Tuesday Edition

Get the Blog Feed
What is RSS?

dispatches from the new world of work

The Strategic Importance of Listening

I decided, with a little help from participants, to Post the entire set of Comments on LISTENING—some of these posts may seem less relevant than others, but we did not feel it was appropriate to edit as any editing is an application of bias. I think these 45 comments provide a range of perspectives—all worthy of your time:

Great post Tom. Is the video of the professor moving to the right available online somewhere? I tried googling it but couldn't find anything.

Posted by Brett Tilford at April 2, 2009 10:12 AM

Please, someone post a link to that video ...

Posted by Cam at April 2, 2009 10:12 AM

[I tried, too. No luck.—CM]

Pet peeve subject of mine.
Listening is NOT a skill - you can learn some techniques but this is not true listening.
Listening, above all, is an attitude. If you are/not interested in the person your body language will show it.
This is the reason why so many senior people are not good at listening - their attitude (I am Smarter, more successful, more important, have to answer this question, know the way forward etc) gets in the way.
Your interest in the other person has to be genuine. Your head needs to be totally empty of your thoughts - you need to be at one with the other person.
When preparing for a meeting (say a coaching session with an employee or a 1:1 with a customer) most people prepare notes, things to talk about etc - how many prepare their attitude and deliberately empty their mind?
Be Curious!

Posted by PaulH at April 2, 2009 10:27 AM

I agree with Paul.
I was talking to a nurse a few weeks back after a communication skills workshop. We discussed listening. She said 'Listening is a function of the ear, hearing is a function of the brain' - I like that and I now use it regularly. It's neat and says it all.

Posted by Trevor Gay at April 2, 2009 10:38 AM

Nodding not listening?
Writing not listening?
Listening is listening?
and hearing
and understanding
and acting
and caring
and respectful
and right
and occasionally you hit gold!
Pan for the gold, it's there - you just need to listen.

Posted by patrick at April 2, 2009 10:56 AM

I'm stealing this line: 'Listening is a function of the ear, hearing is a function of the brain' Thanks, Trevor!
Being in the middle of a duck-nibbling mess right now (because nobody will actually pick up a damned phone and talk to the other people. They'd rather fire emails back and forth...) - it really hits home. Aargggh.
One very valuable lesson I also learned when working for a Japanese company is that nodding doesn't mean agreement. It just means "I hear you." Something we Americans don't always grok.

Posted by Mary Schmidt at April 2, 2009 11:20 AM

I don't disagree on the attitude-skill distinction. But I'd argue that awareness may come first. Some are not aware of what lousy listeners they are--most bosses, for instance; they think they're listeners, their employees think they're interrupters.
I also think that a lot of people simply have not thought about the "strategic" importance of listening per se.
Finally, I think if you get a little better at listening-as-a-skill, you may be surprised at how interesting some of the stuff people say is--and some attitude adjustment may take place.
Finally finally: I think (no evidence) that about 60% of people, and 80% of men (there is evidence--on the gender differences) are lousy listeners--and you can't just write off that share of the population.

Posted by tom peters at April 2, 2009 11:40 AM

Learning to shut up is - well - learned behavior. That's the first step to developing the listening ability. Sure, it can be learned, to a certain extent. At least, you can practice the art of silence.
It's one of the hardest things I had to learn when I became a consultant. Since - OF COURSE - I already know what the problem is and how to solve it (um, maybe not...;-)

Posted by Mary Schmidt at April 2, 2009 12:13 PM

No problem Mary - I stole it too! :-) There is of course, very little originality.
Tom - "their employees think they're interrupters." - I worked for him! - Adapting a well known quote - "A conversation between two bosses is a competitive exercise where the first person to draw breath is declared the listener"

Posted by Trevor Gay at April 2, 2009 12:36 PM

Nice, Trevor!

Posted by tom peters at April 2, 2009 12:40 PM

Back to attitude vs skills. Any good trainer is working on attitude as much as skills. I acknowledge attitude is hard to change, but central to great training is giving people a whole new way to frame a problem--which may indeed lead to the start of a new attitude.
If you go down the "attitude--and it's fixed" path, then more or less shut the door to 100% of leadership training.
(All that said, I surely subscribe to "Hire for attitude, train for skills." One must, however by and large work with the hand we were dealt.)

Posted by tom peters at April 2, 2009 12:45 PM

I too am a fully signed up member of the club ‘recruit for attitude train for skills.’ I agree with your sentiments about trainers. As a trainer myself I estimate 85% of my workshop time is on attitude and 15% on skills. I’ve met well over 2500 front line healthcare staff in the last three years in customer care/communications workshops for front line healthcare staff. One of my favourite quotes I use in all workshops is this one:
"The greatest discovery of my generation is that a human being can alter his life by altering his attitude of mind" - William James 1842 – 1910
Feel free to steal :-)

Posted by Trevor Gay at April 2, 2009 12:57 PM

Training is of little value if the culture does not encourage (institutionalize) the requisite behavior.

Posted by Tom Asacker at April 2, 2009 1:03 PM

In terms of attitude - one question set worth asking a "poor" listener.
Who do you most respect as your hero?
Let's say they answer Tiger Woods
If I could engineer a day with Tiger Woods would you listen to him?
As well as 80% being lousy listeners. How many of you have really been listened to?
There is a level of listening in coaching beyond active listening where the coach is almost in a transcendental state and the listener feels as if their very soul is being heard. It's the most amazing experience - so few get to feel it.
Listening is a massive gift to humanity - if you can do it you can touch people in a way others can't.
Listening works well with children too. One of my favourite quotes from child coaching:
"What the children of today need is a damned good listening to."

Posted by PaulH at April 2, 2009 1:04 PM

"What the children of today need is a damned good listening to."
Like it Paul - thanks, another one for the slides.

Posted by Trevor Gay at April 2, 2009 1:10 PM

If I could be presumptuous enough to offer you guys another tip: when in a meeting requiring them, offer to write the minutes. It has 2 advantages: a) it makes you listen; b) s/he who writes the minutes gets to shape the official record and the action points. It's a double win!

Posted by Mark JF at April 2, 2009 1:42 PM

The Japanese teach and practice the art of "active listening." Nodding, note taking, eye contact, and the regular "ah..." are all tools to help the listener be an active participant in the exercise, not just a passive lump.

Posted by Useless Sam Grant at April 2, 2009 2:49 PM

Denzel Washington (attorney) in the 1993 movie Philadelphia, "Talk to me like I'm a two year old."
Not because he can't listen
Not because the other person can't be heard
But because, even when listened to, most people don't speak intelligently enough to be "heard" clearly with understanding.
Therefore, for another slide, proudly display TALK TO ME LIKE I'M A 2 YEAR OLD so you can truly understand what people are attempting to say in a meeting.
Funny exchange I had with an executive leader once...we were disagreeing on a budget for finished goods. In my assessments, I thought his numbers were stratospheric and unattainable. He wanted to convince me the numbers were supported by sound principles of business. Before he begins to plea his case he states, "Let's have a positive probe for a few minutes." I gave him a look like he was F'ed out of his mind. Before he continued, I blurted out...
"The doctor said the same thing last week and the probe wasn't so positive." The President and CEO were in the meeting and began to laugh. I was trying to show everyone how stupid we sounded, when listened to, in the meeting.
As much as these posts (very good) are focusing on listening, how about focusing on the dumb ass that's trying to communicate too.
TP----nice to see you provide a lot of pointers on this blog. Good blog!
Nodding in America, to me, now means the other person is full of s&^t, full of themselves, or both.

Posted by Scott Peters at April 2, 2009 3:13 PM

Thanks Mark JF - your point b is something Tom's been advocating for years!

Posted by Shelley Dolley at April 2, 2009 5:07 PM

Once we had an active listen session with Trevor Gay with plenty of nodding & copius notes - & got TG to admit to:
1. plenty of soccer hooligan events with him as ring leader
2. up is down & down is up in the new utopia socialism of Labour
3. Margaret Thatcher is his secret heroine of all time
4. complex tranche derivatives are his real passion
Then he deftly & super swiftly ran an intricate maze like a genius member of the rodentia family.
And he was super pleased to get all-you-can-eat fish & chips as a reward. :>)

Posted by C Love at April 2, 2009 6:43 PM

PS: "You Are Psychic" is a favorite - the author lives in Sedona, AZ. - take a seminar from him perhaps. Psychic 3.0 gets beyond mere "listening" 1.0.

Posted by C Love at April 2, 2009 6:59 PM

Listening is a skill, and an attitude.
But it seems that Tom is describing something different: How to communicate empathy, as a listener, to the speaker. These are great techniques, that do not have to be manipulative, to invite a speaker to engage with you more deeply. Nothing wrong with that!
Next time you are trying to get a slightly disinterested prospect or lukewarm customer to pay attention to a conversation with you, get them talking and then use the techniques Tom is suggesting. Nod, take notes, and then take notice. The other person will be much more engaged with you.

Posted by Steve Yastrow at April 2, 2009 8:14 PM

Steve,
I agree. Another tactic to use, when listening to someone that doesn't make a bit of sense, is to look bewildered, stoic, and puzzled throughout the conversation. Don't say a word and let them talk themselves in circles. Just use body language and an occasional Hmmmm. Sooner or later the person will state that they're full of poop, and then you can begin a real conversation. I believe the biggest flaw with communication today is the overemphasis on being politically correct!
When I was training as a counselor, there were times in a 50 minute session that I wouldn't say a word (deliberately). I would just use facial expressions and utterances. I was amazed to find out how many people would flip-flop through a session, a story, and get to the truth. They knew, based on my non-verbal messages, that I knew they were skewing the truth.

Posted by Scott Peters at April 2, 2009 10:18 PM

"First comes my belief that Serious Training in listening-information extraction is a "Top 5" skill for leaders, and non-leaders for that matter."
Information extraction! Yes, definitely a skill that is needed and one that can be taught indeed. You extract information through questions, by gaining confidence and credibility...even in the briefest exchange. You can teach folks to "hear" what people aren't saying. What's the old story about the reason you have two ears and one month is listen twice as much as you speak? Our biggest challenge in training new customer service reps is convincing them the ability to game and use social networking sites means nothing when you have to access an unfamiliar system, extract information to answer a customer's question, and then apply that information to exceed the customer's expectations.

Posted by Dave Wheeler at April 2, 2009 11:47 PM

C Love - Brilliant ... with one minor criticism. You forgot the mushy peas and salt & vinegar with my fish and chips. Promise me you will try harder :-)
Yours as always ... affectionately
from "Thug Tory Thatcher Complex Kid"

Posted by Trevor Gay at April 3, 2009 1:12 AM

If you vary the pace of your nodding you can get the speaker to speak slower or quicker. It's all part of the natural ability all humans share to be in rapport with each other.
Other tips for rapport involve frequent uses of the word "Yes" especially when used at the first word in response to a statement that you may disagree with fundamentally. Also everywhere you would consider using the word "But" switch to "And". "But" means delete everything before and substitute with everything following and that can come across as a real slap in the face. If you use "And" you can subvert without necessarily getting into a fight.
To the person who said listening is not a skill, I completely disagree. It is a skill because you can learn to do it, and that includes learning actually to be interested in other people and what they have to say. The word "Attitude" is hopeless as it is unmeasurable, ambiguous and unteachable. Never use it in a personnel appraisal because the appraisee might challenge you for evidence and accuse you of prejudice if you haven't got any.

Posted by Sean at April 3, 2009 2:22 AM

Levels of listening:
1) Cosmetic – Not really listening, going through the motions. Often happens in social situations. Unfortunately it's very common in business situations too.
2) Conversational – general mixture of talking, thinking, and listening. If you catch yourself thinking about anything else or even what you are going to say next this is the level you are at. Behaviours are often outwardly positive (the nodding, ahas, etc). Most meetings happen at this level as people are actually thinking about the responses or what they are going to say next.
3) Active Listening – very focused on the individual – ensuring understanding of what is said. This is where you are 100% focused on UNDERSTANDING the other person. You move from the Aha and nodding and you are actively using different questioning techniques (open and closed questions, etc) to really get deep on what is in the other person's head.
4) Deep Listening – a level where the listener is able to experience the other person. It is a deep emotional engagement as well as understanding. Has similar qualities to meditation. Generally this doesn't last very long - you can't conduct a whole meeting like this.
Most people who think they are active listening are still in conversation level. 99% of business interactions take place at levels 1+2. Remember if you are trying to think about what they are saying and understand it in your head you are not listening - you want to get to the point where you understand it in THEIR head.
Level 3 is the one to aim for. If you are really curious about the other person you don't have to think about the questions (the act of thinking about your questions puts you back to level 2) - they will arrive from your intuition/subconscious. Your aim should be to be a catalyst (i.e. not adding to or being changed by the situation - simply helping it to happen)
Part of the challenge of listening in a business context is in letting go and trusting your intuition to ask the right questions. Many business people (especially senior) struggle with this.
It's probably unlikely you will experience level 4 in a normal business environment - it's a little too intense without permission to go that deep anyway.

Posted by PaulH at April 3, 2009 2:36 AM

Sean
I understand your point about skill - there are skills you can learn. However I would say most people would gain more in terms of their listening ability by changing their attitude first.
If you don't respect another person's views you are simply not going to listen to them - no matter how much skill you have. I would say that in learning to do this their attitude might change.
In terms of "attitude" I would agree that attitude is not useful in most appraisal situations because most appraisal type meetings are massively superficial.
In a coaching environment where you are exploring values, self limiting beliefs and perceptions, the attitudes and beliefs that people have about others, events and themselves are very useful.

Posted by PaulH at April 3, 2009 2:47 AM

Sean - on reflection I might have been a bit strong against the importance of skill part - good call on your part to bring that up.
I should have been clearer - What I detest is the superficial skills that is often talked about around listening (use of body language, mirroring, the ahas etc). Sorry Steve Y - I do disagree - these techniques are nothing to do with real empathy. You have exactly the right approach - (i.e. start listening to the customer) but the wrong method to carry it out.
Perhaps I am being a bit harsh here - any listening is better than none! But I would urge you to find out more and practice this art.

Posted by PaulH at April 3, 2009 3:02 AM

"In a coaching environment where you are exploring values, self limiting beliefs and perceptions the attitudes and beliefs that people have about others, events and themselves are very useful."
I would argue that attitude is not useful even in a coaching environment because it's such an ambiguous word. Behaviours, skills and beliefs are more accessible and observable characteristics of a person. All of those are involved in listening and they can all be identified, taught and measured.

Posted by Sean at April 3, 2009 3:03 AM

"What I detest is the superficial skills that is often talked about around listening (use of body language, mirroring, the ahas etc)."
Couldn't agree more. If you attempt to break rapport or learning down into simplistic, unthinking procedures you will fail. Then again too much in business these days is procedural. Thomas Watson's greatest (I would argue) contribution to IBM was the introduction of the word "Think" as the corporate motto.

Posted by Sean at April 3, 2009 3:07 AM

Hi Paul - these are the notes from our handbook used in our customer service/communications workshops - very much like yours I guess
In order to provide an exceptional service to patients we must be able to listen. Listening is not something that most people do well naturally. There are several levels of listening:
Level 1: Background: Most people can listen to what is going on in the background without really listening to it. Interestingly enough they do hear and can replay the last couple of sentences from memory on request. Many of us did this at school when the teacher caught us daydreaming!
Level 2: Superficial: This is when we are not really listening. We are only pretending. We naturally slip in "Umm" or "Uhh" to give an impression of listening.
Level 3: Positive: This is when we really put energy into listening, and focus on what the person is saying.
Level 4: Empathetic: This is a higher level of listening when we really try to understand what it is the speaker is saying, and how they feel about it.
At work most of us listen at level 3 (unless someone is being long-winded in which case we may swap to level 2). In order to offer exceptional customer service we need to work at moving towards level 4. In order to do this we need to learn the skill of active listening.
Have a great weekend!

Posted by Trevor Gay at April 3, 2009 3:13 AM

This is a great conversation. I am tempted to post the whole thing as a single "run on" post. I think the thoughtful disagreements would be invaluable to somone try to decide whether or not the topic was BS, whether it's teachable or not, etc..
What do you think?
Post the whole thing?
Or not?
It's "yes" or "no," whole thing or no thing. I don't want to apply my own edits.

Posted by tom peters at April 3, 2009 7:17 AM

Wow! This is a great conversation.
To me, the heart of listening is reflected in the well-known story of Zen master Nan-In. The story goes that a professor of philosophy from Tokyo University once came to Nan-In to learn Zen from him. And Nan-In said sure, let's talk. As they spoke, Nan-In soon realized that the professor was more interested in putting across his point of view than in really learning about Zen. So Nan-In offered him tea. And while pouring him a cup of tea, he poured until the cup was full and kept pouring until the cup overflowed and hot tea spilt onto the good professor's lap. The professor jumped up and yelled: "What are you doing? Can't you see the cup is full? It won't take in anymore." At which Nan-In replied calmly, "Like the cup, you are full and you aren't taking in anything. Why don't you leave now and come back when you've emptied your cup, and then we'll talk about Zen."
In my mind, Listening is about emptying the cup. Not only the listener's cup, but also the speaker's. It’s only when the speaker's cup begins to empty that the real insights, reflections and deepest truths begin to emerge. And perhaps Tom's experience with the journalist was around this emptying-the-cup kind of listening and speaking. Here's to more empty cups?
And yes Tom, I do think this is a great conversation that deserves a post of its own.

Posted by Porus Munshi at April 3, 2009 9:38 AM

Porus, one vote is enough--it shall be done.

Posted by tom peters at April 3, 2009 9:44 AM

A separate post? Did you not see me nodding? ;-)

Posted by Sean at April 3, 2009 10:05 AM

yes

Posted by PaulH at April 3, 2009 10:19 AM

Great post Tom. Is the video of the professor moving to the right available online somewhere? I tried googling it but couldn't find anything.

Posted by Brett Tilford at April 2, 2009 10:12 AM

Brett, I VEEEEERY RELUCTANTLY admit that I saw this in the fall of 1970, right after I'd started at the Stanford Business School. Hence, 39--yikes--years have passed. God alone knows whether or not you can unearth it.

Posted by tom peters at April 3, 2009 10:20 AM

This has been one of my favorite discussions because you can feel the passion. In my experience, most people want to be better listeners and hence the development of listener training. What is lacking is the mental preparation to go into a meeting and listen. We work with our clients to do a short mental preparation before any meeting, negotiation, etc. to set their intentions, visualize their physical response, establish their state, and set their energy level. I posted a blog on www.tignum.com called What You Focus On Grows and this is a perfect example. If you focus on your interest and curiosity in another person's opinion your engagement grows. As a bonus, so does their interest in you.

At first, clients feel like this is a little forced but can you imagine an athlete not "warming up" before they perform. I have had clients call me immediately after a meeting to share how engaged they were and how much more effective they were because they took the time to go into the meeting prepared.

I agree with PaulH's very first comment about being curious. Next is be prepared. This means making the effort to clear your mind, prepare your mind, make up your mind and then engage your mind.

Posted by Scott Peltin at April 3, 2009 10:29 AM

Yes

Posted by Trevor Gay at April 3, 2009 10:56 AM

In our age of Blackberrys, Buttberrys, Treos, iPhones, Twittering, Tweeting, Facebooking, My Spacing, etc., I find that listening skills have eroded over very recent years.

I think about how many times I've been to lunch with someone that is texting, tweeting, or generally annoying me.

Tom, I think it's prudent to continue the conversation as you see fit, because, in my assessments, all of our F'ing gadgets keep us from truly focusing on the here, now, and future.

Thx,

----I see the next generation as completely preoccupied in the world of nothingness. Many people overcommunicate, which de-sensitizes people from listening.

Posted by Scott Peters at April 3, 2009 11:03 AM

I'm with you, Scott. My observation -- especially disconcerting when watching teens today -- is that by and large Facebook, MySpace, et al, have become mechanisms of vanity. When I see a teen who can't seem to carry on a face-to-face conversation with someone posting dozens... hundreds... of pictures of themselves and merely writing words to convince someone how wonderful they are, I am saddened by the lack of true communications and social skills they are stepping into life equipped with. My feeling is, if you REALLY want to convince me your my "friend," do a bit more than including me in the list of a quadrillion (thanks, TP) people you emailed today. I watch these teens key in literally hundreds of text messages with lightning speed on their cell phones, then at the end of the day, they have NO CLUE what any of their friends are up to. HUH? Bottom line, "Everybody's talkin' at me... I'd don't hear a word they're sayin'..." To me, that's not "commnication," "conversation," or "dialog." It's BROADCASTING.

Perhaps nodding as a means of pretending to be listen could be analogous to just having your cell phone turned on so the other person's message is received... by the phone anyway. "MENU... INBOX... UNREAD MESSAGES - 285... DELETE ALL MESSAGES FROM INBOX?... Y.

No time. Too busy SENDING.

To loosely quote Stephen Covey: "We were given two ears and a mouth. Only one of those holes was DESIGNED to close." (Emphasis added.)
Posted by Dan Gunter at April 3, 2009 12:05 PM

Scott - at the risk of sounding like an old fart, I agree with the point about people texting, doing e-mail on the Blackberry etc over lunch but I'd expand the point. A) I think it's a basic lack of manners. B) If answering e-mail during a meeting is more important than being in the meeting and contributing, you shouldn't be in the meeting. C) If people concentrated on the meeting and it's properly run, it probably would only take about half the time that's needed when people bring these distractions in with them: you need to break the vicious circle.

I used to work for a company that operated "Champagne Rules" during formal meetings: if your mobile phone rings or you're caught using your Blackberry, you have to buy a glass of champagne for everyone present. Someone left his phone on during the annual sales kick-off meeting once: that was expensive!

Posted by Mark JF at April 3, 2009 1:01 PM

I must be an old fart, too, because I agree with Scott and Mark above. Although I've never figured out why my wife doesn't think I'm listening to her when we are on the phone with each other. I'm nodding away like a madman and she thinks I'm ignoring her!

I interviewed with a large, high-profile company for a nice position last summer, but the person who would be my boss took me to dinner the night before to "get to know me" and he spent the entire time either on the phone or texting--to his children! I asked them not to make me an offer the next day. Never looked back.

Posted by Useless Sam Grant at April 3, 2009 2:23 PM

One thing, mostly missing in this excellent discussion, is gender differences. Are women who read this blog laughing at us boys (mostly) for even having this discussion?

Posted by tom peters at April 3, 2009 3:21 PM

Tom Peters posted this on 04/03/09.

Comments

Let us not forget the Trevor Gay maze genius rodentia skills either after he is ultra energized by nodding & note taking of his all things front line & simplicity manifesto - I shall get high on a 7 mile run Saturday out of respect for such sheer madness :>).

Posted by C Love at April 3, 2009 5:44 PM

C Love - thank you and please accept my love in return as always. I am doing a 20 mile run on Monday morning as we build to the London Marathon, now only 3 weeks away ... BTW as an avowed capitalist keen to see the trickle down of money to those less fortunate have you sponsored me yet for my Charity??? - I am delighted to tell you that many of your fellow generous minded US citizens have already done so. We all know you have plenty of money so I am sure you will support such a good cause :-)

Go to this link and part with some dollars for a good cause my friend – go on ... surprise me!

http://www.justgiving.com/runningforcarers

Posted by Trevor Gay at April 3, 2009 6:37 PM

The other input I suspect is missing is under-25's of any any gender. They're probably mystified as to why we're so uptight about texting during dinner or nodding during a conversation.

Posted by Mark JF at April 4, 2009 1:52 AM

It comes down to empathy, being able to put yourself in the other person's shoes and see their worldview. First indicator of a psychopathic personality, no empathy!

Posted by cj lambert |@cjlambert at April 4, 2009 6:00 AM

From "The Zen of Listening", by Rebecca Z. Shafir:

"In Chinese, characters or pictograms communicate ideas and situations. The character for listening attentively consists of the characters for Ear, Standing, Still, Ten, Eye, and Heart and Mind (...) When in stillness, one listens with the heart. The ear is worth ten eyes."

http://paulocesarrovai.blog.lemonde.fr/2007/12/01/the-zen-of-listening-rebecca-z-shafir/

Posted by Paulo Rovai at April 4, 2009 6:06 AM

This great discussion, from which I've learned a lot, reenforces my view that, much as attitude is ultimately important, as a boss, raising listening per se to the level of true blue "strategic competence," talking and coaching constantly, would make a big big difference over time.

Imagine a 5 or 6 point Values Statement, one of which was:

"We listen to and engage with all with whom we work."

Not so great, but you get the idea.

Posted by tom peters at April 4, 2009 9:26 AM

Experience makes one a better listener. There have often been times where I have heard the same thing perhaps many others times, but at one particular time the words of another resonant in ways that are meaningful. The light goes on, my eyes are widened and an incredibly "aha" comes on my face. I can feel it. Trainers, teachers, coaches, Broadway performers and live singers can readily see when hearing occurs. There is agreement or acceptance between the audience and the "performer." I think that perhaps there is also a difference between listening and hearing. For many years we may listen and not hear. But after having experienced a few things, hearing takes root and often action and accompanying behavior is the result.

While nodding and taking notes may encourage the speaker, if note-takers and nodders are not receiving the message given and merely doing so for a show, they miss out on something, unless, of course, they are successful in achieving their motive, which is essentially to have the speaker focus on them. In that case, the performer is the loser and the note-taker and nodder the winner-but then again, maybe not.

If the actions of the note-taker and nodder enables the "performer" to reach a better understanding/interpretation of his own words this is very important too. This reminds me of the repartee of my personal experience on the stage as an opera singer and the understanding/interpretation of the character gleaned from each performance with various audiences. Once you've done a role many times the energy from the audience is particularly important.

It is obvious when "performers" are reaching the audience and often times it is based on their own preparation, confidence, and love of their work. These things come through in volumes on any "stage." Can you not see the things also in perfect strangers that you meet? Is there not this same repartee? We draw other to us or away from us and encourage or discourage others by our very gate and face. This too is important between the "performer" and audience in any arena.

Regarding the ego, it is the reason that distinguishes us in the earth. It is a necessary thing. Of course, we all know and/or have seen the ill-effects of egos that are out of control or lessened to the point of near non-existence. But this is a matter of degree and the key, of course, would be to balance the ego. The great atheist philosopher, Jean Paul Sartre speaks of a very spiritual principle of "being in the world for ourselves" and "being in the world for others" as he sought to navigate through a world ridden with angst.

In the Black church we are encouraged to be active participators during the preaching and singing. You will see thousands of people taking notes at the same time, standing, nodding, saying amen, occasionally shouting, and waving hands. This is the call and response which has come down through many centuries, even when the gods were different.

Once when I was moved by a particular American preacher, who would be in this same faith tradition more of a profound teacher instead of a preacher, I was incredibly moved. Each time I heard him I could not say a word; often times I could not even take notes. But my spirit heard him and tears ran down my cheeks uncontrollably. There was no doubt that he was being heard and after one service he sought me out. When such beauty is revealed, I am not otherwise active; sometimes I may even appear immobilized. It is what's known as revelation knowledge.

This same knowledge extends to various professions and there is a hush that often comes over an audience without overt visible signs of agreement or acceptance. I have had such experiences in museums, seminars, symphony halls, churches, opera houses, hospitals, etc. When I saw Michelangelo's David or his Pieta. The sculptures seemed very much alive and it was as if I were there. There were people all around me taking pictures and talking. I wept. People respond differently. OK. But whichever way, my preference is authenticity. This can be felt. Yes, we can do certain mechanical things to grab the attention of the "performer" for whatever reason but being real is essential to me. Can we not tell idol worshippers from receivers? As "performers," which encourages us more? Perhaps, for some this is irrelevant. Perhaps it is also a calculated means to an end. Perhaps this is OK too.

I guess I've said all of that to say, it’s all good! But experience has made me a better listener and "performer."

Posted by Judith Ellis at April 4, 2009 11:03 AM

Sorry, Judith, I was drinking a coffee and giving the dog the last of my chocolate biscuit, plus I was looking to see who was ringing my mobile, so I lost you around the start of the 2nd paragraph. Could you just run though that again?!

Posted by Mark JF at April 4, 2009 11:46 AM

MarkJF - Is multi-tasking a female thing? :-) Take what you will if any, discard all or any.

Posted by Judith Ellis at April 4, 2009 2:17 PM

Somehow Trevor I was able to EXTRACT all donations & transfer them to our true Love account - so delightful - thank you.

Once you finish the jog-walk in 5-6 hours or so - you must soon after inhale several snacks/bottles of wine of generous proportions & yet somehow vow to not regain the extra 30 lbs by November 2009 :>).

Posted by C Love at April 4, 2009 6:03 PM

C Love - So kind of you to remove all money to your offshore account. Is that the account in the name of Madoff? :-)

Rest assured will be eating large Fish and Chips on 27th April and consuming Red Wine in copious quantities. On schedule for 4 hours 45 minutes which is ok for us. Simply completing the 26 miles is the main ambition. Bed beckons at 00.45 am. Sleep well and have a great Sunday. My Mom's 80th Birthday party tomorrow - Moms are special.

Posted by Trevor Gay at April 4, 2009 6:48 PM

TP,

I would imagine the women are not nodding at us but shaking their heads in utter bewilderment. I certainly need not point out to you (quite the astute observer) that women have long been proven more effective and empathic listeners, perhaps traceable in origin to well-deserved survival tactics in what was an OWM world, but no longer so.

This is another case of "What seems like common sense isn't common practice." What I am encouraged to see is the amount of passion-fueled dialog on this topic. It tells me that people (men?) are starving for some "back to basics" education on the art of listening AND hearing. I will admit that I have not kept up with your training offerings very well as of late, but if you don't offer a very specific course on "listening to hear vs. pretending to listen to earn brownie points" perhaps you should. So what female from TPC would be willing to deservedly brow-beat us guys for a couple of days at a time and dare us to actually admit to and do something about our shortcomings and actively ENGAGE in the course DIALOG (as opposed to listening only for the purpose of formulating our defense?)

D.G.

Posted by Dan Gunter at April 5, 2009 10:25 AM

"So what female from TPC would be willing to deservedly brow-beat us guys for a couple of days at a time and dare us to actually admit to and do something about our shortcomings and actively ENGAGE in the course DIALOG (as opposed to listening only for the purpose of formulating our defense?)"

Oh, YES, Dan! You can count me in! :-) I appreciate your words here. Thank you.

Posted by Judith Ellis at April 5, 2009 1:41 PM

In the early 90s I put together a course on the art of listening (which has been a fascination of mine for decades) but couldn't get many of my clients interested. Apparently not a sexy topic 16 years ago (if even now). Interest in the course immediately picked up, however, when I switched the title of the course to "The Art of Coaching." (The course was still two days on listening but I added a day on coaching.) I attributed this to the fact that in the business world listening is not as highly valued as speaking – even though it’s obvious that both have to be present for communication to occur. Even worse - which I explored at length in the course - communication is EQUATED with speaking, delivering, presenting, etc. (at least in western society). If someone is described as a powerful or brilliant communicator most of us assume that this individual is skilled on the delivery side of communication - forgetting the importance of how someone's speaking is heard, interpreted, assimilated, and integrated. If you look at listening in this larger context (not simply sound waves striking tympanic membranes) why isn't it given its due in the world of commerce? An interesting footnote to this is how little attention has been paid to the art of listening in the educational curricula of western society over the millennia compared to the art of speaking: e.g. oratory, rhetoric, etc. which goes back at least 2500 years. Perhaps only in the last century or two has there been much notice paid to whole phenomenon of listening. Curious, eh?

Posted by John O'Leary at April 5, 2009 5:54 PM

John - That's a great comment. Thank you--much appreciated.

Posted by Judith Ellis at April 5, 2009 7:29 PM

John - "The problem with communication is the illusion that it has been accomplished"- George Bernard Shaw. I also recall someone saying we have two ears and one mouth and we should us them in that proportion.

Keep rockin' :-)

Posted by Trevor Gay at April 6, 2009 2:08 AM

I wonder if there is correlation between speaking / listening skills and writing / reading skills? I wonder how much of it is related to attention levels and the ability to focus on what you're doing, as opposed to just being there? Anyone know any good references on this?

Posted by Mark JF at April 6, 2009 2:58 AM

Judith: A thesis or a blog entry? Patrick :-)

Posted by patrick at April 6, 2009 6:42 AM

Tom; revelvant or not I made it to your front page, gobsmacked of Lincoln England, Patrick

Posted by patrick at April 6, 2009 6:43 AM

Mark JF,

I can't put my hands on any direct references at the moment; however, I do recall almost every good composition/writing instructor I ever had the pleasure of learning from stating in some terms or another that if you want to write well, you should be an avid and astute reader. Similarly, when coaching public speaking and debating skills, I (and many other coaches) would always emphasize listing carefully to the other side's points and arguments to truly UNDERSTAND their concerns and "where they are truly coming from." I always stressed similar in working with teams that were striving for more effective communications and functioning. The common thread was always that you can spout facts (true, untrue, well-founded, anecdotal, whatever) all day long, but if you don't first understand the other person's real concerns by at least internally empathizing first, you will miss your greatest opportunity to actually have THEM hear what YOU have to say.

I think someone pointed out earlier in this thread that by definition communications requires a sender and a receiver. Pretty much sums it up. There are cases where the message is intended to go in one direction (i.e., the Presiden't "State of the Union" address); however, if there must be true "dialog" for solutions to be discovered and real things to happen, if you're not willing to turn off the transmitter and turn on the receiver occasionally, you might as well save your breath and someone else's Tylenol and invest your time in some other endeavor.

That, or just try to tackle the problem yourself, because it's not likely anyone else is going to "buy in" to your ideas anyway.

Posted by Dan Gunter at April 6, 2009 7:08 AM

Mark JF, RE Speaking, listening, reading, and writing--There is a direct correlation between effective speakers and effective listeners. Good public speakers are always listening to their audience in one form or another. Noticing when heads or eyelids droop, keys rattle, people fidget, side conversations start, people engage with the speaker through "ah...," laughter, nod in agreement, etc. One-on-one is just the same. I think speaking effectively requires effective listening. Maybe the pros like Dr. Peters have a different opinion, but I do a lot of speaking in front of groups and I am always listening to what the audience is telling me.

The same is true of writing and reading. Reading is really listening, except that the reader is allowed to do so in his own time and repeat anything unclear due to distraction or misunderstanding. Good writers are like good speakers, they are listening to their audience all the time. Most of my public speaking is preceded by writing in the form of preparation of one sort or another, and I am "listening" to the audience before I ever meet them.

Speaking, listening, reading, writing--all parts of the same whole known as communication.

Posted by Useless Sam Grant at April 6, 2009 7:44 AM

"Reading is really listening, except that the reader is allowed to do so in his own time and repeat anything unclear due to distraction or misunderstanding."

This is a good statement. Reading is also interactive. As we read there is without doubt interaction with the text, pictures are developed and images evoked, statements agreed with or not. We may see words but our minds often evoke pictures. We create scenes which include our past experiences and our perceptions of those experiences, no matter the material, fiction, non-fiction or technical. This is why when we have first read a book and then seen the movie, though often good, it never quite measures up. We have created our own images. So, there is definitely interaction with reading material.

Speaking is relative to this. Often times when others are speaking images develop in our minds first, not words. Words are the outcome. We see this in others in their faces and bodies. Sometimes it is not simply being ego-driven to want to share. It is, in fact, the very words of the speaker that sparks us to want to share our own images. I wonder if it is sometimes not rudeness or arrogance but passion and wishing to participate readily. Sometimes the hearer (interrupter) says something very valuable and redirects the conversation. This, of course, could be positive or negative, tangent-like or not. Sometimes tangents are relevant.

We can also tell when others are being rude. But there is also passion to consider in communication as it relates to the speaker and hearer. A ready give or take at any moment by either party is an important element of communication. I suppose this takes a bit of humility and sharing that is necessary in communication. The reason speakers adjust when looking at the body language of the audience is because the image that the audience has given is an image that they themselves know—no words necessary.

Posted by Judith Ellis at April 6, 2009 11:53 AM