How Now

by Steve Johnson
<[email protected]>

Steve Johnson has been a technical manager on and off for nearly two decades. At AT&T, he's best known for writing Yacc, Lint, and the Portable Compiler.

and Dusty White
<[email protected]>

Dusty White works as a management consultant in Silicon Valley, where she acts as a trainer, coach, and troubleshooter for technical companies.



When something goes wrong, most people want to know "Why?" This is especially the case when someone we work with fails to meet our expectations, be it an employee, peer, or manager. Why didn't I get that promotion? Why aren't you finished with this project? Why did you send that email flame to Joe?

We would like to suggest that, when dealing with people, "How?" is a better question to ask than "Why?" How did the company make that decision? How did this project not get finished? How did your discussion with Joe lead to your feeling angry?

This may seem like a trivial distinction, but it is actually quite profound. "Why" asks for ideas, abstractions. It asks someone who may not see the whole picture to construct cause-and-effect statements: "Because XXXX." If the outcome was clearly undesirable, most people will get defensive. They don't want to be seen as the cause of an undesirable outcome, so they make "Because" statements that put the cause elsewhere—some other agency or person really made this happen, not me. "Why" is an invitation to pass the buck, an invitation to take an active role in disempowering themselves! In effect, we put them in a double bind—either admit that you screwed up, or admit that you were powerless. It's no wonder people get defensive when asked "Why?"

But managers need to address undesirable outcomes, to make sure that they are less likely to happen again. Asking "Why?" causes lots of bucks to get passed; everyone is defensive, and only in situations where there is great trust in the manager do the "real" reasons come out. Moreover, even these reasons may not lead to better procedures or processes.

Now consider what happens when you ask "how" questions. It clearly does not magically eliminate defensiveness, but it lessens it. The answer to a "how" question is a process that may involve many different people. As the process is uncovered, it is natural to ask questions like, "If we did this step differently, would we have had a better outcome?" The manager uncovers those places that need better coordination or communication. Employees are encouraged to see themselves as part of a team, and to understand better the whole team mission and how they fit into it.

It may be clear how this could be a useful approach in project planning, but less clear how this would help issues like getting angry at Joe. In fact, once you start to see your management job as one of guiding processes, it is natural to see developing your staff in the same way. Because an action, like getting angry at Joe, is discussed in the context of what led up to it and what follows it, you can ask the person who got angry:

• What were you trying to achieve by sending the flaming email?

• Do you think Joe does not want to achieve this as well?

• Can you and Joe agree on the overall goals of the project?

• What effects did your sending the flame have on Joe?

• Was this effect likely to make the project more likely to succeed?

This may not be a really comfortable discussion for either the angry employee or the manager. But it is far more likely to lead to a constructive resolution end than asking, "Why did you get angry?" or by just ordering, "Don't send flames." By asking "how" you encourage the employee to take responsibility for his or her actions. You get insight into how the employee functions. The focus on process leads naturally to suggestions for changing the employee's behavior, as well as yours. So next time you are unhappy about something and feel the urge to convene an inquisition, start asking "How?" rather than "Why?" and see whether you don't find a better solution.