Have you ever been absolutely certain you heard someone say something they later claim they didn\u2019t say? Or inaccurately interpret requests from your spouse or colleagues when you could swear you\u2019re right and they\u2019re wrong? It\u2019s interesting how mutually defined words end up causing such havoc.<\/p>\n
Spoken language is a mutable translation system \u2013 a best attempt to impart thoughts, feelings, and world view between dialogue partners for the purpose of shared understanding, intimacy, and maintaining relationships. Senders (unconsciously) choose their words as representative of what they wish to share. Most of the time their communication partners understand them. But sometimes Receivers don\u2019t hear a Sender\u2019s message accurately even when they define the words identically causing them to misunderstand or bias what\u2019s been shared, with a potential for a miscommunication. What\u2019s going on?<\/p>\n
When researching my new book (What? Did you really say what I think I heard?<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0I spent a year reading 52 books to learn why there is a gap between what\u2019s said and what\u2019s heard. I studied brains, bias, collaboration, filters, AI, and the neuroscience aspects of communication, and learned just how fragile our listening process is. Before the research I had naively believed that I accurately heard what others meant to convey most of the time. I was shattered to learn that\u2019s not even possible.<\/p>\n THE REASONS<\/p>\n The problem is our brain. As Listeners, we think there is a direct transmission between words spoken and our interpretation. But the reality is far murkier: just as our eyes take in light and our brains interpret captured images, our ears take in sound and our brains interpret meaning. That means we all see and hear the world uniquely, according to our mental models and filters, and are at effect of what our brains allow us to hear, not necessarily what\u2019s said.<\/p>\n During conversations, our brains delete, misconstrue, and misinterpret according to filters \u2013 biases, triggers, assumptions, beliefs, habits and mental models \u2013 in order to keep us comfortable and maintain our status quo. Accuracy is not their criteria. And we\u2019re left with the residue, assuming our unique interpretation is accurate: not only do we not realize what we think has been said might be inaccurate, we adamantly believe what our brains tell us we\u2019ve heard is accurate. Hard to fix when it\u2019s not obvious there is a problem.<\/p>\n How, then, do we know when we\u2019ve misheard? How do we correct a problem we literally can\u2019t get our minds around? We must go beyond our brain.<\/p>\n THE CURE<\/p>\n For us to accurately hear what our communication partners intend to convey we must enter conversations from an \u2018observer\u2019 standpoint, allowing us to rise above our filters (I have a thorough discussion on this in Chapter 6 in What?<\/em><\/strong><\/a>). Since we can\u2019t use the same skills that cause the problem, we must use our physical system to go beyond our brains. Try this technique: During conversations stand up (I get permission to walk around during meetings, saying \u201cDo you mind if I walk around so I can think more creatively?\u201d) or lean back against your chair with your feet up. It physically unhooks you from your physiology that causes automatic responses and takes you, instead, to an unbiased place in your brain. I know this sounds simplistic but try it \u2013 it\u2019s an NLP technique that I\u2019ve used in my training programs and coaching sessions for 30 years. It works.<\/p>\n It\u2019s also possible to notice clues in your communication partner that denote \u2018misunderstanding\u2019. Visibly, s\/he will look confused, or his\/her face will go blank or scrunch up. Verbally, you\u2019ll hear a response that is not aligned with your response, or there will be a long silence, or a voice\/tempo\/volume shift, or a \u2018What??\u2019 The cues of miscommunication will depend upon the strength of your relationship, of course. The worst result is that nothing is said and the conversation continues as if there has been understanding.<\/p>\n THE PREVENTION<\/p>\n To have more choices when you need them, start with discovering your tolerance to adding new behavior choice:<\/p>\n The big decision is: are you willing to do something differently to have a higher probability of having an effective communication? Because if you always do what you\u2019ve always done, you\u2019ll always get what you\u2019ve always got. And just maybe you might need new choices for those times what you\u2019re doing isn\u2019t working. Not to change what you\u2019re doing, but just add a choice when you need one.<\/p>\n Get What? Did you really say what I think I heard?<\/em><\/strong><\/a> \u00a0to make sure you read it, to help you understand how and why people end up mishearing and miscommunicating. I also developed some learning tools<\/a> for those who wish to recognize their communication choices. Should you wish to train your team to learn to hear clients or collegues more effectively Contact Sharon Drew<\/a>. Enjoy. Let me know how this works for you.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Have you ever been absolutely certain you heard someone say something they later claim they didn\u2019t say? Or inaccurately interpret requests from your spouse or colleagues when you could swear you\u2019re right and they\u2019re wrong? It\u2019s interesting how mutually defined words end up causing such havoc. Spoken language is a mutable translation system \u2013 a […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_exactmetrics_skip_tracking":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_active":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_note":"","_exactmetrics_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n\n