Plus, learn how one nonprofit dramatically reduced domestic violence in Uganda.
| | | | | Hi John,
Do both parties in a disagreement need to use the skills taught in Crucial Conversations for that disagreement to be productive?
What do you think? And how would you persuade someone of your perspective?
Today’s Q&A explores this interesting topic, and we invite you to add your perspective in the comments section.
|
|
| | | | | Crucial Conversations for Mastering Dialogue | |
| |
|
| | Convincing People of the Power of Crucial Conversations | | by Ryan Trimble |
|
| | We’ve been learning Crucial Conversations skills at work. Things have been going well and we’ve had some great, open, and honest discussions about the skills and principles. However, several people have said that they only work if both parties use them. I said that I kindly disagree. It takes only one person in the conversation using the skills to have a successful Crucial Conversation. I’m having trouble expressing this better. How do I show that this is true?
Signed,
Advocate
|
|
| | | | The first time I attended Crucial Conversations I asserted the same thing your peers are—that productive disagreement depends on BOTH parties using the skills and principles taught in the course.
I shared my perspective with the trainer and asked what he thought. I don’t remember what he said, but I do remember feeling illuminated by his response, which is perhaps best represented by this question: If caught in a Crucial Conversation with someone who is being dishonest or disrespectful, would not using the skills yourself be effective?
|
|
| | | | | | | | CASE STUDY | | Stopping Abuse in Uganda | | Thousands of Ugandan women are beaten by their husbands every year, a behavior ingrained in the culture there. Yet one nonprofit, Ourganda, has dramatically decreased domestic abuse. This case study highlights how. | | |
|
| | | | | | Aug 19–23 | | Crucial Conversations® for Accountability | | Join us live online and learn how to:
Master performance discussions. Reach alignment when stakes are high and opinions vary. Strengthen trust and reliability. Apply multiple sources of influence. Get results and improve relationships. | | | |
|
| | | | | | Simplicity and sincerity generally go hand in hand, as both proceed from a love of truth. | | | | | |
| |
|
|
|
