The Difference between Dialogue and Discussion

Dialogic Learning is about learning through dialogue. I want to share an essential distinction between dialogue and discussion. This is a crucial lesson I reflect on every day.

Here is David Bohm explaining the subtle difference.

Defining Dialogue

“Dialogue” comes from the Greek word dialogos. Logos means “the word,” or in our case we would think of the “meaning of the word.” And dia means “through” — it doesn’t mean “two.” The picture or image that this derivation suggests is of a stream of meaning flowing among and through us and between us. This will make possible a flow of meaning in the whole group, out of which may emerge some new understanding. It’s something new, which may not have been in the starting point at all. It’s something creative. 

Contrast this with the word “discussion,” which has the same root as “percussion” and “concussion.” It really means to break things up. It emphasizes the idea of analysis, where there may be many points of view, and where everybody is presenting a different one — analyzing and breaking up. That obviously has its value, but it is limited, and it will not get us very far beyond our various points of view.

David Bohm

To sum it up, dialogue creates a new understanding, whereas discussion is analysing different points of view.

An Education Example

I remember a rare moment with a group of teachers I worked with – we had been involved in a rich dialogue/discussion. I explained the difference between the types of talk, and we reflected on the conversation we had just experienced. It was enlightening to consider how long we spent in each.

Talking in groups is messy. It rarely, if ever, fits neatly into one category. Facilitation helps with having clear intentions before starting a meeting or session.

Meeting Protocols

Use these questions to consider framing your session, workshop or meeting.

  • What type of thinking is needed during our time together?
  • Will we be generating new ideas today?
  • What disposition will be most helpful for this work?
  • What do I need to do to be present and prepared for this meeting?
  • How will my mindset help?
  • What are the conditions and protocols we need to pay attention to make the most of our group meeting?

Conclusion

Most of the teacher or leader sessions I am involved in require the group to move nimbly between different types of talk, discussion and dialogue.

By having a strong understanding of the different types of talk, we can create the right conditions for a successful experience.

Have you experienced this distinction? How might you use this new understanding of your developmental work? What other questions do you have that are worth considering?

Photo by Priscilla Du Preez

How to create the ideal conditions for dialogue, creativity and feedback

I thought I would share in a little more detail about some of the different things we can do to positively impact on these topics.

Creativity Can Be Blocked

One of the most interesting areas to read about is the disposition it takes to be able to be creative.

In this context, I refer to creativity as the generation of novel ideas that add value. Much of the time we face a range of blocks that get in the way of this endeavour.

These can often be our own approach and self-censoring, even self-sabotaging. Or the environment around us sometimes has a negative impact through exuberant judgement or too much pace.

During the session, we will have a look at the different types of blocks and explore the ideal conditions for ideas to thrive.

Speak up!

Dialogue is no different and it can be a delicate experience, swayed and influenced by dominant voices or even culled by assumptions and an underlying threat.

Of course, we can control much of these issues through deliberate protocols and practices. Long term it is about establishing a core set of habits that work for you.

Dialogue is different to a discussion, the former being much more akin to building and developing ideas together in a highly supportive environment. Certain conditions will encourage this and some will detract from it.

Feedback, up, down, forward

Getting feedback right has been a focus for thousands of teachers the world over for many years now. And yet we still seem to spend too much time exploring how to give feedback.

Ultimately we might all be expert feedback givers, but unless the recipient is an expert receiver of feedback, and it is done in a supportive and encouraging space – little may change.

In the workshop, we will explore practical tools and activities for providing and receiving feedback effectively.

We will pay close attention to how we might design the ideal conditions for feedback conversations to take place and what we might do to ensure it is heard and acted upon in the most positive way.

Imagine each of these – Creativity, Dialogue and Feedback as three little seedlings, each ready to burst forth – we just need to carefully surround them with the ideal conditions to thrive and grow.

Join me on the 13th April in Melbourne for my keynote and workshop at TeachTechPlay.

#28daysofwriting

Photo by Neslihan Gunaydin on Unsplash

Tear Off Your Label

When we pay attention to setting clear expectations and creating the optimum conditions for dialogue, our meetings and sessions with our colleagues will be much improved.

This effort to establish a safe environment for talk – before the talking – is one of my core activities when working with a team.

It holds for me that this effort will have a significant impact on the quality of the experience. It is one of my 20% activities that has 80% of the impact – Pareto Principle in action.

Anthony Bourke, a former fighter pilot, refers to a version of this during flight debriefs. In his article he explains how members of a squadron remove their symbols of hierarchy to signal an open space for feedback.

However you structure it, the debrief must be a safe place where all team members — regardless of rank or seniority — are free to share their open and honest observations on how they and their teammates performed during the mission.

In the military, we create that safe space by stripping off our nametags and rank insignia at the beginning of the debrief (they attach to our flight suits with Velcro). With the nametags off, we create a learning environment where the sole purpose is to improve performance both as individuals and as a team.

All the practice has been hard to verify, it got me thinking about how powerful that would be for members of the military.

The very symbol we covert is removed and any hierarchy is set aside for open dialogue and critique.

I wonder how we might create strong gestures and symbols of equality in meetings and development sessions?

I am sure you have been in meetings when a more senior member of the team arrives part way through and the whole dynamic changes and we all become a little more closed.

Equally I have been fortunate enough to work with leadership teams who have explciitly developed habits that allow open dialogue, however tough those interactions may be.

Perhaps it is just continued intentional practice from all of those involved to lift up every voice in the room – but especially for those who hold a “rank” to reinforce the open protocol.

What do you think?

#28daysofwriting

Photo by Nick Hillier on Unsplash

Why Am I Talking?

I am always on the lookout for useful mental models, protocols and habits to improve the quality of dialogue and I discovered this little acronym to improve participation.

W.A.I.T = Why Am I Talking?

One of my favourite maxims and something I wrote down when I started Dialogic Learning is to “Listen twice as much as you talk.” This is based on a quote by the Greek Stoic philosopher Epictetus:

We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.

One of the strengths of this and the Why Am I Talking? protocol is that it encourages us to carefully reflect on what we are sharing and think about our thinking.

Any habits and protocols that encourage us to slow down a little are really valuable at improving the quality of our dialogue and discussion.

It was hard to find the original attribution for the idea but I did come across some useful questions that you can use to elaborate further.

Questions for Reflection

The following is from a post on the The Power of TED* website.

  • Am I talking for approval and to be overly helpful? (Rescuer)
  • Am I talking to control and take charge of the situation? (Persecutor)
  • Am I talking to complain and whine about all I don’t like? (Victim)
  • What is my intention behind what I am about to say?
  • Is there a question I could ask that would help me better understand what the other person is saying and perceiving?
  • How might I simply listen and let go of my urge to talk at this moment?

Perry Holley posted last year about the WAIT habit encouraging us to ask the following questions:

  • Is this the time to share? Is what I want to share on the topic? Don’t divert the conversation away from what they are speaking about just because “that reminds me of a time when…”
  • Is it my turn to share? Are you mastering the pause?
  • Is what I want to share going to add to or subtract from what they are sharing? The temptation here is to divert the conversation from them to you.
  • If you do interject, be concise. Add value and then shut up.

Strategies to Try

Perry goes on to share a few other strategies which I have come across before and are well worth including in the mix. His titles in bold, but my explanations:

  1. Dare to be Dumb – This is all about asking questions and being open to new ideas. Often a dialogue or discussion can falter because we halt, cut down or stomp all over other people’s ideas. When we ask questions we are also much more likely to challenge assumptions in a group setting. Our curiosity should be a guide.
  2. Master the Pause – This one reminds me of running interviews during design thinking processes and also during coaching sessions. Just because it is quiet does not mean we are not thinking or engaged. Every second does not need to be filled with talk. Pausing allows others to extend their stories and contributions and sometimes reveal new ideas. Also pauses and lower volume time encourages reflection and thinking.
  3. Don’t top someone’s story – My favourite. I have been a victim of this so many times. The other person is simply waiting for their chance to speak. This is the antithesis of high-quality participation and nowhere close to a behaviour associated with rich dialogue. Story topping is the closest thing to competitive conversation.

Why Am I Talking Chart

If an acronym is not enough then here is a handy flow chart to keep us straight from Alan O’Rourke over at AudienceStack.

18956529930 6901758a35 z

When I just reviewed those questions above I wondered if you can practically be referencing those in the midst of your interactions with others? I suppose you could be but it might slow things down too much and reduce everything to an internal reflection process.

However, these structures and protocols are not meant to be explicitly used ad infinitum – I have seen groups internalise and normalise similar structures over time and with practice. That is the goal here – to have high-quality dialogue and discussion by normalising reflective participation.

Free Bonus Resource

Interested in protocols for better meetings?

Subscribe to my newsletter and get yourself a copy of my eBook on feedback, collaboration and dialogue.

Screenshot 14
  • 55 Ideas & Protocols to improve your feedback, collaboration and dialogue.
  • Practical Strategies to get the most out of every feedback experience.
  • Expert Advice to avoid typical feedback pitfalls.

Photo by Antenna on Unsplash

Name Your Perspective

If you have spent any time with me in small group development sessions you will likely have heard me talking deliberately about perspective. I am always keen to make explicit what can often be an implied understanding or concept. Trying to name up front and from the outset assumptions we might be making is a handy habit to get into. The same is true about the perspective we might be taking towards a discussion or dialogue.

I think one of the challenges we face is in our ability to zoom in and out in terms of our thinking and when in collaboration or discussion with others.

When I say “zoom in” I mean taking heed of the “Micro” perspective, the daily grind the specific, concrete things that might be happening in the classroom. Paying attention to the “Individual” would also be common with a “Micro” perspective. With this lens we are paying less attention to the larger more abstract goals at play and focusing on the concrete decisions and actions in the classroom. When we zoom in we might be asking “How” or “What” questions.

“Zoom out” to a wide angle lens and we bring into view the “Organisation” level goals and aspirations. They might be much less concrete to allow many people to get on-board, so our perspective is more abstract. We are thinking less about ourselves and the concrete stuff that might get in the way of whole school progress. When we zoom out we ask “Why” questions to get to the drivers of our actions and decisions. We have to be more comfortable dealing in a more abstract currency.

I typically signal the perspective I am taking to help set the expectations about a particular part of a discussion. I think it helps me make explicit my choice of perspective and also allows a group to quickly appreciate the expectations that come with that perspective. Micro = details, Macro = drivers.

“Let’s zoom out for a second and consider the reason why this programme needs to change in this way.”

“If we think about a wider lens for a moment we can see that this decision fits with what we are choosing to do across the school.”

“OK now let’s zoom back into what this means in terms of the day to day. How could we explore this everyday?”

“What about the learners experience of this? Let’s jump back into the classroom for a second and consider how this concept would be evidenced in the classroom.”

In most discussions we might move fluidly between the concrete and the abstract. So perhaps start with why but keep returning to it. By doing so we continue to rationalise our actions or ideas and ensure they are connected to a bigger picture.

Perhaps the challenge is not just zooming out to think in an abstract way or zooming in to consider the concrete actions, but more precisely how effectively, fluidly and quickly we can move between those perspectives. Another layer to this is of course how synchronised our perspective is with others we are with.

By explicitly naming a perspective in dialogue we are forming good mental cues to ourselves and external cues for others to gain a better understanding. I think we can all benefit from solid thinking habits that tether our concrete ideas to the drivers and the broader rationale.

If you enjoyed this please sign up to my weekly newsletter here, for more insights about learning, creative culture and feedback. Don’t forget to say hi on Twitter as well, just watch out for the American politician who goes by the same name.