Navigating the “What Happened?” Conversation

When things go wrong or unexpectedly, leaders want to understand what happened. Where was the misstep? What wasn’t anticipated? Why did things go astray? 

The What Happened? conversation occurs so frequently, it’s a wonder leaders are not more adept at it. Perhaps the conversational skill involved is stunted by the very need for the conversation. When things go awry, it is hard for leaders to remain patient and not allow their frustrations to boil over. 

A frustrated leader typically starts the What Happened? conversation with a tone of disbelief, impatience, or uncomfortable surprise. The word “So” normally precedes the question, pointing to an obvious or avoidable mistake. This puts the other party on the defensive. 

By requiring that they explain themselves, leaders inadvertently suggest the other party is guilty until proven innocent. While this clearly creates accountability and the likelihood the team member will avoid this mistake in the future, there is a better way. 

There are two approaches to handle the What Happened? conversation. One is to directly or indirectly assign blame. The very question of What Happened?suggests the other party should have known better or performed differently. The second approach is to reduce defensiveness by creating a learning opportunity from the misstep. 

With the focus on learning and not blame, those on the receiving end feel supported, not accused. Good leaders work hard to promote an open conversation with takeaways for the future, rather than beat people up and teach them a lesson. 

The temptation to do the former is what makes these conversations so difficult, as busy leaders are often baffled by why people make errors and mistakes. Digging in to find the answer seems an intuitively effective thing to do. It usually isn’t. 

Instead of “What Happened?” better leaders ask different questions: 

• What is to be learned here? 

• What is the takeaway? 

• What will we do differently next time? 

Confronted by questions with a learning focus, team members drop their defensiveness and get highly practical about the insights worth acting on in the future. This changes the relationship team members who make mistakes have with their leader. 

Feeling supported in moments of error creates a tighter bond and a willingness to go above and beyond for such a leader. The value of that connection is worth far more than any catharsis gained by frustration. Once again, when it comes to leadership, learning trumps blame.