“It’s urgent”: agree on work you can actually deliver

Find out what the request needs to enable

In Getting to Yes, Roger Fisher, William Ury and Bruce Patton distinguish a stated position from the interest behind it: the need or concern the request is meant to serve. They propose exploring those interests and developing options before settling on a single solution.

The application here is to ask which decision or action depends on the requested work. “What decision will you need to make with it?” is a useful opening. Then ask what must be ready by the deadline and what could follow. Listen before suggesting a smaller scope. The whole request might be necessary, or part of it might not be needed for the immediate decision.

Fictional example: tomorrow morning’s presentation

A manager asks for a complete presentation for tomorrow morning. A colleague says it will take another two days. This is an invented example, not a case from Shachar’s work.

The conversation reveals that the meeting is intended to choose between two project directions. Participants need the differences, the missing information and the decision being requested. Design matters, but the entire delivery plan is not needed tomorrow.

The colleague checks what is feasible and proposes a comparison page: two options, the main considerations and the open questions. The full presentation would follow the choice of direction. Before agreeing, the manager checks that this format suits the meeting and that there is no external requirement for a full deck. They also check what happens to another task already promised for that morning. The agreement makes the cost of reprioritising visible.

Offer two genuine options

Bring options you could actually deliver, and name their conditions. For example: a decision page tomorrow if another task is postponed with approval, or a full presentation at a later date. If another person could help, check their availability and the time needed to bring them up to speed. Unconfirmed help is not available capacity.

Compare the options against the meeting’s needs: can people make the decision with this material? What information would remain missing? Who else is affected? This comparison is the article’s proposed working method, not a table reproduced from the book.

Avoid presenting two “options” when only one is viable. If a real constraint has already determined the choice, say so. A discussion about scope should give an honest picture, even when there is little room to change it.

Finish with an agreement people can use

“Agreed” can conceal two different understandings. Write a short recap: what will be delivered, when, what is excluded, and what must happen to make the commitment feasible.

In the example: “If postponing the other task is approved, I’ll send a comparison page by 9 a.m., covering both directions, missing information and the questions for decision. The implementation plan and full design will follow at a date we agree after the meeting.”

The person authorised to change priorities needs to approve that change. Once it is agreed, update anyone else relying on the earlier deadline. A written recap cannot add hours to the day, but it makes the commitment clear.

A five-minute exercise before your next reply

Choose one request awaiting your reply and write four lines:

1. What was requested, and what do you know about the reason for the deadline?
2. Which question would clarify what is actually needed?
3. Which two feasible options could you offer, and on what conditions?
4. Who needs to approve a change, and who would be affected?

Then write a short reply that starts with the clarifying question, without committing to an outcome yet. If the reason is already clear, move to the options. Five minutes is simply a practice window, not a standard time for resolving every request.

When no option works for everyone

Sometimes the deadline and scope remain fixed and the capacity is insufficient. Raise that gap with whoever has authority to decide, rather than quietly promising work you cannot deliver.

Take this into the next conversation: before agreeing to urgent work, clarify the need, the deliverable and the change in priorities. With all three visible, you can make a decision others can reasonably rely on.