Saturday, October 3, 2009

Different Types of Conversations

A ping pong match

You, “I spent the weekend suffering through allergies.” (ping)
The Opponent, “I suffered through much worse allergy.” (pong)
“I took Sudafed, and it really helped.” (ping)
“Nothing helped me.” (pong)
“I generally don’t fall sick.” (ping)
“I am always sick.” (smash!)

Next game

You, “Before falling sick, we spent a nice week in Berkshires.” (ping)
The Opponent, “We spent a great weekend in Paris” (pong)
….
….

A Spanish Inquisition


The Inquisitor, “Where did you go this summer?”
You, “Oh, we went to Europe.”
“Why did you go to Europe?”
“Well, the dollar was high, and besides….”
“How much did you have to pay per Euro?”
“I don’t remember.”
“Why don’t you remember?”
“OK, may be it was $1.45 per Euro.”
“Don’t you think it was too much?”
“Well it is hard for me to judge…”

Next inquisition

The Inquisitor, “OK moving on, how is your work going?
…..
…..

A communist debate


(So named by me in honor of the communist response in the United Nations Security Council to any proposal from the west during the cold war…their answer was always “Nyet!” I am sure the same could be said about the Western answers when seen from the other side.)

You, “So I think that the Indians could be as materialistic as the Western people.”
The Communist, “Nyet, there is a long tradition of leaving simply.”
“Yes but I am making an observation about the current state of affairs.”
“Nyet, you are accusing people of Indian origin.”
“I am not doing so, but don’t you agree that the large mansion that Ambani is building is naked exhibition of materialism?”
“Nyet, yes”
Next debate

You, “OK, moving on, isn’t it a nice day?”
The Communist, “Nyet, it is going to rain.”
….
…..

Productive Conversation

You, “So these are three of many types of conversations we have.”
The conversationalist, “A very interesting observation. I can immediately think of a fourth type.”
“What type is that?”
“It is called productive conversation. It involves listening to what the other person is saying, thinking about what was said, and then responding. The point here is to not to think of the other party as an opponent and the reason for conversation as an opportunity to score a victory.”
“Sounds like a good type of conversation…why is it called productive conversation?”
“You build upon each others thoughts; you give and take, and learn from each other.”
“The conversation then becomes a much more enjoyable activity.”
“Precisely.”
“Can you tell me an example?”
“What do you think we were doing just now?”


October 2009

7 comments:

  1. You missed the "No, but" style. This is the opposite of Productive conversation. No matter what you say the other party starts her/his sentence with "No, but" - even if the person is in general agreement with what you are saying. A great way to kill conversation.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I believe there is an exception to this. Some individuals feel that presenting their situation that is similar to yours (and they think more of whatever it is)is a way of showing they empathize with you. Having a friend who does this consistently, I know she is not dueling with me, although I feel that way and would much prefer her to simply listen when I need to unload and acknowledge what I am feeling, she does not understand this, it is not her way. So the question becomes, do we share how we feel about that or hold it within ourselves?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ashok:

    Very well written. Great style.

    My only comment is that every conversation style is like a fingerprint of the person you are talking to. However, YOU also influence the other person's conversation style. The conversation is maybe an indication of the dynamics between the two. What do you think?

    Sharad

    ReplyDelete
  4. My hypothesis is proved if the same person has consistently different converstation styles with different people. Then it is not a fingerprint!

    Sharad

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sorry for a short comment above---it was meant to be a test. I have been frusruated by my inability to post comment on my own Blog (imagine that). Finally, I changed the browser from Firefox to Explorer (with its own set of settings) and now finally, I can post comments.

    In response to the first comment, I tried to incorporate that behavior into my "communist debate". I am sure there are many variations. Does the other person firmly believe that a conversation can be kept alive only by providing an alternate view, and, on the flip-side, agreeing to something would kill it?
    Diane, you bring up a very good point. I suffer from the same dilema. Should one be blunt to people displaying these styles and disclose the impact that they are having? Finally, Sharad, I think that the basic style (fingerprint) is well established. What you see are variations from that base when the person communicates with different people.

    ReplyDelete