Kim Scott proposes in her framework that you should strive for radical candor which is optimal for professionalism because it demonstrates your human connection but also seeks to improve the workplace.
Suppose a new co-worker has made a significant mistake. Come up with 4 different responses that would fit with Scott’s framework of radical candor, ruinous empathy, manipulative insincerity, and obnoxious aggression.
Answers will vary. Here are some examples of different ways you could react.
“Wow, if you want to keep working here, you better get your act together. Didn’t you read the handbook?” This response would fall into the Obnoxious Aggression category. Someone who says this is not showing much empathy with their criticism.
“Don’t worry. It’s just your first week. Things will get better.” This response falls into the Ruinous Empathy category. You are being kind by acknowledging that being new is hard but you’re not offering any helpful advice.
You don’t say anything to the new employee but you gossip with your other co-workers about their mistake, giving everyone a bad impression of them. This response falls into the Manipulative Insincerity category. You are not being helpful at all; you’re probably hurting your new co-worker by tarnishing their reputation before they even have a chance to prove themselves.
“We all mess up sometimes. Why don’t we grab lunch together and I’ll give you some tips for how to tackle that project.” This is the Radical Candor answer. It shows you care and want to connect with your co-worker and you want to give some helpful advice so they can avoid the mistake in the future.
Figure 1. Kim Scott advocates for communicating with radical candor in the workplace.
Which response would you be mostly likely to give?
