🌶️SPICE ALERT
A colleague says “I don’t have time for this conversation right now” the moment you sit down. What’s the spice?
Their opening line signals defensiveness before you’ve said anything — the room is already hot. Name it, don’t push through it.
Turn this into SBI: “You’re always late to team meetings.”
“In this week’s two MYP team meetings (Situation), you arrived 10+ minutes after start (Behaviour), which meant we recapped the agenda twice and lost planning time (Impact).”
A teacher missed a submission deadline for the third time. What’s the “What?”
The observable fact only — three missed deadlines — no interpretation yet.
You need to open a downward conversation about a teacher raising their voice at students. First line?
“I want to talk about what happened in class yesterday — can we find ten minutes?” Direct, names the topic, invites rather than ambushes.
The other person says “That’s not fair, everyone does this.” How do you respond?
Don’t argue the comparison — return to the specific instance in front of you: “This conversation is about what happened here.”
You notice your own hands are sweating and your voice speeding up while giving feedback. What’s the spice?
You’re carrying more emotion into this than the moment needs — a sign to pause and regulate before continuing.
Turn this into SBI: “Your grading is sloppy.”
“On the last set of Unit 3 assessments (Situation), three rubric scores didn’t match the written feedback (Behaviour), which left students confused about where they stood (Impact).”
A teacher missed a submission deadline for the third time. What’s the “So What?”
The meaning or impact — e.g. it’s delaying moderation for the whole team and may signal workload strain worth naming.
You need to open an upward conversation with your own coordinator about feeling excluded from decisions. First line?
“I’d like to talk through how decisions are getting communicated to the team — is now a good time?”
The other person crosses their arms and says “Fine, whatever you want” and shuts down. What now?
Name it rather than accept it: “That sounded like agreement, but it felt more like closing the conversation — did I miss something?”
Mid-conversation, the other person goes quiet and starts nodding without eye contact. What’s the spice?
Silent compliance, not agreement — check in directly rather than mistaking quiet for resolved.
What’s missing from this attempt: “You never speak up in planning meetings, which is a problem”?
No specific Situation or Behaviour — just a vague trait label (“never”) and an unexplained Impact.
A teacher missed a submission deadline for the third time. What’s the “Now What?”
A concrete next step both people agree to — e.g. a revised deadline plan or a workload check, not just “try harder.”
You need to open a parallel conversation with a peer coordinator whose team’s timeline keeps colliding with yours. First line?
“I think our two timelines are bumping into each other and I’d like to sort it out together.”
The other person counter-attacks with feedback about you, mid-conversation. What now?
Acknowledge it without abandoning the original topic: “That’s fair, I’m open to that separately — right now I want to stay with this.”
You realise you’re about to raise three unrelated issues in one sitting because you’ve been “saving them up.” What’s the spice?
Feedback dumping — each issue deserves its own moment; stacking them turns coaching into an ambush.
Turn this into SBI for an upward conversation with a coordinator: “Decisions keep getting made without us.”
“In the last two scheduling changes (Situation), the MLC team wasn’t looped in before they went live (Behaviour), so we had to rearrange student groupings last-minute (Impact).”
A student council mentor briefing went badly and mentors left visibly frustrated. Frame the “What?”
Just the facts — what was said, who was in the room, what visibly changed in the room. No verdict yet.
The other person opens with “Is this about the thing from the staff meeting?” before you’ve said anything. What would you say?
“Yes, it is — I’d rather talk it through directly than let it sit.” Confirm rather than deflect.
The other person minimises: “It’s really not a big deal.” What now?
Reconnect to impact: “It might feel small in the moment, but here’s the effect I’m seeing — that’s why I brought it up.”
The person you’re coaching has more institutional tenure than you. What’s the spice?
A power-reversal dynamic — the conversation needs extra clarity that this is about role, not rank.
Why does SBI work better than “you always / you never” language?
It’s observable and specific rather than a character judgment, so the other person can respond to evidence instead of defending their identity.
Why is it tempting to skip straight from “What?” to “Now What?” — and what’s lost?
It feels efficient, but skipping “So What?” means action gets decided before shared meaning does — easy to solve the wrong problem.
You have to reopen a courageous conversation that stalled last time because the other person got defensive. First line?
“I want to pick this back up — last time I don’t think I framed it well, and I’d like to try again.”
The other person over-apologises and spirals: “I’m terrible at this, I always mess up.” What now?
Redirect from self-punishment to forward motion: “This isn’t about you being bad at this — it’s one specific thing, and here’s what fixing it looks like.”