This might seem like a very intuitive thing to say, but most of the misunderstandings the whole world over, from the macro to the micro, are all down to peoples unwillingness to listen and understand. However natural and matter of course it may seem, listening with an objective mind is something thats quite hard to actuate. See about dialogue facilitation.
There are many ways to define and delineate the term dialog. Whatever the exact wording, however, perhaps anyone can agree that it sounds friendlier than debate and more productive than discussion. There is something meaningful with this activity, or at least the potential to create meaning through a positive and constructive exchange. That makes dialogue something to achieve and yearn for with every team, group, and most remarkably, perhaps, with opposing parties.
To this end, it is also essential to highlight the differences between the 3Ds, discussion, debate, and dialogue. To start off, a discussion is really more on the presentation of ideas. Debating, on the other hand, entails a win or lose mentality. Theres a lot of stressful disagreements, with the parties involved defending their own respective opinions to the death. Especially in formal settings, the validity of feelings is questioned, looked down upon, and thereafter discounted. People listen with the objective of having something to counter afterward, and it involves the disregarding of relationships.
Dialogue, therefore, when you delve on its essence, amounts to more than just debate and discussion. It is not so much about the contents of the discussion, but rather the dealings or relationship between the parties involved. A debate, in particular, is also particular about competitiveness and about the superiority of one opinion over the other. When talking about dialog, however, you are aiming to reach a common ground.
Although dialogue as a noun is pretty much elastic and general term, we have all used its implements sometime or other. That is because, with everything that involves conflict resolution and management, communication is a quintessential part of it. We have seen methods like mediation and negotiation used, and the thing is, they are actually an integral part of the communication equation.
There are many requirements that are demanded from these facilitators. First of all, they should be multi partial, if not neutral. Their manner should be fair, and their openness should empathetically extend to all parties. Next, they must have strong listening and comprehension skills. Where some statements can come along as aggressive and challenging, they should have the knowhow of reframing them articulately. Or if something contains a potentially powerful message with promising emotional undertones, they can further amplify it. It is all down on effective communication.
Even when they think that they have gleaned the basics of the issue, people will have to be even more open to furthering it and expanding it. All in all, both parties, although coming from different terminuses of a tangent, they should be parallel and going towards a common point of understanding.
Although the importance of this exchange is pretty much established, it is also outfitted with a lot of technicalities, convolutions, and general nitty gritty. In that case, holding a successful exchange can be said to incorporate all the facts and figures of rocket science. The question on how to set up and prepare for a successful dialogue is always a moot point for those at the creating and receiving ends, both.
The constructive results of dialogue are quite easy to actuate with a little bit of tweaking. If only the remarks were substantive, with fewer people, with ample open spaces, more coffee brakes, the particularities go on and on. However, all these will be successfully toggled and juggled by a good facilitator, so you had better hand it to them.
There are many ways to define and delineate the term dialog. Whatever the exact wording, however, perhaps anyone can agree that it sounds friendlier than debate and more productive than discussion. There is something meaningful with this activity, or at least the potential to create meaning through a positive and constructive exchange. That makes dialogue something to achieve and yearn for with every team, group, and most remarkably, perhaps, with opposing parties.
To this end, it is also essential to highlight the differences between the 3Ds, discussion, debate, and dialogue. To start off, a discussion is really more on the presentation of ideas. Debating, on the other hand, entails a win or lose mentality. Theres a lot of stressful disagreements, with the parties involved defending their own respective opinions to the death. Especially in formal settings, the validity of feelings is questioned, looked down upon, and thereafter discounted. People listen with the objective of having something to counter afterward, and it involves the disregarding of relationships.
Dialogue, therefore, when you delve on its essence, amounts to more than just debate and discussion. It is not so much about the contents of the discussion, but rather the dealings or relationship between the parties involved. A debate, in particular, is also particular about competitiveness and about the superiority of one opinion over the other. When talking about dialog, however, you are aiming to reach a common ground.
Although dialogue as a noun is pretty much elastic and general term, we have all used its implements sometime or other. That is because, with everything that involves conflict resolution and management, communication is a quintessential part of it. We have seen methods like mediation and negotiation used, and the thing is, they are actually an integral part of the communication equation.
There are many requirements that are demanded from these facilitators. First of all, they should be multi partial, if not neutral. Their manner should be fair, and their openness should empathetically extend to all parties. Next, they must have strong listening and comprehension skills. Where some statements can come along as aggressive and challenging, they should have the knowhow of reframing them articulately. Or if something contains a potentially powerful message with promising emotional undertones, they can further amplify it. It is all down on effective communication.
Even when they think that they have gleaned the basics of the issue, people will have to be even more open to furthering it and expanding it. All in all, both parties, although coming from different terminuses of a tangent, they should be parallel and going towards a common point of understanding.
Although the importance of this exchange is pretty much established, it is also outfitted with a lot of technicalities, convolutions, and general nitty gritty. In that case, holding a successful exchange can be said to incorporate all the facts and figures of rocket science. The question on how to set up and prepare for a successful dialogue is always a moot point for those at the creating and receiving ends, both.
The constructive results of dialogue are quite easy to actuate with a little bit of tweaking. If only the remarks were substantive, with fewer people, with ample open spaces, more coffee brakes, the particularities go on and on. However, all these will be successfully toggled and juggled by a good facilitator, so you had better hand it to them.
About the Author:
Get to know important facts about dialogue facilitation by reviewing the informative articles online. To obtain further information visit the link http://www.dialogues.cc.
No comments:
Post a Comment