Menemani

Yes ! No ! Because!

Cognitive science is increasingly interested in the ability people have to dialog and cooperate. Why can’t people understand each other? Why do we favor status quo instead of moving forward? Most of the time, it is because we think along different lines or patterns, and because beyond our differences in opinions, we have different representations of a same reality. The example below is a good illustration: what would you have seen in the following figure?

To effectively establish a dialog and understand each other, we need to realize that each of us uses a different frame of reference and representation system. We need to try and define a shared frame or representation, or at least try and temporarily adopt the other person’s frame of reference in order to understand the reasoning behind her thinking.

Ideologies and dogma are made to prevent any incursion in a different vision of the world. Prejudice has the same effect: they rigidify the frame and representation system. As a consequence, even the idea of difference or change becomes threatening and has a paralyzing effect.

Several techniques have been developed in organizations to facilitate mutual understanding and cooperative problem solving through a dialog intended to free expression and vent out concerns and fears, and where each one tries by “informing” the other to understand the blocking factors and to overcome them. This process contributes to reduce threats and worries. The half empty glass has a chance to become half full.

One particular example of these techniques: the proscription of questions that can be answered by yes or no. These questions indeed offer the possibility for the one who replies to hide behind a small word without a slight incursion in the reasoning. By the same token, why-questions are prohibited as well, because even when they try to get to the causes, they often generate responses that are mere justifications, fruitless to move a debate forward.

To progress not only in the corporate world but also in our societies and the world as well, I would be favorable to teach dialog as a “civic skill” at school! 

References:
Many thanks to my friend Gerald O D'wyer and the Fuzen group, with whom I have shared a few workshop experiences as a participant and as a consultant.
Action Science - Chris Argyris

Change or Die

Why is it that even under a death threat, humans can't resolve themselves to change their behaviors? In Fast Company's May issue, Alan Deutschman draws a parallel between health and corporate performance: whatever the perspective or the danger, the core of the solution is seldom to perform an operation -i.e. change the structure, culture or strategy- or to prescribe a medecine -new systems and technology-. Changing behaviors mostly happens by speaking to people's feeling and emotions, not just thoughts, and helping them adopt different frames of thinking. Change agents themselves need to learn how to change their style if necessary to get to the core. On the "change target" side, behavioral change ability, what we commonly call adaptability, is linked to our brain's ability to change, its plasticity. Everything we learn as a child is behavior based and maintains this plasticity. When the leaning stops, the plasticity decreases. This is why, the article says, continuous learning, by constantly rejuvenating the brain's plasticity, is so crucial to adaptability, not only to knowledge -not to mention living older and in a good shape!-.

See full article Change or Die.
Also see a detailed analysis of this article in Creating Passionate Users Blog