Communicate Effectively------English
ragav...@gmail.com
The finer points on communication at work, at home and at social
functions
ssue 1
Want to improve your communication skills?
Whenever you communicate, you should always think of the kind of
relationship you wish to establish with your audience. How casual or
formal you want the relationship to be can be reflected in your
language.
Casual (Using contractions)
He won't agree to a new meeting.
Formal (Not using contractions)
He will not agree to a new meeting.
Issue 2
One way of signaling how casual or formal you want a relationship with
your audience to be is with the use of pronouns.
Pronouns that directly acknowledge the speaker and addressee (such as
I, we and you) tend to make the communication more casual. But pronouns
that are more impersonal make the communication more formal.
For example, compare 'You should bear in mind your audience's
expectations' with 'One should bear in mind one's audience
expectations'. So, always tailor your message accordingly, based on
what kind of relationship you want to establish with your audience.
Issue 3
Do you get annoyed when you ring someone up and they answer the phone
by saying "Yes"?
This means that the caller has to ask lots of questions. The caller is
your customer and you should be helping them.
"Good morning. Speak Good English Movement. Joanna speaking."
This gives the caller lots of information and keeps the customer happy.
Issue 4
Meetings are a part of the business world, whether we like them or not.
The most important thing to do in a meeting is listen.
Listening is not passive. It's something we need to work at. Sit up,
look at who is speaking and ask questions if you are not sure about
something.
"I'm sorry but I don't quite understand. Could you explain that again?"
You won't appear foolish and everyone will be clear about the message.
Issue 5
It's always important to be specific about your purpose or goal in
communicating.
The purpose of any instance of communication can be broken down into
these three main categories: giving information to someone, getting
information from someone, or getting someone to perform some action.
These three different purposes are often associated with specific kinds
of grammatical constructions, though this is not a rigid rule. Giving
information typically involves a declarative (The trees in the park are
really beautiful), while getting information involves an interrogative
(Are the trees in the park really beautiful?) and getting someone to
perform some action involves the imperative (Go see the trees in the
park!).
Issue 6
When networking with business partners, what do you want to know from
the other party?
Questions are a great way to get information and get people talking.
There are two main types of questions:
Open- An open question allows the listener to answer how they want.
"Why did you come to this conference?"
Closed- These questions have 'yes' or 'no' answers. They are not great
for opening up a conversation but are handy when you need information
quickly. "Has the conference started?"
Issue 7
In telephone conversations, how often have we left the other person
wondering if we are not dozing off at our end?
A way to reassure them is to smile when you speak. To achieve this,
simply put a mirror by your phone and make sure you are smiling when
you pick up the phone.
If you are in the service industry, this can enhance your company's
image and even your own.
Issue 8
It is useful to learn how people makes reference to a certain person by
using an object, also known as metonymy.
For example, when a waitress in a restaurant says to her colleague,
"The ham sandwich wants his cheque.", this may mean that staff in the
restaurant have the practice of using the food ordered by the customers
to represent them.
Another example could be how news reporters refer to people by the
building that they work in, as in "The White House has refused to
comment on the matter."
Issue 9
When the person you are speaking to starts to lose his temper and
demands for something that he cannot have, how do you show your
assertiveness without being rude?
The communication technique known as the broken record will come in
handy here. It requires you to say the same answer time and again in
different ways.
Below is an example of how a sales assistant can reject the constant
bargaining demands of a customer:
"Sorry, we can't reduce our price."
"Sorry but this is our price."
"Sorry, this is the best price that we can offer."
The customer will eventually calm down and get the point that the sales
assistant is driving at.
Issue 10
Effective communication entails the understanding of the use of English
in different societies.
For example, in America, the phrase "rain check" means "to postpone"
because in the country, if a baseball game is cancelled due to heavy
rain, patrons are given a compensatory ticket to attend the next game.
However, in British English, the phrase has acquired another meaning -
"let's wait until the time comes and see if it's still a good idea" -
because it rains so frequently in Britain that it is quite normal to
wait until the last minute before deciding to embark on an activity.
Issue 11
In the process of communication, problems occur due to
misunderstandings or incomplete information.
A way to address these problems is the use of repair strategies, such
as cancelling the implications of what has been said.
For example, when "John broke Jane's vase", it is logically implied
that Jane's vase is damaged and she would be angry with John for
damaging it.
So, to cancel the implication, we could say something like "John broke
Jane's vase but she didn't mind."
Issue 12
To communicate well in a language, we need to be aware of the
conventionalized ways of saying things in that language. Otherwise, we
may end up offending our audience even if we do not intend to do so.
For example, the Japanese phrase "Ashita made matemasu ka?" means "Can
you wait until tomorrow?" in English. Both versions are considered
polite requests.
However, if we were to change the Japanese version to "Ashita made
matemasenka?", this means "Can't you wait until tomorrow?" in English.
While the Japanese version is still considered polite, the English
version is impolite and may even be considered rude by native speakers.
Issue 13
When presenting ideas to the audience, it is useful to organize
information in patterns. One such pattern is
SITUATION-PROBLEM-RESPONSE-RESULT.
To illustrate,
The staff in our Hong Kong branch office is relatively new. (SITUATION)
Because of this, they don't know how to deal with queries that crop up.
(PROBLEM) Two months ago, we sent over one of our more experienced
personnel to provide the necessary training. (RESPONSE) Since then,
things appear to have improved significantly. (RESULT)
Other patterns include GENERALIZATION-EXAMPLE and DENIAL-CORRECTION.
While some of these patterns are conventionalized, the audience would
usually expect the information to be organized in a manner that they
are familiar with.
Hence, an effective communicator must not only know the various
information patterns but should also be able to combine them in a way
that can be easily interpreted by his target audience.
Issue 14
We can make use of different patterns to present ideas to our audience,
such as DENIAL-CORRECTION and GENERALIZATION-EXAMPLE. (For
illustrations, please refer to previous issue.)
Apart from using these patterns in a way that is easily interpreted by
the audience, it is also worth the effort to use a number of key
phrases that explicitly signal the status of each piece of information.
To illustrate, with a GENERALIZATION-EXAMPLE pattern, phrases such as
"for instance", "for example" and "consider the following" are possible
indicators that you are about to present an example.
And for the DENIAL-CORRECTION pattern, "I think you've misunderstood
me" or "in actual fact" can be used when you are about to correct a
misunderstanding.
However, do take note that certain phrases are more appropriate in the
formal context than the others. So it is also important for you to
tailor the phrases to the level of formality.
Issue 15
Letting the audience know the source of our information, especially in
cases of official or formal communication would help them to decide
just how seriously the information ought to be taken.
Therefore, when communicating to someone, we need to make clear the
status of our information. This usually involves using both a subject
and a verb.
For example, "I believe...", "I know that..." and "I feel that..."
convey increasing degrees of authority about the information.
And if the information does not originate from us, it is then wise to
use phrases such as "He believes that...", "Most people assume that..."
and "It is generally accepted that...".
Issue 16
In the previous issue, we emphasized the importance of indicating the
source of our information as it would help us decide just how seriously
the information ought to be taken.
In this issue, we will touch on how modal verbs such as 'may', 'can',
'shall' and 'will' can be used to indicate the seriousness of the
information. For example, "I may go home." is less probable than "I
will go home."
The tense of the modal verbs can also play an important role. For
example, "Could you pass the salt?" is less assertive than "Can you
pass the salt?".
Issue 17
All of us appreciate the importance of being polite in our
communication. Where language is concerned, a way to indicate one's
politeness is via indirectness.
For example, instead of making a request via an imperative such as
"Open the door!", we can make it sound more polite with "Could you open
the door?", "Could you possibly open the door?" or "I was wondering if
you could possibly open the door?"
As such, the general rule is the more indirect the construction, the
more polite it would sound.
Issue 18
It is sometimes necessary to refer to previously published documents or
earlier statements made by individuals.
One common way of presenting the reference is to use "as what", e.g."As
what" your letter dated 8 February 2004 indicated, the shipment should
have arrived by now."
However, this is generally not acceptable in standard English. You
should use phrases such as "According to your letter..." or "According
to what the doctor said...".
Issue 19
Most effective communicators make use of the 'rule of three' -
presenting information in three chunks, as we tend to remember the
details more easily.
Some famous examples include "I came, I saw and I conquered" and "the
good, the bad and the ugly".
This rule also applies to larger chunks of information; it is of no
coincidence that we have a conventional genre of the trilogy, which can
be found in books and movies.
Perhaps the recurrence of this rule is related to our preference for
information to have a beginning, a middle and an end.
So when you are organising your ideas the next time, do consider how
they can be presented as a threesome.
Issue 20
Politeness in communication can be manifested in two ways - positive
and negative politeness.
Positive politeness makes sure that the addressee's desire to be
respected or liked is not threatened. This is usually done by
complimenting the addressee (e.g. "Your proposal sounds great!") or
expressing solidarity (e.g. "I understand what you are saying; I've had
the same problem.")
Negative politeness ensures that the addressee's desire for autonomy is
preserved. This is done by apologising for any imposition (e.g. "Sorry
to disturb you but can I borrow your pen?").
An important effect of politeness is that communication is often made
less direct, since directness can be considered impolite. This is why a
conventional way of requesting is via a question rather than a command.
For example, we should say "Can you pass the salt?" instead of "Pass
the salt, please."
Issue 21
There are times when you might want to emphasise a contrast or
difference. One of the most effective ways of doing so is to apply
'syntactic parallelism'.
The idea is simple - use similar phrases or sentences but substitute
the crucial elements to bring out the contrast.
A good example is "don't get mad, get even". Although both use the
phrase 'get', the choice of 'mad' versus 'even' consisely brings out
the difference between what the speaker is advising you to do, and what
not to do.
Other examples include "You say it's hot; I say it's not.
and "The proposal takes two minutes to present, but two months to
prepare."
Issue 22
One of the biggest obstacles to communicating effectively is ambiguity,
where a word or phrase can have more than one meaning. Without clear
signals as to which meaning is the intended one, ambiguity can be a
problem for the hearer/reader, who will be unsure what the
speaker/writer is trying to communicate.
Lexical ambiguity is when a word has more than one meaning, such as
'bank' which can mean "financial institution" or "riverside". This is
usually less serious since the context often helps to clarify which
meaning is the relevant one.
Structural ambiguity, on the other hand, is more problematic, such as
in a phrase like "old men and women", does 'old' apply only to the men
or both men and women?
As such, we must make an effort to avoid such structural ambiguity by
including clarifying statements.
Issue 23
In casual conversation, it is both natural and necessary to provide
feedback to a speaker to assure him/her that his/her message is being
understood. This is known as back-channeling, which can take the form
of "uh-huh", "mmm" or more recognizable words like "yes" or "right".
Back-channeling is especially useful if the speaker has been talking
for a significant length of time, as we need to indicate that
everything said so far has been understood.
Below is an example where B is back-channeling to A:
A: The weather today is really hot.
B: Uh-huh.
A: I don't know how much longer I can stand this. I need to get a new
air-con soon.
B: Right.
However, a speaker should avoid back-channeling to himself as this may
distract the listener. For example,
A: The weather, right, today is really hot, right.
B: Uh-huh.
A: I don't know how much longer, right I can stand this, right. I need
to get a new air-con soon, right.
B: Right.
Issue 24
The use of pronouns can sometimes create confusion in communication.
A pronoun requires an antecedent, i.e. a noun phrase that it refers to.
And with pronouns, the antecedent can be far away or even absent from
the sentence. For example, "Ali wants John to hit him." where "him"
does not refer to John but to Ali or someone else.
On the other hand, reflexives such as "himself" or "herself" are less
ambiguous because, in English, their antecedents are always close by.
For example, "Ali wants John (antecedent) to hit himself." where
"himself" can only refer to John.
As such, when using pronouns, we need to make sure that the addressee
will not be confused about who the pronoun is referring to.
Issue 25
While we have been dishing out tips on effective communication, we
should bear in mind that there is always an element of risk in
communication. There is no guarantee that you would be understood, or
conversely, that you may misunderstand the person whom you are
communicating with.
This is because to understand what is being said requires paying
attention to more than just the words themselves. Communication
involves making inferences about the other person's intentions, and
precisely because of this 'guesswork', the possibility of
miscommunication is always present.
That is why communication specialists have suggested that it is crucial
to either rely on repair strategies or better yet, to be tolerant of
apparent gaffes and try to make the other person understand the best
possible intentions.
Issue 26
Effective communication is not just about using the correct grammar,
but also being aware of the prevailing ideologies and cultural
assumptions.
For example, because of the need to avoid being sexist, the use of the
male pronouns as a generic pronoun may be considered offensive to some
people.
Saying something like "A person should speak well if he wants to make a
good impression" may suggest that the speaker is sexist. That is why it
is more appropriate to say "A person should speak well if he or she
wants to make a good impression."
Issue 27
In the last issue, we discussed how effective communication is affected
by prevailing ideologies and cultural assumptions, such as the desire
to avoid being sexist.
In this issue, we will discuss a less obvious kind of ideology - the
expectation that people have some kind of 'plan' or 'agenda' in their
lives, such that everything they do is geared towards fulfilling that
plan.
We see this at work in the case of job interviews . In addition to the
more clearly job-related questions (e.g. academic qualifications),
interviewees are often asked about their personal experiences, such as
where they went on holiday and what kind of hobbies they like.
Successful interviewees tend to be those who are able to construct a
purposeful relationship between their personal experiences and their
professional aspirations.
For example, consider two people, Ali and John. Both are interested in
gaming and have applied for the same managerial position. Ali justifies
his interest as stemming from a general interest in crisis management;
he says that indulging in gaming will help him prepare for a possible
crisis. In contrast, John merely treats gaming as his personal pastime,
which is completely separate from the job situation. Between the two,
Ali is the more effective communicator in the context of the job
interview .
Issue 28
Many of us assume that effective communication is all about the proper
use of words. So we hear people saying things like "Choose your words
carefully." and "Make sure you use the right words for your meanings."
However, choosing the right words is only the tip of the iceberg. There
is a lot more than words involved in effective communication.
Over the next few issues, we will be exploring the ideas of H. P.
Grice, who has demonstrated how communication is governed by a basic
set of principles, as well as how such principles can be exploited.
Gricean principles go straight to the heart of communication.
They include "The Maxim of Quality" - do not say what you believe to be
false and do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence, and
"The Maxim of Quantity" - make your contribution as informative as it
is required for the current purposes of the exchange.
For the coming issues, we will see how they can be used to explain how
people actually communicate.
Issue 29
H. P. Grice proposed four principles, or maxims of communication. In
this issue, we look at the "Maxim of Quantity", which consists of two
parts:
1. Make your contribution as informative as it is required for the
current purposes of the exchange
2. Do not make your contribution more informative than is required
Giving too much information is just as bad as giving too little.
For example, suppose your friend asks you what you ate for dinner last
night. If you answered 'Some food', this might be true, but it is
obviously not informative enough.
On the other hand, if you answered 'A grilled beef burger with cheddar,
mayo, lettuce, tomato over a sesame seed bun, a large latte, a glass of
water and a bar of dark chocolate', you would probably be giving too
much information since the purpose of the exchange is probably just a
casual conversation.
However, such detailed information might be relevant if a forensic
scientist was interested in the stomach contents of a murder victim, in
order to help establish the victim's whereabouts.
Thus, the appropriate amount of information must take into account the
purpose of the communication.
Issue 30
H.P. Grice proposed a third maxim to capture how people go about
communicating, which is the "Maxim of Manner". This maxim involves
various sub-parts, such as 'be brief and be orderly'.
Consider the part on 'be orderly'. If you say "I went to the store and
bought some beer', you will generally be understood to mean that you
FIRST went to the store AND THEN bought some beer, even though strictly
speaking, nothing in your words actually suggest that. The order of
events is only implied.
This is why you can deny the implicature (in Grice's term) by saying "I
went to the store annd bought some beer, but not in that order."
Without any such denial, you are giving the impression that the order
of your words reflects the sequence of events.
Of course, people sometimes do this deliberately so as to mislead
others. At other times, people have clear reasons for not following the
maxim.
Now, consider the part on 'be brief'. If a dog-owner says "I need to
bring Fido to the V-E-T.", we can assume that the reason for not being
brief is because Fido has learnt to recognise the word; spelling avoids
making Fido unnecessarily agitated.
Issue 31
Grice's fourth maxim is Maxim of Relevance. People always assume that
whatever is being communicated is somehow relevant to them. Therefore,
if the relevance is not clear, they can become rather perplexed.
What is considered relevant depends on shared background knowledge, and
that is why Grice's maxims are important.
They remind us that communication involves assumptions as well as
words. For example, if someone were to ask you "What time is it?" and
you say "Well, the postman just came.", your answer would be relevant
only if he assumes that telling him about the postman can lead him to
know the time. This requires the further assumption that I know what
time the postman usually comes.
Without these assumptions to act as the 'glue' that links your answer
to the question, your statement would simply be irrelevant.
Similarly, if someone were to ask you "How do you get to work each
day?", and you say "I own a car.", you have indicated your possession
but not about how you travel to work. But your answer can be considered
relevant only because one assumes that you make use of the vehicle that
you own. This assumption, however, is not part of the actual answer.
Issue 32
Over the past issues, we discussed Grice's four maxims: Quantity,
Quality, Manner and Relevance. Grice was, of course, aware that not
everybody follows the maxims all the time. His point is therefore not
that we must obey the maxims. Rather, they capture our expectations
about how people ordinarily communicate but they do so by exploiting
the maxims.
One way of exploiting the maxims is by violating them stealthily, which
means that we try to be sneaky or cover the fact that we are not
following the maxims.
For example, a person says I have two children when in fact, he has
four children. Though if you have four children, you must also have two
children, by simply saying that you have two children, you are leading
people to assume that you have only two children, and no more than
that. That is the violation of the Maxim of Quantity.
There are other ways of exploiting the maxims. People can also be very
blatant about not following the maxims, and by doing so, achieve
different communicative effects. We will explore this in the next
issue.
Issue 33
When people deliberately and blatantly show that they are not following
the maxims, this is known as flouting. Flouting leads the hearer to do
extra work in making inferences about what the speaker is actually
communicating.
Imagine that you ask someone Is John an intelligent student? and you
are told Well, he is very polite. Obviously both you and the speaker
are completely aware that politeness is very different from
intelligence, and you might therefore wonder why the speaker's answer
is even relevant to your question.
By flouting the Maxim of Relevance, the speaker is probably trying to
get you to understand that s/he has nothing to say about John's
intelligence. This might lead you to further infer that he is not
really such a good student afterall.
Likewise, if someone says Sally is a block of ice, this statement
obviously cannot be literally true. The speaker is actually flouting
the Maxim of Quality, which leads the hearer to realise that the
speaker must mean something other than Sally is an actual block of ice.
This leads the hearer to understand that the speaker probably intends
the statement to be understood metaphorically, i.e. Sally can be quite
distant emotionally.
Issue 34
In this final discussion on Grice's Maxims, it is worth noting how
different cultures can assign different interpretations to the Gricean
maxims. This is invaluable in reminding us that what counts as
effective communication varies cross-culturally.
For example, people in Malagasy are considered less informative than
Americans or Australians. This is because in Malagasy, information is
generally treated as something highly valuable, even if it may appear
to be quite trivial.
Someone in possession of information that is not widely known can gain
prestige, which is why there is a widespread reluctance to freely
dispense information. For example, if asked when a festival will take
place, a speaker might reply I'm not sure or Sometime next month even
if s/he knew the exact date.
To an American or Australian, this would look like an irrational
attempt to avoiding observing the Maxim of Quantity. Such cultural
differences can create unforeseen problems in a globalised world.
Imagine, for example, how a Malagasy student on an exchange programme
in America might be perceived. Or conversely, the kind of impression on
American tourist in Malagasy might make. One might be seen as being too
reticient while the other might be described as being too talkative.
Issue 35
In a globalised world, we are increasingly aware that people from
different cultural backgrounds can have different values and
assumptions.
To facilitate cross-cultural communication, Anna Wierzbicka, a linguist
based in Australia, has advocated that words from different cultures
all be defined using a set of universal concepts, allowing a speaker
from one culture to better understand similar words from other
cultures.
For example, the Russian word drug is usually said to mean the same
thing as English word friend. But this is not accurate enough; it
doesn't capture important differences since unlike friend, drug
emphasises that someone will help you even if this means jeopardising
him/herself. For example, especially during acquiring food, clothing
and essentials, even if this means political risk.
The English word friend involves companionship and involves concepts
like "I want to be with this person often" and "I want to do things
with this person." But with drug, it involves risk-taking and concepts
like "I want to do things for this person and when something bad
happens to this person, I can't not do something good for this
person.".
Issue 36
In the previous issue, we discussed how distinctions between words that
otherwise appear to have similar meanings can be captured by making use
of a set of universal and simple concepts such as good, bad, people,
thing, someone, etc.
But sometimes, we will come across words that people claim have no
equivalent in other cultures, i.e. these words are simply
'untranslatable'.
One example is the Japanese word omoiyari, which has been glossed as
'compassion' or 'consideration' even though most people admit that
these glosses fail to fully capture its meaning.
Omoiyari is very prominent in the Japanese culture, and is often
reflected in a Japanese person's desire not to explicitly convey
his/her desire, expecting instead the other person to anticipate this
desire.
Anna Wierbicka has suggested that omoiyari includes the concepts 'I
think I can know what this person wants', 'I want to do this' and 'This
person doesn't have to say anything'.
This explication nicely captures an essential aspect of omoiyari
without resorting to a more complex concept like 'sympathy', which
doesn't really tell us how to behave in Japanese culture.
Issue 37
One important advantage of Wierzbicka's approach to explicating
cross-cultural concepts is that it does not just try to give us the
meaning of words; it also tries to include cultural expectations about
how we are expected to act.
Consider the Japanese word enryo, sometimes translated as 'restraint'
or 'coyness'. However, different people can have different ideas about
what it means to be coy and furthermore, some people think that being
coy is good while others may think that being coy is bad.
But in cross-cultural communication, it is the perspective of the
native speakers that matters. Thus, Wierbicka suggests that part of the
meaning of enryo can be explicated as 'I cannot say to this person: I
want this, I don't want this' or 'I think this, I don't think this'
because 'If I did, someone could feel bad because of this. And because
of this, I don't say such things.'
Notice that this tells us that in Japanese culture, there is a general
preference for avoiding imposing one's opinions or desires on others.
It is enryo as a cultural value that leads observers to understand how
important group solidarity and social self-restraint are to the
Japanese.
Issue 38
The idea of cross-cultural communication is a reciprocal one. In other
words, from the perspective of Australians, Japanese or Russians, there
are words in Singapore English that may appear quite mysterious.
Singapore English is famous for its many particles, which include lah,
meh and hor. Consider meh, which can be described as an expression of
skepticism. Thus, in The door is open, meh?, the speaker is expressing
skepticism as to whether the door is really open.
But a more accurate explanation of this particle might be "Someone
causes me to think that something is true; I think this thing is not
true; therefore I say to this person '...meh?'". The '...' refers to
whatever someone else has claimed to be true, and by adding meh at the
end of this claim, a speaker conveys his or her doubt about the truth
of the claim.
Issue 39
Communication is not just something we carry out in social isolation,
it is something we do as part of a group or community. This means to be
effective communicators, we need to think of language as a form of
doing, that is, as an activity of languaging rather than a thing called
language.
This requires a fairly fundamental mindset change. To see language as a
process rather than a product is not always easy. But once we
appreciate this, we become more flexible and versatile in our approach
to communication. And this is especially crucial in a fast-changing
world.
Most of us are already aware of the need to constantly improve as
technologies become obsolete and newer ones become more common, or as
some forms of knowledge become dated while other forms become more
relevant.
Unfortunately, for some reason, we still tend to assume that language
use is an exception to change. We cling to the idea that how we used to
speak is the way that we should still speak, and we forget that
effective communication, like effective knowledge or technologies,
requires constant adaptability.
Thus, the best communicators are those who are open to diversity and
change.
Issue 40
In the workplace, we sometimes encounter situations where we need to
have serious conversations or dialogues. The term dialogue comes from
the Greek word dialogos.
Participating in dialogue is somewhat different from the ordinary
conversations that you or I might encounter during coffee or lunch
breaks.
In this kind of dialogue, people make a special effort to meet and
genuinely try to understand the other person's point of view. In
dialogue, we use certain skills that will help us have a shared
understanding of the issues raised.
Benefits of Dialogue
- It helps the group to go beyond the surface issues, to explore
underlying reasons and root causes for the incidents or issues raised.
- It also helps us to get a clearer picture of the issues at hand.
- Lastly, it is a special time set aside for us to have our views
heard, to be honest, frank and uninhibited.
Issue 41
Having talked about the benefits of a dialogue in the previous issue,
we will look at the skills we need in order to be an active participant
in a dialogue.
Skills
Practise asking questions of a probing nature - surfacing any
assumptions that the group may have.
Act as a sounding board for the group - bouncing off ideas, possible
solutions and actions to take.
Provide much-needed emotional support by trying to listen with empathy
and suspending judgement.
Take time to reflect on and explore what is meant and be clear about
how others may perceive our words.
Discuss ideas with objectivity and be open to new or unfamiliar ones.
Put aside personal feelings to understand what others are saying and
why they are saying it.
Avoid making sweeping assumptions or reaching premature conclusions
until all aspects of the issue have been thoroughly examined.