Hi, I'm Becky, and welcome to Short Story Long. Today's episode is a little different. No guest, no skill builder, just something that sits at the core of good leadership and a good life. Civility. You might be asking, why this topic? Frankly, it's personal and professional. I'm actually seeing a bit of uncivilized behavior out there in the world right now. I'm not loving it since I don't believe it has a place. I was once the person who used that poison pen. I cringe even now to think of it. I thought it was helping. And I was wrong. So wrong. Today I realize that that behavior has absolutely no productive place in life or work. Sure. Sometimes the snark felt validating in the moment. In the end, it set me back farther than it did anyone else. Today I'll ask you, how civil is your workplace? How civil are you in your workplace? Or in your life? Civility is actually a disciplined choice to treat people with respect. Civility at work isn't about pretending everything is fine and giving that fake smile. Let's be honest. Leadership includes disagreement and pressure. It includes moments when you could use your authority to push something through simply because you can. At its core, civility is choosing not to. It's choosing to treat people with respect when it would be easier to be sharp. It's deciding that dignity matters, even intense conversations. Okay, how about especially intense conversations? Civility means you deliver the truth, but without any dose of humiliation added in. It means you can give direct feedback without contempt. You can disagree without turning it personal. You can make a firm decision without dismissing the people who offered input. And this matters. Now you may be thinking, I don't do any of that harsh stuff. You may be thinking, I only pull that out when I need it. Well, I encourage you to consider how others may talk about your level of civility. I hope you can still say you don't do any of it. Human nature does lean toward defensiveness, so I still recommend a good long hard look. When the environment feels unsafe, your team doesn't think clearly. They protect themselves and edit every word. They shrink back from saying anything in case it's the wrong thing to say. The wrong thing to say to you. Others, well, they probably hear a lot more of it. When you remain civil, energy moves from defense to engagement. The team speaks up and challenges ideas instead of each other. Some say intense pressure creates diamonds. Okay, I I understand the metaphor, and still my response is simple. Humans aren't dirt and rocks, they don't respond to pressure in the same way. Relentless force doesn't produce brilliance, it produces withdrawal. Civility is strength that doesn't need to prove itself. In leadership, it's one of the clearest signals of character and integrity. I'm not talking about simple politeness. It's about cultivating a place where the best ideas have a chance to surface. And I'm also not talking about civility as just interpersonal. It shows up at work. It shows up in how we make decisions, how we run strategy, and how we plan the work. When you apply civility to process, not just personality, your team and the entire organization benefits. And like I say, this isn't just about the interpersonal, this isn't just about the being nice and kind. This is actually about effectively leading a team. I want to dive in here a little bit more into the areas of decision making and in terms of strategy. When we think about civility and decision making, it really means being transparent about who decides. It's about how input is gathered and why a direction was chosen. It reduces all of that unnecessary drama. Unclear decisions create frustration, politics, and second guessing. Imagine what I might call an uncivil work example. Your leadership team is debating a new product launch. Voices are raised, a few people start to offer concerns. The leader cuts it off. We're going with this direction, we don't have time to overthink it. Well, that statement carries no clear criteria, no explanation of how input will be used, and no acknowledgement of any dissent or even discussion. After a meeting like that, side conversations start. People wonder whose voice carried weight and whose didn't. The broader team hears about the decision through hallway chatter or a rushed announcement with no context. Questions all over the place. No one feels comfortable asking them though. The message isn't spoken directly, but it's heard clearly. Your input was optional, the decision was already made, and you don't need to understand why. Uncivil leadership doesn't need to be loud or dramatic in decision making. It's just dismissive and unclear. Perceived disrespect does not stay contained to the moment, and it lingers and it affects how your leadership feels for other people. Even if it seems small, it creates noise. People start replaying the exchange, they analyze the wording, they wonder what they did wrong, and they decide whether it is safe to speak again the next time. That is the sound of energy leaving the work. Instead of solving the problem, they're learning how to manage the environment. They're learning how to protect themselves and edit themselves. When your tone is steady and your responses are respectful, people do not have to decode you. They can stay in the conversation and they can stay engaged. That keeps the focus where it belongs, on the work, and not on surviving the room. In that fast-paced team discussion, tensions rise and the exchanges get sharp. The leader was ignoring it or snapped, can we just move on? The edge in the room stays. People stop engaging. The task continues, but friction comes with it. Team members are so busy scanning for what feels off so that they can feel safe, whatever that means for them. If the environment is too charged, they withdraw. Staying respectful lowers the emotional volume so people can stay present and analytical. Them staying present and analytical, that's a competitive advantage. You see, that same circumstance can actually end differently. When those tensions rise and when those exchanges get sharp, you can step in and say, Wow, let's let's stop for a moment. There's an edge here that is not working for us. Everyone, take a breath for a second. What I'm hearing everyone say is X and Y. Now let's really take a moment and think about how those things can work together. It doesn't take a lot of time, and it keeps that incivility from devolving all the way down into the rabbit hole. In doing this, you've stopped the sniping, which let's admit is exhausting on its own. And you're able to refocus from the noise to actually finding a solution. And that's why you're in the meeting anyway. The pause itself helps, and the acknowledgement plus a redirect keeps the team from going back down into that said rabbit hole. Civility in decision making shows up in a different way. Emotionally charged decisions especially require more thoughtfulness. Layoffs, performance issues, restructures. Leadership includes difficult calls. Civility ensures that even when outcomes are tough, people are treated with dignity. Now I warn you, I could get on a serious soapbox about these things. Separations and difficult message? Leaders, this is the time to be kind, be civil, and build room for the other person's dignity. It matters as risk management and even more as a human being. My short soapbox, and I swear I'll keep this short, is to vent that some organizations notify of layoffs in text messages and emails. Some even send a text message for the employee to check email. Rude, unsupportive. As an alternative, imagine a meeting focused on the harsh realities of layoff communications. Instead of blindsiding team members or using vague language, you treat them like the adult they are. You briefly outline that the position was cut, offer appreciation for work they have done, and share any support the organization might be offering. And by that I mean things like severance or outplacement. Some have asked me, what if they really were a bad performer? My response, right now is not the time to go into any performance issues, even if there were some. That individual is no longer working for you and they don't need your feedback anymore. Dignity matters more. Trust doesn't arrive in big dramatic moments. It forms in small exchanges like redirecting fiery conversations or showing team members dignity in hard conversations. Those steady signals of respect are what build credibility, even when they're heard secondhand. The person you are is the leader you become. Civility is one of the most practical ways to keep those aligned. When your behavior is steady and respectful, people aren't trying to read the room to figure out which version of you showed up today. Let's return to that work example that I referenced earlier. It's the one about debating a new product launch. Your civil self shows up in something like the following. You say, I'll make the final call after hearing input from each of you. The criteria we're using is XYZ, so please speak to that or justify an additional one. Once the decision is made, you communicate the reasoning to the broader team instead of letting rumors fill the gap. Bonus points for acknowledging ideas provided by any of the team members that had an effect on the decision that you made. That's all in making the decision itself, but there's also civility in the strategy and the planning process as well. Strategy without awareness can really drift into wishful thinking. Civility in strategic planning looks different. It means a leader is willing to slow down long enough to ask what this will actually require of people. It means acknowledging that time and energy are finite. It means naming trade-offs instead of pretending everything can sit at the top of the list. It also requires a kind of psychological safety. If people don't feel safe saying we don't have the bandwidth, they won't. If a leader can't tolerate criticism of the plan, the plan won't actually get better. Civility and strategy is a leader's willingness to hear what's inconvenient, adjust in real time, and accept that strong thinking sometimes sounds like pushback. Again, let's reference an uncivil style of a work example. Imagine you're in an annual planning meeting. The leader rolls out a slate of new initiatives, and it's with all of that confidence and urgency that comes out in those meetings sometimes. Sadly, there's little pause, little curiosity about what's already in motion, and the extra work is framed as ambitious momentum. Yay, growth. When someone raises a concern about capacity, the response is sharp. We can't think small. Or this is what we're paid to handle. The tone signals that questioning the load is a lack of commitment. That's when a conversation shifts. Again, people stop naming constraints. The message has been delivered clearly. Challenge the direction, and you'll be labeled resistant. Naturally, the room is quiet, and it's not because everyone agrees, it's because they understand what kind of response dissent will receive. Motivating? Feels good. Everyone leaves committed to doing their best work? I don't think so. Thoughtful leaders often see capacity constraints before others do. Civility in strategy gives them permission to name those constraints. It treats the team like adults with finite bandwidth, not machines with unlimited output. Civility isn't just asking people to give false agreement. It isn't nodding along to keep the peace or smoothing over disagreement so no one feels uncomfortable. In reality, it's what makes real debate possible. When people trust they won't be embarrassed, dismissed, or sidelined for speaking up, they're more willing to challenge an idea. They'll ask the harder question or name the risk others are skimming past. As a side note, historical pain, remember, I said this kind of feeling will linger. Even if it's not you, you might see this behavior in people because historically they have been shut down. You need to offer the alternative that might slow the room down slightly, but strengthen the outcome by opening up very specifically for these kinds of conversations. So imagine for a moment during that strategy session I described, a team member pushes back on a key initiative. As the leader, maybe you thank them for raising the concern and the team explores it openly. The final plan may or may not stay the same, but the team dynamic is stronger because dissent was welcomed and not punished. You didn't just teach the one person. You taught everyone in the room and all that they spoke to after the meeting. Sometimes it's not the right time. And if someone does push back in a discussion and it is the wrong time, an alternative might be to request they talk with you one-on-one so you can hear the concerns. You can say for now, let's go this direction, but I want to hear your thoughts, and I'll communicate back to the team whether we stay with this plan or discuss an alternative based on what you share. Oh, and definitely do that follow-up. Consistency here matters. So the team members know it was okay to raise those concerns. Again, you're teaching the whole of the group, not just the one individual. Respectful discussion is what allows rigorous thinking to surface. Without it, without it, we default to power plays and the strongest voice instead of progress. At its core, civility is not about manners. It is about the leadership maturity needed to treat people as humans first. Leaders who choose that consistently find that performance grows. The team performance also grows when the team feels safe to participate. People do their best thinking when they're not bracing for impact. If every meeting feels like a battlefield, you get compliance and silence, not insight. Quite frankly, you may also get active resistance once they've walked out the door. Imagine a team member disagrees with a strategy proposal you share in a team meeting. Instead of dismissing it, you say, walk me through how you're seeing this play out. The idea may still be challenged, but the person is not. Even the idea is addressed as something to be explored and not shut down. Your approach is tell me more, rather than please sit down, I'm the decider, and you are the doer. As I said, this isn't softness or treating people with kid gloves. It is you showing discipline. It takes restraint to respond thoughtfully instead of reacting. When you model calm, respectful disagreement or questioning, you create room for quieter voices to contribute and more insights to be gathered. It is also a powerful retention tool because people who feel safe to speak up and share their ideas have a tendency to stay in that team and continue to contribute those ideas. Strategic blind spots are really expensive, and they don't just cost money. They cost credibility, momentum, and sometimes talent. You can be losing people because of tone and attitude, and you may not even recognize that they are on their way out. Civility creates the kind of environment where someone can raise a red flag without being labeled negative, dramatic, or disloyal. It allows you to hear there's something missing without taking it as a personal challenge. When that space exists, risks they surface earlier. Assumptions get tested and weak spots are exposed while they're still manageable. You have an opportunity to solve a problem before it shows up in all of its glory. So, for example, before finalizing a strategic plan, you might intentionally invite critique. You can talk about it as if this fails, where will it fail first? That doesn't even give people the opportunity to say, no, boss, that looks great. Instead, you're actively asking for a failure point. Then they can listen without defensiveness and adjust accordingly. I often talk about evolving as a leader. Civility is something that allows evolution to happen. When dissent is handled respectfully, it strengthens strategy instead of fracturing relationships. The quiet person in the room may see the flaw no one else sees. Your civility gives them space and potentially the confidence to speak. When I step back and look at all of this, it strikes me how practical civility really is. It isn't decorative. It isn't something you layer on top once the real leadership work is done. It is the mechanism that makes the real work possible. Let's take a look at what could have been true in that first example that I shared. During that annual planning, the energy in the room is high. New ideas are flowing. Growth actually feels possible. Instead of simply stacking five new initiatives on top of what's already in motion, you pause. You look at the board, then back at the team, and ask, if we did these, what are we willing to stop? It isn't rhetorical. You're waiting for an answer. Someone names a project that's been limping along. Another mentions a reporting cadence that no longer serves a clear purpose. There's probably a brief moment of discomfort. Letting go of work can feel like admitting it wasn't worth doing. This is an opportunity for you to avoid rushing that moment and instead acknowledge the effort that went into those projects. Then you guide the conversation toward impact. Each project or initiative has a time and a place. It's not always a forever project. The criteria becomes what actually moves the needle? What aligns most clearly with the direction we've already committed to? What do we do or not do going forward? Civility is more than the kindness, which I also talk about. When people can challenge a strategy without being sidelined, the strategy improves. And when the tension is reset instead of escalated, energy returns to the work and not on the escalation. When hard calls are delivered with dignity, character is revealed. When you are steady in those small interactions, the trust grows quietly in the background. Your strategy for planning can respect actual human capacity. Execution then becomes realistic instead of some aspirational goal. None of that is soft. It's disciplined and intentional. It shows restraint where giving into ego might be easier. It requires clarity and maturity when pressure rises and ambiguity would protect you. The point is that civility is not about smoothing things over. It is about creating the conditions where the best thinking, deciding, and planning can happen. It's about protecting the space so everyone's thoughts can sharpen an idea instead of fracturing relationships. If we want better decisions, stronger strategy, and sustained performance, we have to care about the environment we are building every day. I returned my earlier questions. How civil is your workplace? How civil are you in your workplace and in your life? Me, I'm not what I was, and I'm not entirely where I'd want to be. I am what we all are, a work in progress, and hoping others show grace and civility toward me while I learn. Thanks for listening. If you found this episode helpful, share it with someone who could benefit from it. Until next time, I'm Becky Fraser, reminding you to integrate who you are with how you lead. Okay, bye.