The Art of Dialogue
This page is
devoted to principles of dialogue which are instrumental to fostering
relationship and reaching understanding among the different portions of
organizations. When we learn to communicate through our minds, hearts and souls
with the desire to connect to the spirit in one another to act for the higher
good of all we will be on the way to high performance, understanding, peace,
harmony and spiritual progress. Hopefully, articles displayed here will
serve to raise our consciousness on the essential skills of dialogue.
Rights, Responsibilities and Skills of Dialogue
For true dialogue to
occur it needs to take place within a protective environment of mutually
accepted rights and responsibilities, rooted in two fundamental values: respect
for the human person and trust in the process of dialogue. Dialogue
works best when the participants are willing to develop certain skills that
facilitate the process.
| Rights |
Responsibilities |
Skills |
- 1.
|
- Each person has the right to
define him/herself without being labeled by others
|
- 1.
|
- Each person must be willing to
seriously question his/her assumptions about "the other"
|
- 1.
|
- Each person should be able to
evaluate and articulate his/her own attitudes, values and positions on
issues within the context of his/her tradition.
|
|
2.
|
Each person has the right to
express his or her beliefs, ideas and feelings
|
2.
|
Each person must allow others the
same right of self-expression that s/he expects for him/herself.
|
2.
|
Each person should learn how to
temporarily set aside his/her own views and feelings in order to be more
sensitive to what the other is saying.
|
|
3.
|
Each person has the right to ask
questions that help him/her understand what someone else has said.
|
3.
|
Each person should ask questions
that respect the other's right of self-definition, even in times of
conflict or disagreement.
|
3.
|
Each person should learn how to
respond to questions in ways that help others understand.
|
|
4.
|
Each person has the right not to
change or be coerced to change.
|
4.
|
Each person must accept the
others as equal partners in the dialogue, and acknowledge the dignity of
the traditions represented
|
4.
|
Each person should learn to deal
with different points of view while maintaining his/her own integrity.
|
|
5.
|
Each person has the right to
expect that what is said will be held in confidence.
|
5.
|
Each person must agree to hold
what others say in confidence.
|
5.
|
Each person should learn to deal
with others from a position of mutual trust, based on an expectation that
others come to the dialogue in a spirit of honesty and sincerity.
|
Comparison of Dialogue and Debate
| Dialogue
is collaborative: the sides work together. |
Debate
is a type of fight: two sides oppose each other to prove each other
wrong. |
| Dialogue
builds a learning relationship between people. |
Debate
builds a competitive relationship between people. |
| Dialogue
encourages the participants to identify questions and goals they could
share. |
Debate
encourages each side to articulate its own questions and goals. |
| In a
dialogue the goals are finding common ideas and new ideas. |
In a debate
the goals is winning with your own ideas. |
| In
a dialogue everyone contributes to solving a problem. |
In
a debate one person and viewpoint wins, the other is dismissed. |
| In a
dialogue you believe that many solutions might exist, and that
different people have parts of the best solutions. |
In a debate
you believe that there is one solution, that you have it, and other
solutions are not considered. |
| In
a dialogue you are sensitive to each other's feelings, hopes, and
ideas. |
In
a debate you do not care about the feelings hopes and ideas of others. |
| In a
dialogue you contribute your best ideas to be improved upon. |
In a debate
you contribute your ideas and defend them against challenges. |
| In
a dialogue you listen to each other to understand and build agreement. |
In
a debate you listen to each other to find flaws and disagree. |
| In a
dialogue you search for the good parts of other people's ideas. |
In a debate
you search for search for weaknesses in other people's ideas. |
| In
a dialogue you may consider new ideas and even change your mind
completely. |
In
a debate you do not admit you are considering new ideas and you must
not change your mind, or you lose. |
| Dialogue
encourages you to evaluate yourself. |
Debate
encourages you to criticize others. |
| Dialogue
promotes open-mindedness, including an openness to being wrong. |
Debate
creates a close-minded attitude, a determination to be right. |
| Dialogue
encourages you to see all sides of an issue. |
Debate
encourages you to see only two different sides of an issue. |
| Dialogue
invites keeping the topic open after the discussion formally ends. |
Debate,
by creating a winner and a lose, discourages further discussion. |
by Martha Merrill
Peter Senge wrote The Fifth Discipline, The Art and
Practice of the Learning Organization, which, when published in 1990,
became a resource book for organizations interested in team learning. Senge
looks at the "paradigm shifts" needed for an organization to become a
learning organization, or an organization that learns collectively.
Senge's ideas on dialogue and its use in learning
organizations draw heavily on the work of David Bohm, a contemporary quantum
physicist. In introducing his chapter on "Dialogue and Discussion,"
Senge discusses Bohm's treatment of the subject of dialogue:
Dialogue, as it turns out, is a very old idea revered by
the ancient Greeks and practiced by many "primitive" societies such as
the American Indians. Yet, it is all but lost to the modern world. All of us
have had some taste of dialogue--in special conversations that begin to have a
"life of their own," taking us in directions we could never have
imagined nor planned in advance. (Senge, 1990, p. 239)
Senge uses Bohm's work to define and examine such concepts
as quantum theory, systems perspective, mental models, incoherent thought, and
synergy as they are related to dialogue. Bohm's thinking and writing saturate
Senge's discussion of dialogue. For example, Senge quotes Bohm in identifying
the three basic conditions necessary for dialogue:
- All participants must "suspend" their
assumptions, literally to hold them "as if suspended before us";
- All participants must regard one another as colleagues;
- There must be a 'facilitator' who 'holds the context'
of dialogue. (Senge, p. 243)
An in-depth examination of Bohm's conditions follows the
discussion of the necessary conditions. Only when Senge begins to examine
dialogue from a team learning perspective does he offer some insight into his
own perception of dialogue and its uses:
A unique relationship develops among team members who
enter into dialogue regularly. They develop a deep trust that cannot help but
carry over to discussions. They develop a richer understanding of the uniqueness
of each person's point of view. They experience how larger understandings emerge
by holding one's own point of view "gently."... Part of the vision of
dialogue is the assumption of a "larger pool of meaning" accessible
only to a group. This idea, while it may appear radical at first, has deep
intuitive appeal to managers who have long cultivated the subtle aspects of
collective inquiry. (Senge, p. 248)
Senge often says that "reflection and inquiry skills
provide a foundation for dialogue" and that "dialogue that is grounded
in reflection and inquiry skills is likely to be more reliable and less
dependent on particulars of circumstance, such as the chemistry among team
members" (Senge, p. 249).
Senge's perspective seems to be that dialogue can be a
powerful tool for building team learning. His discussion of dialogue in The
Fifth Discipline is heavily informed by the work of David Bohm. Senge
provides little new knowledge about the definition or principles of dialogue.
His contribution to the body of knowledge regarding dialogue lies in his application
of dialogue in fostering organizational learning.
|
