest with regard to the issue of sexual misconduct or any form of equality.  They need to shirk labels like “mob” used by Senator Grassley and other senators to disparage their right to speak out.

We have unfortunately learned that if you are sexually assaulted you’d better write down every detail, tell your friends, and seek legal advice because otherwise you won’t be believed.  And you might be mocked and patronized by people with too much power.

Posted in Politics | 3 Comments

The Kavanaugh Advantage

Posted on September 20, 2018 by Kathleen Kelley Reardon

As we wait to hear if  Professor Christine Blasey will acquiesce to what her attorney described as not a “good faith” process, consider what is being asked of her.  If we look at the four options presented by Senator Chuck Grassley, the deck is stacked in favor of Judge Brett Kavanaugh.  Yes, Blasey has come forward out of anonymity to describe what could be a disqualifying act for Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation.  To be fair, she needs to make her case.  But she will do so in a massive public venue without the option for vague answers that have characterized the judge’s responses.  She will lack the extensive practice that he has acquired and, worse, she may be nervous.

Why is being nervous an issue?  Decades of source credibility research attest that conviction is a huge part of perceived truthfulness.  As we’ve seen with other women in the public sphere, they are judged differently on this dimension.

In my sessions and coaching on persuasion and leadership, I usually work harder with women on conviction.  We are socialized to be less direct.  When we are, there’s an inclination to use disclaimer phrases like “I hope this doesn’t upset anyone, but…” and “This isn’t meant to critical, but …”, even “This may be a stupid idea, but…”  in order to offset the impression of abrasiveness — of coming across as an ice queen or unlikable.

We’re expected to smile more than men and to use gestures that soften directness.  These expectations plagued Hillary Clinton and they could well be an issue for Blasey.  Deny as senators might that they apply different criteria to interpret male and female speech, research does not bear that out.

Anita Hill has called for a neutral body experienced in sexual misconduct cases to investigate the incident in question and present their finding to the Senate Judiciary Committee.  The findings would then be used by Senators to frame their questions.  She added that a week’s preparation is not enough time for meaningful inquiry into very serious charges. It is also not enough time for Blasey to consider, as Kavanaugh has for months now, how her answers will be perceived in terms of content and delivery.

It’s easy to dismiss communication issues as irrelevant.  But you can bet Brett Kavanaugh has considered his communication at length.  How we speak is a huge part of how we’re perceived.  And women walk a thin pink line balancing impressive conviction with gender expectations.

Blasey’s colleagues, school friends and acquaintances see her as a bright, articulate and credible professor and scientist.  Also important, however, is whether we can hear the truth through our biases and whether a few days of preparation is enough given how imbedded they are in our minds and culture.  Not likely.

 

Posted in Gender Issues, Persuasion, Politics, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Going Forward with the Brett Kavanaugh Vote – A Betrayal to Women

Posted on September 17, 2018 by Kathleen Kelley Reardon

Does a woman remember assault, ten, twenty, thirty or more years later?  Absolutely. How does a person forget powerlessness – being demeaned, terrified and deprived of humanity?  It burrows into the mind leaving an indelible mark.  Even if suppressed, that memory lingers often accompanied by embarrassment, self-blame, anger and shame.

So, people who argue that a sexual assault from years past must be unreliably fuzzy and half-remembered are wrong.  When someone holds you down, covers your mouth, and almost smothers you while tearing at your clothes you don’t forget it.  This is not a nudging toward intimacy.  It’s sexual assault.

Those who want to rush the Supreme Court vote for Brett Kavanaugh should be ashamed. They’re reminding women who’ve been assaulted of those horrible moments and telling them this time it doesn’t matter.

Senators who vote against delay dismiss women as credible when it comes to sexual misconduct, scoff at the courage it takes to come forward and close the door to important evidence regarding a Supreme Court nominee’s fitness for a lifetime post.  If he is innocent, let’s know that.

In the absence of delay, there will be no fuzzy memories in November by countless women who thought things had finally changed – that their voices were at last being heard. Betrayal by those sworn to honorably serve tends to leave an indelible mark as well.

Posted in Gender Issues, Politics | 2 Comments

When Leaders Bully and Lie

Posted on September 6, 2018 by Kathleen Kelley Reardon

On the first day of teaching persuasion and negotiation classes, I talk about how three forms of influence differ.  Persuasion, coercion and manipulation are primary ways by which we influence each other. Of the three, persuasion requires the most effort and skill.  Coercion requires some form of power over the person being influenced.  Manipulation has its base in deception.  It involves lying and/or duping people.

There are powerful people who exert their influence in a manner that seems like leadership and therefore becomes acceptable – at least for a period of time.  There are also expert manipulators.  Those of us who don’t notice disconnects, for example, between what such manipulators say and do are blindly led around by the nose.

At some point in most people’s lives they rely on coercion or manipulation.  “Do it because I said so,” is a phrase familiar to most children. “I can turn this car around,” tells arguing children that a vacation may be over before it begins if they don’t settle down in the car.  We may deceive out of love or good intentions when a small “white lie” appears to be the wiser course of action.  We all use power now and then.

But what if manipulation and coercion become primary forms of influence, especially by leaders?  Of what use is reason in such a climate?  What value is there to honesty and reason?  If leaders lie as a rule, then those around them are likely to do so as well. If they bully, those who work for them may become so inclined.  Soon you have a toxic environment whether in government, organizations, teams or at home.  For a while, work may get done.  Talented people with integrity may briefly stick around hopeful of positive change.  But, as I described in The Secret Handshake, pathological arenas tend to self-destruct.  Why? Because liars and bullies are in charge. They don’t trust each other and for good reason.

Persuasion is about using reason and emotional appeals to influence others.  At its best, it allows the person being persuaded to learn how the persuader thinks.  In this sense, it’s up front.  It gives ground as needed so others feel that they’ve been heard and have had input into decisions.  Usually, the best decisions are not one person’s “side” but rather a position or course of action that evolves through discussion.

Effective persuasion requires listening skills,  learning how to link desired outcomes to the interests of others and framing positions in appealing ways.  It isn’t about “I think” and “some people say” types of evidence, but instead relies on credible arguments and examples.

I wrote this blog as a brief thought piece and as an opportunity for leaders, in particular, to reflect on how they influence others.  Leaders who rely on coercion and manipulation rather than persuasion may get things done for a period of time.  But when their backs are turned, in the absence of convincing arguments for taking a particular course, people often waver or rebel.  They haven’t been part of the solution.  There is no buy-in, no sense of ownership, and many eventually tire of only sycophants being heard.  In short, not only is living or working in an environment fraught with liars and bullies painful, it is not the way to truly and effectively lead.

 

 

Posted in Bullying, Leadership, Persuasion, Politics | Leave a comment

Harvard Business Review Article – Using The Spectrum of Sexual Misconduct

Posted on July 16, 2018 by admin

Attached here is an article I published with The Harvard Business Review online.  In it how organizations and individuals can use the Spectrum of Sexual misconduct is described as well as experiences of those already using it.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment