 Crucial Conversations- Tools for Talking When Stakes are High Deluxe
Author Company: McGraw-Hill
Category: 
Crucial Conversations- Tools for Talking When Stakes are High Deluxe 5 stars (The Most Important Thing In Life) - We speak our lives into existence ...
File Size: 10.47 kB
OS: Windows 98 / NT / 2000 / ME / XP / VISTA
License: Digital - Time Limit, free to try, 10.47 to buy.
Software Developed by McGraw-Hill
 Download now (10.47 kB)
 Click to buy with discount via Amazon (10.47$)
Description :
Crucial Conversations- Tools for Talking When Stakes are High - 5 stars (The Most Important Thing In Life) -
Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking When Stakes are High review:5 stars (The Most Important Thing In Life) - We speak our lives into existence.
The most important subject I have ever studies -- the most important class I've ever taken -- has been a class on Conversation.
We have 3 conversations which determine our lives, and the impact we have on those conversations determines our success or failure, our happiness or tragedy: The conversation we have with ourself. The conversation we have with another person or people. And the conversation that occurs after we leave the room.
Do whatever you can do to impact and improve the results of those conversations.
If this issue is a challenge for you, by all means, get this book. Study and perfect your conversations -- it will change your entire life.5 stars (The Pool of Shared Meaning) - Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking When Stakes are High, by Kerry Patterson, Joseph Grenny, Ron McMillan and Al Switzler, Forward by Stephen R. Covey, McGraw-Hill 2002, 240 pages, AU$27.95 (Dymoks)
The authors define Crucial Conversation as a discussion between two or more people where (1) stakes are high, (2) opinions vary, and (3) emotions run strong. Crucial Conversations are frequently spontaneous; more often than not they come out of no where. To find that you enter a Crucial Conversation watch for signs that people don¡Â#t feel safe (silence or violence) and your own style under stress. (...)
The authors address three aspects of Crucial Conversation - managing our style under stress, dialogues technics and, briefly, techniques we may use to arrive at a decision once the pool is filled with shared meaning.
On Style Under Stress
At the foundation of the book lays the EQ theory, popularised by Daniel Goleman in his 1995 book . The EQ theory articulates the evolutionary survival value of the amygdala, a part of the brain that overrides the problem-solving part of the brain in fight-or-flee situations. As had been predicted by the EQ theory, the authors have observed in numerous occasions, in business and home environments, that in Crucial Conversations we are at our worst behaviour, we tend to violence or silence. Part of authors¡Â# novel contribution is a set of tools we may use to manage these pyramidal instincts.
When entering a crucial convection maintain focus in two ways. First, know what you want, second, avoid either/or choices. When you are at the throes of a Crucial Conversation, new and less healthy motives often supplant your original, nobler one. Often you change your goal to save face, avoid embarrassment, win, be right, or punish others. Rather, you should ask ¡V ¡Â#What results do I want?¡¨ and ¡Â#How would I behave if I really wanted these results?¡¨ As you introduce that complex and abstract question to your mind, the problem-solving part of your brain recognises that you are now dealing with intricate social issues and not physical threats. Your body sends precious blood to the parts of your brain that help you think, removing the shortcut imposed by the amygdala.
In order to justify an especially sordid behaviour, we suggest that we are caught between two distasteful options. We think that there are only two options available. These simplistic tradeoffs keep us from thinking creatively of ways to get to dialogue, and justify our silly games.
When emotions get high remember ¡V others do not make you mad. You do. You and only you make you mad. Once you have created your emotions, you have only two options: You can act on them or be acted by them. There is, however, an intermediate step between what others do, and you feel some emotion about it. Just after you observe what others do and just before you feel some emotion about it, you tell yourself a story. That is, you add meaning to the action you observed. If you take control of your stories, they will not control you.
To control your story the authors suggest that you may:
Â#XAsk yourself if you are in some form of silence or violence. If you tell yourself that your violent behaviour is a ¡Â#necessary tactic,¡¨ you would not see the need to reconsider your actions.
Â#XFind what emotions are encouraging you to act this way. Once you have identified what you are feeling, you have to stop and ask, given the circumstances, is it the right feeling?
Â#XFind what story is creating these emotions. Watch for double standards and clever stories such as: ¡Â#It is not my fault¡¨, ¡Â#It is all your fault¡¨ or ¡Â#There is nothing else I can do¡¨. Clever stories keep us from acknowledging our own sell-outs. The dialogue smart recognises that when they are telling clever stories, they stop, and then do what it takes to tell a useful story.
Â#XFind evidence to support that story. Do not confuse a story with facts. We tend to assume the worst possible motive while ignoring any possible good or neutral intentions a person may have.
Â#XAsk yourself ¡Â#Am I pretending not to notice my role in the problem?¡¨, and wonder, ¡Â#Why a reasonable, rational, and decent person does what this person is doing?¡¨ Again, ask yourself ¡Â#What do I really want? For me, for the others? For the relationship?¡¨ Then ask yourself ¡Â#What would I do right now if I really wanted these resalts?¡¨
On dialogue
The authors observed early on in their research that when it comes to risky, controversial and emotional conversations, skilled people find a way to get all relevant information, from themselves and others, into the Pool of Shared Meaning. The Pool of Shared Meaning is a measure of a group¡Â#s IQ. When people purposefully withhold meaning from one another, individually smart people do collectively stupid things. As members of a team explain their opinions, people form a clearer and complete picture of the circumstances. As a result of the free flow of meaning, the quality of the final choice is greater than that of the original arguments. Conversely, when people are not involved, when they sit back quietly during touchy conversations, they are rarely committed to the final result.
The authors do not suggest that every decision be made by consensus, that the boss should not take part, or make the final choice. The authors do suggest, however, that whatever the decision making methods are, the greater the shared meaning in the pool, the better the choice - whoever makes it.
The authors¡Â# novel contribution is a set of technics we may use to enter a dialogue and to stay in dialogue ¡V enriching the shared pool of meaning. The authors speak about Mutual Purpose and Mutual Respect, the stories we tell ourselves, how to state your view effectively, how to encourage people to express themselves, how to build upon disagreements and, finally, how to move from dialogue to decisions making mode.
The first condition of dialogue is Mutual Purpose. To determine when the Mutual Purpose is at risk:
Â#XWatch for: Signs that other start forcing their opinion into the Pool of Shared Meaning. It is often because they figure that we are trying to win and they need the same.
Â#XAsk: ¡Â#Do others believe I care about their goals in this conversation?¡¨
Â#XAsk: ¡Â#Do they trust my motives?¡¨
To succeed in Crucial Conversations we must exercise empathy, care about the interest of others, not just our own. The purpose has to be truly mutual. If your only reason for approaching your boss is to get what you want, your boss will hear you as cynical and selfish ¡V which is not what you are. On the other hand, if you try to see the other person¡Â#s point of view, you can often find a way to draw the other person willingly into a very sensitive conversation.
Mutual Respect is the continuance condition of dialogue. Why? Because respect is like air. If you take it away, it is all people think about. The instant people perceive disrespect in a conversation, the interaction is no longer about the original purpose ¡V it is now about defending dignity. Ask yourself: ¡Â#Do others believe I respect them?¡¨ When you made a mistake that hurts others, apologies.
Sometimes others feel disrespected even though you have not done anything disrespectful. Clearly, an apology is not appropriate in this circumstance. When other misinterpret either your purpose or your intent, step out of the argument and rebuild safety by using a skill called contrasting, a don¡Â#t/do statement that:
Â#XAddresses other¡Â#s concerns that you don¡Â#t respect them or that you have malicious purpose.
Â#XConfirms that you do respect them or clarifies what you do really want.
When you are aware that something you are going to drop into the Pool of Shared Meaning could create a splash of defensiveness, use contrasting to bolster safety ¡V even before others go into silence or violence. When people misunderstand you and you start arguing over the misunderstanding, stop. Use contrasting; explain what you don¡Â#t mean until you have restored safety.
Sometimes, however, we clearly have different purpose. In that case the authors suggest the CRIB path to lead your group back to Mutual Purpose.
Â#XCommit to seek Mutual Purpose. You have to agree to agree. You have to suspend our beliefs that your choice is the absolute best and the only one, and that we will never be happy until we get exactly what you currently want. You have to be willing to verbalise this commitment even when our partner seems committed to win. You should act on faith that our partner is stuck in silence or violence because he or she feels unsafe.
Â#XRecognise the (strategic) purpose behind the tactic. We think we will never find a way out because we equate what we are asking (tactic) for what we want (strategy). When you find the purpose behind a particular tactic, new options (tactics) become possible. When you release your grip on your tactic and focus on your real purpose (strategy), you open up the possibility of finding alternative tactics that can serve a Mutual Purpose.
Â#XInvent a Mutual Purpose. Move to more encompassing goals.
Â#XBrainstorm new tactics. Once you have built safety by finding a shared purpose, you should now have enough safety to return to the content of the conversation.
To speak the unspeakable and still maintain respect be confident, have humility and be skilled. Be confident that your opinion deserves a place in the Pool of Shared Meaning, but have the humility to realise that others have valuable input. If you follow this, when you speak the unspeakable, people will be grateful for your honesty.
To STATE your view effectively the authors suggest that you may use the following tool:
Â#XShare your facts. Facts are the least controversial. Fa2 stars (Common sense for dummies) - This book offers minimal amount of original thought. Most ideas are commonsense. There is little in a way of suggestion to realize when conversation has become critical. There are also no ideas for the ways to resolve the situations "already gone bad." Some conflicts introduced to showcase specific techniques are not resolved convincingly. I read till the end hoping to find something of value, but was disappointed.
This is the Digital version. The full version can be purchased by clicking on the "Buy Now" button below for around $10.47 USD.
Click to buy with discount via Amazon
    
|
Games download
Mp3 Software
Multimedia Software
Internet Software
Utilities for PC
Software for Desktop
Home and Education Software
Business and Finance
Software Development
Mobile and PDA
Software for MAC and UNIX
