This might seem like a very intuitive thing to say, but most of the misunderstandings the whole world over, from the macro to the micro, are all down to peoples unwillingness to listen and understand. However natural and matter of course it may seem, listening with an objective mind is something thats quite hard to actuate. See about dialogue facilitation.
In this case, dialogues often entail conversations among people of different identity groups. This is emphasized because this ups the challenge for understanding and relationship, the lack of either can cause stagnation in action. With proper facilitation, conversation is promoted and controversial issues are resolved, or at least given a consensus on.
However, the dialogue that we are pertaining to here has to do more with the results than the ways and means. All you have to do is delve into its etymology. The etymological roots translate to a conversation of more than two parties, one that is characterized by genuine listening, openness, and honesty. It is all down on meaning.
Dialogue, therefore, when you delve on its essence, amounts to more than just debate and discussion. It is not so much about the contents of the discussion, but rather the dealings or relationship between the parties involved. A debate, in particular, is also particular about competitiveness and about the superiority of one opinion over the other. When talking about dialog, however, you are aiming to reach a common ground.
Although dialogue as a noun is pretty much elastic and general term, we have all used its implements sometime or other. That is because, with everything that involves conflict resolution and management, communication is a quintessential part of it. We have seen methods like mediation and negotiation used, and the thing is, they are actually an integral part of the communication equation.
There are many requirements that are demanded from these facilitators. First of all, they should be multi partial, if not neutral. Their manner should be fair, and their openness should empathetically extend to all parties. Next, they must have strong listening and comprehension skills. Where some statements can come along as aggressive and challenging, they should have the knowhow of reframing them articulately. Or if something contains a potentially powerful message with promising emotional undertones, they can further amplify it. It is all down on effective communication.
Even when they think that they have gleaned the basics of the issue, people will have to be even more open to furthering it and expanding it. All in all, both parties, although coming from different terminuses of a tangent, they should be parallel and going towards a common point of understanding.
Sometimes, its less about the abstract concepts but really more on the evident, physical, and controllable aspects. You have ergonomic and psychological givens to take into account, such as with putting a fetter to the size of the individual groups, the place where the dialogue is being carried out, the seating arrangement, the refreshments provided, the session breaks, you get the drift. The thing to keep in mind is that you should be holistic in your approach, leaving no stone unturned.
This enterprise involves adherence to certain principles. Everyone should be ready to engage in conversation and REALLY listen and understand. Although sentiments are given free rein, everyone should take it upon themselves to renounce and stoke violence. Here are the principles of empathy, fair play, mutual support and the desire for reconciliation. Everyone must keep in mind both diversity and similarity. Although each individual is different from each other, they are all striving towards common values. Therefore, they should build trust and fair rules to ensure peaceful coexistence. In the end, they should be open to accepting apologies and recognizing their own mistakes.
In this case, dialogues often entail conversations among people of different identity groups. This is emphasized because this ups the challenge for understanding and relationship, the lack of either can cause stagnation in action. With proper facilitation, conversation is promoted and controversial issues are resolved, or at least given a consensus on.
However, the dialogue that we are pertaining to here has to do more with the results than the ways and means. All you have to do is delve into its etymology. The etymological roots translate to a conversation of more than two parties, one that is characterized by genuine listening, openness, and honesty. It is all down on meaning.
Dialogue, therefore, when you delve on its essence, amounts to more than just debate and discussion. It is not so much about the contents of the discussion, but rather the dealings or relationship between the parties involved. A debate, in particular, is also particular about competitiveness and about the superiority of one opinion over the other. When talking about dialog, however, you are aiming to reach a common ground.
Although dialogue as a noun is pretty much elastic and general term, we have all used its implements sometime or other. That is because, with everything that involves conflict resolution and management, communication is a quintessential part of it. We have seen methods like mediation and negotiation used, and the thing is, they are actually an integral part of the communication equation.
There are many requirements that are demanded from these facilitators. First of all, they should be multi partial, if not neutral. Their manner should be fair, and their openness should empathetically extend to all parties. Next, they must have strong listening and comprehension skills. Where some statements can come along as aggressive and challenging, they should have the knowhow of reframing them articulately. Or if something contains a potentially powerful message with promising emotional undertones, they can further amplify it. It is all down on effective communication.
Even when they think that they have gleaned the basics of the issue, people will have to be even more open to furthering it and expanding it. All in all, both parties, although coming from different terminuses of a tangent, they should be parallel and going towards a common point of understanding.
Sometimes, its less about the abstract concepts but really more on the evident, physical, and controllable aspects. You have ergonomic and psychological givens to take into account, such as with putting a fetter to the size of the individual groups, the place where the dialogue is being carried out, the seating arrangement, the refreshments provided, the session breaks, you get the drift. The thing to keep in mind is that you should be holistic in your approach, leaving no stone unturned.
This enterprise involves adherence to certain principles. Everyone should be ready to engage in conversation and REALLY listen and understand. Although sentiments are given free rein, everyone should take it upon themselves to renounce and stoke violence. Here are the principles of empathy, fair play, mutual support and the desire for reconciliation. Everyone must keep in mind both diversity and similarity. Although each individual is different from each other, they are all striving towards common values. Therefore, they should build trust and fair rules to ensure peaceful coexistence. In the end, they should be open to accepting apologies and recognizing their own mistakes.
About the Author:
Get to know important facts about dialogue facilitation by reviewing the informative articles online. To obtain further information visit the link http://www.dialogues.cc.
0 commentaires:
Enregistrer un commentaire