The framework: “So what / Now what”This framework saved me so many times when I started slipping back into over sharing. Most people start with a very broad what. The full story, the journey, the deep research… everything that happened on the way to this conversation. But they usually go too deep, too long and completely lose track. Instead of sharing chronologically (or play-by-play) use these two questions before you speak, present, or send a message: So what? Why does this matter to the business, the goal, or the decision at hand? Why should your stakeholders care? Give yourself a constraint here. No more than three bullet points. This forces prioritization. It forces judgment. It forces you to stop going on and on and start filtering. And it stops you from falling into the chronological order trap. You don’t need to start at the beginning, you need to focus on the most important thing. Now what? What do you want to happen next? This is where many smart people get vague, and where senior leaders get very specific. You choose one outcome. Not “let’s align.” Not “let’s discuss.” Not “we’ll talk about it next meeting.” One clear outcome: - A decision
- A direction
- A commitment
- A trade-off
For example: - “I need approval by Friday.”
- “I’m asking for one additional headcount.”
- “I recommend we move forward with option B.”
This isn’t just a communication trick. It’s a thinking filter. When you can answer these two questions clearly, something powerful happens. People understand you faster. Your ideas land more cleanly. And you start to sound like someone who can lead, not a nervous intern who can’t stop blabbing. How to stop over explaining at work (and life)Let’s make this very concrete. Here’s how an over-explainer might surface an issue in a leadership meeting. They start at the beginning. “Two weeks ago, we received a complaint from a user. We spent the next couple of days researching because this client has been with us for a long time and it felt urgent. My team ran three different analyses to understand what was going on, and we looked at several possible causes…” There’s effort here. There’s intelligence here. There’s also a lot of information decision makers don’t need and almost no signal. The room is working hard to figure out why they should care. If you don’t give them a reason fast, you lose your chance. Think about it, have you ever met someone at a networking event and asked a simple question like “what do you do?” and they recite their entire career for 7 minutes? You check out after about 60 seconds and pray for them to stop speaking. (And silently wonder - are they oblivious to how they sound?) That is what senior leaders experience when you over explain. Now here’s the same situation, framed without over explaining: “We’ve identified a critical issue with the product, flagged by a client. After four days of investigation, we traced the root cause to X. The best way to fix it and prevent recurrence is Y. I’m here today because we need one additional headcount to implement this within three days. The ROI is clear: we reduce client risk and accelerate time to value. Here’s the budget request. I’m happy to answer questions.” Same problem. Same intelligence. Completely different level of clarity and authority. One version is a bed time story (it might put them to sleep). The other is a leadership narrative. That difference is what executives think of you at the end of the day. And before you say “Maya…but sometimes the context is important…they need more information…” Let me reassure you - they don’t. In fact my rule of thumb is to follow what every good 90’s action movie taught us: ”They’re are on a need-to-know basis, and they don’t need to know” (For movie buffs this one is from The Rock but I always hear Bruce Willis’s (a.k.a John McClane) voice in my head). |
No comments:
Post a Comment