How well do we harness the power of listening?

The following is a recent conversation between a boss and a subordinate who are working at multiple options at diffusing a critical situation

Subordinate: I have analyzed the situation and there are 2 possible options. Option 1 costs C1 and provides benefits B1, B2 and B3. Option 2 costs C2 (which is greater than C1) and provides benefits B1, B2, B4, B5. In my opinion, we should go for Option 1

Boss: Good analysis. I would still recommend that we go for Option 2 because cost is not a major consideration at this stage. Further the client has specified that B4 and B5 are an absolute must while the other benefits are nice to have.

Subordinate: I totally agree with you. However I think that we should go for option 1 as C1 as it costs us less.

Boss (a little surprised but still retains his cool): Did you listen to what I said? The client definitely needs B4 and B5 and so option 2 is the way to go.

Subordinate: I completely agree with you. Nevertheless we as a firm don’t sometimes understand that cost is the main problem with our operations. So we should go with option 1

Boss (now getting irritated): Ok, I don’t think that you are listening to me. Further I don’t want to lose any more time. I have made the decision. Please proceed with Option 2.

Subordinate (now animated): I totally agree with you. But I think we should explore Option 1.

Boss (now close to bursting out): Time out buddy!!!. Get going with option 2 and if you can’t do it, I will get another guy to do it.

Subordinate (goes out grumpy and murmuring to himself): This idiot!!! Doesn’t listen to reason. He has no respect for individual views. And finally takes a silly decision.

I am sure that people would agree that the above is not a unique situation  and that all of us have faced this quite often. Many times, we have been the grumpy subordinate and at a number of times, have been the boss who has to try hard to make reason with his subordinate. Interestingly both the boss and subordinate in most cases are intelligent and sensible individuals who have the best interests of the stakeholders. But then what causes this discord?

The more I think of it, I begin to come to the conclusion that the primary culprit in this case (who, in my view is the subordinate) and in general in other similar cases is the inability to listen to what the other person says. For instance in the above example, the subordinate who has every right to disagree with his boss is not engaging in a constructive dialogue for the following reasons

• He first wants to be seen as an understanding person and starts the conversation by saying "I agree with you". A few other euphemisms that are in vogue are "I hear you". If he really did agree with what the boss said, there was no reason for any further debate. That is a first indication that while he has been hearing to what his boss said, he has not been listening.

• The boss who in general must have a better understanding of the bigger picture has specified clearly that the client is looking for only B4 and B5 and that cost is not a major consideration at this stage. The subordinate could have disagreed with this and pointed out why he disagreed with this hypothesis. Instead he again starts with "I agree with you but". This only irritates the boss as it is very clear to him that the subordinate is not listening.

• In essence, the subordinate is fixated on the solution and feels passionately about it but not on the problem. This is good but then any solution needs to be assessed with respect to what is the problem that is being handled. Defining the scope of the problem is always the first step to defining the right solution.

I believe that this behavior seems to be getting more and more common in today’s world because in the quest to make our voice heard, we have forgotten to listen to somebody else's voice. Yes, it is important to speak your mind, let people know what is your point of view but what is more important than all of this is to clearly know your audience and then present the proposition to the audience in such a way that ensures that the right decision to come out. We have to remember that debate is not a monologue and listening to an argument is sometimes more important than commenting/reacting to it.  Increasingly I find myself mediating in situations where for some funny reasons, both warring parties keep saying exactly the same point of view but keep arguing because neither is willing to listen to the other. Very often, the only thing that I do is to create an environment where each of the parties are given an option to articulate their position and the other party has to acknowledge/disagree point by point rather than jump to generalizations or past history. Invariably once this is done, both the parties are able to come to a logical understanding pretty quickly.

Sometimes, a position of belligerence or an extreme point of view is adopted in a controlled position so as to dictate the proceedings of a negotiation. In this case, even the person taking the stand is listening to the others but is sticking to a definite point of view with an ulterior motive. Even in these cases, listening effectively will help us get a few clues on how to diffuse the stalemate. Not listening at all and just hearing the words is only going to move things to an argumentative and rhetoric stalemate from where recovery is almost always exceptionally painful than if the receiver listened to the argument with an open mind and responded appropriately. We will have to remember that disagreements are absolutely welcome and highly respected as long as the disagreeing party lays it out in a sensible manner and after providing due respect to the person with whom he is disagreeing with.

Listening is not a sign of weakness. On the contrary, it has immense potential and the folks how have harnessed its power are definitely better influencers than the ones who just stop at hearing and go on the aggressive only to find that it has not got them anywhere.  But is anybody listening?