EYN#041: 3 Approaches To Giving Bad News

No-one likes giving bad news. It's hard.

But just because it's hard doesn't mean it's not important. Giving difficult messages can be one of the most caring things you can do. It's genuine, it's honest and it needs saying.

I happened to be watching the new Netflix show on the Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders. Not my normal sort of show, but my wife wanted to watch it so I took one for the team (honest). Anyhoo, they spent a lot of time sharing bad news.

I've had to share lots of "bad" news over the years to customers, employees, job candidates and others.

Bad news could be things like - we can't deliver what we said dear customer, we can't offer you a job dear candidate, or this is the result of your performance review dear employee.

So here's three approaches I've seen or used. My favourite being Option 3:

• Least Favourite - The Sh*t Sandwich
• Middle Favourite - The Punchline
• Favourite - Rip The Plaster Off

Least Favourite - The Sh*t Sandwich

• You tell them something wonderful about them.
• You drop the bad news bomb hidden in the middle.
• You tell them something wonderful about them.

This is probably the most common approach to sharing bad news. So much so, it's got its own special name.

Pro's

• It’s the easiest to do because it feels nicest.
• The other party leaves feeling happy.

Con's

• The power of the bad news message is diluted.
• Sometimes they never really hear the bad news. And therefore people aren't informed or nothing changes.
• Sometimes they have delayed reaction when the conversation finishes. A "wait a minute what did they say?!".

I personally try and never use this approach. I would rather have a deeper conversation about the bad news. It might be emotionally hard for both of you, but it's a real conversation that needs to happen.

Middle Favourite - The Punchline

• You tell them something wonderful about them.
• You start to edge towards the problem for most of the meeting.
• You drop the bad news bomb.
• You end the meeting.

They used this a lot in the cheerleading show. Again not my favourite approach:

Pro's

• It's a bit easier to do.
• It softens up the other party to receive the news.

Con's

• The other party can't really concentrate on the opening bit because they're just waiting for the news. "Am I cut from the cheer squad", "What's my performance review outcome", "Did I get the flipping job". Just tell me.
• You've taken so long in the preamble that there is no time in the meeting to discuss the news. That honest conversation after the news is vital in helping the other party deal with what they've heard.

Favourite - Rip The Plaster Off

• Quick hello and how are you.
• Get straight to the point.
• Drop the bad news bomb.
• Spend the rest of the meeting talking through the topic.
• Offer a follow up meeting if they have a strong emotional reaction and need some time to regroup.

This is my favourite approach. It gives maximum time to talking about the main issue. It also gives maximum time talking to the other party when they are in an informed position. It's not easy, but I think it's effective.

Pro's

• The message is delivered and remembered.
• You haven't kept them hanging whilst they wait for the news.
• There is time for an conversation after the important message is known.

Con's

• Can feel hard to do.
• May lead to an emotional reaction from the other party (which is actually fine, but often people shy away from causing strong emotional reactions).

I`m not saying I always use my favourite approach. I'm not saying there isn't a time for the other approaches. However, if I can have a compassionate conversation in a difficult situation, with the other party in an informed position then it's the most fruitful.

In all scenarios, planning what you want to say is important. Prepare for these conversations and pick your approach.

Hope this helps

Ben