I kept falling into the same trap with Bec during conversations.
I would talk about what we were talking about.
Let me explain.
We’d sit down to work through something important, but rather than resolve the issue I’d keep trying to define it.
And once I opened that door, the whole conversation would drift.
We’d spend most of our time trying to label the conversation instead of just having it.
In the moment, I felt constructive, like I was laying the groundwork for a meaningful outcome.
But I was just causing a lot of frustration and wasted energy (for both sides).
Bec would need to tell me that I’m talking about talking about it to bring me back on track.
The irony of this is that a lot of coaching clients were coming to me about this happening in meetings at work.
This happens all the time.
What starts as a clear problem to solve quickly derails when someone tries to reframe it mid-discussion, thinking they’re helping clarify but actually muddying the waters.
And just like that, the conversation veers off course.
Everyone starts weighing in on what the meeting is actually about, and suddenly you’re in a whole new discussion.
The original issue then gets lost, and everyone leaves without making progress on the thing that mattered.
There’s a place for clarity, of course.
But you don’t need to perfectly label a conversation to make it valuable.
You just need to stay with it.
My conversations with Bec have improved a lot by me consciously trying to get out of my own way.
If you’re the same, it will help a lot to distinguish between the conversation and how you’re having it.
Because you’ll gain clarity by staying with the conversation, rather than staying outside it.