|
Communication |
Broadening
Participation in Biological Monitoring: |
|
Building trust—To effectively collaborate, participants must trust one-another. Building trust requires clear and non-threatening communication, but engaging in clear communication with individuals who do not share our background can be one of the most difficult things we do. Developing trust takes time and shared experiences. The more different individuals are, and the greater their original distrust of each other, the longer mutual trust takes to develop. Communication is a process, however, and there are methods to improve its effectiveness. Means for improving the effectiveness of communication can involve appropriate styles of communication, focusing on each others perspectives and use of language, meeting and communicating in appropriate venues, and getting help or training in effective communication techniques. Inevitably the process of building trust requires spending time together, getting to know each other, and reaching clear understanding and agreements. One of the best ways to do this is to participate in projects. For this reason, working with each other to address all the applicable considerations listed in the modules of this manual is an excellent trust-building exercise in and of itself. Communication styles—People vary in the way they communicate. For instance, some individuals are action oriented and others focus on building relationships, some wait for others to finish their thoughts and others interrupt frequently in a fluid brainstorming style, some like to hear themselves talk and others concentrate on listening carefully. All are appropriate styles in some circumstances and not useful in others. Learning to understand and appreciate these various styles can prevent hard feelings or frustration. Regardless of style, communication if facilitated when it is respectful, civil, open-minded, inclusive of all viewpoints, thoughtful, frank, honest, non-accusatory, non-coercive, unrushed, and safe. In situations where some individuals feel intimidated by differences in power, education, language skills, or feared repercussions, providing the time and support for them to be heard and appreciated is especially important. The references listed below include a variety of helpful documents for addressing various communication styles. Perspectives— All humans perceive their world through the lens of their past experiences and those experiences vary widely. Fundamental differences such as worldviews or paradigms consist of sets of assumptions about the way the world works, what humans are like, how we should behave, and what is important. These assumptions often lead to preconceived notions about what people in other cultures or socio-economic groups are like. We also have preconceived notions about the best way to understand the world, be it science, tradition, religion, or direct personal experience. When our worldviews, assumptions, perspectives, and preconceived notions differ significantly from those of other individuals with whom we are trying to collaborate, clear communication often requires additional effort. Building trust and providing a comfortable context to begin the process of appreciating each other’s viewpoints can be facilitated by activities such as visiting each others homes or places of work; taking field trips together; joint fact finding; undertaking small projects; or sharing informal meals, music, or recreational activities. Structured communication and learning exercises are other ways to explore alternative perspectives. Examples include:
Language—Because language is the medium through which we communicate our varied perspectives, our use of different words, phrases, acronyms, terminology, or native tongues is natural. A rancher is unlikely to describe a creek in the same manner as a university researcher. A retired elementary school teacher is unlikely to understand the management acronyms of a BLM forester. A Hispanic migrant worker or Asian immigrant could have difficulty understanding simple English. Outside facilitators or translators also can be helpful with our use of language. Nobody should feel embarrassed or hesitant to ask others for clarification or help with translation. Neither need we take our differences too seriously. To promote sensitivity with language differences, participants might consider tools such as humorous skits and role-playing. Meetings—Getting things done in a group usually requires meetings, so meetings often are the context where communication difficulties become apparent. Meeting coordinators or project leaders might not be the best individuals to facilitate communication. Often professionals have more training and an objective perspective. Early decisions about whether professional outside facilitation will be worthwhile can avert later difficulties. Some suggestions are discussed in the next section, “Getting help”. Meetings work better in venues where all the attendees feel comfortable sharing their opinions candidly, and where they are comfortable with the location, facilities, access, schedule, and activities. Elements as simple as chair and table arrangement can help or hinder open and balanced communication. Group size and the diversity of the participants are important determinants of social dynamics and personal interactions. Meetings usually result in more useful outcomes when they are focused by leaders, ground rules, agendas, note-takers, and shared minutes. First meetings can be awkward if participants do not know each other. One way to engage everyone in such a meeting would be to ask each person to describe how he or she pictures a vista or landscape located in the area that will be monitored. Individuals will likely emphasize positive and negative attributes they recognize and can relate to in each other’s images. Getting help—Clear communication is such an important facet of modern society that resources for assisting the process are abundant. One need only look as far as city or county courts to find local professionals who specialize in facilitation and mediation services. Library books and web sites abound; some are listed in the References section. Local community colleges or other schools likely teach courses on the topic. The group need not spend a lot of money on a consultant if selected members of the group receive training. Sometimes overcoming hurdles can be as simple as agreeing to group norms of behavior or taking time to let emotions cool. Or the entire group could take training in effective communication skills or decision-making processes. On-going evaluation, feedback, and reality-checks can be useful techniques. The bottom line is that if clear communication or the conduct of meetings is a problem for the group, help is readily available Checklist—¨ What are the plans and methods for building mutual understanding and trust among participants? ¨ How do communication styles differ among participants in the project? ¨ How do perspectives differ among participants? ¨ What differences exist among participants in their languages, terminology, or use of words? ¨ How will different communication styles, perspectives, and languages among participants be addressed during meetings and other communications? ¨ How will meetings be planned and conducted to facilitate or enhance clear communication? References—Adler and Birkhoff n.d.; Ballard 2004; Behar 1996; Collaborative Forest Restoration Program 2003; Christoffersen 2003; Coughlin and others 1999; Daly n.d.a ; Dukes and Firehock 2001; Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network Coordinating Office and the Canadian Nature Federation 2003; Everett 2001; Justice and Jamieson 1999; Kaner and others 1996; Krishnaswamy 2004; Lynch and others 2004; Moote and Becker 2003; Sirmon and others 2002a, 2002b; Sithole 2002; Stockdale and Corbet 1999; University of Maine Cooperative Extension and Sea Grant Program, Maine Coastal Program of the Maine State Planning Office n.d.; Voluntary Sector Initiative 2001; Wondolleck and Yaffee 2000. ©2005 Institute for Culture and Ecology
|
|