Value of Dialogue

Effective communication is a key component in effective team development. Team members must understand how to effectively communicate with each other to achieve team objectives. The ability to have meaningful dialogue is an important level of communication that teams ought to achieve. This discussion examines the value of dialogue in team development and strategies to design effective dialogue sessions in teams.

Describe the differences between debate, discussion, and dialogue.

Different forms of communication can happen within a team. Three of these forms include dialogues, discussions, and debates. Each form of communication offers different values to a team. A debate is a combative form of communication where the members aim to be victorious (Anderson et al., 2003). Debates are set in a climate of antagonism where one side opposes a given idea, and the other side supports it. Therefore, debates are not designed to promote collaboration in a team. However, debates can be of value in a team when there is a need to challenge ideas that may not be beneficial for the team.

On the other hand, a discussion is similar to a debate but with less opposition (Anderson et al., 2003). Much like a debate, the participants of a discussion want their ideas to be accepted by others. The emphasis in a discussion is on getting ideas accepted rather than learning. Conversely, a dialogue is an opportunity to explore issues. Unlike the other form of communication, dialogues involve active listening and accommodating the viewpoints of others (Anderson et al., 2003). Dialogues are characterized by active listening and inquiry in search of the truth.

Analyze the value of dialogue in helping a team learn and change.

Dialogues allow team members to keep an open mind. In a dialogue, team members listen to each other deeply. They suspend their personal views and accommodate team members’ views with the intention of learning. Dialogues give people access to a larger pool of information than other forms of communication. In a dialogue, the team members are ready to get new information rather than push their ideas, as in a discussion and debate. Therefore, the highest level of learning occurs in a dialogue. Additionally, dialogues create more chances to challenge the status quo. Since the team members are open to new ideas, they can explore new options that may lead to change.

What are the ground rules required to reach this level of conversation?

To reach a dialogue level of conversation, it is important to eliminate rifts between team members, open closed subjects, and eliminate any issues that might block conversations. The following are rules that can be explored to create an appropriate environment for dialogues.

The team must encourage others: For communication to reach a level of dialogue, all team members must be encouraged to contribute their ideas.
Team members must ask questions: Team members should be encouraged to ask questions if they have any concerns.
Every participant must engage in active listening: For dialogue to occur, all members of the team should be willing to listen to the contributions of their team members.
The team should seek common ground: In a dialogue, the team should be seeking common ground. Unlike debates and discussions, there is no ‘winner’ in a dialogue. The members of the team seek to find ideas that they can all agree on.

Describe what you are learning about how to design an effective dialogue session.

The analysis of dialogue as a valuable level of communication in team development reveals several lessons on designing effective dialogues. When creating a dialogue session, it is first important to pay attention to the interpersonal relationships between the team members. Dialogue is a compassionate level of communication where team members are in understanding of each other’s points of view (Manning et al., 2013). Therefore, there must be a positive environment to develop the right relationships between team members. Another strategy to achieve dialogue is to encourage communication of feedback. Team members should ask questions and give feedback on the ideas that other members share. This strategy ensures that all team members have a chance to share information in an interactive manner. Lastly, when creating this level of communication, it is important to discourage competition among team members. The goal of dialogue is not to win but to learn new ideas.

Analyze the ease or difficulty of conversing at this level. Comment on the dangers and obstacles.

Dialogue is a valuable level of communication, but it is not easy to achieve. There are some challenges that can limit a team’s ability to engage in dialogue. However, there are factors that can make dialogues easy to develop. For instance, it is easy to start a dialogue when all team members are at the same level of understanding. It is also to have dialogue when a team is made up of good listeners.

However, a dialogue is affected by team members starting out at a level of disagreement. When getting into a dialogue, the team should be made up of people with an open mind and willing to accommodate others. When members have already made their decision about the issue at hand, it is hard to achieve this level of conversation (Bohm & Weinberg, 2004). For instance, many political dialogues start out with people in antagonism. Therefore, they end up failing. Another common obstacle to dialogue is showboating. Having a team member or more who are concerned about getting noticed rather than the discussion can easily lead to a discussion or sometimes a debate. It is important that all people have the intention to learn and achieve a consensus.

References

Anderson, R., Baxter, L. A., & Cissna, K. N. (Eds.). (2003). Dialogue: Theorizing Difference In Communication Studies. SAGE publications.

Bohm, D., & Weinberg, R. A. (2004). On Dialogue. Routledge.

Manning, C. A., Waldman, M. R., Lindsey, W. E., Newberg, A. B., & Cotter-Lockard, D. (2013). Personal Inner Values–A Key to Effective Face-to-Face Business Communication. Journal of Executive Education, 11(1), 3.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Question

[u06a2] Unit 6 Assignment 2

Value of Dialogue

Overview

Value of Dialogue

The purpose of this assignment is to obtain an understanding of the nature of dialogue, and its role as a foundational skill in group and organizational learning and in the application of the various learning disciplines discussed in this course. To this end, you will discuss the differences between debate discussion and dialogue, the ground rules that promote dialogue, and you will analyze your learning related to the design of an effective dialogue session. You will also consider the ease or difficulty of conversing at this level. The use of dialogue will be helpful in the successful conduct of your second team development session.

Instructions

Based on your readings so far in the course, analyze how ground rules and dialogue can be used to grow a learning organization. Address the following elements:

Describe the differences between debate, discussion, and dialogue.
Analyze the value of dialogue in helping a team learn and change.
What are the ground rules required to reach this level of conversation?
Describe what you are learning about how to design an effective dialogue session.
Analyze the ease or difficulty of conversing at this level. Comment on the dangers and obstacles.

Submission Requirements

Document format: APA format preferred. Use APA for references.
References: Include title and reference pages.
Length: Your assignment should be a minimum of two pages, not including title and reference pages.
Font and spacing: Papers should be double-spaced and in a standard font.

Writing: Writing should be well organized and clear, with correct spelling and grammar. Align paper paragraphs/headings/topics to match with scoring guide distinguished categories.

Resources

Value of Dialogue Scoring Guide.
Due Date:End of Unit 6.
Percentage of Course Grade: 5%.

CRITERIA	NON-PERFORMANCE	BASIC	PROFICIENT	DISTINGUISHED
Compare your definitions of debate, discussion, and dialogue. 20%	Does not define debate, discussion, and dialogue.	Defines debate, discussion, and dialogue.	Compares your definitions of debate, discussion, and dialogue.	Compares debate, discussion, and dialogue; and provides real-world examples of each.
Analyze the value of dialogue in helping a team learn and change. 20%	Does not describe the value of dialogue in helping teams learn and change.	Describes the value of dialogue in helping teams learn and change.	Analyzes the value of dialogue in helping a team learn and change.	Analyzes the value of dialogue in helping teams learn and change, supporting analysis with theory or real-world examples.
Describe the ground rules required to reach conversational level in a dialogue. 20%	Does not describe the ground rules.	Describes the ground rules but does not connect ground rules to the requirements needed to reach conversational level in a dialogue.	Describes the ground rules required to reach conversational level in a dialogue.	Analyzes the ground rules required to reach conversational level in a dialogue, supporting the analysis with relevant theory and real-world examples.
Analyze learning related to designing an effective dialogue session. 20%	Does not describe learning related to designing an effective dialogue session.	Describes learning related to designing an effective dialogue session.	Analyzes learning related to designing an effective dialogue session.	Analyzes learning related to designing an effective dialogue session and provides recommendations for improving the design.
Analyze the ease or difficulty of conversing in a team dialogue session, including the dangers and obstacles. 20%	Does not describe the ease or difficulty of conversing in a team dialogue session, or the dangers and obstacles.	Describes the ease or difficulty of conversing in a team dialogue session, or the dangers and obstacles, but not both.	Analyzes the ease or difficulty of conversing in a team dialogue session, including the dangers and obstacles.	Analyzes the ease or difficulty of conversing in a team dialogue session, including the dangers and obstacles, providing real-world examples.