I have met Theodore Zeldin during an annual gathering of the “ Change Leaders “, the alumni of the specialized master “ Consulting and Coaching for Change “, in Oxford. His name was known to me, without being familiar … So I listened to him without a bias or, rather, I discovered the “ conversation “ that the talented organizer had prepared… Was it more than a Liberating Structures’“FishBowl”, one of the facilitation exercises I enjoy and use ?
My first impression was that of a pleasant and unformal conversation, one with a well-educated man, whose life had been made up of encounters and discoveries, and who had not often been confronted with the world of work. At least the one that we know, as consultants, in companies. He also declared that he never had the feeling of having worked… While shooting a few bittersweet arrows at us, who intervene to help the teams to work better (together, for my part).
So, if he so much proudly stated his distance from the world of work, why had he been associated with the “ Attali commission “ in France (also named “ for the release of the French growth “ ). The occasion during, some say, he had established a real close relationship with Emmanuel Macron, when the latter was appointed to the former presidential administration ?
Reading he other book commented in this paper, I made the decision to rediscover the “conversations”, after having mused in the pages of another of his works, “ The hidden pleasures of life “.
The power of conversation
The reading of his little book “ Conversation — How talk can change our lives ” , (a transcription of BBC broadcasts), reinforces the feeling of meeting what we call in French an “ honest man ”… Someone whose conversation is pleasant, charming, cultivated ; who appreciates the time that passes over various encounters ; who truly believes in humanity. His attention seems above all focused on global relationships , between peoples, between cultures and also between genders. And he shares the conviction that “conversation” allows everyone to grow, and that this personal development -interpersonnel actually — will lead to a better understanding for everyone, including in the world of work (even if he does not evoke it very much) . And this conversation can only take place — he had made it clear in Oxford — between two people. A postulate which will stimulate the critical mind of facilitators, who are specialists in “ group conversations “.
When interested in organizational and collective “changes”, how then is it possible to consider the power of the “conversation” , and its practical use ? Planning a multitude of one-on-one conversations (thousands, millions) ? Or rather, deciding that there are “key influencing players” and that these, because they will grow thanks to the power of conversation, will lead to more collective changes ?
From the “conversation” he had in front of us , it seemed to me that Theodore Zeldin favors the second path — while encouraging everyone to use it, even in our private lifes.
Perhaps also because, according to Zeldin, the higher one goes up in the professional (or social) hierarchy, the more one speaks… and more than that, with other “decision makers”. And although he warns the reader against “rhetoric”, as a barrier to real exchanges and therefore to individual progress … Rhetoric, a very popular technique, especially to “decision makers”.
No mention, there, of “people”.
Then why discussing in this paper for professional use, Zeldin’s book ?
Because, beyond his philosophical beliefs related to “conversations”, Zeldin also presents his approach as a tool for transformation, especially thanks to the “conversation dinners” he organizes.
For these exercises, you get a “menu”, in order to guide you : themes to discuss with your partner (who you knows, or not). Are these “dinners” really operational (and not only inspirational) ? Not directly. As the “dishes” are, as examples : “ Have you changed your priorities over the years ? “,” When do you feel isolated or lonely, and what are your remedies ? “,” What are the limits of your compassion ? “…
Very personal, deep questions, which no doubt allow us to speak to each other “truly”, to discover the other one, and to “grow” … to change too ?
This is undoubtedly the humanistic prejudice of Theodore Zeldin . As he states himself : “ It is true that most people love to hate. Hatred gives people the impression that they have principles and opinions ”.
So, can a conversation help to change, even to love, or at least to respect ?
This is an open question, but also the conviction of Peter Boghossian and James Lindsay. Who offer a very operational book — since it is presented as a practical manual.
If these names are familiar to you, it is undoubtedly because they made headlines in the media some months ago — you know, before the Covid era … -, by trapping “scientific” journals with pastiche but very serious-looking articles. A “Lancet-gate” before the Covid-19 one, with less consequences on public health and government credibility…
My interest for epistemology and my playful mind had drawn my attention to them. Turning pedants in ridicule is a shameful pleasure I recognize. And only high-level experts, as they are, can tackle what is happening in American universities, and is now arriving in ours, with no doubt.
Recognized academics, they are among those who, in the United States , are fighting the coming obscurantism, driven by new “ideologies”. Denigration, exclusion, refusal of debate, of disagreement, of controversy : it is undoubtedly what gave them the idea of producing this “practical guide”, in order to help people to have what appears now as “impossible conversations”.
So why talk about it here ? Because these practical insights are great lessons to help resolving conflicts in companies, in teams, between decision-makers barricaded in their positions, their objectives, their trenches …
Conversation as a lever for change
The book structure is original because it offers a gradual “skills ladder”, from the “beginner” level, novice in conversations, to that of “master”, ready to attempt conversations with “ideologues” — a category more prone to affirmations than to exchange .
As, and this is one of the fascinating points of their work, “conversation” is a powerful lever for change.
Not in the sense Zeldin gives. As it is, for him, more a factor of “maturing” for those who participate in it, and always upwards. But in the sense of a possible mutual transformation, towards the other one’s point of view. As their idea is not to “grow”. But to change the other, and that is also accepting — and it is a significant postulate — that the conversation will also change yourself.
This is also why, in the extreme cases of conversations with “ideologues”, the only objective they propose is to get them to accept the points of view of others. And that it is necessary to consider, if they refuse, to flee… As the objective is the conversation, and not the conversion.
Conversation is, in this very practical approach, a mean for a real relationship. One can disagree to the other, of course. But one has to accept the exchange. And one arouses it.
Listening, of course, but also questioning. Because listening is not only polite, even when distracted. What one can imagine in the conversations organized by Théodore Zeldin. It is real, some say “active”.
Respecting the other, by not putting it in an uncomfortable situation. Taking the time for the relationship, accepting the other one’s limits, it pace. Giving some credit in advance, too.
How are these “common sense” insights original, and therefore useful in the corporate world ?
In that they apply, through their variations, to conversations which seem “impossible” : “conversations which seem useless so much they reveal an apparently insurmountable abyss of disagreements on ideas, beliefs, morals, politics or visions of the world ”.
Impossible because the protagonists don’t want to talk to each other ?
Not really. Because “the difficulty in these cases is not to find someone with whom to speak : it is the exchange (“give- and- take”) which seems hopeless because the person in front of you fails to speak with you and, instead, speaks to you. In this case you are a receptacle for his ideas, or an adversary to be defeated”.
These words must resonate in the minds of readers who, in their projects or their day-to-day activity, must often “convince” or are experiencing “leaders” who should.
Eager to exert their “leadership”, they appeal to their oratorical talent, their rhetoric, when they master it… They shine, they “persuade” — in any case they believe it. This is sometimes the case, on the spot, with the effect of a well-run show. They achieve the “ramp test”. But they don’t get sincere and lasting “buy-in”.
Conversation as a mobilization technique
Conversation is therefore a mobilization technique. A one that we can learn, and put into practice. This is not a kind of manipulation, as the effect and benefits are two-ways, and mutual mobilization.
We will therefore leave you the pleasure of discovering the key skills offered by the authors, who suggest that you apply them with patience, before moving from one level to another … Also put them in perspective, thinking of your “conversations” failures or even interrupted or incomplete exchanges.
Eventually, if many books — like that of Theodore Zeldin — share convictions, leaving the reader to imagine their practical applications, this manual allows, conversely, to identify, when reading the founding principles that gave allowed these variations.
It seems to me that, for Boghossian and Lindsay, the key lies in the identification of “values”.
Conversation is, for them, and in particular in the most difficult cases, an archaeological exercise. Because it is advisable to cross, gradually and delicately, all the sedimentary layers, which hide and protect the foundations of the expressed thought : the “underlying values ”.
Their belief is that what enables a real conversation are shared “values”. A rather vague concept, almost too common, one could think.
According to the authors, what makes possible the identification of these “common values”, except in the extreme cases of conversations which want to be conversions, is the belief, that more than supported convictions, every one refers to “values”, in order to draw the line between “good people” and “bad people” — and wishing, in the vast majority of cases, to be in the camp of the “good ones”.
Therefore, expressing a very simple value such as “respecting the others’ beliefs” allows to build the bases of a sincere conversation. And from this common base, which is only a starting point, it becomes possible , by going back through the reasoning, to identify where disagreements were made, to measure them, even to relativize them in order to overcome them… By changing the understanding, the belief, ours or the other ones, ours and the other ones.
The basics of a true conversation
“Values” are therefore the core of “conversations”, according to Zeldin and Boghossian / Lindsay.
Rather than confronting each other on details, on true or supposed interpretations, the exegeses of the initial intention, they all state that one can only progress by going to the fundamentals.
For Zeldin, only these deep conversations will allow individuals, and societies to change, by understanding each other better. But one can fear that, carried out outside of circles of “goodwill” or of “well-behaved” people , these conversations will only become one-sided presentations, whose extent will only depend on the willingness of the other to really listen. And that they only lead to change those who have already taken this path — probably because Zeldin also considers “conversations”, the ones with oneself or with God.
For Boghossian and Lindsay, conversations are a purpose by themselves. Because the quality of the relations they suppose, and which they induce, are those of the human societies which seem, today, to disintegrate. Conversations are therefore a real issue for them, in their professional and social environment, and in particular in US universities.
For us, in companies, conversations are real levers of action to reconcile collectives, re-express the common sense of projects sometimes diluted in complex organizations, battered by a particularly anxiety-provoking context, which encourages more rapid behavior than shared breaths.
So, for the success of your projects, in this time of tchats, emails, texts and other tweets , are you ready to speak , for “real” ?
Theodore Zeldin “ Conversation. How talk can change our lives ”. Harvill Press, 1998, HiddenSpring Books . 2000.
Peter Boghossian & James Lindsay “How to have impossible conversations. A very practical guide ”. Lifelong Books, 2019
Initially published in French on October 1st, 2020.
Leave a Reply