In every aspect of our lives, we make agreements with other people, from day-to-day decisions like where to go to dinner to monumental topics like how we want to achieve our strategic/life goals together.
We are often disappointed with the results no matter what kind of agreements we make. The other person doesn’t follow through, and I fully understand the changes I would have to make, so I don’t follow through. Even when we do both follow through, we often still don’t meet each other’s expectations.
When I reflect on the agreements that were not effective for me, I realize there was some level of ambiguity present. We tend to agree to things at a high level without getting very specific.
Ambiguity is the enemy of good agreements.
Why do we choose to be ambiguous? Yes, it is a choice. It may not be a conscious choice, but it is a choice. One reason may be that if I stay at a high level, it is easier to get someone’s agreement. Without specifics, there is less risk.
In Flawless Consulting®, we talk about sharing our “technical” wants (What are we going to do together?. We also share our relational wants (How are we going to work together?).
Both technical and relational wants are important ingredients for a good agreement. However, if I’m too ambiguous, we still won’t be effective with each other.
An example of an ambiguous technical want is when I ask you to meet with me regularly to share the status of a project. That is relatively easy to agree to. However, if I ask you to meet with me for 30 minutes every Wednesday at 10:00 a.m., that might need some negotiation. The latter is more specific and will help us reach a deal that works for both of us.
For a vague relational want, I might ask you for your support on a project. Again, it is easy to say yes. It also is so ambiguous that neither one of us will be satisfied. We didn’t really agree to anything. At best, you will support me in the way you want to. And, it may or may not align with what I want. Most likely, it won’t align. I need to be more specific in my initial ask.
A great antidote to an ambiguous agreement is to ask yourself, “What would it look like?’ In this example, instead of asking for support, I would ask myself, “What would it look like if you were supporting me?” To get more specific and less ambiguous, I could ask you to introduce me to your team and be an advocate for our project. Again, this might take some more time to negotiate, but in the end, we will build a much more effective relationship by being specific. Specificity is the antidote to ambiguous agreements.
I have found that the relational elements of an agreement are the hardest to get specific about. I am more comfortable asking for support, collaboration, partnership, buy-in, sponsorship, etc., but I am less comfortable describing what each of these would look like. We end up with poor agreements because we don’t get specific.
So, if you find yourself frustrated with one of your relationships, reflect on how specific you were when you asked them for something. If you were ambiguous, re-negotiate the agreement with specifics.
Ambiguity is the poison for good agreements, and specificity is the antidote.
Article by Jeff Evans
Learn more about making good agreements here.
