Truth telling is an admirable quality, but it is not one that is valued by underachievers and poor performers. Still, crafting your statements so that they carry no blame or judgment takes practice. If you’re not used to being open and direct, it might help if you “script” your message, as follows:

“My intent in sharing this with you is to build our relationship and to help you understand what I need in the future, not to make you feel bad. I recognize that what I say may hurt your feelings, but I’m hopeful that that feeling won’t last. I’m confident that our relationship will eventually reach a level where I don’t have to choose my words carefully to avoid hurt feelings. The sole intention of this communication is to clarify my expectations so that in the future we both get what we want.”

While language such as this may seem awkward, that’s okay. The fact that it is “not like you” shows the recipient that you’re willing to try something new. It also evidence that you want to change the way things are—a crucial first step in building a relationship.

Communicating with superiors

Sometimes you find yourself seeking clarification from those above you—especially if their functionality is suspect. In that case, you may have to adjust the content of your message. First, avoid implying that they are poor communicators. Second, take care not to suggest culpability. Until you develop a repertoire of your own, use one of these phrases:

– I don’t know where I stand with you.

-This way of communicating doesn’t work for me.

– I’m disappointed with these results because I had higher expectations.

-I’m not happy right now and need time to think about my response.

Communicating with peers

With peers, the content of your message is less important than the approach you take. So, the trick is to choose the right path. Three are available:

Sympathy: Use a sympathetic approach with functional people in situations where you truly want to understand their intentions and are willing to acknowledge their feelings. The sympathetic approach is not as useful with dysfunctional people. They are less likely to understand their own feelings and will find it difficult to discuss them. Even so, a sympathetic dialogue could afford them a rare opportunity to have their feelings acknowledged without being the focus of blame. It could lay the groundwork for use of this path in the future.

Empathy: An empathic approach gives you the option of connecting on either an intellectual or an emotional level. It shows that you have insights to share and are seeking a deeper exploration of the issues. This path is a good one to take with functional colleagues who are interested in developing closer ties.

Empathy also works with dysfunctional peers, but only up to a point. Their willingness to communicate with you is likely to stop once it’s clear you understand and accept their intentions. When they are satisfied, they have gotten their position across, they will become disinclined to go any further. You’re liable to find your communication is strictly one-way from then on.

Apathy:  Use the apathetic approach with people who have demonstrated that they care more about their feelings than about yours. This matter-of-fact approach is devoid of emotion. It cuts through the facade of pleasantry and communicates your intentions clearly.

Reserve this approach for dysfunctional coworkers who don’t respond to gentler communication styles. It demonstrates that all you want from the other party is confirmation of his or her intention and an understanding that you’ll be back if the misunderstanding persists.