SLAUGHTER: Learn how to say 'no' at work

Robby Slaughter
September 19, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

For most Hoosiers, work is the process of accepting responsibility. Ambitious employees actually pursue more duties, perhaps because they believe putting in long hours is the fastest route to promotion and career advancement.

Whether we do so out of fear, greed or a sense of duty, relentlessly volunteering for more work is one of the worst choices we can make at the office. Instead, we must bring back a term we’ve intentionally forgotten: the word “no.”

It might seem like declining a request from a colleague or a supervisor is a terrible idea. After all, don’t satiated co-workers make for happy co-workers? But there’s something more to the rat race of work than receiving and executing directives. Great organizations don’t just do, they ask why and learn to do better.

The reason your boss wants you to complete a research project is the same reason your colleagues wants you to help them find a missing client file. From the vantage point of the person asking, the work has to be done. If anybody helps out, they believe the task will be completed more quickly, thus benefiting the organization overall.

But this argument ignores perhaps the most fundamental aspect of modern work: specialization. The human resources specialist is not an information technology expert; the graphic designer is not an account manager; the receptionist is not a sales representative; and the vice president of finance is not a copy editor.

Yet when you ask a cube-mate to look at something wonky on your computer, to e-mail the client with an update, to call a prospect with a new promotion, or to edit your memo to the board, you are unconsciously denying their years of effort in becoming a highly focused expert. You are requesting they do something they really don’t know how to do.

Unfortunately, most of us are on the receiving end of workplace assignments. We end up accepting the task. It takes us longer than a qualified expert and we probably don’t complete the work to the same level of quality. Since we did finish, we are not incompetent, but we’re not exactly a competent practitioner, either. Instead, we are countercompetent, stumbling over the finish line long after one would expect and with many bruises and false paths along the way. This is no way to work.

Instead, we must learn to sometimes say “no.” This can require a bit of spin. Try these lines on for size:

“I’d love to help you out, but that’s really not my area of expertise.”

“Absolutely! But I have to allocate some extra time to learn how to complete this task. Is this what you’d prefer?”

“I really feel honored that you are asking me, but I have to admit I’m probably not the best choice for this project.”

“Do you mind if I research this a bit before I give you an answer? I don’t want to say ‘yes’ unless I’m sure I can learn enough about the field to complete this task correctly.”

“My schedule is full, but I’m happy to shuffle it around to learn more about this project and try to complete it. Can you help me decide how to prioritize?”

Each of these suggestions guides the process from issuing a request to having a conversation.

If it’s a task that’s already part of your job description, completing the work is just a matter of finding time. But if you are assigned work that’s not something you were hired to do, it’s an opportunity to discuss why it benefits the organization and whether you are the best person to do the work. That’s a sign of true loyalty: a commitment to success stronger than your own personal pride.•


Slaughter is a principal with Slaughter Development, an Indianapolis business-process and work-flow consulting company.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. The $104K to CRC would go toward debts service on $486M of existing debt they already have from other things outside this project. Keystone buys the bonds for 3.8M from CRC, and CRC in turn pays for the parking and site work, and some time later CRC buys them back (with interest) from the projected annual property tax revenue from the entire TIF district (est. $415K / yr. from just this property, plus more from all the other property in the TIF district), which in theory would be about a 10-year term, give-or-take. CRC is basically betting on the future, that property values will increase, driving up the tax revenue to the limit of the annual increase cap on commercial property (I think that's 3%). It should be noted that Keystone can't print money (unlike the Federal Treasury) so commercial property tax can only come from consumers, in this case the apartment renters and consumers of the goods and services offered by the ground floor retailers, and employees in the form of lower non-mandatory compensation items, such as bonuses, benefits, 401K match, etc.

  2. $3B would hurt Lilly's bottom line if there were no insurance or Indemnity Agreement, but there is no way that large an award will be upheld on appeal. What's surprising is that the trial judge refused to reduce it. She must have thought there was evidence of a flagrant, unconscionable coverup and wanted to send a message.

  3. As a self-employed individual, I always saw outrageous price increases every year in a health insurance plan with preexisting condition costs -- something most employed groups never had to worry about. With spouse, I saw ALL Indiana "free market answer" plans' premiums raise 25%-45% each year.

  4. It's not who you chose to build it's how they build it. Architects and engineers decide how and what to use to build. builders just do the work. Architects & engineers still think the tarp over the escalators out at airport will hold for third time when it snows, ice storms.

  5. http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/duke-energy-customers-angry-about-money-for-nothing