A school owner asked me when to bring leadership up again after a family says not right now. If you’re asking that question, the problem could have been upstream in the process.
Here’s the question:
“Once you talk to someone about joining leadership and they say not right now, when do you bring it up again? And how does that conversation go? Hi Mrs. Johnson, I know you said no before, but how about… now?”
He already knows that script is bad. That’s why he asked. And he’s right that there’s a better way, but it doesn’t live in a cleverer opening line or a “magic” phrase.
There are three things to address here, in order. What happened at the conference. Why there should never be a disconnection in the first place. And only then, how to re-engage a family who slipped through the cracks anyway.
Say a family “no” out loud and it stops being a preference. It becomes a stance they own, and people work hard to stay consistent with the stances they own (Cialdini & Goldstein, 2004). Reopening it head-on invites them to prove they meant it.
Two biases are working at the same time here. The first is the consistency principle: once a person states a position out loud, holding to it protects how they see themselves, so they end up defending it harder than they ever actually believed it (Cialdini & Goldstein, 2004). The parent isn’t being stubborn. They’re being consistent.
The second is psychological reactance. People push back when they feel their freedom to choose is being squeezed, and the push-back gets aimed at whoever squeezed (Steindl et al., 2015). Ask a second time and you trigger both at once: they defend the position, and they resent being asked. That’s the adversarial seat, and you put yourself in it.
Worse, most of those no’s weren’t no’s at all. Matthew Dixon and Ted McKenna studied more than two and a half million sales conversations and found that between 40 and 60 percent of stalled deals die in indecision, not rejection (Dixon & McKenna, 2022). The buyer isn’t choosing a competitor. They’re afraid of getting it wrong. (also see my article on decision anxiety for more)
Their second finding is the one that decides how you follow up. Buyers fear messing up far more than they fear missing out. Turn up the pressure and you turn up the fear, and the family gets more stuck, not less. Every re-ask is pressure.
A lot can happen in that room. Run these five checks before you touch the phone.
Not the belt. The path past it. If the parent can’t see their child two years past the basic program, the leadership conversation is a stranger showing up asking for money. Vision comes first, always. (see article on Past Present Future for more detail on how to do it)
Everyone means both parents and the student (and anyone in charge of finances, schedule, transportation and custody). One parent checking their screen who never said the word “yes” is your no, showing up two weeks late. A student who never said it out loud will tell his mom he’s tired of karate the same week you call.
These are two different things, and skipping the second one is the most common miss I see.
What they get. “He earns his Black Belt.” Concrete, dated, on a wall. (in fact we write on their belt so they remember)
What changes because they got it. “He’ll finish what he starts, and I’ll stop fighting him about homework.” And BIGGER goals when they are an adult. That’s what the parent is actually buying – a successful, happy, capable adult.
An outcome with no transformation attached to it is a purchase. An outcome the parent has connected to their own life at home is a decision. Goal research has said the same thing for decades: specific, personally owned goals drive effort in a way that general encouragement never does (Locke & Latham, 2002).
You graded them at the progress check for a reason. An A-plus family renews on the spot. A B or a C never should have been asked for a decision that day. If you discussed leadership to a C family, you didn’t get a no. You got a receipt for skipping a step.
Options, not one number. Price last after the goal is set, not first. And listening far more than half the time. If you did most of the talking in that conference, you don’t know why they said no, which means you have nothing to re-engage with. The whole conversation that builds this is the Past, Present, Future progress check, and it’s worth rerunning before anything else on this page.
Here’s the part that answers the original question. Even when check number one through five all went perfectly and the family still says not right now, you’re not done. You set the follow-up before they stand up.
That second piece is what makes the first one work. Deciding when, where, and how a thing will happen, in advance, moves people from intention to action at a rate that intention alone never reaches. Peter Gollwitzer named these implementation intentions, and the meta-analysis across 94 independent tests found a medium-to-large effect on actually reaching the goal (Gollwitzer, 1999; Gollwitzer & Sheeran, 2006).
“Let’s revisit this in a few months” is an intention. “Thursday the 24th at 5:15, and between now and then he does the discipline sheet Monday, Wednesday, Friday and you initial it” is a plan. One of those creates a next conversation. The other creates a phone call you’ll dread making.
Run this rule everywhere and the question of when to bring it up again stops existing. You already know when. It’s on the calendar, and it’s a week or two out, not a month or two.
The tone is a coach reviewing progress, because that’s what it is. Nobody is defending anything.
“Two weeks ago you told me the thing driving you crazy was that he quits on anything hard. We put the discipline sheet in. Show me how it went.” Then listen. Then add what you saw on the floor that they missed.
Now pull out the goal sheet, the one from the intro, and do a personal review against it and the Past Present Future sheet that should be all marked up with lots of outcomes. What did we say we wanted? Where are we? What’s the next belt, and what’s the path to the Black Belt from here? That question isn’t a close. It’s a status update, and it does the closing for you.
If they’re still not ready, you already know the ending: another date, another action step. Repeat until they’re an A or they tell you plainly to stop.
These come straight off the KarateBuilt renewal training. Read every one as a way to earn a new appointment, never as a way to re-ask the question.
There’s a reason the semester and the test work better than a date you picked off the calendar. People start over at the edges of things. Gym visits, diets, and fresh commitments all spike right after a temporal landmark, with the start of a new semester among the strongest (Dai et al., 2014). Your testing cycle is a landmark generator. Use it.
Most not-right-nows are one of three misunderstandings, and none of them are about wanting the Black Belt less.
“Because we know training for Black Belt is going to be the best thing you have ever done for him. The skills he learns will carry into his adult life, and I want you to know we’re not going to give up on him. He needs to earn his Black Belt.”
Say it once, warmly, and then be quiet. Don’t stack a request on the end of it. If it lands, they’ll tell you. If it doesn’t, you’ve still told a parent you’re not the kind of school that quits on their kid, and that gets remembered long after the renewal window closes.
Pull the list of every family who told you not right now in the last 90 days. Next to each name, write the reason they gave. If you can’t write it, you didn’t listen. Now, 100% of these families gets a progress check.
Then fix the upstream problem for good. Starting with your next conference, nobody leaves the room without being prepped, setting a goal for Black Belt and Beyond and thorough review and then if it’s not now, a date on the calendar and an action step with their name on it. Do that for 90 days and the re-engage list gets short enough to clear in one sitting.
Lastly, remember the target is to renew 75% or more – if you’re in that range, you may be doing everything well! You’ll still lose a few but have the right target in sight!
Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591–621. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142015
Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. Academic Press.
Dai, H., Milkman, K. L., & Riis, J. (2014). The fresh start effect: Temporal landmarks motivate aspirational behavior. Management Science, 60(10), 2563–2582. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2014.1901
Dixon, M., & McKenna, T. (2022, June 8). Stop losing sales to customer indecision. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2022/06/stop-losing-sales-to-customer-indecision
Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54(7), 493–503. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.54.7.493
Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta-analysis of effects and processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 69–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38002-1
Steindl, C., Jonas, E., Sittenthaler, S., Traut-Mattausch, E., & Greenberg, J. (2015). Understanding psychological reactance: New developments and findings. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 223(4), 205–214. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000222
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705–717. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.57.9.705