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!
Comments