The Problem with Saying “It’s No Big Deal”

The problem may very well not be a big deal; if that’s the case, a calm conversation will take care of it. Similarly, if the person wasn’t being nefarious, simply naming the behavior that’s troubling you in respectful terms should allow the person to address it without a big blow up.

Well-intentioned people who’ve made small mistakes are generally capable of listening without reacting negatively.

When you let things build up, you’re more likely to act in an uncontrolled fashion at an inopportune time.

So, when your colleague says something mildly upsetting in a meeting, schedule some time to talk about it or discreetly approach them about it after some time has passed. That way you give yourself a chance to detach from your initial emotional response and to carefully think about what you want to say and how you’ll say it.

True inquiry is a respectful way of testing whether something actually is a big deal and is entirely consistent with the notion of assuming positive intent. For example, try saying “Can you help me understand why you’re doing that?” or “Could you share your data or reasoning on this?”

After all, if positive intent is warranted, a person’s response to genuine questions should only confirm that. If it doesn’t, then you know that continuing to assume positive intent is both a mistake and an excuse for your inaction.

Not everything that triggers an emotional response requires a response. But if something is really no big deal, then you probably wouldn’t use this rationalization in the first place; you’d simply address it or ignore it.

So, learn to recognize this when it happens, and address things before they really become a bigger deal.