“I’m curious — I noticed you no longer sit with us. Is everything okay? Is there something you would like me to be aware of?” they asked me.

Me: Oh my goodness, my sitting away was so I could host or participate in virtual meetings and not have to disturb you — because even if I used headphones, they are only for listening and they don’t mask my talking. And since I tend to talk a little louder when I have headphones on, I figured it would be the decent thing to do to go to some other location.

Me: Thank you for asking me from a place of curiosity. I really appreciate how you did not assume anything. Because one can walk around not knowing how certain behaviors are read, and sometimes even what we presume are good intentions can be misinterpreted.

As I walked away from that meeting, I kept thinking about all the times I have been in spaces and heard people misattribute others’ intentions and actions to something they had made up their minds to be the presumed reasons for their observations. The difference being that the persons in question would never be given an opportunity, just like I was, to explain the reasoning from their own points of view.

Whether you are still in the early stages of your career and are working on moving on up, or if you are planning on being an inclusive and transformative leader, I cannot tell you how important it is to approach what appears to be ambiguous observations and reports from a place of curiosity.

Asking questions from a place of genuine curiosity, even if you are going to give feedback that is not pleasant, allows the other party to feel heard. Having courageous and crucial conversations with other adults is not easy. Most of us shy (run) away from it because of a multiplicity of reasons. We either do not want to seem like a mean person, we don’t want the other person to reciprocate, we don’t want to be disliked, and even sometimes we do not want to know the truth — because we are too steeped in the stories we are telling ourselves about the situation, such that any conflicting pieces of data or information would cause our well-structured cause-and-effect stories to come crashing down.

I used the term “compassionate” to qualify curiosity here because curiosity just for the sake of it can come across as non-genuine and Machiavellian at worst. The qualifier here means you genuinely care to know what is going on and how you can contribute to helping either the situation or the person.

Compassionate curiosity fits well into the proverbial “content is king and context is queen” saying. When you approach others from this position, it is actually a winning strategy for all persons involved, because you are both trying to find information to answer your questions while also making room for the context around the information.

Why is this important? Because as Anaïs Nin said, “We see the world as we are, not as it is.” Engaging in dialogue and feedback from a place of compassionate curiosity allows us the chief luxury of being able to see the world from others’ perspectives. A true leadership gift indeed.

There are many models and ways to approach dialogue and feedback, and I find the FEED and the CEDAR models to be useful in my engagement with others. The CEDAR model (which reminds me of the cedar tree for its life-affirming properties and fragrance) is a useful one for people working in teams.

No matter what model you use, you will have to practice to get comfortable using it with those you are interacting with, remembering that a culture of mutual trust and transparency is essential if these must work as well as they were designed to.

What are some things to remember as we work on soliciting and giving feedback?

1. Feel the discomfort, but do it anyway. To me, giving feedback well is one of those things that we have to both go and grow through. The downside to not learning and practicing is an erosion of trust and credibility in the long run, and I do not think anyone wants that.
2. Hold humility tight: recognize that you might have misconstrued a situation, and that it is okay if you are corrected on your misconceptions.
3. Lead with transparency regarding impact: make this about the observed behavior and its impact on you or the team. Do not make it about the other party’s character.

In my opening story above, the person could have led with stating that I appeared to not be a team player simply because I was no longer sitting with them. Instead, they led from a place of wanting to understand the reason behind the behavior they had noticed or observed. This is both the right way and the right thing to do, in order to honor the other person and give room for the explanation that is most likely bound to come.

Finally, work on a shared understanding of the future and what should be done or what should happen. And always make room for intentional clarification, both in the present and in that desired future.