Project managers are constantly told they need to "learn how to say no." But in the real world—especially when the ask comes from a sponsor, executive, or important customer—just saying no often isn't productive, strategic, or even possible. In this Top Shelf Replay episode of Project Management Happy Hour, Kim Essendrup and Kate Anderson revisit one of the show's earliest "Appetizer" episodes: Say No by Saying Yes, originally aired in 2017. Short, deceptively simple, and still pai...
Project managers are constantly told they need to "learn how to say no."
But in the real world—especially when the ask comes from a sponsor, executive, or important customer—just saying no often isn't productive, strategic, or even possible.
In this Top Shelf Replay episode of Project Management Happy Hour, Kim Essendrup and Kate Anderson revisit one of the show's earliest "Appetizer" episodes: Say No by Saying Yes, originally aired in 2017. Short, deceptively simple, and still painfully relevant, this episode breaks down a technique that helps project managers protect scope, schedule, cost, and sanity—without sounding combative or inflexible
The core idea is straightforward:
Instead of responding to tough requests with a flat "no," you respond with "yes—but" or "yes—and here's what that would require."
"Yes, we can do it faster—but it will require triple the resources."
"Yes, we can release both languages at once—but we'll need more budget or a delayed launch."
"Yes, we can remove that resource—but you'll need to help me explain the downstream impact to the sponsor."
This approach reframes the conversation away from emotion and into trade-offs, which is where real project leadership lives.
As the conversation unfolds, Kim and Kate explore why this technique works so well psychologically. Leaders—especially busy executives—often don't have full context. Their "ridiculous asks" aren't always malicious; they're frequently driven by incomplete information, pressure from above, or a misunderstood business constraint. Saying "yes" first acknowledges their goal, signals partnership, and keeps them engaged long enough to hear reality
The episode also connects this technique to a broader leadership pattern the hosts have refined over the years: what they now describe as "affirm, caution, query."
You affirm the request.
You surface the risk or constraint.
You return the decision to the person who actually owns it.
In other words, you stop absorbing problems that don't belong to you—and you stop shielding leaders from the consequences of their own decisions.
The replay discussion expands the idea further, touching on burnout, executive presence, and why many project managers get stuck in a defensive "control mindset" around the triple constraint. Kim and Kate argue that stepping back—mentally taking off the project manager hat and putting on the sponsor's hat—makes these conversations easier, calmer, and more strategic. When you focus on outcomes instead of guarding boundaries, you stop reacting and start partnering.
There's also an unexpected but memorable parallel: gentle parenting.
The same structure used to redirect an emotional five-year-old ("I see what you want—but here are your options") turns out to work remarkably well with stressed executives, difficult customers, and unrealistic stakeholders. You don't remove agency; you structure it.
Ultimately, this episode is about more than saying no politely.
It's about changing the power dynamic—from executor to partner.
From order-taker to decision facilitator.
From "blocking progress" to helping leaders make informed choices.
If you've ever been handed an impossible deadline, an under-funded scope change, or a request that made your stomach drop, this episode gives you language, structure, and confidence to respond without burning trust—or yourself.
