Bea V. Larsen . . . .Commentaries

Bea V. Larsen is a Senior Mediator at the Center for Resolution of Disputes in
Cincinnati, Ohio 
Bea V. Larsen

For a number of years Bea V. Larsen, senior mediator at the Center for Resolution of Disputes in Cincinnati, Ohio [www.cfrdmediation.com], presented weekly commentaries on WVXU radio, both on her professional work as a mediator and on more personal or general experiences. These broadcasts reached thousands of listeners in a number of midwestern states and elicited many comments. This new series of online commentaries will continue that tradition, now broadcast to the world via the internet. Comments, which can be posted directly to this blog, are warmly encouraged. More personal background information can be read in the "Introductions" category below.
 

Small Talk

Print the article

This entry was posted on 6/7/2008 11:20 AM and is filed under Personally Speaking.


    I avoid most large social occasions, explaining, or complaining, that my tolerance for idle chat, small talk, is low.
   
    The three friends with whom I shared this view on a recent spring evening, nodded in silent agreement, as we strolled to our city’s huge Convention Center. We were headed for what we expected would be a crowded event, that I knew would require considerable insignificant chatter, before I could retreat to the pleasure of having the remaining hours of the day be of my own design. There was every good reason to be in attendance at this grand event honoring four civic leaders for their major contributions to our community, people I felt genuine fondness for and great admiration. But what most pleased me as we entered the building was learning of the emailed promise one friend earlier received assuring that the evening’s program would end by 8:30 pm.
   
    If asked, I likely would have pontificated that talk should either be intimate and disclosing or purposeful. All else a waste of precious time. My mantra.
   
    But as pre-dinner wine was shared, and later in the festive ballroom, I took note of many others who seemed to be really enjoying greeting old friends, and seeking to discover connections when introduced to new acquaintances. As I thought about it after returning home and in the days since, this gave me pause. Should I reconsider my negativity? Was I the one out of step, missing the point? Discounting and avoiding something of value?
    
    These thoughts reminded me of reading some time ago about a surprising research finding. An experiment was conducted with law students. Each was paired with another student at a distant school, given only a name and phone number, and a set of facts presenting a fairly complex problem to be negotiated during a long distance call. Half of the group at each school was told to conduct a brief, no more than three-minute, conversation on the day before the telephone negotiation session was to take place. In this initial conversation they were not to refer to the facts of the case in any way, but simply make small talk, get minimally acquainted, talk about the weather in their respective cities, if they chose.
   
    Data was later collected from both groups on the settlement success rate of those who had insignificant friendly conversations the day before, and those who had not. The rate of successful settlements was much higher in the “small talk” group.
   
    With the results of this study in mind, I thought back to my idle conversations of the evening just passed, and wondered about their impact if those with whom I’d exchanged banter met soon again, especially if we then shared a purposeful goal.
   
    In his most recent book, Beyond Reason, Roger Fisher (of Getting To Yes fame) and his co-author Daniel Shapiro, both of the Harvard Project on Negotiation, address the emotional components, both positive and negative, which can be used to advantage when seeking to reach agreements. They give significant importance to “affiliation”, the building of personal connections, reducing personal distance with one’s negotiating partner. This is what seemed to have happened with the brief casual exchanges of the student group with the greater success rate.
   
    As we were leaving the Convention Center, gliding smoothly along on elongated escalators, I noticed one of my close friends in animated friendly chatter with a woman who for many months has been her negotiating counterpart in a very difficult dispute. I don’t know how much time they’ve had for idle talk when attending meetings around massive formal conference tables. For now, I’ll hold out some hope their small talk may make a difference. I'll find out. I may have to shift gears, stop complaining and improve my affiliation skills.


 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
Trackback specific URL for this entry
  • Trackbacks are closed for this entry.
Comments
    Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

    • 6/7/2008 11:34 AM Philip Brickner wrote:
      I subscribe
      Reply to this
    • 6/7/2008 1:27 PM Robert Rack wrote:
      I suspect you've just identified that the distinction between idle chit chat that puts you off and that which builds collegiality lies not in the significance or purposefulness of the subject matter, but the openness of the people to connecting. Sometimes those exchanges feel closed, more intended to shield people from being exposed or known, designed to get past that conversation to something else. Those really are a bore.

      Bea: how do you tell the difference? Intuition?

      I think it's more than intuition.  There are signs.
      Are they really looking at you, engaged, or are they looking past you for the one they think they should be talking to next?
      Do they ask questions that open to a sharing conversation, or make statements that sound like topic enders?
      Does it feel like they would be open to talking about a subject of your choosing?
      Would they run if you said something really personal about yourself?  Would they deflect if you asked something a little personal about them?
      Does it seem like the person you're talking to is trying to know you?

      There's a feeling you can get, maybe it is intuition, that there's a connection happening well beyond the words of the conversation.  You can be/feel more aware of it than the actual topic.  And, without it being spoken, you are confident they feel it, too.


      Reply to this
    Leave a comment

    Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.

     Enter the above security code (required)

     Name

     Email (will not be published)

     Website

    Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.



      
    Copyright . http://BEALARSEN.COM. All rights reserved.