Psychology REFLECTION ASSIGNMENT

Chapter 8 Going Beyond the Tango sO hOw dO we replace the Flat-Brain Tango (everyone talking and no one listening) with a communicating style that un-flattens brains, makes in-formation sharing clearer, builds empathy, trust, and cooperation, and puts the “commune” back in the word communication? For me, the answer is the talker-listener pro-cess — taking turns talking and listening. My un-derstanding of the process developed over years of trial and error. As it became clear to me that the roles of talking and listening were substantially different, I noticed that what we focus on, what we think about, and how we say it depends on which role we are taking. To pinpoint these roles to my classes I first wrote “Talker” and “Listener” on op-posite sides of A-frame cards so we could practice switching roles and taking turns. Gradually, I discovered “do’s” and “don’ts” for each role. I passed out manila card stock and people folded and wrote the goals and rules on them. They found the cards useful in their homes and offices. I began to use them in marriage counseling, giving couples a take-home tool to help them communicate better, when I wasn’t there with them. Several years later, I decided to move from rough scribbled cards to professionally printed ones. I struggled to make the phrases on the card sharp and parallel. I took the mock-up to a workshop. It went over well, except for one phrase that nearly brought the participants off their chairs. As a guide for the Listener I had written: “It’s not my problem.” They heard it as a put down: “It’s your problem, and you can stuff it.” After I finished the workshop I hurried to the nearest phone and called the graphic designer, who said, “Too late. I already turned it over to the printer and it will cost us.” I said, “I’ll have to eat that. Change the loser line to read, ‘I don’t own the problem.’” The corrected card has worked well ever since. Another note about “problem.” It’s not a negative, but merely an indicator of an issue or topic or concern you’d like to talk over or solve. (Can you tell I have a degree in mathematics?) I’ve taught the Talker-Listener Card (TLC) method in workshops, parent/child relationships, couples’ counseling, churches, school and university settings, city governments, small businesses, and large corpo-rations. I have it printed on the back of my business card, so it’s always available. Occasionally, people show me the worn and wrinkled cards they keep in their purses or wallets. Some attach them to their smart phones, keep them on their desks at work or on their mantles at home. Others give theirs away to people they feel need them more than they do. When they run into me, they ask for new ones. This handy little tool, the Talker-Listener Card, has helped many people significantly improve their communication, their relationships, and the cooperation of their work groups. I believe in it so much we made the business-sized cards free to read-ers. If you want a few free business-sized cards or a PDF to print on the back of your own business cards check our website at PetersenPublications.com. Taking Turns Seems Simple Taking turns is essential to the Talker-Listener process. It may seem simple, but it is not. We learned the social-getting-along skill of taking turns in pre-school. However, before we left grade school, many of us abandoned it for the more competitive skills useful in getting ahead of others. I want us to apply our child-learned skill of taking turns directly to communication. If we can focus on one person’s view at a time and establish human connection, we’ll all feel heard, sense that we are val-ued, relax, feel safe, and function better. The A-frame card works by folding it in the middle so that TALKER is on one side and LIS-TENER on the other. Placed between two people or used in a group, the Talker-Listener Card helps track whose turn it is to talk and whose turn to lis-ten. It’s like a game people choose to play togeth-er. It sets guidelines to aid participants with their roles and makes it easier to focus on one person at a time. The game-like quality can take the edge off the personal communication struggle and replace it with some friendly objectivity. TALKER I’m most bothered I own the problem l GOALS To share my thoughts Attacking To share my feelings l Without l Accusing l l Labeling l Judging I’m calm enough to hear I don’t own the problem GOALS l l l To understand To clarify Without l Agreeing l l Advising l Disagreeing Defending Using the TLC is simple: One person talks; the other listens. When both talker and listener finish, the card is reversed. Then the person who listened first talks and the one who talked first, listens. This works like an online keyboard Chat with a customer service tech: While you type a question or comment in your Send box, the screen indicates the tech is Listening. Then when you hit the Send button, the screen indicates the tech is Responding (Talking). You wait for the return message to be typed and sent to your screen. Hitting the Send button changes the direction of the communication, like turning the card. So you are either Responding or Listening, but only one at a time. When you first use keyboard Chat it seems unnatural and mechani-cal, where only one person can type at a time. Similarly, when we first take turns with the TLC, it feels odd, but that’s simply because we aren’t used to communicating that way. Imagine we are fishing together in Oregon. Standing hip deep in a wild cold river, I fight and land a fifteen-pound steelhead. Those big trout swim to the ocean and back to spawning streams, repeating the cycle sev-eral times. As a result of fighting ocean currents and predators, they be-come crafty and strong — one of the hardest fighting game fish to catch. It’s been awhile since I caught my last one. I’m so excited I have to talk to re-live the experience, even if you were there to see it. So I start babbling to unload my emotion container. But an odd thing happens. When I pause for a breath, you grab the conversation and change the subject to a fishing memory of yours. Perhaps my steelhead reminded you of a larger one you caught last year, one you heard about, or “the one that got away.” Even though I’m too excited to listen (flat-brained), you launch into your story anyway. I stuff my story and off we go into one of those episodes leaving both of us feeling unheard and incomplete. Each of us sees our story as the most compelling as we toss pieces of our stories over the other’s shoulders, each waiting for breaks to finish ours, as did Jack and Jill leaving work on Friday. Don’t beat yourself up when you think of how many times you’ve done this. Every time someone else catches a fish, I notice the same nearly uncontrollable memory surge (emotion) well up in me, jolt my brain, and I want to tell one of my stories. On good days I can remember to avoid talking when others need listening ears. On other days I still blow it. One fish story at a time We don’t have to give in to the urge to take over someone else’s air-time. If we communicated well about the fishing incident, that is, I finished my turn to talk (tell my story) before you started yours, it might sound something like this: Me: “Wow! Was that a fighter! Did you see her jump?” You: “I came around the bend in time to see the last jump, how long did it take you to land it...?” Me: “About fifteen minutes. Thought I was going to lose her when she got near that submerged branch.” You: “It’d be tough to lose a fish like that...? You more relieved or excited...?” Me: “Excited. I haven’t caught one in quite awhile. She’s really bright, just in from the ocean.” You: “Bright as a new dime...? You going to keep it or release it...?” Me: “This one’s a hatchery fish, see the clipped fin? It’s a keeper.” You: “You must be pleased...? What’d you hook it on...?”

Me: “Salmon eggs with chartreuse and fluorescent orange yarn — water’s pretty murky.” You: “You use the yarn to make it tougher for them to spit the hook out or for the color...?” Me: “Both, and I use salmon eggs for smell in the colored water.” You: “That makes sense...?” Me: “Yeah, I’m happy my strategy worked.” And finally, your turn begins: “You know, that reminds me of one I caught last year...” Having pretty well finished a turn at my story, my ears and heart are open enough to take in your fish story. Being heard revives my ca-pacity to listen to you, so I can ask, “Where’d you catch yours...?” When we handle one fish story at a time, we can experience a level of satisfaction and connection that may not happen otherwise. Good listeners improve our stories Once at a preaching conference, I heard a nationally recognized black preacher discussing the “amens" and other vocal responses of his con-gregation during his sermons. (I learned from a reader that in most pre-dominantly black churches “call and response” is a critical component of preaching. The response is not just the congregation affirming the message; the response is part of the message. Without the interaction of the congregation, a black pastor would know that there was a commu-nication breakdown somewhere in the preaching.) He said, “It isn’t just up to preachers [talkers] to get the message across. We need help. Preaching takes a lot of work from the congregation too [the listeners]. After services sometimes my people say, ‘We did good this morn-ing!’ Now that’s real preaching when they feel like we did it together.” In genuine communication it does take both talker and listener do-ing their parts. The listener’s job is more than waiting for people to finish their fish stories. A capable listener, like a midwife, helps people give birth to the feelings and thoughts inside them. It often takes time for talkers to become clear about what they are trying to say. Listening supports theprocess and helps them tell their stories. Such midwifing takes skill and patience, but it’s worth it. For talkers, sharing an experience with someone who is interested completes it. If no one listens or cares, the wonder of the incident some-how diminishes. We can help other people round out their experiences by listening instead of interrupting. In return, we become closer to the talkers, as we share in the excitement of the birthing process. Teeth marks in the tongue When other people are talking, I find that my thoughts and feelings have a life of their own. They seem to want to butt into other people’s talking time. They seem so pressing at the time, I want to say, “That re-minds me...” and dive right into the middle of their paragraphs. Recognizing our tendency to interrupt, change the subject, give opinions, make suggestions, or argue, gives us a chance to keep ourselves from leaning into someone else’s sentences. When someone tells you about a death, a job change, or their two-year-old’s accomplishments and you’re struck by something more interesting, bite your tongue and listen. Instead of talking, respond as a listener, “Sounds like your friend’s death caught you by surprise.” Or, “How will this job change affect you?” Or, “Oooh, what a proud father...?” Then bite your tongue again to keep from talking. If you absolutely can’t stand waiting any longer, say: “That reminds me of something, but we’ll get to it later...? Please go on...? What happened then...?” Teeth marks in the tongue — signs of a good listener. End arguing as we know it Arguments occur when two views clash and a flat-brained tango be-gins. If I try to sell you my point of view, while you are trying to get me to buy yours, we’re in trouble. I’ll be waiting for you to pause so I can straighten you out. You’ll be listening for a hole in my view so you can drive a truck through it. And soon we’ll be trying to take each other apart. If we take turns, that is, focus on one point of view at a time, we lit-erally can’t argue. Just as one hand can’t clap alone, so one point of view can’t produce an argument. It’s like dropping one end of a tug-of-war rope. Again, this may sound too simple to be true, but you and I can’t argue if we both are focused on understanding either your point of view or mine — one at a time. “But, how do I get others who really disagree to hear me?” In the years since the last edition of “Why,” the cultural norm in public and private discourse has been changing: Civility and compro-mise are in many circles gone, demonizing and blaming seem in, right and left extremist rigidity and contentiousness is hard to avoid, caus-ing many heart-wrenching splits over political and religious lines. Some families have quit getting together for holidays, too frightened of poten-tial friendship-breaking arguments. Church denominations and politi-cal parties stop talking to each other and searching for ways to cooperate on what they can agree about. In this context a professional counselor friend invited me to speak to her senior community. I asked what they had in mind and she said a version of “How do we talk and get someone to understand us, someone we really disagree with —that is, really, really disagree with — to listen to us?” And I replied, “I get that question a lot these days.” I paused and said, “I notice that no one comes to me and asks, ‘Jim, these are contentious times, how can I listen better and really understand where others with whom I disagree are coming from?’” Yep, most of us want to talk and be heard. My friend winced and ac-knowledged, “Ugh, caught. I expect I’m more interested in getting others to lis-ten and agree with me than I am in trying to understand them. I’m embarrassed.” What about you? Are you more interested in your own views? Do you really want to know how those who you really disagree with think and feel? Are you interested in understanding them or in convincing them of your truth? Well, there’s a clue in that conversation about how to disagree agreeably. It’s one of my earliest learnings in communicating: Listen first and talk second. Our best chance to be heard is to listen until others trust us and feel safe. It takes genuine curiosity and the humility that acknowledges we might have something to learn, by asking, “I’m going to set my view aside, because I’d really like to get a handle on how you see this issue. What can you share about your point of view that might help me understand you better?” My guideline, listen first, talk second does not mean doing one or two proforma listening techniques to set them up for your one, two punch and then nailing them with your truth. It means genuine open-ness, and a deep desire to understand what makes them tick. For the sake of full disclosure: When I run into someone who is convinced they are right and we thoroughly disagree, I often get argu-mentative and blow it, but I’m trying. And that is all I can ask from you. Put your money where your mouth is Occasionally Sally and I hit one of those spots where we thoroughly disagree on a relatively factual matter and see a possible argument tak-ing shape. We both “know” we’re right. When there seems nowhere else to go, one of us says, “Want to put a quarter on it?” We chuckle, relax and come off a near squabble. On a lighter note, we often do it when watching sports on TV. We each figure who we want to put a quarter on. When we find out who was right or won, we actually pay off. Once in a while we go double or nothing. We’re big spenders. Note how the simple bet reminds us that at critical times we can be playful. It acknowledges that people who care about each other can seri-ously disagree. Differing points of view have nothing to do with friend-ship. Over time it has built our playful, disagreeing muscles. This betting game incidentally, does not work on strongly held opinions where we really see the related facts differently. More on that later; I’ll suggest putting our opinions into a drawer and closing it, while we’re attempting to understand another person. Powerful opinions of-ten get in the way of listening. If you want to stop arguing, you can. We can switch from leaning on others argumentatively to moving with them in cooperation, or at least mutual understanding, if we use the talker-listener process. We’ll go to work on it in the next chapter.

How to Listen Better: Technique #7 When you are well into a turn listening, you may have a guess about what your talker is trying to say. You can use it to help that person figure out where they’re coming from without breaking into their turn. Guess ■ After listening awhile, guess what’s going on with the talker. Spell it out briefly. Ask the talker to try it on to see if fits. Guessing is a reality check for both you and the talker. Making a guess says to the talker that you are listening, interested, and think-ing (engaged). Try saying: “I have a hunch about what may be going on with you. Let me lay it out for you and see what you think... Does that fit...?” Or, “From what you’re saying, I’d guess that you might be ready for a job change...? How does that strike you...?” Note that (...?) makes it clear the talkers are the authorities on what’s going on with them and are still talking (not you). To keep us from pushing our ideas on to the talkers, keep in mind that what we’re doing is guessing. Not laying our “truth” on them. Our listen-ing job is to help them find their truth. Then we won’t get invested in our guesses and turn them into talking points (even though it’s more fun to talk and hand our “truths” down from above). An accurate guess matters little. While a good guess may open the door for talkers to see their situations through different eyes, guesses that are only partly right or even all wrong work too. They invite talkers to correct us or fill in what we miss. Talkers may say in response to your guess, “Mmmm, the first part missed a mile, but that last part really hits me. I’ll think that one through.” Or, “No, that’s not it at all, but I’m beginning to see what the problem is. Thanks.” Or, “You may be right. I hadn’t considered changing jobs, but that might solve a lot of the problems I’m facing. I’ll think on it.” Guess is a helpful listening technique because it encourages talkers to review and clarify their thoughts and often to take a step beyond the options they were considering. Now let’s move a little deeper into the Talker-Listener Card.

Chapter 9 The Talker-Listener Card a friend Of mine calls the Talker-Listener Card “a foldable third person,” that is, someone you bring in to moderate a difficult discussion. Intro-ducing a third person into a conversation adds objectivity and puts us on our good behavior — the same thing that happened when I arrived to help the arguing couple that rainy night years ago. At times we all can use a foldable third person to keep us honest and on target. If you and I agree to use the Talker-Listener Card, it links us in a common effort. We play by the rules of a game and take turns, instead of letting a discussion slip into misunderstanding and arguing like a couple of street fighters. Using the TLC forces us to observe the roles we play. Placing the card between us takes some of the heat out of discussing difficult issues. It provides a little objective distance, because we are playing a game with rules and holding a serious discussion at the same time. This two-pronged action makes it harder to get caught up in an argument. When we’re playing a game with a little folded card between us, how can we take ourselves too seriously or our conversation too per-sonally? The card reminds us that we can work and play together even when our opinions differ widely. As a reminder in more settings some-one suggested I put Talker on one side of a necklace pendant (or coffee cup) and Listener on the other. How would that strike you? Using the TLC opens the door to more effective conversations when someone needs to “talk things over.” This worked many times for me in my last pastorate. Members of my congregation, who knew the method, would invite me to breakfast or lunch. After we ordered, they’d pull the TLC out of their pocket or purse, and set it on the table between us. I knew immediately that they had a concern to share or some kind of complaint. I’d think, “Oh boy, I’m going to get it now. Why do I teach this stuff?” In a minute or two when my thud subsided, I remembered the ground rules were there for both of us. I couldn’t use subtle attacking techniques to save my skin, because the TLC was there to keep me hon-est. Using the TLC made it safe for them to discuss something that was churning in their emotion containers. It insured that they would be fairly heard. After I’d calmed down, I was pleased that they had learned to confront me in a constructive way and that we were able to discuss contentious issues. I knew that after I had absorbed a few emotional jolts in the pro-cess of understanding them, I would get my time to talk. They knew the rules applied to them too, so they would take their turn trying to understand me. By using the Talker-Listener Card we had chosen cooperation over trying to win, partnership over courtroom. We had tacitly agreed up front not to argue, but to work toward understanding each other. Taking turns was the symbol for all that and what’s more, it worked. It made it so much easier to collaborate for the good of the church, even when we held divergent views and concerns. The TLC as intervention While sitting in their living room late one afternoon, a couple who knew the TLC system forgot their training and slipped into a typical marital squabble. Their arguments grew fuzzier, their voices louder. As their quarrel escalated into the Flat-Brain Tango, they lost track of their initial concerns and their caring for each other. Their teenage son was rummaging through the refrigerator in the kitchen. He could hear the rising voices. He hesitated, then walked through the living room, grabbed the Talker-Listener Card from its place on the mantel, set it on the couch between his parents, and circled back into the kitchen to finish making his sandwich. He never said a word. The parents were exposed as if a mirror had been turned on them. They shuddered and smiled at each other in embarrassment and said, “Guess our brains went flat. Okay, let’s take turns. Who talks first? Who can listen first?” Focusing on one point of view at a time, the couple soon resolved their dispute. When they told me this story later, they knew, old habits had re-surfaced and bumped them back into a familiar pattern before they real-ized it. With their son’s simple act, the foldable third person intervened, allowing them to see what they were doing. Self-recognition makes bet-ter choices possible. We all forget Sometimes I forget what I teach. One evening driving home after at-tending a play, my wife asked whether I enjoyed it and what I thought about it. It always makes me feel good when she’s interested in what I think and feel. So eagerly, I shared my reactions to the drama. Then I settled into what I thought was a companionable silence. A ways down the freeway she said, “This is when you turn the card and ask me how I liked the play. Remember taking turns?” Fortunately for me, she was smiling and knows the Talker-Listener Card, sometimes bet-ter than I do. I’d become so caught up in my own talking that I forgot to take a turn listening. I’m still learning too. As we move along we’ll focus more on listening than on talking, since most of us have more difficulty with listening. But I will also discuss how to take your turn talking in ways that have the best chance of being heard. Getting ready to use the TLC Begin by observing other peoples’ conversations when you are not involved. Identify the roles, who’s talking and who’s listening, who’s sending and who’s receiving. You can tell by whose issues are being discussed.

The issue, concern, or story belongs to the talker. Once you can recognize when other people switch their roles, move to your own conversations and observe the role changes between you and another person. See whether you are sending while the other per-son receives, whether the other is sending while you receive, or are you both sending with no one receiving? The goal here is to develop skill as an observer while you are either talking or listening. It takes practice. Observing pays dividends The act of observation puts distance between you and the heat of a con-versation, creating some objectivity. This will help to keep your brain from going flat, so you can think, talk, and listen more effectively. If you listen while the other person talks, you not only get a clearer pic-ture of what the other is saying, but you gain time in the back of your mind to figure out what you think — before it’s your turn to talk. You do this not to win an argument, but to respond to what’s really there in your talker. When you observe that someone can’t stop talking, an option is to choose to stop talking yourself and listen instead. Then when you observe the other person has finished talking and seems ready to listen, you can shift to talking and have a better chance of being heard. We have little chance of changing our behavior unless we can calm-ly observe it. Improving communication skill depends on being able to accurately identify what we are doing, so we can choose other options, if they are needed. Let’s observe a phone conversation between forty-year-old, harried Mary, and her widowed mother, who lives across town: Mary (talker role): “Oh Mom, my feet hurt. I spent all day shopping for a new sofa.” Mary’s mother (also talker role): “Well, I don’t get to shop at the big stores anymore. Since your father died, I’m stuck in this apartment.” Mary (talker): “But, you could get a driver’s license. All your friends drive. They could take you shopping. I’d like to get a sofa before our anniver-sary party. It would make the living room more inviting. The old one looks pretty tacky.” MM (talker): “I guess I feel run down too. Sometimes your brother takes me shopping, but I hate to trouble him. I know how busy he is. And you never seem to have time to take me anymore.” A pretty standard low-level flat-brain tango: Each person so focused on their own concerns, that neither pays attention to what the other is saying. They spring-board off each other’s comments, right back into their own agendas, each delivering low-level thuds to the other. The result? Both feel unheard and hurt because their concerns don’t seem to matter to the other. Had the TLC been in sync with this conversation, it would have moved back and forth quick enough to make a good fan. Let’s try the conversation again using the Talker-Listener method. Observe the listening response to each talker statement and note the thud reduction:: Mary (talker): “Oh Mother, my feet hurt. I spent all day shopping for a new sofa.” MM (listener): “You must be really tired...? What kind of sofa are you looking for...?” Mary (talker): “Something in green that would fit our living room. I want it before our anniversary party. The old one looks pretty tacky.” MM (listener): “I’ll bet you’d be glad to get it before your party...? The party seems really important to you...?” (shifts role to talker) “I can’t get downtown to shop in the big stores anymore since your father died.” Mary (listener): “Sounds like you feel pretty limited and lost without Dad...? That must be really hard for you...?” MM (talker): “It really is. I didn’t realize how much I depended on him. (Pause) Your brother takes me shopping sometimes, but I hate to ask him be-cause he’s so busy.” Mary (listener): “I can’t imagine what it would be like losing a husband after all those years...? It must make you feel good that (brother) Bill takes you once in awhile...? Sounds like you’d appreciate it if you and I spent more time together...?” MM (talker): “Oh, yes I would, but I do know how busy you are.” When each acknowledged what the other felt and thought, the pressure on their flat brains subsided. They also learned more from each other than they did in their first conversation. This conversation would provide them a sense of connection in-stead of distance, as in the earlier conversation. Telephone practice The phone is great for honing observer skills because the other person can’t see what you’re doing. Keep a Talker-Listener Card next to the phone or computer on your desk or in a pocket or purse with your smart phone. When you are on a call place the card so the TALKER side faces the one who’s talking and switch when roles change. You may be surprised at how rapidly the roles shift, how easily you both get caught up in expressing your views, and how little time either of you spends focused on what the other person is saying. During face-to-face conversations, use the telephone observation model by mentally keeping the Talker-Listener Card between you and the other person. If you do that, you can monitor conversation flow, and know when to listen and when to talk with the best chance of be-ing heard. Try the TLC with a “safe” friend When you’ve observed enough to track the role switches, then try using the TLC with a friend who is patient, kind, and understanding — some-one with whom you feel safe. This can benefit you both. Because you each get a turn to talk about something that matters and have someone else really focus on what the two of you are thinking and feeling. This can benefit you both. Because you each get a turn to talk about something that matters and have someone else really focus on what the two of you are thinking and feeling. Start slowly. Explain the taking turns process. Ask if the other per-son will try it with you and be sure you have enough time to experi-ment. You may want to draw a quick flat-brain picture on a napkin by way of background. If you get agreement, pick a neutral but interesting topic and set the TLC between you and decide who talks first. Both of you be observers to note the role changes. Whoever first notices a role shift turns the card, keeping the Talker side facing the new talker. If you start to talk out of turn, say, “Wait, it was your turn to talk, wasn’t it...? You weren’t finished yet...? Let’s go back to what you were saying...?” Or, ask, “Who’s talking and who’s listening...? I think we lost track...?” Then turn the card back so the original talker can finish. This game-playing “give and take” makes it easier to hear another person’s concerns. It can help keep you out of the courtroom and deep-en your friendships. For further practice with friends, family, or business associates try taking turns by using topics such as: • What does (vacation or any other topic) mean to you? • What traditions did/do matter most and least to you? • What do you like and dislike about your (work, recreation, etc.)? • What places in the world would you like to see and spend time in? • What is it about these places that grabs you? • What places have been most meaningful to you? In what way? • What people have most touched your life? In what way? • What books, movies, ideas, or events have moved you? • What would you like to be remembered for? You could use questions like these to enliven your lunch breaks or family dinners. Conversations with meaningful personal sharing can significantly deepen knowledge and relationships. A coffee house experiment At times I find myself upset and/or confused about something in my life. It works for me to talk it over with someone who listens and helps me sort it out. So I call a friend to meet me over tea or coffee. After I pay for our liquids of choice I set the TLC on the table be-tween us and say, “I need a listener to help me clarify an issue. See what the TLC says: When I’m the talker, it’s my problem. You try to understand and clarify, that is, ask me questions and repeat back what you hear me saying. And please note the ‘Withouts’ at the bottom of the card: No agreeing, dis-agreeing, giving advice, or defending. I want to solve the problem myself. To do that it would help me to talk out loud and hear you feed back what I’m saying. Then when I’m finished, you’ll get a chance to say what you think about my situation. We’ll turn the card around and I’ll listen to you. Are you willing to do this for me?” While they routinely say, “Yes, of course,” but before I’m through my first paragraph they jump in with advice or an argument: “But you could do...” Or, “Why don’t you...” Or, “That’ll never work...” Or, “Don’t you think they had a reason for doing that?” So I turn the card around and say, “I know this is hard, but you just switched from listening to talking. Remember, no agreeing, disagreeing, advis-ing, or defending. Please, just ask questions; say back to me what you hear me saying; bite your tongue, and say, ‘Un-huh’ a lot. Okay to try it again?” I usually have to turn the card another time or two, but most peo-ple learn quickly. So, I talk, they feed it back, they ask a few questions, and I sort out my issues. When I’m clearer headed, I say, “Okay, I think I’ve got it worked out. Thanks for listening. You’ve been really helpful. Now it’s your turn. Is there anything you want to say about my situation or for that matter, about your situation?” Then I listen to them the way they listened to me. I might also add, “I appreciate your listening to me. If you could use a sounding board anytime, I’d be happy to return the favor and be a listener for you.” One time when I was in a decision-making bind and needed to fig-ure something out quickly, I phoned someone who had recently taken my listening skills class, a real novice at the process. We met for lunch. He struggled to do what he’d learned: “Oh, ah, okay. What’s it about, Jim...?” As we continued I could hear the words he’d learned in class. Being inexperienced, it sounded pretty stilted and canned. Even though I could see what he was doing and knew where he learned it — it still worked! What an experience. He practiced his talker-listener skills. I began to calm down and got a handle on my issue. I was surprised, pleased, and a little embarrassed that his mechanical yet earnest efforts worked for me. Can you use the TLC with yourself? Sometimes when I have something troubling me or a decision to make, no listener is available. I practice the method on me. Why not? We carry on internal conversations all the time, so why not use good listening skills with ourselves? During an internal conversation I try to give up criticizing myself in a way that blocks creative thinking. I treat me as an accepting friend would. I ask myself questions and respond. I re-say my thoughts with different words. I move back and forth between my head and stomach, my thoughts and feelings, using the listening techniques in the book. Gradually, I become clearer, more relaxed, and better able to make decisions. But, it doesn’t always work. If I’m still too muddled, I call a friend and set a time later to trade some good listening. You might be surprised at how many of your friends would happily take you up on such an offer. Some people can’t listen I was on a fishing trip with a friend who normally doesn’t listen well, but I really needed to talk something out. He was familiar with the TLC, so I thought I’d give it a shot. When we stopped for breakfast I said, “I really need to talk.” I described what I wanted: “Ask questions, repeat what I’m saying, and don’t argue or give me advice.” He agreed, but immediately interrupted and started plowing me under with advice. After a couple of tries, I gave up and reverted to fish-ing talk. I’m sure he never noticed. Some people don’t seem to have the disposition to be listeners. Their own thoughts and feelings make so much internal noise, they can’t hear anyone else. I imagine them with constant low-level walking-flat-brains, that disable everything above their mouths. When I make the mistake of trying to share with one of them, I’ve learned after a bit to change the subject or ask them a question about their lives, and off they go to the races, enmeshed in their own worlds, seemingly impervious to anyone else’s concerns. In spite of their paltry listening skills, I maintain some of these relationships with friends, co-workers, and relatives because we share other interests, values, or work. Cultivate some listening friends A life accompanied by a few good listeners makes for less loneliness, clearer thoughts and feelings, and creative, collaborative living. The question, “Who did you discuss important, personal issues with this year?” was asked in a study in 1985 and again in 2004. Roughly three decades ago, the average answer was “Three friends.” Two decades later, “No one.” That is a scary loss! If you don’t have enough friends with whom you can “talk things over,” you may want to connect with a few who are willing to learn with you how to be good listeners. If you do, then quickly tell them the flat-brain story, give them a Talker-Listener Card, and teach them how to use it, so you can exchange listening with each other. −∞− How to Listen Better: Technique #8 Asking questions is basic to good listening, but must be done carefully. Play detective ■ Ask questions to gather information. Sort, compile, and organize it so you and the talker can see it better. Fill in missing pieces and look for connections and relationships. Kinsey Milhone, the private investigator and hero of Sue Grafton’s mys-tery series (A is for Alibi, etc.), describes a similar crime-solving method. As Kinsey gathers information, she writes each kernel on a three-by-five card. She stick-pins them to a large bulletin board so she can organize them in groups, see their relationships, notice the information gaps, and get a clue about the next questions to ask. Every situation has a past, present, and future. Each area can be mined for important people, events, and influences. As you listen to fill in the information-picture ask what led up to this situation, what is go-ing on now, and what the future ramifications might be. As the pictureunfolds, the talker (and you) will better understand their struggle and see more options. As a listener you are treating talkers as though they can think, ob-serve, question, examine, and problem solve their own situations with-out falling apart. This process gives talkers the sense that they can impact their own situations. It lets them know you have confidence they can act in more creative ways in the future. Use questioning carefully A word of caution: Questioning can be misused. More often by men, though sometimes by women, questioning becomes a license to take over a conversation from the talker. Rather than taking time to savor and soak in what the talker is un-covering, we can morph questions into judgments, jump ahead, or push for solutions: “What did you do that caused the problem?” Or, “So you’re up-set? When are you going to get over it?” Or, “When are you going to call him and take care of it?” Or, “Why’d you do that?” It is important to let talkers be where they are until the owners of the problem are ready to move on. In bullying hands questions can turn into staccato attacks and bat-tering rams. For questioning to be helpful, it takes gentleness and patience. Good listeners really try to understand what is developing in talkers, rather than trying to force opinions on them. Listen for clues: “You said a couple ofseemingly opposite things... What do you make of them...?” Allow time for information to emerge. Listen for possible implications. Let silence provide space for the talker to reflect. We often miss clues in what talkers are saying by jumping ahead to something we’re focused on: “So why did you spend so much money?” “Why” questions not so subtly mask accusations, rather than seek more information. Soften your questions with heart talk: “So, I’m wondering if you have any idea about what’s bothering you...?” Or, “I’m curious about...?” Or, “It seems to me that this matters to you...? Tell me how this is affecting you...?” When you play detective and personalize your questions to keep them from taking on a prosecutorial tone, you’ll better be able to follow the leads that your talker provides. This careful questioning mode turns up and fills in helpful informa-tion for you and the talker, all of which is helpful for making decisions.

Chapter 10 TLC — Who Talks First? when yOu are ready to experiment further with the Talker-Listener Card, it’s best to sit down with someone who’s agreed to do it with you. For illustration in the next few chapters, I’ll move back and forth between setting up a talker-listener practice session and some real situations you might experience or observe. When you invite someone, tell them first that you want to talk something over with them, trying a safe method with no arguing, just an attempt to understand each other. Say: “I want to try a Talker-Listener Card taking-turns-method with you. Are you willing to give it a try with me?” TALKER — I’m most bothered Then Then look at the TLC together. The first step is to decide who talks first. Because you asked for the session, you would probably talk first. If you have used the TLC, you may choose to be listener first to show how it’s done. However, if you both have something going on, figure out who’s the most bothered, stirred up, or flat-brained. Let that person talk first, because they are least able to hear. “Bothered” here isn’t necessarily a negative. It could mean con-cerned, excited, angry, happy, depressed, or worried. Talking first will unflatten the brain, enabling the ears to take a turn listening later. Sometimes deciding who’s most stirred up is difficult because we don’t recognize our feelings or haven’t learned to communicate them. Men tend to have more trouble with this and often will say, “I’m not really bothered. You talk first.” Polite, yes, but notice how it’s qualified with a “not really.” While the “not really” means not bothered a lot, it still means bothered some, and that some may affect the eardrums enough to cause trouble hearing. The best way I know to recognize and describe feeling levels is to rate them on a zero to ten scale — zero for no feeling and ten for enough energy to power a rocket. So “not really” isn’t an eight on the scale, but probably somewhere between two and five. What do we do about this? Most people can attach a number to their emotional levels, so when you want to know how bothered a person is, first share your number, then ask: “So you’re not ‘really bothered.’ How bothered are you? Give me a number between zero and ten...?” And the other will say without hesitation, “Five” (or whatever num-ber fits). We all have an emotional level above which we can’t listen effec-tively. One of you needs a number low enough to listen without getting distracted or argumentative. Take a minute now to think about what the maximum feeling level number might be where you can still set aside your concerns and focus on someone else’s. If you attempt a conversation when both of you are too distracted by your own agendas, then you’re in for disappointment and probably a damaging disagreement. LISTENER — I’m calm enough to hear LISTENER GOALS I’m calm enough to hear I don’t own the problem l l l Without l l To provide safety To understand To clarify Agreeing Disagreeing Advising Defending l l Once you’ve compared your feeling numbers, return to the card. The lower-number person says: “You’re a five and I’m a three, you talk first. I can listen a while.” Set the card so the Talker side faces the “five” person and the listener side faces the “three” person. The least flat-brained person is acknowledging what’s printed on the Listener side of the card — “I’m calm enough to hear.” The listener sets his or her concerns aside for the moment, knowing that both will get turns to talk. The listener focuses first on the other’s point of view and works to help sort out the talker’s concerns. Thud means listen Outside of a practice session the need to use the Talker-Listener process is obvious when someone says, “I’m upset. I want to talk with you.” Unfor-tunately, people usually don’t give us such clear messages. In the real world my gut tells me when another person needs to talk. I meet a friend on the street who says with a slight edge, “It’s been a long time since you called me for lunch.” Or, “You missed an important meeting last Tuesday.” Or, “My wife died since I saw you last!” Such com-ments register with that uneasy, vaguely accused, thud feeling. It usually evokes an urge to set the other person straight, to defend myself, or at minimum to talk rather than listen. This easily could escalate into the Flat-Brain Tango of Chapter Six. To apply love here requires giving new meaning to the pit-of-the-stomach thud. It could mean returning to Chapter Seven to remember how to deflect or manage the Tango. Instead of letting those feelings goad you into defending yourself, recast them as early warning signals that someone else is bothered and needs to talk. Shift into a listening support mode, when you run into comments like those above. Say: “Mmmm. A long time since we had lunch...? Have you wanted to get together...?” Or, “Was the meeting I missed an important one...? Did that cause difficulty for you...?” Or, “Your wife died...? You must be terribly shaken...? What happened...?” Listening responses like these, open the way toward reducing alienation and increasing understanding. Don’t let a question mask what someone needs to say Sometimes when people are bothered, they throw us off by asking ques-tions. Grammatically, question marks call for answers, but often they hide what needs to be said. Questions like, “Why haven’t you called me?” Or, “Did you know I just got a new job?” often disguise unshared concerns. What lies under the questions is not clear. Are we in trouble with them? Do they want us to be more involved in their lives? Listen, clar-ify, and find out. In this wife/husband encounter listen for the masked concern. She asks, “Why did you ignore the children last night?” This question could trig-ger the husband to defend himself (attacking her) when what she needs is an understanding listener (him). If he gives a quick answer, “Because they were a pain in the neck,” he’ll be talking not listening. As the tango begins she’ll get even more upset because she didn’t get heard. She’ll likely get defensive (attacking him) because he judged (attacked) her children. Often when someone asks a question, the first answer that pops into our minds may seem really important, but after listening awhile, it turns out to be irrelevant. What the person says first, often isn’t what the person means or needs to say. Remember the listening technique, decode? In the above case the wife didn’t recognize she had something to tell her husband, so he didn’t have a clue what she meant by her ques-tion. If the husband had responded as a listener, he might have asked, “Are you irritated about how I handled the children last night...? Did you think I hurt their feelings...?” Then he’d find out what she needed to say, “I’m worried about them. I think they were acting up because since the dog died they haven’t had much chance to talk about it.” Does the TLC help when only one person uses it? Do both parties need to understand the talker-listener process for it to be useful? Certainly it’s easier if both do, and especially if you use the Flat-Brain Syndrome to give you a common language to describe upsets. But it can be effective even when the other person doesn’t know how to listen or understand what a flat brain is. If we notice that someone is bothered, we can choose to listen first. When our turn comes to talk, we’ll likely be more successful, because we’ll understand their concerns and they will already feel heard. As a result, they will be calmer and more able to listen to us.

How to Listen Better: Technique #9 Many people think that single-minded is good, that they shouldn’t have more than one feeling or motivation at a time. Either they should want this, or that, but not both. They assume they can’t both love and hate people at once, love two people at the same time, or that if they do, there is something wrong with them. The both hands listening tech-nique will help clear this confusion that gets in the way of their making clean decisions. Both hands ■ Acknowledge the talker’s mixed feelings by alternating hand gestures. To help talkers get comfortable with their mix of feelings, gesture back and forth from one hand to the other as you acknowledge all of their feelings. In listening you might say to a guy: “On the one hand you love her and on the other hand, you’re afraid to propose to her...?” Or, “On the one hand, you could hug her and on the other, you want to yell at her...?” Here’s an example of more than two feelings in the person you are listening to: “On the one hand, you want to buy that expensive boat, and on the other, you want to save your money...? And then again, on this hand, you want to buy a new car, while on that hand, you want to reduce your mort-gage...? Must be tough to be pulled so many ways at once...?” By going back and forth between hands you can cover an infinite range of feelings, help your talker clarify their emotions, and relax about having more than one. Physically, using both hands to acknowledge helps talkers see that it’s okay to have more than one concern at a time. This listening tech-nique legitimizes their several emotions so they can deal with them in making their decisions.

Chapter 11

TLC — Owning the Problem Once yOu’ve established who talks first, then you need to maintain clarity about who owns the problem you are going to talk about. So check the second lines under TALKER: I own the problem and under LISTENER: I don’t own the problem. As noted earlier, by “problem” here, I don’t mean to suggest something negative, but rather whatever concern or topic the talker wants to talk about. TALKER — I own the problem TALKER I’m most bothered I own the problem l GOALS To share my thoughts Accusing Attacking To share my feelings l Without l l l Labeling Judging l I own the problem means that I lead off and we talk about my issues, agenda, or story from my point of view. Both of us look through my eyes and experiences, not yours. When it is your turn to be the talker, we’ll shift to your problem, that is, consider your concerns from your perspective. Bouncing pronouns Problem-ownership revolves around whose story we are discussing. Watch the pronouns. Let’s say I tell you about my attempt to lose weight. You describe a foolproof method you know that could solve my weight problem. Note the ownership shift from my problem to your solution. I own the problem also means the talker has responsibility for han-dling the issue. In this case, dealing with my weight is up to me. If, as a listener, you remember this, you might ask about my frustra-tion over my weight-loss attempts, what I’ve tried, what’s worked, what hasn’t, and what I’m considering. Then I’d be free to come to my own conclusions and put full energy into them. For another look, let’s change the problem to finances and from mine to yours. You as the talker say to me: “What do you think I should do about my financial situation [problem]?” I quit listening and start talking, “Mutual funds are the only way that makes sense. Here’s a list of the best...” Notice how I’m deciding for you and your money. I lost track of the fact that it is your life, not mine. While on the sur-face it appears that we’re discussing mutual funds vs. other investments, actually underneath we’re getting into a tug-a-war over who decides about your investments. During challenging counseling sessions, I sometimes lose track of who owns the problem. I start leaning forward, working hard, coming up with solutions, trying to be helpful. I find myself explaining what they should do. I try to persuade and even push to get them moving (in my direction). Once when I was working hard on his problem, the guy responded by sitting back and relaxing. He said, “That’ll never work. You don’t know my wife. If you did, you’d know better than to suggest that.” That activated my observer role and I saw that I had leaned in while he leaned back, as if to say, “Just try to solve my problem. You’re so smart. Hah! You can’t do any better with my life than I can.” Fortunately, I recalled the LISTENER side of the card: I don’t own the problem, leaned back, and handed the problem back to him. While I listened, he went to work and clarified his problem. Such ownership issues fall under the “good fences make good neighbors” philosophy. While looking over your backyard fence, you can comment on your neighbor’s peas and carrots, if you remember they are her peas and carrots. She gets to decide what to plant, how to make them grow better, and when to harvest them. You can help her think about them, but they are hers, not yours. (If you respect her owner-ship, she may even share some veggies with you.)

If you push her toward your ideas about her peas and carrots, you will have crossed the line (and the fence). Most of us instinctively feel this overstepping of boundaries. We don’t like it when others tell us what to do about our lives. And what is worse, we often resist even when the advice makes sense. The issue is deeper than pronouns People never fully commit to our solutions for their lives. They only give one hundred percent effort to their solutions. When we grab responsibil-ity for the problems of others, they usually stop working on them (and become irritated with us). Why? Because they feel put down. By taking responsibility from them, we imply that they are not capable of managing their own lives. This can erode their self-esteem and hamper their progress. When I first started pastoral counseling, I carried the problems of so many people, I almost went under myself. If they didn’t get better, I got worse. Young and eager, I was confused about problem-ownership. Finally, I figured out that my life was the only one I had any chance of handling well. Perspective came when I discovered that most people have within them the resources to effectively manage their own lives. While they momentarily may be upset and confused, with support and clarifica-tion, they will find their strengths and handle their lives. This belief helps me keep ownership of problems where it belongs. When someone tries to hand me their responsibility (or I try to grab it from them), I consciously give it back by saying something like: “This is really a tough problem you have...? It looks as though you have been struggling a long time with your situation...? I don’t have the answer...? Do you have any ideas...?” Or, “What are your options for handling the issues you’ve presented...?” (pause) “Do any of those look better to you than the others...?” (pause) “What would the costs and benefits be to you and others for the options you like best?” In counseling, when shifting the pronouns doesn’t work, I lean back in my chair, bite my tongue, and say, “Mmmm...?” (Technique # 10 – Hem and haw follows this chapter.) If my urge to solve their problem gets too strong, I put my elbow on my chair arm and clamp a hand over my mouth to keep it shut, to stop me from coming up with my solutions to their problems. That’s when the magic happens. When I lean back, they lean for-ward and go to work on their situations. Silence is a useful tool. It bothers most of us, so we tend to talk. When your friends, children, or employees want you to pick up respon-sibility for solving their problems, say: “Mmmm..?. Tough problem...?” and rather than letting the silence get you to talk, let it gently nudge them into talking about their solutions to their problems. There are exceptions Offering quick solutions can be useful sometimes — when someone asks: “Where’s the restroom?” A quick answer works. But the question of responsibility shifts if your talker is seriously depressed, suicidal, or nearly violent. We may need to assume responsibility for the safety of that person and/or others by taking the person to a hospital or calling the police, but these occasions are rare. People generally respond better when we are responsible to them, not for them. The four-alarm issue in problem ownership Now that we’ve warmed to the ownership issue, let’s get serious with the toughest side of it. Consider a situation where I’m angry with you. You didn’t do what I expected and I forgot that my anger and expectations are my problem. I’d prefer thinking that my anger is your problem. That would be convenient for me because “If you would just shape up, mend your ways, and do what I expect you to do, then the problem would be solved. So see? It is your problem after all. Right?” Wrong. If I try to make my anger problem yours, then you’ll prob-ably become defensive or give in. In either case, I won’t solve my prob-lem, feel understood, or be any clearer about what’s troubling me. When my anger is directed at you, there’s little chance you’ll become concerned about me or what’s bothering me. Your making lasting behavior changes toward me requires that you become concerned about me, not just knuckle under to me. To illustrate, imagine a frustrated, angry husband saying, “You’re always late. You never plan ahead so you have enough time to get ready. If you would just plan a little, we wouldn’t have to show up late to parties, miss the first scenes of movies, or walk into church during the first hymn.” And she says, “You only have yourself to get ready. I have the youngsters. And I’m not late that often anyway. Why can’t you be a little more flexible or remember the children are yours too, and help?” This flat-brain tango could escalate for the rest of their married lives with them locking deeper into their arguments, neither feeling heard nor understood, and both believing their problems would be solved if the other changed. It might be different if the wife listened: “Sounds like it really bothers you to walk into situations late...? It must seem to you as though I’m always late and a little planning on my part would make your life more comfort-able...?” (para-feeling & para-thinking) Or, it might be different if the husband listened: “You sound irritated with me and overwhelmed handling the children on your own...? It must seem to you as though it’s easy for me to be ready on time, because I don’t help out much...? You figure the problem isn’t that you are routinely late, but that I’m not very flexible and don’t pick up my parenting responsibility...?” (para-feeling & para-thinking) If she listened effectively, she could help them both understand his concerns. Then he might realize that his upset over being late is his problem. He could even learn to handle it better by helping get the chil-dren ready or by the two of them taking separate cars. His awareness of options for handling his concerns might increase substantially. When people are stressed they see fewer options, if any, but when they are calm, the options suddenly become limitless. If he listened effectively, he could help them both understand her concerns. Then she might realize that her upset over his lack of help and inflexibility was her problem. She could even learn to handle it better by talking with him about a more cooperative way of dealing with their children, by getting ready earlier, or by suggesting that they take separate cars. Her awareness of options for handling her concerns might increase substantially. In addition, if she tried to understand what was bothering him, remembered she liked/loved him, and didn’t resist his anger, she might become motivated to change her behavior to make him happier. And, if he tried to understand what was bothering her, remembered he liked/loved her, and didn’t resist her anger, he might become moti-vated to change his behavior to make her happier. In communication crises like these, both techniques and attitudes need adjusting for real improvement (long-term behavioral changes) to take place. LISTENER — I don’t own the problem Keeping ownership in the lap of the talker is tricky. It’s tough for many of us, because we want to be “nice” people who are helpful. And “helpful” often has meant giving advice and solving friends’ problems. The card’s I don’t own the problem does not mean we don’t care about people. It means we’re committed to helping them focus on what they are doing about their situations. Years of experience has proven to me that listening is a more ef-fective and empowering way to help others than trying to solve their problems for them. LISTENER GOALS I’m calm enough to hear I don’t own the problem l l l Without l l To provide safety To understand To clarify Agreeing Disagreeing Advising Defending l l When we remain clear that we don’t own the talkers’ problems, we set aside our points of view, hot buttons, biases, and hobby horses. As we do we become more able to focus on their situations and get inside their perspectives. This provides talkers the support they need to better take charge of their lives, make their own decisions, and commit them-selves fully to them. −∞− How to Listen Better: Technique #10 Sometimes it gets really hard to listen because you want to solve some-one else’s problem. Can you hem and haw in a way that will help you keep from grabbing their problem and keep them focused on solving it themselves? Hem and haw ■ When you feel the urge to answer, solve, give advice, defend, fill the talker in on who died of his/her dread disease, immediately bite your tongue, clamp your hand over your mouth, tap your pencil, clear your throat, clean your pipe, hem and haw. As listeners we are there with talkers, not to take over problems, but to provide support so they can safely process their own thoughts and feel-ings and come up with their own solutions. A management consultant I respect described “constructive hemming and hawing” as an effective listening device to keep talkers responsible for doing their own work. And it allows time for talkers to think out loud. When you have an urge to jump in to your talker’s time and take over their problem, constructively hem and haw. Stroke your jaw and say: “Hmm...?” Or, “That’s a tough problem...?” Or, “I’ll be darned. I wonder what you could do about that...?” Or, “Mmmm. My goodness...?” While staying focused on the talker, keep your mouth shut. Stick a pencil in it and chew on it. Lean back in your chair, walk across the room, clear your throat, or turn back to your cooking. All these subtly remind both of you that this is the talker’s problem to figure out, not yours. Do anything but take over the talking. I love the phrase the fictional detective, Kinsey Milhone uses to describe how she keeps her interviewee talking. She makes “sympathetic noises.” And remember, teeth marks in the tongue — signs of a good listener. Hemming and hawing after school Once in a while a youngster will come home, sit at the kitchen table with a snack, stare at their smart phone, and start talking about school problems. If the parent on kitchen duty turns around, faces them di-rectly, and asks, “Do you want to talk about it?” Ninety-eight point three percent of them will retreat and say, “Oh no, it’s nothing. I can handle it.” But instead, don’t look at them. Keep on rattling pots and pans at the stove and say: “Mmmm...? That’s a tough one...?” and then shut up. More often than not they will continue talking, feel heard, and relax. After awhile, when it’s clearly your turn to talk, they may even be open to a suggestion or two. Keep in mind that near-silence doesn’t work as a listening tech-nique if it’s the only one you use. Talkers need to hear us feed back what they are saying. Hemming and hawing gives you the listener something to do, rather than going with the urge to talk about your stuff or give advice. When you hem and haw and mix it with other listening responses, it will really help your talkers keep focused on discovering their options for their issues.

Chapter 12

TLC — What Does the Talker Do? sOmetimes when we we have trouble putting our concerns into words, we get frustrated and say, “I know what I mean. I just can’t say it.” I suspect the truth is, we aren’t sure what we mean, or we could say it. What we likely have is a mixture of feeling and thinking with its meaning still unclear to us. Talking has two parts: 1. Determining what we think and feel. 2. Sharing that with someone. This definition assumes that we aren’t always clear about what we think and feel and need to talk out loud to clarify. This may be embar-rassing for those of us who learned not to speak until we knew what we wanted to say or until we were sure we had the right answers. However, when we realize we are unclear, we can choose to move toward clarity. Talking aloud with someone who feeds it back can be like projecting our digital images onto a big screen so the fine details and interrelationships become sharper. Nothing makes a dumb (screwy) idea seem more sensible than keeping it trapped inside our heads. Getting our thoughts out into the light of day helps us see their pluses and minuses more clearly. For me, one of my dumb ideas crumbles to dust when I hear it fed back in someone else’s words. Conversely, an odd kernel of an idea can morph into sheer brilliance when someone reflects it back to me. Over the years, I solidified much of what I believe by listening to myself. (Teachers and preachers get to do a lot of this). My views sharpened as others reacted and fed them back. Rough edges got knocked off, poor ideas fell aside, and my commitment to the better ones grew. It’s a relief to me when I share an idea and no one faints. If we share our deepest desires and thoughts, and no one collapses, we become less afraid and more sure of ourselves. In addition, those who hear us find themselves trusting us more. Good listeners are worth their weight in gold. They help us sharpen our insights and directions. But talkers have their work to do as well. In Chapter 3 we took a first look at stomach, heart, and head talk. Here in Chapter 12 we’ll look at them in depth as the talker’s goals. FIRST TALKER GOAL — To share my feelings As talkers, how do we share our feelings and thoughts effectively? The best communicating attempts contain three parts — feeling, think-ing, and an open kind of ownership. The first two components show up as goals listed on the Talker side of the card. The third is less ob-vious, yet important. We’ll look at how they impact communication, how they can work TALKER I’m most bothered I own the problem l GOALS Without l To share my feelings To share my thoughts l l Accusing Attacking Labeling Judging l l together, and how communication falls off when any of them is excluded. To share my feelings means to describe our feelings (emotions) to a listener. These include, but are not limited to, excitement, depression, enthusiasm, concern, hope, anger, anxiety, attraction, irritation, fear. Stomach talk Stomach talk is not “spilling your guts.” It is language that puts feelings into words. The E in the model stands for emotions. While people who say they are going to spill their guts or “be perfectly frank,” think they are expressing their feel-ings, they usually aren’t. They are likely attacking: “At the dinner party last night you were overbearing. You talked too long and too loud. You ruined it for everyone.” All the feelings in that attack are undercover and un-named. Spilling our guts or being perfectly frank usually means taking our feelings out on people rather than sharing them with people. To share my feelings or stomach talk describes what’s inside me, rather than describing someone else. The difference is huge: “I feel un-comfortable and insecure when I hear you say...” instead of, “You put me down.” The first describes the feeling that’s in me and therefore, shares my feelings with you. The second is a thought that describes and ac-cuses you, and as a result, takes my irritated feelings out on you. Feelings require very few words (usually one or two and less than five): “I’m irritated...” “I don’t like...” “I’m tired...” “I want...” “I’m in love, excited, angry, disturbed, depressed, turned on,” etc. Watch out for the dreaded “I feel that...” Sometimes we confuse emotions with thoughts. We say, “I feel that...” We think we are expressing a feeling, but what follows is actually a thought: “I feel that you drank too much and were all over Marcia at the party last night.” Anything coming after “I feel that...” will be a thought (idea) that describes and/or judges behavior. It is a mild form of spilling your guts or taking your feelings out on someone. “Feel thats...” almost always lead to an argument or at minimum — avoidance. Whether or not someone likes asparagus is a feeling and therefore, non-debatable. Whether asparagus is good or bad for us is a thought and can be debated: “Asparagus has nutrients you need.” “Asparagus needs hol-landaise sauce to taste decent, but has too much fat.” At the party mentioned above, her thought/attack, “I feel that ... you drank too much and were all over Marcia,” could be debated into the next millennium. His thought/defense, “My behavior was appropriate. Besides, how would you know? You were hanging out with Tom.” If she had expressed her feelings, she might have said, “I was feeling lonely at the party. I got anxious when you were talking with Marcia. Odd, that after so many years I still get insecure and jealous.” What a difference.

The latter comments drop the thought (attack) and share her feelings. He might have been able to hear what she was saying without defend-ing himself. Sharing feelings is risky, but often worth it As a self-protective device many of us learned not to share our feelings. By walling our feelings inside, we may protect ourselves against others, but often it is to the detriment of our relationships. Having said that, a person who enters this process as a talker does take certain risks that I don’t want to minimize. When we let our feelings and thoughts out into the open, people will react to them. If our listeners are inept, unhappy with us, distracted, or hostile, our attempt to clarify may not only fail, but could be used against us. As we share the personal part of us, we risk getting hurt, like the following: • While trip planning a wife says, “I’m really scared of flying.” The husband says, “Oh, grow up.” • Or a man shares, “I think I might be falling in love with you.” And she says, “Yeah, sure, you fall in love with anybody in a skirt.” • Or a son shares, “I’m scared about taking the tests the doctor recommended.” And his father says, “You cry-baby. Be a man.” Though it’s risky, I often find that as I open up more with people, they open up more with me. Sharing is an act of trust that moves us to-ward intimacy. Allowing people to know how we feel lets them deeper into our lives, where they have a chance to care more about us and as a result, act more often on our behalf. In short, no sharing, no caring. While I encourage you to risk increasing the sharing level of your feelings in general and especially with those who matter to you, please take note: I am not suggesting that you share your feelings indiscrimi-nately. Some folks operate so much in the courtroom that they’ll put you down at any opportunity. So, keep your eyes open, select your con-fidants wisely, and choose the level at which you share your feelings with each different person. SECOND TALKER GOAL — To share my thoughts To share my thoughts means to describe de-veloping ideas, points of view, concepts, phi-losophies, memories, questions, guesses, and accumulation of facts and fictions. When we share thoughts, the sharing helps us and our listeners gain clarity about TALKER I’m most bothered I own the problem l GOALS Without l To share my feelings To share my thoughts l l Accusing Attacking Labeling Judging l l what we are thinking. If we limit sharing to our feelings, then we don’t give others a clue as to how we see life, what we think about it, or where we stand on is-sues. Saying, “I’m happy to be here,” doesn’t tell you what I think about being here. I might be happy to be here (feeling), because I plan to rip you off and take your money (thought). Head talk J E Head talk is language that puts our thoughts into words. The J stands for judgments (thoughts). The square’s harsh edges hint that thoughts (judg-ments), expressed without feelings attached, tend to come across as accusing. Judgments without the inclusion of our feelings change in nature and become judgmental, because the personal part of us is left out. For example if I say, “So here we are at long last having dinner together.” This thought, without an expressed feeling, might sound as if I’m irritated with you because you should have invited me to dinner sooner. Anyone with normal insecurity could interpret it as an accusation and reply defensively, “You could have called anytime. It’s not my fault it took so long to get together.” My feelings might have ranged from “I’m really delighted to be with you; I’ve been looking forward to this for a long time.” To, “I don’t want to be here; I’ve been dreading it and can’t wait to get out of here.” Unless my tone of voice or body language clearly conveys my feel-ings, the other person is left to assume what’s under my thoughts and that’s usually trouble. Without feelings expressed, thoughts leave the hearer hanging. When the feelings are unclear it leaves room for the hearer’s insecurity to fill in the gap and convert what may be flat factual statements into complaints or accusations. It would have been much clearer had I said, “I’m thrilled that at long last we’re having dinner together. I’ve missed you.” Compliments Ever get in trouble when you were trying to be nice and give a compli-ment? He says, “You look great in that dress.” This is a positive thought, appears to be a simple compliment, but on closer examination, it is one person judging another. Since we don’t like to be judged, we tend to get defensive. A typical response indicates that she felt judged: “This old thing? I’ve had it forever, and you never noticed it.” She defended herself by at-tacking him. Compliments without a feeling expressed are rarely received well. If he had included his feeling from the beginning, it might have gone over the way he intended, “I really like the way you look in that dress. You look great.” His judgment is there, but it is softened and personalized by his feelings. Or in another situation she says, “You did it.” This thought, without her feelings expressed, sounds accusing. So he responds, “I did not.” A standard defense. “You did too.” “Did not...” Think how this conversation might have gone, if she had said, “I am so relieved that you did it. I didn’t want to do it myself.” Note how in-cluding her feelings both softens and clarifies her thought. You’d better include both feelings and thoughts in your statements, if you want to reduce the argument quotient, ambiguity, and the risk of misinterpretation. Stop a second. Look back at that last statement, and consider it. Does it seem a little argumentative? Or, at least debatable? As a reader you might have been tempted to say, “Yes, maybe, but why?” Or, “Doesn’t really matter, why be so picky?” Here it is again, but with both feelings and thoughts included. See if it reduces the argumentative or judgmental quality: “I’m excited to share what works for me. When I include both feelings and thoughts in my conver-sations, the argument quotient seems to be reduced so we have fewer misun-derstandings and arguments. What a relief for me. I hope it works for you.” Sharing thinking is risky too In most situations, my preference is to share what I think, so that peo-ple react to what I really believe, rather than to their assumptions and guesses about my views. When we say what we think, we take a stand. We risk being wrong or having people react negatively, and that’s difficult. On the other hand, if we let others know when we’re unsure of what we think, there’s a chance they’ll criticize us for inconclusiveness. Keep in mind, it’s easier for them to attack us than to deal with their own lack of certainty. If that happens, then listen more to understand the people who can’t handle honesty. If that doesn’t work, you may want to avoid them, or at least, avoid trying for an in-depth relationship. While saying what we think often helps us and others figure out where we stand, I don’t always describe my thinking or “tell everything I know.” It is wise to consider that our thoughts might be hurtful, inap-propriate, or poorly timed. The principle that makes sense to me is to “speak the truth in love.” This recognizes that we can use “the truth” to initiate constructive change and also, to bully or hurt people. I believe we have a responsibility to decide what, when, and how we say what we think so that it has a chance to be helpful in building rela-tionships and getting worthwhile things accomplished. When we do this, others may become uncomfortable with what we say, but then I figure we are not here to please people, but rather to act on their behalf (love them). THIRD TALKER GOAL — My TALKER I’m most bothered I own the problem l GOALS Without l l To share my feelings To share my thoughts Accusing l l Labeling l Attacking Judging Both goals for the talker include the word my to emphasize the importance of ownership and openness in communication. I call the qualities of ownership and openness “the human factor,” that is, the part of us that accepts responsibility for what we’re saying and yet leaves room for the other person in the conversation. Let’s look at these two parts of the human factor. Ownership Ownership in communication means taking responsibility for the feel-ings and thoughts that are ours. When we speak, using “I” or “my,” we make it clear that we are expressing our feelings and opinions and that we are including ourselves in conversations as people with something to offer. Many call this “using I statements.” For example, it helps to shift from “The way the manager sees it...” Or, “Other people are saying...” To: “I’m uncomfortable with how it looks.” Or, “My preference would be...” Or, “The way I see it is...” These “I/my” state-ments make it clear that we are expressing our feelings and thoughts, not someone else’s — and especially not “everyone” else’s. If I were to say to you as my boss, “People are saying that you shouldn’t have fired Fred,” you wouldn’t know what I think or how I feel. I’d be keeping you from dealing with me and pitting you against unknown people you can’t deal with. You wouldn’t know who’s upset and dis-agreeing with you. You’d have no way to respond. My talking about how others see you is at best impersonal and self-protective, and at worst, gossipy and manipulative. Openness Openness in communication makes it clear that we are open to other people, that they too are people who have something to offer. The human factor acknowledges that none of us knows “the truth.” None of us sees, hears, or thinks perfectly. We each have limited perspective, affected by background baggage, experience, less-than-perfect eyesight, and faulty hearing. However, even though we’re all a bit flat-brained, we’re still ba-sically nice people (BNPs) and can learn something from each other. Heart talk Heart talk puts openness and ownership into words. The H in the symbol represents the human factor that opens the door to relating and collaboration.

Heart talk says, “My point of view is...” Or, “It seems to me...” Or, “As I see it...” Or, “As I remember it...” These phrases own my thoughts, yet leave room for yours. Heart talk says, “I think...” instead of “I know...” Or, “It looks to me as if you often do it that way.” Instead of, “You always do it that way.” And heart talk says, “It looks to me as though you may have goofed on that one.” Rather than, “You goofed on that one.” Or, “I don’t remember you ever fixing the plumbing.” Not, “You’ve never fixed the plumbing.” While these may seem like subtle differences, the trouble becomes more obvious when we leave heart talk out of our communication. Ab-solute statements deny our ownership and leave no room for the other person’s views. If someone says to me, “You never help in the kitchen,” there isn’t much room for an exception. I might instinctively argue, “Oh, but there was that one time I helped. It was in 1997, when...” I would feel less defensive if the person said, “It seems to me that helping in the kitchen isn’t your best thing.” (heart talk softening head talk) “Most of the time I’m okay (or not okay) with that.” (stomach talk) “But I would like it if you...” (Stomach talk) Television evangelists can leave heart talk out of their preaching. They proclaim, “The Bible says...” Or, “The only way to believe is...” Seems to me they drop the human factor, that is, I don’t hear much heart talk. When I listen to absolutist preaching, the hair on the back of my neck stands up. It sounds to me as if they’re saying that their under-standing is identical to God’s, and if mine is different I must be wrong. As near as I can tell they make no room for the hearer to think differ-ently (which I, for one, often do). They seem not in tune with French novelist and Nobel prize-winner, Andre Gide who said: “Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it.” As most people do, I feel better when I listen to speakers who use heart talk. Their inclusion of ownership and openness leaves room for me to feel strongly about my views and also more able to hear theirs. When the human factor is evident, religious leaders say, in effect, “This is very important to me, I believe the Bible says this... However, you may find different meaning in your faith or your philosophy, and I wish you well.” Rather than, “If you don’t believe as I do, you are wrong and going to hell.” The latter seems to me to have shifted from sharing a judgment to being judgmental. We all judge and draw conclusions about many things as we should. Being judgmental is different. It doesn’t leave room for differing views. Strikes me that judgmentalism denies ownership, kills openness, puts us above others, and invites defensiveness. In business, the process is the same, even if you have the authority to decide. If you want buy-in, you might say, “I’m excited about this new concept. I believe my approach is best for the company. Let me tell you how I see it and then we’ll look at how you see it,” rather than, “The only way our business will be successful is by adopting this strategy. Any other course will put us in bankruptcy.” Heart talk explicitly invites others to express their feelings and opinions about what is best for the company, the marriage, the progeny, or for keeping slugs out of a garden. The EHJs of balanced communication It takes two parts personal and one part logical to give our talking the best chance to be heard. Let’s use a balance scale to illustrate how feel-ings and the human factor are needed to balance judgment. The E and the H on the left side of the scale balance the J on the right side. If all three are not included in some form, any attempt at com-municating will be thrown off balance and the potential for misunder-standing will increase. Remember that we communicate the Emotion with stomach talk, the Human factor with heart talk, and the Judgment (thought) with head talk. “I’m curious (E). Did you know (H) that this book is overdue (J)?” If the E drops off the scale, it will tip toward the J side. When the scale tips toward J, the judgment changes quality and assumes a judgmental quality and will likely draw a defense (attack). “Did you know (H) that this book is overdue (J)?” “Of course. I’m not stupid (J).” Leaving out the H in our communicating also creates a “courtroom” quality and draws the usual de-fensive response. “I’m annoyed (E). This book is overdue (J).” “So I’ll pay the stupid fine (J).” This problem seems pervasive. Most of us grew up routinely learning to leave the E and the H out of our talking. Non-verbals often modify or soften a thought statement: tone of voice, context, smile. Still, you’ll note we spend a lot of time communi-cating courtroom style — Judgment and Defense. Let’s check a salty but common example of head talk (J) without any stomach talk (E) or heart talk (H). “The meatloaf is too salty (J).” This simple thought without the per-sonal parts, takes on an accusing tone that draws a defensive response, like: EH “All you do is complain. You can cook from now on ( J).” It would be easier for the cook to hear that the meat loaf tastes salty to you (J), if you added: J “You probably salted according to the recipe (H), but I’m comfortable with less because I’ve cut down to lower my blood pressure (E).” Adding the person-al elements helps balance the J and keep it from sounding judgmental. On the other hand, if the J falls off the scale, then the balance shifts toward the personal side of the scale, “I’m wondering (E) what you think (H) about government intervention in...” This gives no hint about what the talker thinks about the intervention. The hearer has been asked to take a position without knowing what the talker thinks — feels like a set-up. It’s very much like when a talker says, “I want to go out for dinner and a movie (E), whichever you’re interested in... (H).” No head talk turns com-munication manipulative. It hands the talker’s responsibility for input to the listener, makes the listener uncomfortable, and shirks any respon-sibility if the food isn’t good or the movie is a dud. Stomach talk alone tilts the balance toward E and makes the hearer feel responsible for the talker’s emo-tional state: “I’m just so depressed. Nothing feels right. I feel worthless, and ready to collapse.” Heart talk alone tips the balance toward H and leans on the hearer for decisions. Saying: “Wherever you want to eat, just anywhere, whatever you think best.” In both cases the talker avoids responsibility for participatory deci-sions leaving it all up to someone else. Once again, a balanced statement includes all three components, “The meatloaf tastes salty (J) to me (H). I’ve been worried about my blood pressure (E) so I’ve cut down on my salt intake and am used to a little less (J). You probably put in what the recipe called for...(H)” (I went a little overboard here to make the point.) J H Balanced statements are direct since they include opinions. They leave room for hearers and invite response. They are not too difficult to hear and certainly not judgmental because they are tempered with open ownership and an expression of our feelings. They also require advance work on the part of the talker. Some peo-ple are not willing to take this time – and their conversations suffer a little each time because of that. When I’m facing a difficult encounter, I think first about what I want to say and then decide especially how to include the humanizing parts of communication into what I actually say. I’m amazed how often this helps my connections with others. I encourage you to experiment with EHJs in your communication attempts and to observe others and how they do or don’t use them. However, even the best communication techniques can be misun-derstood and argued by uptight, flat-brained, defensive folks. So, when you come through with a well thought out and balanced EHJ statement and your hearer turns defensive, what do you do?

What else? Turn the card in your mind, and get back to listening. −∞− How to Listen Better: Technique #11 Sometimes if you admit ignorance, it will encourage your talkers to help you understand what’s going on with them, and it helps them under-stand themselves as well. Admit ignorance ■ Briefly, tell talkers you don’t understand what they are saying, don’t know what’s going on, or don’t know what they should do about their situations. Then get on with using other listening techniques. This may be difficult for you. Many of us have terrible trouble admitting we don’t know something. But if we are willing to be ignorant, we can provide better listening help. It helps me do this when I remember that ignorance is temporary. It just means I don’t get it yet, and that’s fixable. Stupid means we can’t learn and that’s serious and permanent. (I know the latter is not your problem or you wouldn’t have read this far.) Admit ignorance works as a listening technique because it invites the talker to educate you. Even talkers who are upset will want to help you understand what’s going on and fill you in. Try saying: “I don’t un-derstand what you mean. Help me understand...?” Or, “Tell me that again, I didn’t follow it...?” Or, “I just got here, and I don’t know what happened...?” When we risk admitting our ignorance, it keeps us from talking be-fore we know what’s really going on and this allows bothered talkers to “tell us all about it.”

Chapter 13

TLC — Talk Without... we’ve lOOked at what to do when you’re trying to communicate well. Let’s look now at what not to do. Take a look at the list of GOALS and Withouts on the TALKER side of the card. Note the difference: Sharing & Accusing. TALKER — Without accusing, attacking, labeling, or judging Tracking the difference between sharing and accusing really makes a difference when you are talking. I call the keeping-track process “the finger method in communication” to help you remember it. Here’s how the finger method works for I’m most bothered I own the problem l GOALS To share my thoughts Without Accusing Attacking To share my feelings l l l l Labeling Judging l me: When I talk while pointing my finger at me, I’m describing my feelings and my thoughts, that is, I’m sharing what’s going on inside me. When I talk, pointing my finger at you, I’m describing you, that is, I’m accusing, attacking, labeling, or judging you. Not helpful. Creates defensiveness. Sharing instead of accusing keeps us out of the courtroom. When we are talking, arguments drop off dramatically when we simply shift from pointing at others to pointing at ourselves. Using the finger method When you’re bothered with someone and want to share it without put-ting them on the defense, keep the finger method in mind. You can use it to keep clear whether you are sharing or accusing. In a tense situation where you need to say what you think and feel, literally point your finger at yourself to remind you not to accuse, at-tack, label, or judge. You can do this without being obvious. You can further refine this by: • Pointing at your head and saying, “I think ... or remember ... ” • Pointing at your eyes or ears and saying, “I saw ... or heard ... ” • Pointing at your stomach and saying, “I’m scared ... upset ... irritated ... excited ... ” The finger method helps to talk effectively in tense situations. For example: As your supervisor, I might point my finger at you and say, “You didn’t finish your assignment and left me hanging.” I judged your per-formance and accused you. You might defend yourself: “I gave you the necessary report.” Or, “You didn’t give me enough time to finish.” Or, “You’re never satisfied with what I do anyway.” If I point at me and share my feelings it might sound like, “I’m em-barrassed at not getting my part to my boss on schedule, and I really caught it. I know you have a lot on your plate right now. I’d like to understand what’s happening with your part of the project, so we can figure out how to handle it.” If I’m not attacking you, it will be easier for you to hear my con-cerns. You might even be more cooperative in finishing the project quickly, so I can repair the damage with my boss. The finger method with heat Imagine it’s morning. I’m not at my best. I stagger into the bathroom and step on a heap of wet towels. I point a finger at whoever is within earshot and shout, “What inconsiderate clod left the wet towels on the floor? Why do you do this to me? You never pick up after yourself! You always ruin my mornings!” If you were the “shoutee,” would this approach create concern for my welfare? Would it foster a desire to pick up your towels next time in order to make my life more comfortable? Not likely, unless you are some kind of saint or a serious pleaser. Such an attack would almost always draw a counterattack: “What’s the big deal? Everybody forgets and you leave your junk in my way too. Be-sides, I hardly ever leave wet towels on the floor.” I’ll bet you could write the rest of this script. Let’s try finger method sharing. I could express the same frustra-tion and anger without accusing, attacking, labeling or judging: “I get so mad when I stagger into the bathroom and step on wet towels!!!! I want to do bodily harm!!! I don’t like to start mornings off like this!! Oops, look at the time! I’d better get to work.” Notice: By pointing my finger at me, I’m not attacking, accusing, labeling, or judging anyone. The reduction in exclamation points sug-gests that my emotional steam is being reduced with each statement and my brain is un-flattening. Such comments describe and relieve what’s going on inside the talker, without taking it out on the listener. It increases the odds of communicating. There is even some chance that the towel dropper, not needing to get defensive, might register how exasperated I get when I hop out of bed and step on wet towels first thing. After the next few showers the towel dropper might even think, “Ah, the towels. Well, I do like the old guy. Might as well get his day off to a better start. Think I’ll just put them in the hamper.” So when we’re talkers, let’s not attack (win at any price), accuse (lay blame), label (call names), or judge (put others beneath us). No more taking out our anger by pointing at others. Okay? Pointing at ourselves to share our feelings and thoughts has a better chance of improving our relationships than pointing at others and accusing them. And remember, more long-term behavior changes come out of con-cern than coercion.

How to Listen Better: Technique #12 It helps talkers to know that their stories elicit human response in you. If they engage you, they are not alone. Own your own feelings ■ When a strong emotion pops up in you while listening, share it. But keep it to a few words and get right back to the talker’s story. While sharing our feelings comes dangerously close to talking, it can be a useful listening technique as long as we refocus on the talker’s story quick enough. I might say to you, “I get excited, frustrated, scared, etc. when I hear you talk that way. Now back to what you were saying...?” Notice, I acknowledged my feelings, but returned immediately to your issues. Sometimes when listening, talkers say things that flatten my brain enough to make it difficult to continue listening. I gulp and then reduce my emotional buildup by saying, “Oops! That caught me off guard and shook me up. Now, you were saying...?” This lets you know I’m engaged. It calms me down enough to go on listening. It lets me focus again on you and lets you know you’re not alone. “How’s school?” “Fine.” How often have parents picked up youngsters after school and encour-aged them to be talkers, sharing what’s going on with them in school. With good intentions, they start with “How’s school?” and get, “Fine.” as the first of many one-word answers. The initial exchange is followed by: “Well, didn’t anything interesting happen in school today?” “Nope.” “Did you learn anything?” “Nun-huh.” “We pay huge taxes for schools and they’re not teaching you anything worthwhile?” “Right.” “Is school a waste of time and money?” “Yep.” These one-word defensive dodges hurt (and young people don’t understand why they’re doing this either). Can anything be done to improve these after-school conversations?

Some years ago, I went through the above frustrating conversation when I picked up our youngest daughter from junior high. In the unpleasant silence that followed, I asked myself what I teach in my classes. Then I remembered. People are cautious about sharing their feel-ings. Sharing is risky, an act of trust. This got me thinking of one of the principles I’d learned in leading groups. When I want others to share, I ask a feeling question, but then I share first. By opening up and sharing a feeling, I’ve established safety and they are willing to step in next to me and share at a similar level. I figured this applied to young people too. The next day when my daughter hopped into the car, I said, “As I was driving over here to pick you up, I was thinking about what I learned in seventh-grade social studies. I remember the teacher bringing a tiny rickshaw from China. All I remember learning about Chinese people was that they were really small, like maybe six inches tall. As I think back I’m really disappointed I didn’t get anything useful from that class. I wondered if your social studies class is any better than mine was...?” Instead of one-word answers, she talked for thirty minutes about what she was learning and what it meant to her. We finished the con-versation in the car, sitting in our driveway at home. What happened? I started the dialog with own your own feelings before I asked her to share hers. This listening technique made it safe for her to share. I risked acknowledging that I had been disappointed with an educational experience and was curious about hers. I shared my feelings and thoughts and invited her to do the same. I treated her as though she had something to offer me (which she did). It gave her a chance to talk about her experience and to be valued by an adult who cared about her. It produced one of those wonderful connections that makes parenting worthwhile. When you use this technique, when you keep your feeling-shar-ing short, you let talkers know that you are emotionally responding to them, which makes it clear they are not alone. It also encourages your talkers to continue their self-discovery. And you may be touched and surprised with how engaging them this way deepens the relationship.