One of the habits of highly effective people is to “seek to understand before being understood.” This habit teaches us to approach life with openness and willingness to learn — as a precondition to our effective contributions to the world. Some of us are quite good a “taking it all in” and processing lots of information. Some of us are quite good at expressing ourselves and having other people understand us. Both are important; and Stephen Covey tells us the sequencing matters.
But what about bloggers? How can they follow this habit? On the surface, a blogger first expresses a thought and then (perhaps) invites comment and participation. It seems bloggers can’t listen before expressing. Upon further examination (introspection) I think there is a path to success for the blogger too.
A few months ago I started reviewing chapters of a book a colleague of mine plans to publish soon. When it comes out I’ll write a full review. Before meeting Katrina Pugh a few years ago I never took the field of Knowledge Management very seriously. Now that I know her and her work, I do. Some people in the E2.0 field don’t care for KM — I think it’s because they have seen so many KM failures. When you meet a KM success, your views might change — they did for me. Kate’s book will break down the nature of conversation and knowledge into segments and steps that are beyond insightful. She’s the “real deal” and I’m very happy that she’s working on this book — you will enjoy it when it comes out.
We spoke about the nature of the blog-oriented engagement, in particular the way conversations change the people involved, in particular themselves. I shared the following thoughts with her:
I agree with your observation. I blog to reach out and invite others in. This process creates engagement. I have to refine my thoughts before blogging – which is good for me. But more importantly I get to learn more when people react. This improves me, while also allows me to engage with others. As an extrovert – I take the risk of being out there, and sometimes being wrong. But getting the engagement is rewarding. It’s also transformative.
A wise mentor once told me why I should listen more than I speak, and should ask more than I inform. He did this in the most remarkable way, since he appealed to my self-interest. He explained that when I enter into a conversation I already know what I know, but I don’t know what the other person does. If I dominate the conversation, the result is that someone else will know what I think. But I won’t even know if I was convincing. But if I listen actively, then I’ll get much more out of the conversation too.
What this means to me: Blogging done correctly is not a speaking act, but an inviting act. Blogging done with mastery is not just a conversation, but a platform for transformation and rediscovery.
Why is this so? Before you hit the “publish” button, you need to think carefully about what you are about to publish. This alone (the thinking carefully part) is incredibly valuable. A good blogger first finds out what others say. Then he tries to incorporate that information and come up with something new to say — hopefully something valuable to the readers. Maybe it’s an opposing view or a deeper insight into something we take for granted. And he has to accept the risk of being wrong, or at least being corrected, disagreed with, or even worse — ignored.
Doing this on a regular basis, will change you. And it’s somewhat addictive.
Bloggers have choices – they can use their blog as a speaking platform or an engagement platform. And even if they use it to engage, they can choose to be receptive to the direction of the conversation or simply use their responses to comments as a way to restate their positions to anyone who might express dissent. I believe the effective communicator is one that seeks to gain as much as they give — doing this by being open to other viewpoints, and allowing for discovery to take place by conversing thoughtfully.
So far this all sounds nice and good, so let me contrast this with a interesting behavior that I encounter every so often. It’s somewhat funny when it happens too. The pattern goes like this:
In a group conversation, Abe expressing an opinion to the group. Barry responds by saying “I disagree” and then proceeds to explain his views. Once Barry finishes, it becomes apparent to anyone listening carefully that Barry actually agrees with Abe. But many in the people in the group will think that Barry disagrees with Abe about something, they are not sure about the details. One thing they are sure about — Barry and Abe disagree. And the funny part is that they don’t.
So what happened? Barry simply began a long-winded message with a simple and clear one “I disagree with you.” Ironically, it’s not accurate. Moreover, it sets up confrontation, not understanding. The avoidance tactic is simple: Don’t begin with “I disagree” — especially if you are in a group of people you work with but don’t know well.
I recently observed this, and concluded that the disagree-er started with the “I disagree” in order to demonstrate he had an authoritative opinion. We listened carefully. When it became clear he was actually in agreement with the other guy, I was left with the impression that he was just a disagreeable person. Leadership failure.
The lesson: listen more than you speak, ask more than you tell. Adopt an open posture to new information. Even when you disagree with someone — seek to understand why you disagree, ask yourself why the other person holds that opinion, and look for the common ground you share, so that even your divergent views don’t cause divisiveness. In this way your conversations will change people, maybe even yourself.
{ 1 trackback }
{ 14 comments… read them below or add one }
Blogging is an inviting act. http://bit.ly/fdCAGn insights – thanks Gil @gyehuda
Gul, what you fail to understand is that you people are terrible at communication becuz just like the fascists u don’t listen carefully enough and then xpress urselves in a way that makes it less likely for people to connect with you and your stupid ideas.
(JK!)
Great post, Gil… in fact, this post is so great that it makes we want to contribute, so I’ll add three things in increasing order of abstraction: 1) using good conjunctions, 2) avoiding overuse of validation, and 3) a bootstrapping issue for bloggers.
1) Conjunctions: In most conversations where there are competing ideas (for example, a brainstorming session) the tone of the conversation can be improved dramatically simply by replacing the word “but” with the word “and.” Even with validation (e.g. “That’s a great idea…”) the word “but” (“..but what about this other idea”) completely negates the opposing position, whereas the word “and” (“..and what if we also looked at this other idea”) will convey the same message, in a much more effective way. (*Note: “however” or “regardless” aren’t any better, either… and “irregardless” is not a word.)
2) Overuse of Validation: Sometimes people use validation (“I hear what you’re saying,” “I respect that,” etc.) too much, especially in contexts where they are digging in their heels. The effect of that is to make them appear disingenuous… and even less serious about reconsidering their initial assumptions. There’s an art to doing this stuff… and it’s always audience- and context-specific.
3) Bootstrapping issues for bloggers: If you are a blogger with a nascent (or nonexistent) audience, getting input from others can be hard, especially nowadays in the micro-blogging Facetwitterbooking Age that we live in. Questions posed by such bloggers get the response of “crickets” ..or worse, come across as rhetorical questions from a person who doesn’t really want to hear an opposing viewpoint (see #2, above).
Bottom line: You’re asking bloggers ask more questions when they post, keep an open mind and to research their topics better before posting (good advice… most people under-think their posts and don’t suffer from the analysis paralysis / nothing-new-under-the-sun-ism of academia). What else can bloggers do, particularly the ones who are trying to build an audience? Recruit their friends to write comments? Edit existing posts to incorporate subsequent comments (e.g.: http://danspira.com/2008/02/20/long-tail-survival-tip-1-strong-communication-skills/ ..similar topic to this one, though possibly overly self-referential)? Anything else?
Also, I think you once told me about rules of thumb on the length of a blog comment… a comment that runs too long, especially in proportion to the post (or the comment it’s replying to) comes across as over-bearing,
If one is able to and has the time, relentless editing or “boiling down” of one’s words is a useful habit to develop.
You had some other insights related to this here http://www.gilyehuda.com/2009/04/21/practice-inside-to-express-yourself-outside/
Thanks for this post… please keep this theme going! Also, I’m looking forward to reading Katrina’s book… you got me very interested.
Dan your insight is great — and funny. And yes it’s tough to contain so much in a small comment. But your comments are welcome and enjoyed, as always.
Katrina’s book should be a very worthwhile read (I only reviewed two chapters, but I’m sure the entire book will be just as great — but I’ll give it an honest review once I read the whole thing). What I read so far really inspired me and I think it will help me be more successful in my daily interactions at work.
And yes, your three points above are indeed important balancing forces. It can be disingenuous to hear phony communications that are clearly overly programmed by some communications mentor. So I guess I’d sum it up with 1. be authentic and 2. present the best “you” you have in you. The best “you” sometimes is a result of guidance and training in the art of effective communications. But then you still have to be “you.”
Thanks RT @carstenpoetter: Blogging as transformation & rediscovery. Great post! @gyehuda: The Blogger’s Transformation http://www.gilyehuda.com/2011/01/03/the-…
RT @gyehuda: Thanks RT @carstenpoetter: Blogging as transformation & rediscovery. Great post! @gyehuda: The Blogger’s Transformation htt …
Thanks RT @carstenpoetter: Blogging as transformation & rediscovery. Great post! @gyehuda: The Blogger's Transformation http://is.gd/k1sDn
The Blogger’s Transformation http://j.mp/eVqLGx via @AddToAny
RT @gyehuda: The Blogger's Transformation http://is.gd/k1sDn
Hi Gil,
I was waiting for more reflection on this question of ordering–that is, putting listening before speaking–after your previous post. It’s good to hear you expanding upon this theme.
It is particularly interesting to hear this (and your respondent Kate Pugh’s response) in the context of a business blog, since I think of the issues here as (generally) about interpersonal communication. Even more surprising for me was to read Kate’s advice about active listening & paraphrase–strategies which I have learned in the context of Rape Crisis Hotline work and have taught (in a slightly different form) in the context of College Freshman Composition classes.
I am disconcerted because I never made the connection between these areas before in quite this way. Academic discourse requires the comprehension of others positions; a precursor to entering the scholarly conversation is the ability to understand and articulate, fairly and accurately, others’ positions. It’s not a matter of repetition, but the acknowledgment that you are not the only smart kid on the block–that you might disagree with some one in particular regards, but you will still likely learn from him or her if you think through his or her approach.
Roselyn
Roselyn
Thanks for your comment. I think good advice can be applicable in diverse contexts; and this reveals a shared undercurrent — a goal of a good conversation is to create common ground upon which to expand the ground together. Yes, I agree that an academic discourse and a business conversation also have different goals, but consider the interpersonal interaction that takes place in the pursuit of those goals…
Let me contrast this to the style of conversation that I was taught in my youth. I went to a yeshiva as a teenager, where I spent years studying Talmud. There, a good argument was highly valued. We were rewarded for proving someone else to be wrong. We were trained to find weakness or inconsistency in someone else’s words. It was great “mind-training”, and would make us pretty good talmudists, and perhaps lawyers. Not particularly good training to be a nice supportive husband though
. Two things made this work in that context: 1. we were constantly humbled and reminded that we have much to learn before we can be proud of what we know and 2. were trained to be somewhat detached from our argument. Our argument could be proven or disproved, but that did not make us any more or less worthy of the conversation.
When I left that world and entered the workforce, I learned (the hard way) that the adversarial, argumentative, approach was not rewarded or socially appropriate. It made me look like a disagreeable person who just wanted to prove that I’m the smartest person in the room. Regardless if either was true (being smart or wanting to prove that I was), it was counterproductive. But that is how I was taught to behave. I finally learned a new way — one that is far more successful for me. And yet, I still see the pattern all the time with others in the workforce who start off with disagreements instead of seeking to find common ground upon which to expand.
Kate’s wisdom (and what she learned from her mentors and colleagues, Chris Argyris, Nancy Dixon, etc.) as well as Covey’s oft-quoted work reminded me of the importance of this active listening approach — both for the purpose of getting the content well-understood as well as for getting the conversational participants in a healthy interaction pattern. As a blogger, there’s an inherent challenge since the post comes before the comments — but the comments are the best part (proof: your comment). Since I read your comment with great interest, I’m thinking how much better this post would have been if we would have had this conversation first, and I would have had the benefit of your insight. (I guess what I’m saying is that I miss our conversations and look forward to seeing you soon.
).
What do you think?
Gil
RT @gyehuda: Blog post: The Blogger’s Transformation: One of the habits of highly effective people is to… http://goo.gl/fb/mhNXR
Thanks Gil,
I appreciate this post and especially your thoughts about self-transformation that comes with conversation. I could also relate to the story of “Abe” and “Barry”. I see it happening a lot.
One thing you might advise Barry, is not just, “avoid starting with I disagree,” but encourage him to show that he has heard, and play back some concepts before adding anything — and be loyal to even the concepts he might reframe or re-rank. Just play them and say, “I respect you.” That is intensely powerful. I teach people this when we are doing knowledge capture. just be as loyal to the words as possible. And if you didn’t hear well, or they talked to fast, ask them for permission if you are going to paraphrase (and try as hard as possible to be neutral).
Starting with “I hear you,” is more powerful than starting with “I am invincible.” Says a step on the stairs of the Vermont Law School, “Audi partem alteram“. That means, “hear the other side.”
Kate
Blog post: The Blogger’s Transformation: One of the habits of highly effective people is to… http://goo.gl/fb/mhNXR