Disciplined Conversation

Part of working in pseudo-management over the years has been exposure to many different styles of conversation. Not particularly the content per se, but rather the structure. One specific style has been critical to communication across a broad spectrum of people ---some skilled communicators employ it naturally; others have picked up the technique with a few simple pointers and, through a little trial and error, have rapidly found it indispensable.

One of my job descriptions in the past has been assisting some pretty hardcore geeks, some of which were actually frightening others on our staff because of their odd ways of interaction, by helping them to communicate more effectively. Most of my "cases" have turned out well, especially when communication was presented to them as a "technology." Some even became scarily skilled once they understood how to "hack" their style.

Anyway, I'll talk about the really cool style last but first, here are a few that one typically comes across in the workplace (and perhaps in life):

1. Didactic communication. Probably the most common. Essentially this is two or more people talking to themselves. They will take a word, a phrase or an idea from another's sentence and then relate it to themselves or their experiences... kind of like:

"Man, I almost squashed a squirrel on the way to work, sucker must have changed his mind about 5 times before deciding he really didn't want to cross the road anyway!"

"I almost ran over a skunk once."

"My neighbor got sprayed by a skunk, you know what the best way to take the smell off is?"

This is not all bad, in fact, it can be a fun way of finding a lot out about each other; where it breaks down is when nothing is really registering other than a springboard for returning attention back to self or one's own interests. Usually ends up with both parties getting bored with one another quickly.

2. Pedantic. This is when a "communicator" feels compelled to climb on their soapbox for a particular issue and "instruct" the other person on the correct perspective. Usually responded to by the didactic style above where the "listener" tries to wrench the conversation back to something more interesting (to them) and the pendantic vehemently resists.

Can be entertaining to outside observers.

This style can be instructive sometimes, but often the pedant mistakes polite consideration of their viewpoint for a passive receptacle of their superior knowledge.

My work cases in the techno-geek spectrum were usually a combination of #1 where they waited for any word that would connect to something they felt passionate about and #2 where they would then launch on a pedantic diatribe about whatever issue was triggered in their associative neurologies.

3. Debate. This is usually listening with a filter; rather than considering the opposing point of view, one is looking for weaknesses to assert one's own vantage in an attempt to convince another to share our perspective because it is the only intelligent way to think about the issue :-) Been guilty of that on numerous occassions.

Generally the most productive way to interact is none of the above. Although in the context of blogs and forums and such they are fairly prevalent because the dynamic nature of real-time interaction is missing. But where interaction is available the following has been, in my experience, the most effective style. It is especially important when working toward a common solution or maximizing the value of a professional conversation.

4. Dialog.

The "discipline" of dialog is simply observing the following rules:

# You prefer a certain position but do not cling to it.
# You are ready to listen to others.
# Your mindset is not one of 'convincing others that your way is right' but of asking what you can learn from them.
# It is recognising that other people’s input will help you refine your own ideas or reveal your misconceptions.
# It is not argument or debate. It is not win-lose. In dialogue all sides win by coming up with a more appropriate solution than a single person could ever have. It is win-win.

Simple in theory and powerful in practice.