Never add consequences during problem‑solving if you want real buy‑in

Hard - Requires significant effort Recommended

A family set out to help an overweight dog get healthy. They started well, listing walks, measuring food, and deciding who would do which task. Then one child asked, “What happens if someone forgets?” Arguments erupted over penalties, and the plan died before the dog took a single lap around the block. The parent later noticed the pattern: whenever they mixed planning with punishment, trust evaporated.

They tried again with a clearer process. The parent opened with the purpose, “We want our dog healthy and happy.” They brainstormed without judgment, then chose a simple system: a feeding scoop marked at the right level, a walk schedule taped by the door, and a Sunday five‑minute check‑in. When a child raised the consequence question, the parent said, “We’re designing for success. If something slips, we’ll adjust at our check‑in.” The tone stayed collaborative. No one felt set up to fail.

By week’s end, the dog was already more energetic. At the check‑in, they tweaked the walk time to after dinner because mornings were chaotic. Compliance improved not because anyone feared a penalty, but because the system fit their real life.

This approach aligns with research on psychological safety and problem solving. When people fear future punishment, they shift from creative thinking to self‑protection. Mixing planning with consequences poisons the well. Separating design from enforcement increases ownership, which raises follow‑through. A brief, predictable review anchors accountability without drama. If patterns persist, you still have options to protect what matters, but you don’t mortgage trust while you’re trying to build it.

Open with a purpose everyone cares about, fill a page with ideas before you judge them, then pick small visible roles and a short check‑in time. When someone pushes for penalties, hold the line kindly: today is for design, not discipline, and we’ll adjust at the check‑in. Put the plan where everyone can see it and make the first review fast and friendly. Try it this week with one nagging family task.

What You'll Achieve

Internally, you cultivate patience and trust in a process instead of relying on fear. Externally, you’ll see better follow‑through and plans that survive past day one because they fit people’s realities.

Separate planning from enforcement

1

State the shared purpose first

Name the outcome you all care about, like a healthy pet or peaceful bedtime. Purpose builds unity.

2

Brainstorm without evaluation

Capture every idea, silly or serious, before judging. This increases creativity and ownership.

3

Decide roles and a check‑in

Choose who does what and set a brief follow‑up time. Keep tasks small and visible.

4

Refuse the consequence trap

If someone asks, “What if I don’t?”, say, “We’re designing for success today. We’ll revisit what’s not working at check‑in.”

Reflection Questions

  • Where do I mix planning with threats and see motivation collapse?
  • What small weekly check‑in could keep our plan alive?
  • How can I rephrase consequence questions to keep us in design mode?

Personalization Tips

  • Family pet plan: Assign feeding, walking, and an alarm check‑off, then review Sunday nights.
  • Homework plan: Time‑box to sixty minutes max with a timer, split across subjects, and note to teacher if time expires.
How to Talk So Kids Will Listen & Listen So Kids Will Talk
← Back to Book

How to Talk So Kids Will Listen & Listen So Kids Will Talk

Adele Faber 1999
Insight 4 of 9

Ready to Take Action?

Get the Mentorist app and turn insights like these into daily habits.