Because I’m interested in starting conversations that help people reach beyond their usual social circles, I’ve been thinking about ways to change how groups interact.
I’m inviting people to comment here with ideas and resources.
What are some strategies you use for making online and offline conversations more welcoming and less polarized?
Hi Kat,
Great question.
I think in both online and offline conversations, a large element is of course how the question is framed and contextualized. So I guess my first step would to be think about ways to invite both sides to consider the problem collaboratively. Maybe by encouraging the group to consider the flaws of their own apporaches to the polarized issue (denying that either side has it perfectly right in a real world context–not a distilled hypothetical absolute applied model).
I also wonder if pairing people off that are in fact polarized; creating a sort of team-building/challenge (outside the polarized issue; maybe on a different issue where this is commonality) and then challenge the pairs or groups to come up with mutually-agreed solutions. From there have each group share their approach/ideas/thoughts with the larger group. Just my initial thoughts…
Thanks for your comment, Lance.
If a topic is very polarizing, team-building can help reduce communication barriers and establish common ground.
After they’ve established a sense of safety, then people in the group might find it easier to consider the shortcomings of their perspectives.
I don’t see very much team-building taking place online in these contexts.
Another approach involves giving teams a goal and rewarding them for success – and setting up the goal so their success depends on their willingness to collaborate.
I have found that not focusing on the obvious interest but looking for hidden interests tends to reduce the guarded nature most individuals & groups represent. I look for an alternative topic to learn about the listeners. Often in groups there is the leader personality other than the facilitator. That leader often is not a good listener. The quiet group member is often the better listener & if inclined tends to offer more to the group. In a room full of separate conversations these quiet types allow for absorbing information & often at a quieter moment will instigate conversation in a mutully acceptable direction.
If the topic is the enviroment for example the quiet listener learns who is an active doer & who is just a self indulgent individual in it for the prestige of being part of the in crowd.
I have found many listeners that have more to offer than the social elites that spend countless hours looking for their elusive kindred spirits.
I look for these types where ever posible as they often are the biggest doers & look for others of their type !
That’s an interesting point. Within a group, people’s viewpoints vary, but their styles of communication will also influence the results of the conversation.