Hello listeners, welcome to the Social Skills Coaching Podcast on Wednesday, April 24,
2024, where you become more likeable, more charismatic, and more productive.
Today we're diving into the world of Conversation Mastery, with a chapter from Patrick King's
book, Conversation Skills Training.
Patrick is a communication expert who helps people, just like you, improve their social
skills and build stronger relationships.
You can find more about Patrick and his consulting services at bit.ly-slash-pk-consulting.
We'll be uncovering the secrets to keeping conversations flowing and engaging, all while
making a lasting positive impression.
So, whether you're looking to conquer networking events, feel more comfortable at parties,
or simply have more fulfilling conversations with friends and family, this episode is for
you.
Are you ready to become a conversational charmer?
Well, let's get started.
The rules for communication are pretty basic.
Talk with people and not to them.
Be present.
Listen.
Easy, huh?
Yet, somehow, almost all of us could stand to be better conversationalists.
The irony is that nobody ever wakes up in the morning and says to themselves,
Today I'm going to be a complete bore to talk to.
Nobody wants to be that person who constantly one ups everyone else, interrupts, or talks
too much.
Here's a rule for good communication that you might not have considered.
Having charm and charisma is not about you, it's about the other person.
So many of us embark on a mission to be more interesting and likable in conversation, but
just by having this attitude, we sabotage ourselves.
Why?
Because we have it backward.
Being a great communicator is not about having other people listen to you like you or compliment
you, it's about you making other people feel heard, liked, and praised.
The irony is that when we try too hard to be witty and impressive, our focus narrows
down to our egos, and we instantly become the opposite of what we're hoping to be.
The other person disappears, and we are engaging in what is, for all intents and purposes,
a boring monologue.
Director, consultant, author, and coach Dr. Carl Albrecht explained in Psychology Today
that every conversation is made up of three key elements, one, declaratives, two, questions,
three, qualifiers.
Declaratives are simply statements of fact.
For example, the sky is blue.
However, to make things more complicated, they aren't always exactly facts, but opinions
that are presented as though they are facts.
Light blue is too weak a color to wear to that job interview.
Questions are self-explanatory, although this doesn't include rhetorical questions that
take the grammatical form of a question, but are not literally asking the other person to
respond.
For example, what is it with this weather today?
What's your favorite color?
What should I wear to the interview?
Finally, qualifiers are something we've encountered already and include any words or phrases intended
to soften or moderate what is being said.
For example, in my opinion, I'm wondering if I could be wrong, but as far as I know,
I'm not speaking for everyone here, but qualifiers are also great at helping you express uncertainty
or make a claim, but not too strongly.
So instead of saying that light blue is a weak color, you could say it might be a slightly
weak color.
Instead of saying Freud was a pervert, you say, in my opinion, it may be the case that
Freud in fact had a distorted sexuality.
Now Albrecht suggested what he calls the rule of three.
Simply, in a conversation, make sure that you are never making three declarative statements
in a row.
Instead, include plenty of questions or qualifiers, i.e., softer and more moderate declaratives,
to give your speech a little more flexibility.
Crucially, doing so will make sure that the conversation doesn't become bogged down in
ego and narcissism.
A question is a way to bat the conversational ball over the net and to the other person
who is then invited to say what they want to before batting the ball back again.
A modifier is halfway between a question and a declarative statement.
You say what you want to say, but you leave a little room in there for someone else to
add what they want to.
There's nothing wrong with a declarative per se, but it is the sort of thing that closes
off any avenues for connection.
Beyond bland agreement or outright disagreement, that is, both of which do not actually further
the conversation.
Try it, and you may be surprised at just how much more your conversations flow, and you'll
come across as more likeable too.
Understanding the rule of three means you won't soon run out of things to say in any conversation.
You can basically never go wrong if you, A, ask a question, or, B, say whatever declarative
statement you were just about to say, but soften it with a qualifier.
Consider the following conversation.
I got this really bad shoulder pain.
The physiotherapist says it's bursitis.
Wow, bursitis.
My grandmother had that last year.
It's more common than you think, you know.
Yeah, well, it's the first I've heard of it.
Apparently it was most likely caused by the COVID vaccine.
Well, you have to consider all the possible cases.
There are lots of things that could be to blame.
It's actually repetitive strain that causes most cases of bursitis.
Sure, yeah.
Anyway, my physiotherapist says it's an injury that can happen when the needle is placed
slightly in the wrong place.
A lot of those people giving vaccines didn't get the right training.
Well, let me tell you, it hurts like hell.
I'm sure.
The best thing would be to have plenty of rest, I guess.
Now, take a look at the above conversation and ask yourself how much you like person
b.
They're not being a conversational narcissist in the sense that it's all me, me, me.
But somehow their ego seems to loom large in the exchange above.
Why?
You'll notice that everything that person b says is a declarative statement.
It gives the conversation a flat, dead feeling.
After a declarative, there's not much to do except agree, disagree, or stop talking.
In the extreme, too many declaratives like this can actually make the person seem as
though they are lecturing, preaching, or explaining, i.e. it can feel very dull and
even condescending.
Let's look at a different conversation.
I've got this really bad shoulder pain.
The physiotherapist says it's bursitis.
Wow, bursitis.
My grandmother had that last year.
It's more common than you think, you know.
Yeah, well, it's the first I've heard of it.
Apparently it was most likely caused by the COVID vaccine.
Really?
Well, that's interesting.
You mean you had a bad reaction to something that was in the vaccine?
Actually, no.
My physiotherapist says it's an injury that can happen when the needle is placed just slightly
in the wrong place.
Ouch.
Well, I may be wrong about this, but I seem to remember reading an article last year about
how many volunteers had emergency training to learn to give the vaccine.
Maybe the person who jabbed you just wasn't all that experienced?
Yeah, exactly.
That's what I think, too.
It's annoying because it really hurts.
I can imagine.
What do you think you'll do now?
Have you got something relaxing planned for the weekend?
First, just ask yourself which person you feel is more likeable.
The two conversations are very, very similar.
Both are perfectly acceptable.
And there's no offense caused or any major rupture in social etiquette in either one.
And yet, even in this short interaction, you can probably see the big difference the rule
of three makes and how a person using declaratives 100% comes across so differently from someone
using a mix of all three conversational types.
Person B likely doesn't believe themselves to be bad at conversation, but they nevertheless
will be perceived as less friendly, less likable, and somehow less enjoyable to speak to.
The effect of such interactions gradually and imperceptibly adds up.
Others may not be able to put their finger on why, but they may feel that person B is
a bit boring, stuck up, rude, or a know-it-all.
Crucially, it's not about the content of what you say.
It's about the emotional implications and the energy in how you say it.
Questions convey a sense of openness, possibility, humility, and receptivity.
They can be playful and respectful, and can demonstrate empathy and compassion, as well
as the covert message, I like you, I'm interested, tell me more.
Qualified statements send a similar message.
They say something, but it's a soft something.
They signal to the other person that you are amenable, flexible, and ready to discuss and
move with the flow.
Declaratives, however, are a little like dead ends.
They are pronouncements made that usually signal the end of conversation, rather than
its beginning.
They position you as a speaker with authority, and the other person as someone who is there
primarily to hear this authority.
Though there is absolutely a time and place for this energy, giving speeches, setting boundaries,
or literally teaching someone.
Too much of it means you're talking at, rather than talking with.
In other words, questions and qualifiers open up a little room that invites the other person
into the conversation.
Declaratives tend to focus only on you and your message, while closing out the other person.
Light blue is such a weak color.
Is it?
Says who?
Literally imagine someone said this to you.
Can you feel how difficult it is to say anything in response?
Maybe it's an unpopular opinion, but I've never really liked light blue.
Can you see how it's possible to have a strong opinion, but nevertheless frame it as exactly
that, an opinion, and leave plenty of space for someone to respond and keep the conversation
going?
What's your favorite color?
A question immediately opens up the conversation and signals that you are willing and able
to share airtime, to listen, and to connect.
It's a signal that you are putting your ego aside and making space for connection.
Even though it's subtle, it conveys feelings of appreciation and generosity that are worth
their weight in gold.
By the way, it's worth noting that you don't have to become passive and unopinionated to
be more likeable.
In fact, occasionally saying something obviously outrageous is a great way to inject a little
playfulness into a conversation and get things flowing.
But note that these declaratives are, in a way, acting like questions or qualifiers,
since they can't help but draw the other person in.
Oh, I simply cannot wear light blue.
It makes my eyeballs itchy just looking at it.
Man, I hate light blue.
They should make convicts wear it in prison as punishment.
If the rule of three feels tricky to implement at first, don't worry, it can take time to
break bad habits.
One easy trick is to literally say whatever you are going to but add, don't you think,
to the end of it.
Light blue is such a weak color, don't you think?
It immediately changes the entire energy and flow of the conversation and takes little
to no effort on your part.
Another trick to try is to simply convert any statement into a slightly softened question,
instead of saying, that blue looks weird.
Say, do you think the blue looks a little off?
If you're the kind of person who likes to get on a soapbox and bombard people with your
strongly held opinions, try to ask yourself why?
Being dogmatic and lecturing people and forcefully pushing your opinions on them is not communication,
but a roadblock to communication.
People can veer toward declarative statements that our opinions dressed up as facts for
a few reasons.
We unconsciously think that the purpose of a conversation is to have our needs met and
to be heard and seen by someone else.
We may hold a core belief that we have to broadcast, defend, or force our perspectives
and opinions, usually because they have not been appreciated or respected in the past.
We are anxious and trying to win validation or appear smart and interesting.
The irony is that using the rule of three is something you do for other people, but it's
ultimately something that benefits you.
Friends that are more balanced just flow better and lead to more comfort, trust, enjoyment,
and attraction than others where one or both parties are talking forcefully at the other,
who is simply trying to endure it, or waiting for their own turn on the soapbox.
You'll notice as well that this trick works seamlessly with all the other advice we've
covered so far.
The rule of three helps you build rapport, removes barriers to connection, and helps
you maintain a communication style that is relaxed and appealing.
Sustain conversations with conversational threading and useful acronyms.
Using the rule of three is all very well and good, but many people may find that this isn't
quite enough.
In casual conversation with new acquaintances, it can be really awkward.
How do you know what to say?
After the initial greetings and the how-are-us are done, then what?
Some people are masters at starting conversations, but this energy fizzles out quickly and they
find that they cannot deepen the connection to the next level.
Perhaps you know somebody who's like this.
They are perfectly friendly and amiable.
You like them and enjoy their company, but somehow you never quite get past the small
talk and into anything juicier.
There can be a few reasons for this, but the solution is easy.
Think of a relationship with someone as a piece of fabric.
In the beginning, you literally just have a single thread with them.
Your job is to spin that thread up and keep it strong, preventing it from snapping or
getting knotted.
If you talk to them again, you get the opportunity to create another thread.
However, the fabric of your connection with them will be stronger if you can actually
link up this new thread with the old one.
Weave them together.
Otherwise, you risk spinning up that same thread over and over again from scratch and
you never weave a larger two-dimensional piece of fabric at all.
Relationships take time.
They're built out of all these conversational threads, thin as each one is on its own.
The more there are, and the more connected they are, the more you will feel that your
sense of rapport with the other person is deepening.
Human beings are actually quite simple in this regard.
They learn to trust and like what is repeated, predictable, and pleasant.
Plus, they make meaning from connections.
Unless your interaction with them connects to something, it will be quickly forgotten.
It starts in the early stages with just keeping that thread spinning.
Using the technique of conversational threading, you will never run out of things to say.
The idea is simple.
One, the other person speaks and you listen.
Two, you notice a few threads that they start.
Three, as the conversation unfolds, you pick up a thread and talk about it.
Four, when you run out of things to say, you go back and find an old thread and follow that instead.
Five, voila!
Your conversation is running smoothly and comfortably.
Let's take a closer look.
A thread is what it sounds like, a word, phrase, image, or idea that is shared by the other person.
It can be literally anything.
For example, if the other person says, since both of my brother's kids got diagnosed with ADHD,
we're all trying to cut down on screen time.
There are quite a few threads in this statement, at least four.
There's the brother, the brother's kids.
The fact of having less screen time and the idea about ADHD diagnoses.
As you listen, hear these threads and pick them up.
For example, oh, is that your brother you said lived abroad?
How old are your brother's kids?
Yup, I can relate.
I've been trying to manage my own internet addiction these days.
Wow.
ADHD in both kids.
I wonder how common that is.
As you can see, you can pick up a thread and ask a question about it, or just react and
make a comment, but as you can imagine, each of these threads leads somewhere else.
One will result in a long and impassioned conversation about the perils of TV on developing
brains, while some others might fizzle out after a few short responses.
For example, yeah, he's my older brother.
He's currently living in Belgium with his family.
Should you happen to talk a little more about Belgium or living abroad and find that avenue
eventually runs dry, you don't need to worry, you can backtrack, drop the brother-Belgium
thread and pick up somewhere else.
Of course, to do this effectively, you need to really pay attention and remember what
you're told, store those little threads for later.
So anyway, was there ADHD diagnosis done there in Belgium?
Two things have happened now.
You have communicated to the other person that you were listening and paying attention,
but you've also gently pivoted away from a dying topic and into one that might be more
fruitful and interesting.
Rather than it feeling like you're flitting from one shallow talking point to the next,
though, it will seem as though the conversation is naturally developing and deepening.
One way to make sure this is happening is with, surprise, surprise, questions, but questions
that probe a little deeper each time.
So your first question might be about the plain facts and details of who lives where
and how old they are.
The next time you pick up this thread, though, you can ask about how people felt about these
details.
What do they want to do next?
Why?
What does all this suggest about their values, their sense of meaning and purpose?
Note that you can do all this without it feeling like you're grilling them or hunting out juicy
gossip.
Start by sharing a little something of yourself to set the tone.
For example, you know, looking back, I've wondered if maybe I had ADHD as a kid.
On the other hand, I'm not sure whether being diagnosed back then would have changed who
I am today, you know?
The thread continues, but it's deepening and gathering meaning as it goes.
You could do this with every one of the four threads above, even returning to certain ideas
days or weeks later.
You're weaving that fabric.
Without them even realizing it, the other person may start to find you trustworthy and
relatable, all while feeling that they are talking about themselves.
In real life, skilled conversationalists tend to practice conversation threading without
even knowing it.
But if you're the sort of person who gets anxious about being on the spot with nothing
to say, conversation threading may be just the thing to come to your rescue.
Here are a few ideas to make it even more effective.
As you listen, prick your ears for words that suggest a strong emotional component for the
speaker.
Pull out particularly vivid images or unusual turns of phrase, or notice when the speaker
gets a little more animated, and zoom in on that topic.
It's likely going to be the most interesting thread to pursue.
Note, it's a bad idea, however, to pull on a thread where the emotion is obvious avoidance
and discomfort.
It's a quick way to be perceived as nosy or a bully.
When asking questions, keep them as open-ended as possible.
So you have a brother, might literally be something to fill the silence, but it can
only be answered with, yep, which then promptly leaves you just where you started.
Don't put the other person in the position of having to think of things to say.
As you listen for threads, don't be in too much of a hurry to pounce on them or forcefully
steer the conversation, just relax, be patient, and hold on to them.
Even better if you can remember them for long after the current conversation is over.
You will come across as attentive and aware and will win major conversational brownie
points.
Hey, I had a new client from Belgium yesterday, and he reminded me about your brother.
How's he doing, by the way?
People who find conversations difficult are usually no less interesting, intelligent,
or kind than people find this kind of socializing easier.
The only difference is that they are unaware of the practical skills required to have a
great conversation, or else they know what to do but are out of practice.
At first, using the techniques and tricks outlined in this book will feel a little awkward
and uncomfortable, but over time and with practice, you will internalize a deeper mindset
shift, and these behaviors will start to be second nature to you.
Keep relaxed, keep listening, and keep the focus on the other person, and you can't go
too far wrong.
The bigger mindset shift that will come about by using conversational threading is one of
non-resistance.
This means that when people introduce a thread, you listen, you are open and receptive, and
you remember.
You never forcefully cling to one thread over another, but stay relaxed and spontaneous
in the moment, waiting to see what interesting things bubble up and following them.
This is the kind of thing you need to experience rather than read about, though, so it's best
to try these techniques for yourself.
In particular, notice when you have a fixed idea of what you want to say or where you
want the conversation to go.
Notice if you're being resistant or forceful when it looks like the conversation is going
elsewhere, then choose to let it go.
If you quietly rehearse things in your head, or keep forcefully bringing the conversation
back to the point you want to make, the conversation will sputter out or die.
This is why we need to be brave enough to enter into conversations without being too
prepared.
If we have too fixed an idea of how things should go, we're not really listening for
opportunities for it to be something better.
Alright listeners, that wraps up our exploration from Conversation Skills Training by Patrick
King.
Remember, the key to having great conversations is to focus on the other person.
Make them feel heard, valued, and supported.
By using the techniques we discussed today, you'll be well on your way to becoming a
social butterfly.
For more tips and tricks on social skills and personal development, head over to our
author's website at bit.ly-slash-pk-insulting or subscribe wherever you listen.
Thanks for joining us today, we'll see you on the next episode of Social Skills Coaching.