I listened to an interview where the head of a grassroots organization had lost funding for the event of the year from his major corporate donor. There were finances, people, and of course, politics involved. It was a heated issue and could have been a heated interview, but I noticed an interesting response on the part of the interviewee. Regardless of the pointed questions, the emotions, the differing facts on both sides, he peppered most of his answers with some form of the word “respect.”
As he did, I noticed I listened more closely instead of trying to figure out who was right and who was wrong. In response to a quoted somewhat curt reply from the donor, he’d say, “I understand that ________ is concerned about ______ and, respectfully, I’d like to add/suggest that another way to look at this is _________.”
In another part, he countered with, “With my greatest respect, I disagree but I personally know this person (donor) is a good man with the best of intentions. I do wish we could come to the table and share a way going forward with respect and honor.”
All his responses were laced with value words: “respect,” “concern,” “honor,” “gratitude,” etc. In doing so, he came across as a reasonable man whose organization was hurt by this corporate decision, a decision made by a corporate “good man that I know personally.”
I came away as a listener who was not in any way involved wondering, do I speak this way when the decisions (and the emotions) get hot?
And one more thing I noticed in this 4-minute interview—the interviewee never used the word “but.” However, the interviewer did!