Simply engaging in face-to-face conversation in the appropriate context while complying with the Cardinal Rules helps people manage their differences and build more satisfying relationships.
But the sceptical reader is asking, ‘What about skills? Aren’t special skills needed in the Dialogue?’
How old are you? You have that many years’ experience in the school of life. You have learned more than you may realise about how to communicate, about how to get along with others. Of course, we also learn ineffective communication patterns along with more positive skills. But, on balance, most adults who are able to maintain friendships, hold jobs, join groups, and survive the crucible of family life possess sufficient communication skills.
Still, let’s not ignore the contributions of the applied behavioural sciences that can enhance our ability successfully. Three social skills are especially helpful: Listening, Negotiation, and Assertiveness
LISTENING
If talking and listening are the two acts of verbal communication, listening is the nobler half.
Listening demonstrates openness to what the Other is saying. How can this receptivity be communicated during the Dialogue? Here are some specific listening tools:
* Keeping steady eye contact
* Not interrupting
* Not giving advice
* Summarising what you have heard
* Making reflective statements, showing that you understand how the Other feels
Hostile enemies don’t listen. Using these listening tools conveys to the Other that you are not a hostile enemy, and that you are open to considering his needs and concerns. Sensing that his needs are respected, your Other will be less motivated to escalate his aggressiveness in order to drive his points home to you. By listening, you are demonstrating that you are not hiding behind the impenetrable shield of sealed ears, but are open and receptive to the Other. You are willing to hear.
NEGOTIATION
We get our needs met by others through negotiation. Some popular writers have equated negotiation with `power bargaining’ in which the needs of the Other are not considered. But here we are concerned with managing differences in ongoing interdependent relationships. Our needs are mutual and reciprocal. Power bargaining erodes trust and goodwill. Such a strategy is short-sighted at best, and self-destructive at worst.
A better model for the Dialogue is ‘principled negotiation‘* which consists of four basic guidelines for interaction.
1. Separate the PERSON from the PROBLEM.
Certain characteristics of your Other may annoy you. Her values may offend you. His lack of social grace may irritate you. As much as you might wish these characteristics to change, they will not. Your Other will remain the same person with much the same psychological makeup, despite your rehabilitative efforts on his behalf. Furthermore, criticising personal characteristics will only inflame the conflict by arousing defences. So how can the situation change? Happily, the conflict can be resolved without changing the person. Do your best to avoid discussing personal characteristics, either your own or your Other’s. Focus instead on the problem — the issues on which agreement or joint action is sought.
2. Focus on INTERESTS, not POSITIONS.
Conflicts happen in part because disputants hold (apparently) incompatible positions on one or more issues. As songwriter Paul Simon melodiously remarked, ‘You want to sleep with the window open, I want to sleep with the window closed. Goodbye, goodbye, goodbye’. Here the issue in contention is whether the window should be open or closed while the couple sleeps. The diametrically opposed positions that the two bedmates hold have apparently led to dissolution of their relationship — an interpersonal tragedy.
The trap of debating positions is that the best possible solution is a splitting-the-difference compromise. The essence of compromise is that neither disputant gets what she wants. Position-based bargaining is a win-lose power struggle.
But every position put forth by disputants rests on underlying self-interests that may be unclear even to oneself. If instead of arguing about positions we probe for our own and the other’s underlying self-interests, then both-gain alternatives may come into view. ‘How does sleeping with the window closed affect me?’ `What do you like about sleeping with the window open?’ By exploring the answers to these questions, it becomes conceivable that both disputants’ self-interests may be satisfied, and that neither must lose.
Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)
Business Interpersonal Peace, Skills for Dialogue
- Business Interpersonal Peace, Skills for Dialogue continued
- What the Employers are looking for
- Business Relationship Conflict, What it can do, what it can’t part 1
- Inspire Team Work Achievement Drive
- The Art of Motivating Employees
- Workplace Listening Skills (Public Speaking Anxiety)
- Business Relationship Conflict, What it can do, what it can’t part 2
- The Power of Networking
- Career Role, Creative Acts of Revolt
- Dealing with Workplace Problem People
Posted by: arlene
Categories:
