Here is an excerpt from an article written by Kathleen Kelley Reardon for Harvard Business Review and the HBR Blog Network. To read the complete article, check out the wealth of free resources, obtain subscription information, and receive HBR email alerts, please click here.

* * *

Every person is at least 75% responsible for how others treat them. Our verbal and nonverbal actions limit or expand the options of others. For example, if someone asks, “How are you?” as he or she walks by, you know better than to turn around and walk with them in order to provide an extensive answer. By continuing to walk past, the person signals that only a nod or brief reply is expected. However, if that person were to stop and look you in the eye when asking the same question, your options change. Their behavior has invited more than a reflexive answer.

We’re all creatures of habit, and communication patterns help us avoid having to think about everything we utter. But when we slip into patterns solely because we’ve failed to develop other response choices, we become predictable. If you are known for a tendency to avoid conflict, for example, others can generate conditions that will cause you to pull back, apologize, or walk away. You abdicate a portion of your 75% responsibility. That’s not good!

But if we have a repertoire of replies and comebacks at our fingertips, we can opt out of predictable patterns. For example, it’s possible to learn to treat some rude questions as objective queries, find some element of logic in a seemingly ridiculous comment, or respond to an insult as though it were accidental. In this way, instead of becoming victimized by habitual patterns, we become arbiters of what happens to us.

Such skill is especially important in harsh political climates where what is said is often not what is meant. Highly political work arenas require a degree of street smarts to survive and thrive. It’s important to know effective ways of responding to tough situations.

What if a person tells you one thing, but then you hear that he or she said something quite different to others? This isn’t uncommon in highly politicized organizations. Should you let it pass? Hold a grudge? Never trust that person again? Address the situation directly? With a repertoire of responses, you have options. You might even be able to prevent such situations from happening to you in the future by selecting an effective response shortly after the initial offense — a response that causes the offending person to think twice next time. Whether you are new to stretching your comeback repertoire or an experienced hand, it’s useful to have various responses readily available. The following “R-List” of categorized tactics can help you do just that. When responding to a potentially negative situation, facility with them can help avoid damage to an important relationship or disarm a threat to your credibility:

* * *

Here is a direct link to the complete article.

Kathleen Kelley Reardon is Professor Emerita at the University of Southern California Marshall School of Business and an expert in workplace politics, persuasion and negotiation. She is the author of Amazon bestsellers The Secret Handshake, It’s All Politics, and Comebacks at Work. Here’s a link to her blog and art website.