Respectful communication

 I have online learning programs where I teach Humanistic Communication strategies and science based conflict management approaches. I was recently approached by a reporter to answer some questions about respectful communication. 

1. In your professional experience and opinion, what are the benefits of respectful communication in the workplace?

The benefit of respectful communication is trust. All business revolves around trust. Without that, things can’t get done and if things don’t get done in business, you won’t be in business long. 

The problem is that the term ‘respect’ means different things to different people. Does it mean treating people with deference. Or does it mean treating people with dignity? I’m not big on arbitrary authority, so I prefer to think of this as a problem of dignity. I reframe the question in my mind. Why I need to treat my colleagues with dignity?  The answer is, trust and professionalism. It’s best not to turn colleagues into enemies and it’s best not to make an enemy out of someone who wants to be your colleague.

But more than that, it’s about making sure I don’t create additional problems for myself and the team. If there is a problem in communication, it means there is a misunderstanding, probably on both sides. To me, being professional means, treating everyone with dignity and behaving in a dignified way myself. So if/when a conflict arises, I don’t respond tribally, I respond professionally and treat the other person with dignity and well-meaning and work through the misunderstanding to re-establish trust. To do that, I must communicate with dignity and reinforce the dignity of the other person.  If it turns out the other person really is undignified and behaving unprofessionally, then my professional dignified communication with them will serve me well by making it clear, the problem isn’t me. 

2. What is your #1 tip for achieving respectful communication in the workplace?

My number one tip is compassion. Compassion for myself when I respond with my hackles up to something that is said or done feels like an attack. This allows me to move out of defensive fight mode into rational thinking mode. Once I’ve done that for myself, I then turn my compassion to the other person and remind myself, they are a human being just like me and that most likely, what happened was just a miscommunication and not an attack.  Compassion allows me to respond to the person with dignity and to acknowledge the dignity of the other person so that we can work through what is almost always a miscommunication back to trust. 

The bonus of this approach is that if it was indeed an attack, by responding with compassion and dignity, I disarm and blunt the attack. 

Learn More:

I have a few online courses that can help you learn to practice these skills.

Humanistic Communication Strategies - Learn how to combine humility, compassion and personal responsibility into an effective communication strategy so you can focus on collaboration instead of combat. https://humanistlearning.com/humanistic-communication-strategies/

and

A Humanistic Approach to Civility and Dignity in the Workplace - This program is broken into two sections. The first discusses civility as a concept, covering the problems and difficulties of using civility as a metric. The second section discussed how to use dignity as a value in the workplace to improve interpersonal relationships and problem solving. The goal is to help people understand how to deal effectively with stress and difficult people while still behaving ethically and problem solving effectively. - https://humanistlearning.com/a-humanistic-approach-to-civility/

or

How to Win Arguments Without Arguing - In this program author and Humanist Jennifer Hancock will discuss recent research on how ideas are formed and changed to help you understand why and how to yield to your opponent and how to turn the conversation around using Socratic questioning techniques to frame the underlying moral debate to your advantage. If you want to learn how to win arguments by not arguing take this course! - https://humanistlearning.com/socratic-jujitsu/

and finally - I offer a certificate course in humanistic conflict management.

Certificate Program in Humanistic Conflict Management - This certificate program includes 8 courses for a total of 9 3/4 hours of content to teach you how to effectively, ethically and compassionately deal with conflict while still being professional.

https://humanistlearning.com/conflict-management-discount-bundle/

What words do I avoid in my teaching when I talk about Humanism?

A couple of weeks ago, I gave the Sunday "sermon" for the Humanists of the Treasure Coast. My talk was on the True Holy Trinity for Humanists.

In the Q&A afterwards, the topic came to how to best market humanism and specifically to language we use to do our marketing. 

The problem with Secularism:

A big part of the problem movement Humanists have is we focus so much on secularism that we forget to promote the other aspects of the philosophy. 

Secularism is important to Humanists, but our secularism is in service to our morality and ethics. The ethics come first and should be central to our outreach.

There are several reasons for this. One is that while secular is a great word, it's not well understood.  When I was the executive director for the Humanists of Florida Association, I did some market testing on promotional materials. What we found about the word secular made me shy away from it as a marketing term. 

Here is the problem in a nutshell. Most people don't know what it means, so they guess. They pull apart the word and end up with secular - must have something to do with sect. Our audience doesn't want to have anything to do with a sect, so they immediately lose interest. The very people who would normally be drawn to Humanism, are repulsed by the word secular, even though they are technically secular. They just don't know it. In marketing, it's best to meet people where they are at their level of knowledge and introduce them to something and make a good impression. The word secular creates a bad impression. It's best to avoid it.

This led to another question: what other words do I avoid.

I don’t avoid words as much as I choose to use the language of my listener or audience. How do they talk about morality?  That is the language I use.

There are no concepts I avoid. Rather – I attempt to speak the language of my audience so they can understand the concepts fully – in a way that makes sense to them. 

This applies to all my work everywhere.  If someone asks me about a concept they hold dear, I talk to them about how that concept is important, even if I didn't highlight it in my talk.

Everyone you meet is an individual

Part of my practice as a Humanist and as a Humanist educator is to recognize that all individuals I meet are individuals, with dignity and worth.  My job is not to teach people, but to empower them to be the best most ethical people they can be.  

I don't need people to be like me. I want them to be themselves in all their glory. If I can do that by helping them find their moral voices, then I count that as win. What language we use is irrelevant to me. Humans share a basic ethical vocabular in terms of what we value. How we describe and talk about those common values may differ, but I don't like to get hung up on that. What language do they use to describe the love of their fellow humans? What motivates them to act ethically? That is what matters.

Disagreements are rarely about values - and almost always about facts

I once participated in a just war workshop at an American Humanist Association conference. We all agreed on what constituted a just war. But when we looked at specific wars - we could not agree on whether any given war or conflict was just or not. How could that happen when we all agreed what a just war was morally?

Because - we all had different information. To reach consensus - we share information and integrate that information into our thinking.

I think - we largely - don't do that anymore. It isn't modeled for us - and it's not valued. When I get questions from people about disagreements - it's usually framed in a: how do I get other people to agree with me - framework.

This is a very self centered framework to think about disagreements. You are right and the other person is wrong - so the problem is - how do I get them to agree with me - that I am right.

We all do this - so I know you - as well as I - see ourselves in that description.

The solution is to understand your role and what is going on differently.

1) Ask yourself - what if you are wrong and the other person is right?  Shocking to think - but it is possible. When you do this - you stop trying to prove you are right and start trying to figure out how you might be wrong.  This sort of disagreement is not about winning anymore. It's about learning. And no - you don't need the other person to agree with you to approach things this way - this is about you. And your responsibilities.

2) Find out what the moral reasoning the other person is using. I assure you - the other person is moral.  Disagreements are almost NEVER about values. They are often about what we value most - but not whether we value it. So - ask them questions. Why is their proposal - moral for them? Do they acknowlege your values as well? Probably they do - but they place them lower than other moral considerations. This can lead to interesting conversations about how we weigh moral values against each other. But even if it doesn't - you can still learn a lot by asking these questions.

3) Do you have your facts right? What "facts" are they working from and are those "facts" true or not. If you are doing the first two things - they should be open to correction. But ONLY if you are ALSO - open to correction. If they aren't - don't fight them. Sometimes all you can do is introduce doubt. It's like planting a seed. You might not be there when the doubt reaches fruition - but that's ok.  If that is where they are - then consider planting doubt - a win.

These are the skills I teach in my online course - Socratic Jujitsu - how to win arguments without arguing. https://humanistlearning.com/socratic-jujitsu/

This program is also included in my certificate in applied Humanistic Leadership - https://humanistlearning.com/certified-humanistic-leadership-professional/

Poor Communication at Work

Poor communication is the root cause of so many problems. Which is a shame because it's a problem that is easily solved. How? By listening.

Listening is one of the most important interpersonal skills.

If you are being misunderstood – the problem is usually that you haven’t bothered to find out what the other person’s frame of reference is. Instead of getting frustrated, step back from your need to be heard, and start asking them questions. Finding out what the other person is thinking and responding too goes a long way and there is a reason Socrates encouraged the asking of questions.

The other thing to do is to let go of your ego. When we have a disagreement with someone we tend to view this as we are right and they are wrong and we ascribe a moral dimension to the conflict. It is imperative we win. When we let go of our ego we no longer need to be right.  It allows us to view the other person, not as an enemy, but as a coworker who simply has a different opinion. We can then start asking questions (to find out what they know that we don’t) so that we can hopefully solve the problem. A person who is focused on problem solving isn’t focused on being right. They are focused on learning what they need to learn to solve the problem. This shift in mindset solves most of our communication problems.

Regarding dealing with someone else who is a poor communicator. Again, ask questions. Seek clarification. Communication takes 2 people.  Don’t put the onus on the other person to improve so that you can understand them. Make an effort to understand them and you do that, by asking questions!!!! Without an ego!  Genuinely seek to find out what they know and why they think they way they do. Not so you can win an argument, but so that you can more effectively communicate with them by finding out from them, what they need from you to be understood.

I teach humanistic management and do offer online communication courses and courses in socratic jujitsu as well as programs for managers on how to communicate effectively as a manager.

See:

• Socratic Jujitsu - https://humanistlearning.com/socratic-jujitsu/ 
• The 7 Sins of Staff Management - https://humanistlearning.com/?p=2248
• Principles of Humanistic Management - https://humanistlearning.com/?p=2237
• Bridging the Generational Divide - https://humanistlearning.com/generationaldivide/ 

Communication – Central to Humanistic Management

Management is all about communication. How you communicate matters.

The modern workplace is filled with a diverse group of people. It isn’t just white men in an office anymore. People come in all shapes, sizes, colors and genders.  Ethical leaders need to be able to communicate effectively with all sorts of people. Thankfully, the days of dictatorial management are over. Or should be anyway.

So what should replace it?  Humanistic management of course!

Sins of Staff Management

If you keep having trouble with employees, you may want to consider whether YOU are the problem.

Not everyone who is hired as a manager has the skill set necessary to be a good manager. Most aren’t trained. If they are promoted, it is assumed they know the company and the work that needs to be done well enough to manage other people doing it.  This isn’t necessarily the case.