HOT buttons

Honesty: Say what you mean and mean what you say. Walk the talk. Playing political games will be perceived as manipulative and is rarely what most people believe it is to be “honest.”

Openness: Remain open to change or changing behaviour; be open to forgiveness. Take ownership of mistakes, mis-statements, or behaviour which may have been linked to intent, mistakenly. Again, 'games' are rarely perceived as openness.

Transparency: Your intent must be clear without hiding the ’hard bits’. If perceptions exist that you have a hidden agenda or harbour unknown threats, there is only one way to transform the distrust. You need to become HOT^©! ...Otherwise...

If you say you’re being honest, you also better walk the talk.

We may be able to fool ourselves about the nature of our relationships or rationalize accepting distrust and manipulation as tolerable behaviours. But as I too often observed, when conflict strikes, both such realities make it almost impossible to resolve differences and still maintain functioning relationships without help. People have to remain or become HOT^© if the relationship is important to them.

Distrust breeds more distrust in a never ending spiral of conflict escalation. To believe otherwise is to ignore reality or history.

Reaping the benefits of being HOT^© however, requires walking the talk while assertively managing differences. So if you want to change the nature of your relationships, here’s what it means to be HOT, or not.

Jessica’s story: a question of reality; hers.

Jessica's knew that someone had been at her computer while she was away on vacation; the hair she had taped to the bottom of her keyboard tray was gone. She even knew that it had been Carl, a colleague and recent addition to her team. After all, Carl wanted her job and dis-respected her for being old enough to be his Mother. Of course when she asked him about the computer he denied it. And as usual, she stewed for days before approaching her supervisor with her concerns. His response that she was being paranoid was followed up by his comments that "…the computers belonged to the organization and she had no proprietary right to exclusive use." She buried the issue resentfully but she'd get over it, she thought; after all, dis-honesty, closed minds, and cold hearts seemed to be the new culture and she needed the job; for now.

Bill’s story: a question of expectations; and needs.

Bill's boss, Jeff, was a disaster when it came to relationships. Often, after Jeff had alienated someone important to the organization's future, Bill had to 'pick up the pieces' and increasingly, resented his role as Jeff's "nanny." For over two years Bill put up with Jeff's dishonest tendencies and prevarications until one day he could take it no longer. When he raised the issue with Jeff, however, the reaction Bill had envisioned and dreaded became the last straw. Jeff would not listen, denied Bill's assertions, and accused Bill of undermining his authority. It was the end of any meaningful relationship between them. If Bill had been honest about his feelings to Jeff, if Jeff had been more open to Bill's needs, do you think the interpersonal outcomes would have been different?

Both scenarios include behaviours which are not HOT. And yet such escalation-generating monsters lurk in many workplaces, families, and communities. If you value a relationship, push or ignore the HOT buttons at your own risk.

He who does not trust enough will not be trusted. - LAO TSE