How would you prefer to receive difficult news?

[mememyname]

How would you prefer to receive unwelcome news?
Face to face, over the phone or by private message/email?

Here's the scenario, an associate in my industry has just won a contract that I was previously looking after. I wasn't aware I'd lost the contract, so it was all news to me. I actually introduced the associate to said company.

Associate tried to set up a face to face with me to deliver the news (and ask my advice!) I was having the week from hell so declined / tried to postpone giving that as my reason. They then pushed for a phone call and again I put them off till the following week. Finally they private messaged me.
I was shocked and surprised at the news and a little upset at how the whole scenario played out.

Now I've had time to think about it, it would have been even more shocking and upsetting (for me) to have had this played out face to face or in a phone call.

Like when people say they were dumped by text message - yes please, I'd rather not show you my pain and prefer not to lose my composure publicly.

Personally I think it is more respectful to deliver news like this face to face. Dumping by text with no prior warning of issues for example is a coward's way out.

Face to face always, then phone, then email and message only as a last resort, if someone messaged me this sort of news without making any attempt at F2F or call I'd be furious.

But I'm a very F2F person, I hate WFH, socially my preferences are the same, in person > call > message

I’d much prefer to receive a message or email. I absolutely HATE being told face to face. I don’t know what to do with my face or what to say. I feel like they’re just watching me to see how I’ll react - like I’m a performing monkey. It’s so cringey.

Yes I think it may come down to personality as to how you'd prefer to hear the news

Phone is my preference. It is human but a bit shielded.

same lol

Face to face, but that's just me.

personally id have email, because then i can digest and analysis etc

I’ve noticed that people who think it’s ‘cowardly’ to deliver bad news by text are often people who relish making a scene.

They feel that if you’re breaking bad news you have a moral responsibility to endure being lashed out at and made uncomfortable, and you’re getting away with something if you don’t have to witness tears and rage.

I’m all for being dumped by text, sacked in an email, etc.

@chirrupybirddon't be ridiculous. Why assume such a nasty thing?
OP I though you were talking about a death or something. A work thing couldn’t care less - you win some you lose some. A more personal event I think a letter unless it needed me to act immediately.

It depends on the news to be honest. But mostly by message, so I can construct my reply.

However I was made redundant and it was mostly done via email with an external HR company doing the initial news teams call with me. That was actually brutal and I'd have rather someone I actually knew had told me on a phone call or face to face.

I might have got the wrong end of the stick, but why was the associate telling you? Don’t you have a boss? Shouldn’t they have told you? Or, shouldn’t the company have told you? I don’t know what industry you’re in, so maybe I’m not understanding this method.

I’m a manager. I would always tell someone face to face, ideally. I think that’s the most professional way. I can then explain the reason, see if you have any questions and ensure your welfare is covered.
If that wasn’t possible, I’d arrange a teams call. Absolute last resort would be via email.

Well you couldn’t be more wrong about me, I hate making a fuss and have never made a scene over being dumped, being made redundant, being passed over for promotion or whatever. But for me it is impersonal and discourteous to deliver bad news by message and yes, cowardly as you are distancing yourself from any response. Click, send, job done, out of sight out of mind is how it comes over to me. Rather than “can we have an adult discussion”.

How long until marriage proposals go online?

Given the people who complain the ring wasn't what they wanted/they didn't get their hair done/didn't get the photos, probably not long. And there might be some logic to it (proper time to think about things, less embarrassment).

But no, to me things like ending a marriage/relationship/news about a friend being ill etc should be face to face-we're human.

Work stuff-I'm probably with you on that, OP. But it is different.

See but I would never send an email and then forget about it! I’d be ruminating endlessly.

Telling someone difficult news in person to their face always feels a bit sadistic, like I’m not allowing them the opportunity of privacy and dignity.

I’ll bet a lot of our preferences are to do with how we were raised. Anyone who was brought up in a culture of punishment by humiliation & public dressing-downs probably prefers a bit of space to lick their wounds, and assumes voyeuristic intent in anyone who wants to watch their reaction as they hear something disappointing or sad.

Message or email, always. The idea that it's 'cowardly' not to do things face to face is odd, and although I appreciate some people prefer bad news face to face, I think a well thought-out message that allows the reader space and time is safer knowing the whole.

When someone insists on face to face it makes me think a) they want to say stuff that they don't want to be held accountable for, or b) they want to be in the position of knowing the bad news and having a chance to prepare what they are going to say when they know the recipient will be surprised/shocked/saddened by the news and have to respond on the fly without having a chance to process it or sort out their thoughts or c) both.

It effectively removes the recipient's right to reply, because saying anything in the face-to-face meeting risks blurting out something you'd rather have had a chance to think about, and following up with an email will be dismissed as 'cowardly' by that kind of person and also feel like a bit of an 'opportunity missed' in a way that responding to an email or message containing bad news does not.

No, following up with an email is fine, but the initial delivery face to face is definitely my preference. The receiver is perfectly entitled (F2F) to say OK, when I’ve had time to think about this I would like to email you to discuss. Unless I needed a paper trail I’d never discuss by email or message though (as a receiver), far too much room for misinterpretation through tone, expression etc and making things worse.

Maybe the ideal middle ground is preparing someone in advance that a conversation might be difficult or sensitive, and then asking if they’d prefer to speak in person or via Zoom / phone.

I prefer messages or emails.

Personally, I prefer a telephone call with a tiny heads up an hour or so in advance that it is serious if possible. Gives me a chance to prepare but not overthink. My face can’t be seen if I go red / I get teary. I can ask immediate questions / clarification if needed and get a sense of how the person delivering the news feels about it. I don’t spend ages agonising over if / how / what to write back if it was an email or message and then be wondering what their response will be.

In your case, OP, I don’t understand why the associate would be telling you herself, rather than the customer or the contracts manager? I’d be contacting the contracts manager myself to ask why I’m hearing it about it through the associate.

@mondaytosunday yes maybe from ‘the title’ of the post but as soon as you read the actual post you could see it’s not about a death, of course no one would want a text or email about a death

@IwanttoWFH yep the company should definitely have told me, I shouldn’t have heard it first from an associate.

We are both external service providers to the company, so no ‘boss’ per se

@VoltaireMittyDream I love your take on this and very much agree

@DysmalRadius yes x 100!

@WhatYouEgg the contracts manager 100% should have told me and my associate appeared to be unaware that I didn’t already know

I understand your point, but I honestly believe they were trying to be courteous and gracious and do what is deemed the polite thing.

I clicked on the post because I thought when it said bad news you meant more like the death of a loved one. When I worked in on oncology I was taught face to face as its easier to read the individual and adapt your delivery and be compassionate. With a cup of sweet tea! Very British, but there is sometjing comforting about it I must say and it forces you to regulate sipping tea, just ad blowing your nose would! Somewhere private - you, them and a support (family member, friend, cancer nurse specialist etc).

So I guess if I apply that logic, I would say face to face, in a private room, with a close colleuuge and a good old cuppa 😉

We found out DH had incurable cancer by getting his biopsy results on the medical app used in our region. Wouldn't recommend that really, but it did give us time to process and research it before seeing the oncologist the following week.

I think work and personal relationships are totally different. I can understand not wanting to be seen upset at work (although I don't think it's wrong to be upset at work), but in our personal lives those people have already seen us have all sorts of emotions.

I think face to face shows always shows integrity. They probably feel very awkward, guilty and embarrassed about it, and wanted to convey that in person (not that they should feel that way as the customer had obviously chosen them).

They are damned no matter how they deliver this news to you, and were courageous to request to meet in person.

I don't think you should let the way you feel about this whole thing rest on this person's shoulders and how they wished to inform you.