Archive for April, 2011
Assumptions about What Makes a Good Listener
A person on a Linked In discussion I participate in stated that it’s necessary to be empathetic to be a good listener. The author went on to explain that no one will share information or ideas if the listener doesn’t display empathy.
I thought about that assumption a lot and just wasn’t convinced I’d agree. Then I went back to my research that led me to develop Hear! Hear? Your Listening Portfolio®.
The first piece of research that I returned to was from Chris Argyris and Donald Schon:
The words we use to convey what we do or what we would like others to think we do, can then be called espoused theory.
When someone is asked how he would behave under certain circumstances, the answer he usually gives is his espoused theory of action for that situation. This is the theory of action to which he gives allegiance, and which, upon request, he communicates to others. However, the theory that actually governs his actions is this theory-in-use, or what he does. (Argyris and Schön 1974: 6-7).
Their writing made me wonder if the Linked In person is himself an empathetic listener who both theorizes and models the behaviors that lead him to be regarded as a successful listener. In other words, if we observed his listening, would he “walk his empathetic talk?”
Next I went to an interview with Srini Pillay from the Neuroimaging Center at McLean Hospital. I’m only excerpting a little of what he said:
We know from brain imaging that the amygdala is stimulated when we are under stress – and a stimulated amygdala interrupts the functioning of the higher order regions of the brain (those involved in clear decision making). So, it’s an easy leap to say that you will make better decisions if you can quiet the amygdala (reduce the stress). Of course, stress cannot be just wiped away, but there are things that you can do to stabilize the amygdala – things like reframing the issue or refocusing attention on another element of the issue or decision. Anxiety is a very powerful emotion – even if you can’t see it, it is influencing the way you behave.
Dr. Pillay led me to think that not all amygdalae would be stabilized by empathy. As a matter of fact, being empathetic will only raise the stress of problem-solver or conceptualizing listeners (as described in my work). Only clarity, facts, data, and details will provide the problem-solvers with what they crave to settle their nerves. And conceptualizing listeners want space to generate ideas. To them empathy means freedom to think and interact without boundaries.
So we must be careful to acknowledge the needs of others and not lay our assumptions or projections upon them. One person’s empathy is another person’s nettle.
However, I did say in the Linked In discussion that no listener would fault by being respectful.
Why Are There “Yes” Decision-Makers?
London, April 20 (IANS) Some people are born “yes men,” thanks to their genes which make them more likely to follow other people’s directives.
Researchers found that coming to a decision often involves listening to two parts of the brain – one that relies on taking advice and the other on experience.
The brain weighs up the often-opposing views and then comes to a decision to take an action. But Brown University researchers in Rhode Island discovered that some people have genes that skew the decision towards one part of the brain than other.
They discovered the DARPP-32 genetic variation meant that individuals are more likely to do what he or she is told, even when it is contradicted by experience, the journal Neuroscience reports.
The gene means that like “a ‘yes man,’ who is flexible to a fault, the brain is more likely to be influenced by what it is told than what its experience tells it,” the report said, according to the Telegraph.
Michael Frank of Brown University recruited more than 70 people who gave saliva samples and then performed a computerized learning task.
The subjects were shown symbols on a screen and asked to pick the ‘correct’ one, which they had to learn by being given advice that was not always correct.
Ultimately, the people with DARPP-32 were the “ones who stuck with wrong advice the longest, and in a later test they were more likely to choose symbols that they were advised were correct over those that in reality had higher likelihood of being correct.”
Frank said that being a “yes man” might actually be advantageous as taking advice is easier and less dangerous than always having to experience things.
What does that mean for people with different listening habits? Each time you listen well, you rewire brain cell connectors and reshape listening ability; thus you increase the likelihood you will be a fluent listener rather than being a “yes” or “no” listener.
Notes from the International Listening Association Convention
The drive from Greenville, SC airport was anything but welcoming. Darkness fell just as I entered my rental car and booted up Tammie, the GPS. Mapquest said 2.5 hours, a person I know from that area said four, the van driver said three, and the agent at the desk agreed, then said it would probably take longer “because of the rain and fog and all goin’ over the mountains.”
She was right about the conditions, and either I wasn’t aware of just how yucky it was, or my years of driving in Pennsylvania made me foolishly confident. I walked into my sumptuous hotel room at a little less than 2.5 hours.
Most of the conference attendees were academics, many coming to share their latest research, and some to examine the present and future state of listening. I seemed to be the only one there to discuss the application of theory and research to the business world. That made me a bit concerned about how my work would be received, but I need not have worried.
Some of the highlights:
Global listening differences are shrinking with the advent of technology. While there are still differences with cultural norms across the world, people are learning to meet in the listening middle. For example, Americans understand that Asians listen first and answer second; whereas, Americans often listen and answer almost simultaneously. So Americans and Asians are getting better at pacing when dealing with one another, especially in virtual meetings where the technology plays a role in the communication process.
I told the following story about a team I worked with. When the team convened and introduced themselves to one another, one person said to a colleague, “Oh, you don’t look at all like your emails.” That unexpected and simple comment was a profound example of how much we read into all interactions, whether in person or virtual.
There’s growing interest in my perspective on listening as a habit that involves the brain, body and emotions. Few presenters brought up neuroscience and the role of the pre-frontal cortex in directing what to listen to. I went to one workshop on how a physical experience helps to articulate ideas.
Finally. The second morning was kicked off by a man named Manny, I didn’t catch his last name at that time. He spoke knowledgeably and passionately about the Association and the history of the field of listening. I appreciated his obvious depth of experience
Manny stayed for my presentation and afterwards said we should meet for lunch becaue of similar interests. Lunch was dedicated to the past presidents, so Manny invited me to sit at his table. When I sat down next to him and I saw that his last name is Steil, probably the first and most respected name in the creation of listening as a field of study. Lyman Steil. He was gracious and probably amused when I blurted out that I’ve been following his work since I began my research, quoted him in my blog, include his taxonomy of listening in my coach certification. I confessed that I wanted to use his company for ours; that is, until I learned it was wisely trademarked.
We tried to talk, but there were luncheon speakers, which made it impossible and impolite to talk, so we exchanged cards and we’ll continue when we both return to our respective offices. I want to pick his brain about automating his and their business model. He liked the designation and description of the four habits as well as how we’re focusing on listening as a cost/benefit ratio.
I was dubious about whether ILA would be worthwhile—it was a real learning environment for me and a place to interact with new colleagues.
More from David Brooks Writing:
In my last post I mentioned David Brooks’ January 17, 2011 article, “The Social Animal,” in The New Yorker. There are three more pieces that are pertinent to the field of listening:
1. “The orbicularisoculi muscle, which controls this (the end of her eyebrow) part of the eyebrow, cannot be consciously controlled, so when the tip of the eyebrow dips, that means the smile is genuine, not fake.” (p.29).
What has that to do with listening? Body language is a big component of what draws us into listening. If a smile is genuine, we are much more apt to stay engaged and listen.
2. “Janine Willis and Alexander Todorov, of Princeton University, have found that we make judgments about a person’s trustworthiness, competence, aggressiveness, and likability within the first tenth of a second. These sorts of first glimpses are astonishingly reliable in predicting how people will feel about each other months later.” (p. 29)
What has that to do with listening? As a listener it is crucial to pay attention to what is being said rather than who is speaking. Think about the amount of time spent in meetings and how much of that time is wasted when listeners disengage because of “chemistry.” Really good listeners do not make snap judgments.
3. “…we inherit a great river of knowledge, a flow of patterns coming from many sources. The information that comes from deep in the evolutionary past we call genetics. The information passed along from hundreds of years ago we call culture. The information passed along from decades ago we call family, and the information offered months ago we call education. But it is all information that flows through us.” (p. 32)
What has that to do with listening? Listening habits are patterns that come from the way our brains work, our physical traits, practiced behaviors, and psychological make-up. Brooks is suggesting we’re never isolated from our past. So, it is incumbent upon us as listeners to be aware and remain in the present.
The results of The Fluent Listener suite of offerings is well described by Brooks, “…having the ability to read situations the way a master seaman reads the rhythm of the ocean.” (p.32)
By all means, tell us what you’re reading about or observing about the field of listening.