During our debriefing of our pipeline activity, one comment really
stuck out to me in particular. One main
focus of this activity was the importance of communication within our
group. We had moments where half of the
group was not allowed to talk, forcing the rest of the group to speak up and
take control with their voices. Everyone
was allowed to talk for one small period of time that became quite interesting
for everyone.
In this small moment where everyone could talk, we had many people
talking over top of each other.
Initially, conversations were focused around how we were doing and
trying to come up with a new idea of how to solve our challenge. All of these conversations being held
together led to the group becoming frustrated with no one person being listened
to. Finally, it got to a point where I
tried to speak up over everyone. During
this time, I was trying to focus everyone on what everyone had to say and their
opinions.
After our talking privileges were taken away again, we continued to
struggle through the activity as frustration grew. Towards the end, everyone was allowed to
speak again which went right back to a power struggle over who was our main
speaker.
The comment that truly stuck out to me focused on how two people can
say the same things but depending on how they say it will depend on whether or
not the group will listen. It almost
seems that some people have this golden voice that can make them more likely to
be heard.
Hearing others describe the situation like this made me think about
how I went about talking with the whole group.
Initially I felt defensive about the comment thinking it was a negative
description about how I spoke to everyone.
However, I am now thinking about why is this so? Why is it that someone can say something
without being heard and then someone else can repeat it and everyone agrees?
The main thought for me that comes to mind, is how you are speaking
to the group. Whether or not you have a
voice that can carry is not a defining quality of a leader. Some very powerful leaders can be quite soft
spoken. What is important is that you
can gain control of the group before you begin to share your thought. One effective skill as a leader is to gain
the attention of everyone before you share information. Whether you can simply speak up over everyone
or if you have a simple trick to quiet the group, the skill is key.
For me, knowing that I can speak up over a group to gain
their attention is important because I know that is my style. As a leader, I need to realize however that
some people may not be able to have that skill when speaking. I am still trying to think about why this is
and what it means with my group leadership.
This comment resonated with me twice throughout the course of that stress inducing class period: first, when it was made and second, when Matt introduced it to the group. The first time I felt a strong connection to Anna in that even when she had the ability to speak to the group, she couldn't be heard. At that point, I thought I felt empathy because my communication skills were bound by the rule of the experiment. I wished we could both talk because I knew what she had to say was important to the rest of the group. Later, I felt guilty. My voice is always heard. Whether or not it is agreed with is another story but I know that I always put my opinion in. I felt guilty because what I felt for Anna was not empathy, but sympathy. I was never actually in her shoes. I was not thinking about it from her point of view, that even though she could speak she was not integral the the decision making. Now I've learned to think more empathetically to the problems of others, where the quote makes sense two-fold. It's an eye opening to know that those whose opinions I cannot hear often are my fault for talking over them, as you mentioned in your response. While being the loudest in the room isn't a bad quality to have, it doesn't mean it's the best. I'm glad that others have been thinking about this as well. Thanks for your thoughts, Ethan.
ReplyDelete