Conversation

People have goals and limited time and so it’s important to communicate what matters.

Otherwise you get dis-engagement.

Intention of the conversation matters. Conservations just for the sake of conversation get old.

Good conversations involve the mutual bidirectional exchange of information that both sides find useful.

A conversation is an example of howSystems Exchange information for their mutual health.

That requires compatibility of the Narratives of each person.

Sometimes people that don’t know each other will have to spend time learning which of their narratives are similar. i.e. having two words that mean the same thing.

Worse is when the same word means different things to different people.

Simple common language is very helpful with concepts.

Try communicating with someone who literally does not speak the same language.

Deep narratives will take more time to change.

If there is no trust then a person is unlikely to even engage in conversation.

Trustwill increase if there is perception that good information was received and decrease if the perception is that bad information was received or harm given etc.

Information given must feel true for both sides - showing Vulnerabilitysometimes helps with this.

Giving Praise in a Healthy Way works because it’s giving more useful information than just ‘good job Johnny’.

If the conversation to intense or too quick or too slow it creates a problem.

Either the conversation is overwhelming or boring.

Speed of delivery must work for both people.

Frequency should be right. Not enough - people forget. Too much - people get overwhelmed.

Time is required for people to assimilate new ideas and integrate them.

See Equilibrium. If people receive a lot of new ideas at once - particularly those ideas that challenge their belief system then it often results in the need for more sleep. See Sleep Concepts

In a group meeting it’s much harder for people to keep up with the conversation. They may hear language the do not understand.

The speed of communication may be mismatch for the person.

One of one conversation is much easier since Clarification can occur to make sure the meaning is more likely to be received.

Both sides need to be emotionally regulated to receive information.

Makes sense - if someone is upset or angry or otherwise unregulated they will not be able to receive information.

This is where Empathy is helpful - to get the other person to regulate.

One way which can be helpful is the technique of reflecting back:

Reflecting Back - was the Narrative received?

Can be slow though. As people get more compatible narratives then it becomes possible to communicate with less information since the narratives are the same.

A good analogy is compression algorithms between computers that depend on having compatible software dictionaries to know what the shorthand means.