 |
Switching. Facilitation and use of dialoguing. Why "non-judgmental" dialogue?
|
|
|
|
Switching
Switching refers to changing from talking to listening and vice versa. This is an essential part of dialoguing, because it is in the back-and-forth,
give-and-take interchange of the process that movement toward resolution is likely to occur. It is important, therefore, for each partner to keep in mind that both sides of the process are essential. They need to say to themselves something like, " While what I am saying is very important to me, how he feels about it is also important", or " While what she is telling me is important, my feelings about it are important too. " This way the interaction will be balanced and lead to an exchange for understanding, so that it really is dialogue.
Either the talker or the listener may want to request switching. The talker may want to know how the listener feels about what she has just said or the listener may have a reaction that he wants to express. Examples of requests for switching are, " I would like to say something now if you are ready to listen", or " I want to hear how you feel about what I just said, so I would like to listen to you now. " The best time for switching is when the talker has expressed the main part of what she wants to say and the listener has understood her to her satisfaction. However, the listener always has the option to request a switch, as long as he first gives a listening response to the last speaker statement which satisfies the speaker. If the listener needs to switch before the talker has really finished, it is usually best to switch back again as soon as possible so that the dialogue stays on one track and does not get overloaded with issues. Dialoguing is more likely to succeed when it deals with only one main issue at a time, so it is good to switch after the talker has made one main point. It may be tempting for the talker to use the dialoguing structure to unload a lot of negative feelings on a " captive" listener, but that defeats the basic purpose of the process, which is for both partners to understand each other better. While dialoguing is a reliable method, it is possible to exploit it if a serious effort is not made to modify lop-sided patterns of communication.
The talking, listening and switching skills are not complicated, but they can certainly be hard to do well. Many old and ingrained communication habits and attitudes need to be unlearned as the new ones are learned. It is therefore necessary to try the skills gradually and systematically, with large amounts of practice and homework. They are first learned for non-relationship topics, then for positive relationship experiences and only after that for negative relationship issues, since these are likely to be difficult and painful. This requires discipline by the learner and firmness by the trainer, based on a thorough explanation and an agreed upon contract between them about their work together. Persons who want to become trainers need experience and expertise both in using the skills
|
|
|
and in teaching them to others. Modeling, demonstrating, role playing and positive reinforcement are some important aids in teaching the method.
While I have attempted to give an overview of the dialoguing process here, the full program for learning it is beyond the scope of this paper {see Guerney, 1977).
Facilitation and use of dialoguing
It may be helpful, and sometimes necessary, for a third person to sit in to facilitate the process. The facilitator checks that the basic structure of the method is being followed, gives reminders and suggestions for the different skills, and encourages and reinforces correct use of the skills. Facilitation is important in the early learning of dialoguing, when dialoguing difficult issues and for using the talker skills. The talker skills appear to be especially difficult to apply without help.
Dialoguing is possible whenever an interpersonal issue. or concern arises, once the basic method has been learned in a relationship or group. It may be initiated by a simple request to dialogue by one person to another or it may be suggested to a relationship by someone not directly involved, perhaps with an offer to facilitate if the persons involved would like help with the issue.
Why " non-judgmental" dialogue?
I believe that it is characteristic of relationship problems that the participants are unable to share the experienced realities that lie at the crux of their differences. They are therefore unable to create a new shared reality that better serves their individual needs. Instead, they react in old rigid ways, fail to comprehend each other's experience as well as their own and remain stuck in the problem. I therefore place a high value on the ability to be open and understanding in personal relationships.
In my opinion, a common obstacle to sharing personal realities is the strong habitual tendency to evaluate our own experience and that of others as good or bad, right or wrong, and to want to assign blame. We usually react to experience before understanding it, both in ourselves and in others, and even more so when disagreements arise and we are in danger of being labelled " bad" or " wrong. " Reacting judgmentally is therefore often an obstacle to resolving an issue on the basis of actual feelings and needs.
Dialoguing is non-judgmental in the sense that it strives to avoid judging the rightness or wrongness of our experience. Rather it attempts to view it and communicate it as it is, fully and honestly. A non-judgmental attitude on the part of the talker says, in effect, " I want to trust the ongoing life process in myself and in you and to see my experience with you for what it is and not for what I think it ‘ought' to be. My judgments about either myself or you as good or as bad are likely to prevent me from seeing and saying what is real for me, and it will then be more difficult for us to work out what is best for our relationship. So, for the moment I only want to describe what I see, think, feel and want as clearly and honestly as I can. In addition, it will be much easier for me to do that
if you also want to understand my experience accurately before judging it. "
|
|
|
A non-judgmental attitude by the listener conveys that, " While I am listening to you I want to suspend making judgments about you, whether what you are saying is good or bad or whether I like it or not. Instead I want to understand your feelings and wants and what your experience means to you as best as I can. By doing that I will better understand what your experience in our relationship is really like for you. Later, after I have understood you, I can look honestly at my own reactions about what you have said and express those. In that way, we will best be able to work out our real differences. Also, when you tell me your own feelings and thoughts without labelling them as good or bad, I am more likely to understand you better and to be able to be more honest myself. "
A shift to a more trusting and less judgmental attitude may come about as a result of the dialoguing process itself. The structure enables us to risk saying and hearing what we may have feared to say or hear before. Defensive blaming then gives way to understanding and appreciation, with a change in feeling from tension and frustration to warmth and trust. The concrete felt sense of opening and renewal in the relationship, which may accompany such a shift, is a good indicator that the dialoguing process is working successfully.
|
|
|
