Latest / The Talent Brief / Are We Really Listening, or Just Giving People Somewhere to Talk?
Transcript
- Are We Listening: What if we're getting better at helping employees feel heard, but not necessarily getting better at listening to them? I've been thinking about that question a lot lately. Especially as more organizations introduce artificial intelligence, digital coaching platforms, and employee development tools designed to support their people. And don't misunderstand me. I advocate for AI. I use it. I'm fascinated by what it can do, particularly in learning. Leadership and coaching. But something about this conversation has been bothering me. We're becoming remarkably sophisticated at providing employees with tools to navigate their professional lives. But are we becoming any better at understanding what they're experiencing? And if we're investing so much in helping employees feel heard, are we investing enough in actually hearing them? Welcome back to the talent brief. I'm Jeff Gantor, executive and career coach, and someone who has spent more than two decades working with organizations and the people who make them successful. Today, I want to explore something I've been passionate about for years. The human side of how organizations support their people. And interestingly, it was a conversation about AI coaching that brought me back to it. Let me give you an example. Imagine you've had a terrible day at work. Your manager dismissed an idea. Someone took credit for your contribution. You're frustrated, maybe angry, and starting to question whether you should stay. You open an AI coaching platform and explained what happened. And the response is something like that sounds incredibly frustrating. You deserve to feel respected and valued. well, thank you. That feels good. But I'm curious, what did we actually accomplish? Did we explore what happened? Did we examine the facts? Did we consider another perspective? Or did we simply reinforce a story we'd already convinced ourselves was true? Now I want to be fair here. Not every AI system responds that way. Some ask thoughtful, challenging questions. And human coaches can be just as guilty of being overly agreeable. I've seen it. And as a coach, I've had to examine that tendency myself. Sometimes we become so focused on making someone feel supported that we hesitate to challenge their thinking. Maybe we don't want to upset them. Maybe we want them to feel better. Or maybe if we're willing to be a little uncomfortable ourselves, we want them to like us. But here's something I've come to believe. Validation Isn't the same thing as agreement. I can acknowledge your frustration without agreeing that your manager is wrong. I can recognize that you're hurting without assuming someone else is entirely responsible. And I can support you without supporting every conclusion you've reached. That's not a lack of empathy. That's an opportunity for growth. A coach might ask, What specifically happened that led you to that conclusion? Have you talked with your manager about it? Is there another possibility you haven't considered? And sometimes the most uncomfortable question of all What role might you be playing in this situation? Now we're having a different conversation. Because good coaching isn't about telling someone what they want to hear. It's about creating enough trust that they're willing to explore something they might not want to hear. Over more than 20 years in recruiting, I've had thousands of conversations with people considering career changes. And one thing has stayed with me. In my experience, roughly 70% of those conversations involved people who were frustrated because they'd already spoken up about something happening at work, sometimes repeatedly. They talked with their manager. They raised concerns. Some had gone to HR, and nothing changed. The other 30% were experiencing workplace frustrations compounded by the feeling that nobody was really listening. Now those aren't scientific statistics. They're my observations from years of conversations. But the pattern was hard to ignore. And I can still remember the exhaustion in some of those conversations. These weren't always people chasing bigger titles or better salaries. Sometimes they just wanted someone to listen. Someone to acknowledge that something wasn't working. Someone to take their concerns seriously. And eventually, many stopped speaking up. Not because the problems disappeared. But because they stopped believing anything would change. That has always bothered me. Because I wonder how many of those people might have stayed if someone had taken the time to have a genuine conversation with them. Not a performance review, not another employee engagement survey survey, an actual conversation. And I also wonder how many managers would have Wanted to help but didn't know how, or felt they didn't have the authority to change anything. That's something we don't talk about enough. Every organization is structured differently. Some have dedicated HR departments, while others rely on owners, managers, or small leadership teams. But no matter the size or structure, the responsibility to create an environment where people feel heard doesn't disappear. I've worked alongside alongside some extraordinary HR professionals and leaders, people who genuinely care about employees, who advocate for them, and who sometimes find themselves caught between what they know is right and what the organization is willing to do. Think about that for a moment. The very people responsible for supporting employees may also be working in environments where they don't feel empowered to speak up. That's a difficult position. And I wonder whether we've created systems so focused on policies, procedures, compliance, and efficiency that we've unintentionally made human connection harder. I've said it for years that we need to put the human back in human resources. And I still believe that. But human connection and accountability aren't the responsibility of one department. Their responsibility shared throughout the organization. When someone raises a concern, do we explore it? Or are we already thinking about how to respond? When an employee says they're overwhelmed, do we ask what's contributing to that feeling? Or do we immediately offer another resource? And when someone leaves, are we genuinely interested in understanding why? Or are we simply focused on filling the position? I don't think these are easy questions. And I do think they're worth asking. Now let's bring AI coaching back into the conversation. Organizations are increasingly exploring digital coaching platforms because they can make development more accessible. And I think that's a positive step. Why should mean meaningful coaching only be available to senior executives? Why can't employees at every level have opportunities to develop self-awareness, improve communication, and navigate challenges? Absolutely. But here's where I start getting curious. And imagine an employee is struggling with a manager who consistently dismisses their ideas. The organization offers an AI coaching platform. The employee learns to communicate more effectively. Establish boundaries and manage their frustration. Those are valuable skills. But what happens when they return to work the next morning and nothing about their environment has changed? Have we helped that employee grow? Possibly. Have we addressed the problem? Maybe not. And I think that's an important distinction. Because I keep coming back to this question. If someone doesn't feel psychologically safe at work, how much can coaching actually change when the environment they're returning to remains the same? Coaching can help someone navigate a difficult situation. It can help them understand their reactions, explore their options, and make more intentional decisions. But coaching alone can't change an organization's culture. And it shouldn't be expected to. I often wonder how often we're asking employees to become more resilient without exploring what's making resilience so necessary in the first place. And to be fair, sometimes employees need to examine their own assumptions and behaviors too. That's why coaching matters. But shouldn't that same willingness to examine ourselves extend to the organization? And there's something else worth considering. When employees use coaching, especially AI platforms, they need to know their private conversations remain private. Confidentiality matters. Because if employees worry their personal reflections could be shared with their employer, how honest are they really going to be? And without that trust, what kind of support are we actually providing? Now I understand budgets. I've spent more than 20 years running a business. I know what it means to manage expenses, payroll, layoffs, financial constraints, and the pressure of making responsible financial decisions. And I understand why scalable technology is attractive. But before we assume coaching is too expensive or impractical, have we explored what's possible? Coaching work. Could managers benefit from targeted coaching? Could AI and human coaching complement each other? Could employees have a choice? I'm not suggesting every employee needs a personal executive coach. And I'm certainly not suggesting technology doesn't belong in this conversation. I actually believe AI has tremendous potential to make coaching more accessible. I wonder whether we're asking enough questions about the outcomes. Not just how many employees are using a platform, but whether relationships are improving, whether difficult conversations are happening, whether people feel more comfortable speaking up. And perhaps most importantly, whether organizations are willing to learn from what their employees are experiencing. Because there's a cost to not listening to disengagement, unresolved conflict, losing experienced people, and sometimes losing someone who might have stayed if they felt heard. This brings me back to signals versus scripts, something that sits at the very heart of my coaching work. Signals are the things we notice before we fully explain them away. Scripts are the stories. Expectations and assumptions that influence what we do next. An employee might say, something doesn't feel right here. That's a signal. The script might be, I should just be grateful I have a job. A manager might recognize that their team seems disengaged. That's a signal. The script might be people just don't want to work anymore. And an organization might notice that employees keep raising the same concerns? That's a signal. The script? We've always done it this way. And here's what interests me. What might happen if we became a little more curious about those signals before reaching for the familiar scripts? What might we learn? Not just about our employees, but about ourselves. Our leaderships and the environments we're creating. Because sometimes the most meaningful change doesn't begin with another program. It begins with someone being willing to ask a better question and then genuinely listening to the answer. One last signal. I started this conversation thinking about AI coaching. But the more I explored it, the more I realized this isn't really a conversation about technology. It's about people. It's about how we listen, how we challenge each other, and whether we're willing to examine our own role in the environments we create. And I don't think this applies only to organizations. Think about your own relationships, personally and professionally. How often have you listened to someone while already preparing your response? How often have you often have you offered advice when someone simply needed to be understood? And how often have you looked for agreement when what you really needed was a different perspective? I've done all three, and I suspect I'm not alone. So here's my challenge this week. The next time someone brings you a concern. Resist the urge to immediately solve it, defend yourself, or offer reassurance. Instead, ask one more question and listen. Not to respond, to understand. Because perhaps the most meaningful investment we can make in another human being isn't always another resource, another tool, or another solution. Sometimes it's our attention. And I'll leave you with a question that started this entire conversation. If we're investing so much in helping employees feel heard, are we investing enough to actually hearing them? Trust the signal, question the script. I'm Jeff Ganter, and this is the Talon Brief. If someone came to mind during today's conversation, especially someone navigating a difficult workplace, Or trying to create a hu more human one, consider sharing this episode with them. Maybe it's a conversation worth starting. Thanks for listening. See ya soon. Bye.