Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Great Listeners Actually Do

hbr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 205 posts

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#111

Post by throwanem »

hamhamed wrote: post #11

This is why I come to HN..to find articles like this. This defies what you learn at school, because I have been taught numerous times, to nod and stfu when you're holding a convo. Always interrupt if you have something constructive to say in a casual/business conversation (unless you're in a debate), that's how you gain trust and credibility.

> Always interrupt if you have something constructive to say...

This is dangerous advice. Being perceived as someone who frequently interrupts is socially detrimental. As another commenter said, save it for when someone really makes it necessary, and converse with grace at all other times.

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#112

Post by mikmoila »

"Good listening invariably included some feedback provided in a way others would accept and that opened up alternative paths to consider."

This might be related to why group brainstorming doesn't result in good ideas as often we think:

https://hbr.org/2015/03/why-group-brainstorming-is-a-waste-o...

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#113

Post by MawNicker »

andrepd wrote: post #100
pizza wrote: post #35

The computational complexity varieties of listening: Let n be the number of things the other is talking about (tricky to define a "thing" but, whatever?, use a consistent thing metric) - O(1) listening: ignoring/may as well not be there - reading your phone while the other talks to you - O(n) listening: loading their information into your brain while they talk - e.g. repeating back to them, nodding to salient points…

This is almost comical :p The brain is not a turing machine. You can't make these kind of analysis because the brain isn't just a huge von neumann computer.

The brain is most certainly a turing machine.

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#114

Post by throwanem »

PakG1 wrote: post #45
groby_b wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>> thus, if you’ve been criticized (for example) for offering solutions rather than listening, >guilty This is not necessarily a question of "guilty". There are two major directions a conversation can go - "sympathy" or "solution". If your partner wants one, and you give the other, you operate under wrong premises due to an unstated assumption. On both sides. (If your "guilty" was a request for sympathy, I'm current…

This is crucial. I've found that when I talk especially with people who reside more on the emotional side of the spectrum (I myself seem to be more on the logical side of the spectrum), I need to really clarify before the conversation gets too deep that I'm good at expressing solutions, but I'm not so good at expressing sympathy/empathy. I'm good at having sympathy (not always empathy), but I'm not good at expressing…

Watch how other people do it and fake it 'til you make it.

It helps to remember that you aren't lying in this; the feeling is real, only the performance is (temporarily) synthetic, and you're doing it to help your interlocutor feel safe and comfortable in the conversation, which in turn makes it more likely you will be able to help them. It will feel fake for a while, and you'll need to keenly observe reactions to know when you've got it dialed in. Eventually it becomes second nature and the feeling of fakeness goes away.

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#115

Post by throwanem »

AdieuToLogic wrote: post #63
PakG1 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is crucial. I've found that when I talk especially with people who reside more on the emotional side of the spectrum (I myself seem to be more on the logical side of the spectrum), I need to really clarify before the conversation gets too deep that I'm good at expressing solutions, but I'm not so good at expressing sympathy/empathy. I'm good at having sympathy (not always empathy), but I'm not good at expressing…

If someone could explain to me how to appear sincerely sympathetic in a way that makes sense to me, I'd love it. I'd go with the direct approach and not bother with appearances. It's consistent, easy to remember, and emotionally honest. For example: I'm an analytical person and am genuinely interested in what you have to say. If you'd like to hear possible solutions I can think of, then they would be with the intent…

"Emotionally honest" is a copout. What you mean is that it's easy for you and keeps you squarely centered in your comfort zone, while the person you supposedly think you're going to help has to do all the scary work of leaving her own.

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#116

Post by xyzzy4 »

johnfn wrote: post #42
cellularmitosis wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article is freely interchanging the concepts "being a good listener" and "being perceived as being a good listener" from one sentence to the next. That's worse than arbitrarily changing the definition (but being consistent with it).

I don't understand there to be any difference between the two. There's no objective judge of listening. There's only the other person, and how well they feel heard.

There's definitely a difference. You could be perceived as a good listener, while actually not understanding or remembering what the other person is saying. On the other hand, you could appear to not be listening, but if later quizzed on the words spoken you would ace it.

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#117

Post by ethanbond »

andrepd wrote: post #100
pizza wrote: post #35

The computational complexity varieties of listening: Let n be the number of things the other is talking about (tricky to define a "thing" but, whatever?, use a consistent thing metric) - O(1) listening: ignoring/may as well not be there - reading your phone while the other talks to you - O(n) listening: loading their information into your brain while they talk - e.g. repeating back to them, nodding to salient points…

This is almost comical :p The brain is not a turing machine. You can't make these kind of analysis because the brain isn't just a huge von neumann computer.

Who says it's not? There's no compelling reason that I've ever heard to believe so.

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#118

Post by ethanbond »

ptype wrote: post #85

Most people prefer talking to listening, so just asking a few question can get most conversations going. It's not unusual to hear someone say "we had such a great chat" when really that person did most of the talking. A trick that is used by many introverts, with great success.

"With great success" for the introvert. The person doing the talking didn't really gain anything.

And also when this happens to me I actually don't enjoy it. Propping up one sided conversations sucks, and I doubt that nearly as many people enjoy it as you're assuming.

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#119

Post by chronolitus »

sovietmudkipz wrote: post #55
pizza wrote: post #35

The computational complexity varieties of listening: Let n be the number of things the other is talking about (tricky to define a "thing" but, whatever?, use a consistent thing metric) - O(1) listening: ignoring/may as well not be there - reading your phone while the other talks to you - O(n) listening: loading their information into your brain while they talk - e.g. repeating back to them, nodding to salient points…

Observation: O(1) listening is easy enough that a rubber duck can accomplish the task.

And it's not even the worst level of listening ability.

Re: What Great Listeners Actually Do

#120

Post by namaemuta »

After almost a year volunteering in 7cups.com as a listener, I can't agree more with the article. When you show genuine interest for what other people are telling you, they will talk openly for hours and will leave the conversation feeling way better than they started it.
Post reply on HN