Jane Dosemagen, Fast Company Article, November 11, 1999

Fast Company, "The Art of Dialogue," October, 1999, p. 166

This article focuses on dialogue. Bill Isaacs, author of Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together (1999), offers his tips on building specific dialogue skills and recognizing the stages of a good conversation. He recommends that we say what we think in a non-threatening way, which he defines as "a way that invites responses and reactions." It takes courage to say what we think. Effective leaders, Isaacs says, "have the courage to say what they're thinking and that usually turns out to be what everyone else is thinking."

Listening generously and respectfully are the two other skills in dialogue. It is important not to cloud what people are saying, but try to bring coherence and meaning out of what the person is saying.

Isaacs defines what he calls the 4 stages of conversation, which provides the structure of conversation that the skills previously mentioned fit into: 1. Polite talk or chit chat 2. Breakdown, which is marked by conflict, with people adhering to their positions 3. Inquiry or real dialogue where speakers let go of their positions and ask, "Why are we talking this way?" 4. Flow or smooth dialogue where individual voices flow into one group voice

We go in and out of these 4 stages of conversation. Sometimes, but not as often, we get to stage 3 and 4, but often quickly get out of them and go back to stage 1 and 2. Isaac says that's to be expected and that "true power lies in being able to gather momentum and to move yourself and your team around that cycle."

I agree with Isaacs that it is very important to listen respectfully to others and that there are varying stages of dialogue. Another article, "On Dialogue," Bohm, 1994, from our Transformative Learning class, points to true dialogue, in which nobody is trying to win. Bohm says that we can't think together when we are busy defending our own opinions. He advises to "suspend your opinions," and listen to everyone's opinions even if we may not entirely agree. True dialogue is reached when people "realize what is on each other's minds without coming to any conclusions or judgments." Bohm's true dialogue occurs when each person participates, taking part in the whole meaning of the group, thinking and looking at everything together, suspending judgement. His definition of true dialogue is much like Isaac's fourth stage of dialogue where individual voices flow into one group voice.

Another article on dialogue from our Transformative Learning class, "Using Reflective Questioning to Promote Collaborative Dialogue" (Lee and Barnett, 1994), points to the importance of non-judgmental dialogue. Lee and Barnett claim that dialogue is enriched through reflective questioning which encourages incentive to expand thinking using follow-up questions in dialogue. This skill can be developed and used in many situations including education. This skill in dialogue is similar to Isaac's recommendation to say what we think in a non-threatening way, in a way that invites responses and reactions.

I appreciate the advice on good dialogue and its importance. I agree with Clark Montgomery, who also reflected on this article. He said that "good" conversation is an important part of our work and that we should "forego our personal perceptions, be more open, and try to listen/learn." He also noted that Isaacs'principles for dialogue also apply to Transformative principles. I think we'd all go through more transformational learning if we really did put aside our assumptions, open up, and listen to each other.

I like to listen and to reflect on what others are saying, but I often don't have the patience for true dialogue. Assumptions often get in the way of true dialogue, as does another big obstacle, which is lack of time. In this fast-paced society, listening and true dialogue don't always get accomplished even by well-meaning people. I do agree that it is very important, though. If we can think together coherently, communication would be enhanced, workplaces improved, and we would be part of a better, more understanding society.

-- Anonymous, November 12, 1999