I’ve read two thought-provoking and very different books in the last few weeks that both address the difficult issue of polarisation.
Supercommunicators: How to Unlock the Secret Language of Connection by Charles Duhigg.
Here are some broad reflections and questions that I’m sitting with as I continue to explore ways to transform how we communicate across cultures.
Why are we so bad at this?
We’re hard wired for connection but we seem to be really bad at it. I’ve found myself wondering how we got here. Is this social media, industrialisation, communication overwhelm? Are we so keen on emojis and tweeting that we’ve lost the ability to instinctively read rooms and deepen conversations? Or did we never know? Do some people intuitively do this while others have to really work at it? Or do we just not know how bad we are?
So many questions!
Listening is everything
So much of our disconnection from each other comes down to our failure to listen. To listen effectively, we need to be fully present with each other. See above for all the issues we seem to be having with that!
It is particularly important, particularly when it comes to building connection with people who think very differently to us, to listen to understand than to react. And when listening, we’d all do well to be reflecting on what we hear to ask a better question than to come up with a smart response or reaction.
And that’s not as easy as it appears.
Connecting requires work
Great conversations and deeper connections don’t just happen. Planning, self-awareness, self-regulation, setting intention and aims for conversations and reflecting on what we hear are critical.
We need tools for effective engagement
It is harder to dehumanise people that you know. Contact, dialogue and engagement all make an impact, but we need to mitigate the risks through careful boundary setting and giving people the tools to have those conversations in ways that are safe, productive and useful. There’s a lot to unpack here about how organisations facilitate conversations around divisive issues. Sadly, the evidence seems to suggest that we can’t all be expected to just be ‘good’ at this. And when we mess up, we can do real, lasting harm to each other.
Cultural intelligence can help
Cultural intelligence (CQ) provides a useful framework for building better connections across lines of difference. I’m not basing this assertion just on David Livermore’s book. While I was reading Supercommunicators, I identified evidence and recommendations that neatly paralleled the four CQ components of drive, knowledge, strategy and action.
I was also conscious that most of the fascinating research cited in Supercommunicators comes from the US. We are more likely to be able to take its insights and apply them effectively in other cultural contexts if we’ve done some work on developing our own cultural intelligence practice.
There are lessons for comms professionals
There’s an argument that these books are great for personal development but maybe not immediately relevant to developing a more effective corporate, internal or external communications programme. I am going to disagree. I think the principles and ideas set out by both authors have applications to our work as communicators. I believe our role is fundamentally about building meaningful connections based on trust, and that’s at the heart of both authors’ work.
There’s also value in assessing what we might be unintentionally doing that could be getting in the way of people ‘disagreeing well’ or even nudging behaviour change. And clearly, we can probably improve our ability to work across lines of difference and cultures because that is work that is never really done.
