Process Communication Model (PCM): Persister

Transactional Analysis

Do you know at least one person that always has an opinion on a given subject? That has a strong set of values and that is the base of most of the decisions that they make? The person that is trustworthy: when they say that something is going to be done, it will, 100%? That’s Persister.

First out of six personality types in Process Communication Model (PCM), the concept created by Taibi Kahleb. You can read shortly about the concept HERE, to have a basic structure around what PCM is really about.

Today, I would love for us to have a description of who the Persister is, how we recognize this type is in the other person’s Base. Meaning that it is their first floor of personality structure, where they have most of the resources, competencies, and skills. The Base also stands for what is the most natural way of communication for the other person and through what kind of lenses they observe the world. So today we are going to discover who the Persister is, how to navigate when this person is in front of us and what to do to communicate effectively.

How do we recognize Persister?

Persister is a person who evaluates the world around them by comparing it to their values and beliefs. Their perception is opinions, and a lot of situations with Persisters relate to comparing one thing to another. How they feel, how they think and how they operate daily against the law, rules, policies, ways of working. While being around people, they’re loyal, and they value trust. They always keep promises: for a Persister it is impossible to even think about not keeping the word. If they say they do something, they are going to do it, no matter what. So, we don’t need to ask them several times a question like: “Are you going to go to do it? What is the progress of it?” because they’ll always do it (in fact, that kind of questions drive Persister crazy).

How to recognize this person if that we don’t have their personality structure yet? You can listen to the words they need.

For Persister it will be: “I believe…”, “in my opinion…”, “we should do something” or …shouldn’t do something”, “I trust…”, “the important thing for me is…”, “the crucial thing is…”.

They say those words because they see the world through the lenses of opinions and values: that’s how Persister is the most visible. Of course, we are talking about being in OK-OK zone. It’s about having an opinion, but also always having a good intention. It’s not about pushing the opinion no matter what or aiming to hurt others.

They have an opinion on every single subject and even if they don’t (i.e., they’re not interested in something), they have an opinion on it. Like: “Ok, so I’m not into politics because it really doesn’t interest me: I don’t want to waste my time on that subject”. Based on that example, we can see that there is always an opinion, even if at the first sight there’s none. What is also important that Persister doesn’t have any problem with saying those opinions out loud. And it’s not about being rude: it’s about being persistent, having a voice that matters (in professional and/or private life). Of course, HOW the opinion is communicated is important (it needs to be said from the OK-OK perspective). If it’s not – it’s another part of the story.

What do Persister need in communication?

The Persister needs communication process where they have a chance to express their opinions. Extremely important for them as well is to have a partner to exchange the opinions with.
To be efficient in communication with Persister, we need to use requestive channel of communication. That means that we need to ask questions about their opinion on certain subjects. For example, when we want to delegate a task, so a chosen employee covers it, the great approach will be telling them about it and then ask about their opinion on it. “Okay, here is a task X, what’s your opinion on it? What do you believe is important to complete it efficiently? What kind of value we can bring by covering this task together?” Asking that kind of questions is something that we can do to get in contact with Persister. Once they are on board, we can talk about the details (scope, deadline, support, required learning etc.).
They value Democratic interaction style. It means that they are really good in making decisions in cooperation with others. They like discussions, brainstorming sessions, they value feedback. And the worst thing that we can do while getting in contact with Persister is to use directive communication channel. Telling them what to do without even asking is something that they hate. When they have an autocratic person on the other side of the conversation, they go into aggression behaviors. By being in that zone there is a huge possibility that they’re going to attack other people. So democratic interaction style and requestive communication channel is a key to success in getting on the same page with that person.
Persister seek to answer the existential question: am I trustworthy? It’s good to feed that question, especially when we see that Persister is under some kind of stress or pressure. For them the following equation is the only truth.

I’m trustworthy = I’m valuable as a person

Motivational needs attached to this PCM type are recognition of principled work and recognition of conviction. It’s important to know it, since when those needs are not met, Persister goes into distress and loses access to their skills, abilities to think clearly. Recognition of principled work means that we are seen as people for what we deliver at work and this delivery is compliant with the rules, ways of working in a certain organization, that is done by the book, or in alignment with a certain process or structure. Recognition of conviction means that we are appreciated with our values, opinions, and beliefs about a given topic. We can feed both of those needs by emphasizing what this person did – not who they are (this is the need of Harmonizer), but what they delivered, by being focused on those two criteria.

When do we know that Persister is in distress?

What does to be in distress mean? Being a distress means that we don’t have our motivational needs covered and we go into a sequence that is aligned with certain PCM type. So, if you have a Persister on the other side of the communication process and their needs are frustrated, they go into distress, you will see 3 steps of the sequence.

Driver: you need to be perfect for me. On the first level of distress, Persister will focus on things that are not good enough, somehow not perfect enough. They will be more into looking for mistakes, than appreciating the things that are done well. We can observe using big, complicated words, or asking complex and difficult questions. When we see that kind of behavior, we can offer recognition, and then proper, requestive communication channel and perception of opinions (i.e. “I respect your work aligned with the highest standards. I know that thanks to that our team scores results that are above average. What is your opinion on an approach X that I invented to do it faster, without losing our quality?). BOOM! We’re going back to OK-OK zone and we can talk with access to the whole Persister’s skillset.
Attacker Mask. If we don’t stop the driver, we go into the second level of distress, which is the mask. On the first level it’s quite easy to take the person out of it, but on the second level is not a piece of cake. Like in a real life: when a person has a mask on their face, sometimes it’s even hard to recognize them. No bueno. Persister with a mask on attack others for not having “proper’ values and live by them i.e. “You don’t care about out customers!” or “You should be more committed!”. They can push their believes on others, treating it like one and only. When we see that kind of behavior, the approach is the same as in the driver situation: addressing the corresponding motivational needs.
Cellar: Despair. It’s time for a payoff. The first and second level of distress convinced Persister that everything and everyone is hopeless. There are no people with values, nobody cares about work according to the principles, processes, and ways of working that are important to have the highest quality of deliveries. Solution? Still the best invitation to come back to OK-OK zone is to offer covering the corresponding motivational needs. It can be extremely hard, yet doable. And we need to remember that the decision about accepting our invitation or not is on the other person, not us.

Being in distress means that we don’t think clearly. When it happens, we don’t have access to our skillset, abilities to deal with different (especially stressful and difficult) situations, we can’t act accordingly (even if we rationally know how to do it). That’s why it’s so important firstly to come back to OK-OK, to our Base, and then – once we are there, go and deal with the situation. That kind of approach is always going to work, regardless of the PCM type. It’s worth to remember the sequence, since it is repetitive. By training ourselves in recognizing patterns we train our muscle of reacting accordingly, without going into distress ourselves. The mask invites the mask: meaning that behavior under distress will have influence on us, and even if we are in OK-OK zone, we can go into the dark side. Being aware of what’s happening gives us tools to protect ourselves and support others in getting into better place.

The bottom line

Persister is a great person to cooperate with. When they say that they’ll do something, we can be sure that will happen, no matter what. We don’t even need to doublecheck: for Persisters it’s impossible to not deliver the things that we agreed on, it’s in their DNA to do it. Their strong principles, values, and a high-level need to be trustworthy make them great partners in crime.

Of course, while being in distress, they lose access to those resources and go into not so shiny place. It requires more awareness, being mindful what happens with us (if we are Persisters in Base), and other people (when Persister is on the other side of communication process). So, I invite us all to observe those behaviors described in the article starting today. It can help us more than we think, regardless of the type of relation, context, or situation that we are in. It’s always worth to develop in this area.

PS. As a first exercise after reading this article, you can count how many times I expressed an opinion throughout the whole text (my base is Persister, so it should be quite visible).

Udostępnij

Komentarze

0 0 votes

Article Rating

0 komentarzy

Oldest

Newest Most Voted

Inline Feedbacks

View all comments

Czytaj także

Leadership

3 Leadership Lessons I Learned from Bad Recruitment Processes

Recruitment is often described as both an art and a science—a delicate balance of intuition, data, and strategy. But sometimes, even with the best intentions, things can go awry. I’ve learned this the hard way. Over the years, my experience in leadership have taught me that recruitment mistakes are not just costly in terms of money but also in terms of time, energy, and efficiency. Today, I want to share with you three of my biggest lessons from bad recruitment decisions that I hope will help you to not repeat those in your leadership practice. #1 The Rush: When Speed Wins With Strategy There was a time when I was desperate to fill a position on my team. Aren’t we really in constant situations like that? I remember that we had a critical project coming up, I was drowning under the amount of tasks I had on my list and I convinced myself that having “someone”—anyone—on board quickly was better than waiting for the better fit. I rushed through the process, skipping some of the deeper evaluations and settling for a candidate who seemed “good enough.” The result? It ended up costing me more than I ever anticipated. The person lacked the skills and mindset needed for the role, and within six months, we had to part ways. Not only did this mean starting the recruitment process all over again, but it also disrupted my work, again. According to research by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), the average cost per hire is around $4,700. However, if you make a bad hire, the costs skyrocket. Studies estimate that replacing an employee can cost anywhere from 8 to 12 months of their salary. For example, if you hire someone with an annual salary of $50,000, replacing them could cost you between $33,000 and $50,000. And that’s just the financial side—what about the lost productivity and influence on yourself? On the team? This experience taught me a crucial lesson: rushing to fill a position is like building a house on quicksand. It may seem like you’re saving time in the short term, but in reality, you’re setting yourself up for long-term instability. #2 The Bias Trap: Judging by Brands, Not Skills Another mistake I’ve made is being overly impressed by the organizations listed on a candidate’s CV. When someone came from a big-name company or a well-known brand, I found myself assuming they must be ready to do the job. After all, if they worked at such prestigious places, they must be highly capable, right? Wrong. One candidate I hired had an impressive resume filled with experience at top-tier organizations. I was so dazzled by their background that I overlooked some red flags during the interview process—things like their lack of enthusiasm for the role or their vague answers about past achievements. It turned out that their success in previous roles was largely due to the systems and teams already in place at those organizations. In my smaller, more dynamic team, they struggled to adapt and contribute effectively. This mistake taught me to focus on the specific person, not just their past affiliations. A brand name on a CV doesn’t guarantee a cultural, personality-based or skill set fit for your organization. Now, I dig deeper during interviews, asking specific questions about their contributions and how they handle challenges in different environments. #3 Ignoring the Personality Match As someone deeply invested in Communication Intelligence (CQ) and the Process Communication Model (PCM), I know how critical personality dynamics are in any working relationship. Yet, there have been times when I ignored this knowledge during recruitment—and paid the price for it. I once hired someone who looked perfect on paper: they had the right skills, experience, and even glowing references. But what I failed to assess was how well we would work together on a personal level. Our communication styles clashed almost immediately. Where I value directness and proactive problem-solving, they preferred a more passive approach and avoided conflict at all costs. Data vs emotions. Logic vs relationship care. Nothing wrong about that, don’t get me wrong! But it comes with a cost, especially when you work in a small setup. This mismatch didn’t just affect our one-on-one interactions; it also impacted the overall efficiency. When there isn’t alignment between a leader and their team members, it creates friction that slows down decision-making and execution. According to Gallup research, disengaged employees can cost organizations up to 18% of their annual salary in lost productivity. Imagine what happens when that disengagement spreads across an entire team! Now, I make personality assessments a non-negotiable part of my recruitment process. Tools like PCM are there to use: I’m not saying that you do a questionnaire for every single candidate since it’ll cost a lot (if you can afford it, go for it!). It’s about using the framework in practice. Listen, observe, connect the dots. Everything is there, you just need to know what you’re looking for. Moving Forward: How to Avoid These Pitfalls Here’s what I’ve learned to do differently: Prioritize Fit Over Speed: Take the time to find someone who aligns with your team’s needs and culture—even if it means extending your search timeline. Remember that fast recruitment can cost you so much more time in the future. Dig Deeper Into Experience: Don’t be swayed by big names on a CV; focus on understanding what the candidate actually contributed in their previous roles. Assess Personality Compatibility: Use tools like PCM or other personality assessments or knowledge from the framework to ensure alignment between you and your potential hire. Recruitment is never going to be an exact science, but by learning from past mistakes and implementing more thoughtful strategies, you can significantly improve your chances of finding the right person for your team—and avoiding costly missteps along the way. Final Thoughts As leaders, we often feel immense pressure to make quick decisions and keep

Czytaj dalej

16 February 2025 No Comments

Leadership

Mastering Tough Conversations: A Tech Leader’s Guide to 1:1s (That Nobody Really Wants to Lead)

As a tech leader, you’re no stranger to challenges—tight deadlines, complex projects, and ever-evolving technology are part of the job. But one of the most delicate challenges you’ll face doesn’t involve code or systems; it involves people. Leading tough conversations with employees is an essential skill that separates good leaders from great ones. Whether it’s addressing underperformance, delivering hard feedback, or navigating team conflicts, these moments can define your leadership. This guide equips you with actionable tools to lead tough conversations effectively, using a structured approach that combines contracting, Communication Intelligence (CQ), including the Process Communication Model (PCM). Let’s dive in. When Tough Conversations Are Necessary: Scenarios You’ll Encounter Before we get into the how, let’s identify the when. Here are common situations where a tough conversation might arise: Underperformance: An employee is consistently missing deadlines or delivering work in a quality we agreed on. Behavioral issues: A team member exhibits disruptive behavior, such as frequent conflicts with peers or unprofessional communication. Career Development: You need to inform an employee that they didn’t receive a promotion or that their role is changing. Restructuring: Delivering news about layoffs or departmental changes. Personal Concerns: Addressing sensitive issues like burnout, mental health, or personal struggles impacting performance. Each of these scenarios requires a thoughtful approach to ensure the conversation is productive and respectful. And none of those are easy: there’s no one-size-fits-all approach so it might sound like a hell to a tech leader. But we have some algorytms that you can use to run the meeting with success. The Framework: Contracting, CQ, and PCM To handle these conversations effectively, use three elements to have a success no matter what kind of situation you are facing. Contracting: Establish clear agreements on three levels—administrative, professional, and psychological. You have more about the contracting itself, the levels and what to do to make sure the contract is fully covered in this article. Communication Intelligence (CQ) muscle: Flex your communication style to meet the employee where they are emotionally and mentally. Managing reactions that are always emotional (you like it or not) is our job as leaders: we need to know what triggers which behavior and what to do to overcome or address it when it appears. Process Communication Model (PCM) Framework: Tailor your approach to the employee’s personality base for maximum impact. Match the language and way of communication they need, not your favorite ones. That’s crucial for the conversation to be successful: you’re leading it for them, not for yourself. Part 1: Contracting—Setting the Stage for Success Contracting involves creating clarity and mutual understanding before diving into the conversation. What are the essentials of 3 levels that are inside? – Administrative Contracting: Define the logistics. Where will the meeting take place? How long will it last? What’s the agenda? Example: “Let’s meet in my office at 2 PM for 30 minutes to discuss your recent project performance.” Take care of this during and after as well. “What is the deadline to implement what we’re talking about?” – Professional Contracting: Clarify roles and expectations. Emphasize that this is a professional discussion and its goal is to find solutions, not to blame anybody for anything. Example: “My role is to provide feedback and support you in improving; I would like for your role to share your perspective and be engaged in the next steps we are going to create together during this meeting.” – Psychological Contracting: Set the emotional tone by creating a space for a person. Acknowledge that the conversation might be difficult but make sure you are focused on the positive outcome. Example: “I know this might be uncomfortable, but I want you to know this is coming from a place of support and wanting to help you succeed.” Part 2: Flex Your CQ Muscle Communication Intelligence (CQ) is your ability to adapt your communication style based on the situation and the other person’s needs and preferences. In tough conversations, this means balancing focus with accountability. What are the easiest 3 things that you can do as a leader to make sure you’re using your CQ muscle? – Listen Actively: Truly hear what the employee is saying without interrupting or jumping to conclusions. Make notes. Paraphrase, check if you understand as your employee intended you to. Don’t assume, ask. – Acknowledge Emotions: If the employee feels upset, angry or defensive, name the emotion without judgment. Example: “I can see this feedback is frustrating for you.” or “I understand that situation is infuriating.” Don’t underestimate the state, let it be, check what kind of information is hidden below this emotion. Use it in the solution creation phase. – Stay Calm and Focused: Keep your tone steady and avoid escalating tension, even if emotions run high. I know that’s one of the hardest things to do: most of the time we go angry when the other person is angry. We mirror each other, that’s how our brain is wired. But by being conscious of that, we can stop the automatic pattern and break it by being more mindful and goal-oriented. When you observe something like that, say to yourself: “What is the goal of this conversation? What I want to achieve here?” That kind of reminder is going to take you back to the OK-OK state and continue with more clear view of mind. Part 3: Tailor Your Approach with PCM—Speak Their Language The Process Communication Model (PCM) identifies six personality types, each with unique communication preferences and stress patterns. Understanding these types allows you to tailor your message effectively. Here’s a quick breakdown: Thinker: Logical, organized, values data and structure. – Approach: Be clear, factual, and provide detailed explanations. – Stress Behavior: May become overly critical or perfectionistic, attack others for lack of thinking or logical approach. Persister: Principled, dedicated, values integrity and commitment. – Approach: Appeal to their sense of purpose and principles. – Stress Behavior: May become judgmental or

Czytaj dalej

8 February 2025 No Comments

Leadership

What Are Most Common Beliefs That Hold Tech Leaders Back?

As a Tech Leader, you’re tasked with guiding innovation, meeting deadlines, and managing diverse teams—all while navigating the complexities of human dynamics. It’s no small challenge. But what if I told you that some of the beliefs you hold about leadership might actually be holding you back from creating an environment where people want to stay and thrive? Let’s take a closer look at three of the most common beliefs that I encounter when working with Tech Leaders and explore actionable solutions to shift your mindset and approach. Belief 1: “If I’m not the expert in the room, I’ll lose respect.” Many Tech Leaders feel immense pressure to always have the answers. After all, you’ve likely climbed the ranks because of your technical expertise. But leadership isn’t about being the smartest person in the room—it’s about enabling others to shine (it hurts, I know). The problem is that when you focus on showcasing your expertise, you risk micromanaging or overshadowing your team’s contributions. This can stifle creativity and lead to disengagement: your people think won’t have enough space to try out new solutions, make mistakes and learn from them to build their own expertise. Solution? Shift from being the “expert” to being the “facilitator.” Ask open-ended questions like, “What do you think we should do here?” or “How can we approach this differently?” Empower your team to take ownership of their ideas and solutions. Remember, respect is earned not by knowing everything but by fostering trust and collaboration. Belief 2: “Feedback will demotivate my team.” I often hear leaders say they avoid giving constructive feedback because they fear it will hurt morale. While it’s true that poorly delivered feedback can cause friction, avoiding it altogether is far more damaging in the long run. The problem is that without feedback, your team doesn’t know where they stand or how they can improve. This ambiguity can lead to frustration, disengagement, and even turnover: all those things are not the ideal situation for you, as a leader, and for your team as well. There are very costly: losing one employee is a cost of 8-12 monthly salaries of this person (in average). Solution? Reframe feedback as an opportunity for growth rather than criticism. Use a structured approach, even the most common ones like “Start-Stop-Continue” will be a huge help (and easy to implement): – Start: What new behaviors or actions could help them grow? – Stop: What habits or approaches might be holding them back? – Continue: What are they already doing well that they should keep up? Deliver feedback with using Communication Intelligence (CQ) muscle, tailor the communication to your employee’s needs, be specific, and always tie it back to their potential and goals. Belief 3: “People leave because of better opportunities, not because of me.” It’s easy to blame external factors when someone leaves your team—higher salaries, exciting projects elsewhere, or personal reasons. While those factors do play a role, research consistently shows that people leave managers, not companies. The problem is that assuming turnover is out of your control absolves you of responsibility for creating a supportive environment. This mindset prevents you from addressing underlying issues within your team dynamic. Solution? Conduct regular one-on-one check-ins where you ask questions like: – “What’s one thing I could do to support you better?” – “Do you think that you’re challenged and fulfilled enough in your role? If not, what can we do to move a needle here?” – “What’s your long-term vision, and how can I help you get there?” By showing genuine interest in your team’s well-being and career aspirations, you’ll build loyalty and reduce turnover. It’s not so obvious to have a leader that actually care and think about their employees’ in more holistic approach. The bottom line Leadership is as much about unlearning as it is about learning. By challenging these common beliefs and adopting a more people-centric mindset, you’ll not only become a stronger leader but also create a work environment where people feel valued and inspired to stay. Remember: great leaders don’t just manage tasks—they cultivate trust, growth, and connection. That’s the kind of environment people don’t want to leave. Ready to challenge more leadership beliefs? Go and listen to the latest episode of Leman Tech Leadership Podcast!

Czytaj dalej

1 February 2025 No Comments