Will Humphreys warns that exaggerated/emotional phrasing (e.g., “everyone,” “nobody,” “all of us”) damages company culture because it creates vague, unworkable complaints. He advises two responses: (1) objectify vague claims by asking who specifically is affected, and (2) insist employees raise concerns only with their direct report (offline broad communication is harmful).
Chapters
Here's how I know when I'm talking to someone that they are part of destroying my culture in my company. When they use exaggerated terminology. What does that mean? Hey, Will, everybody doesn't like this new policy. Hey, Will, nobody feels like we're being valued. Hey, Will, all of us feel like we're being overworked. That phrasing to me used to just emotionally overwhelm me, because what can I do with that? There's nothing objective in there that I can even solve. It's just this big emotional vomit that I'm left to clean up. So when it comes to talking to people who start using emotional terminology, there's two things I want to do. Number one, I want to objectify it. So, okay, everybody who. Well, everybody. Okay, so all 35 employees have talked to you about this? Well, no. Okay, so who have you talked to? They'll either start getting defensive because they're the ones causing the rumor, or. Or they'll say, well, John and Susan. I'm like, okay, so you, John and Susan, are feeling overworked. Yes. Great. Thank you. The second thing I do is I teach them the importance of only communicating their concerns with their direct report. Or their direct reports. Direct report. If they're ever communicating offline. That's the kiss of death of culture for me.