Posted: October 27th, 2022
Select a conversation where you had a disagreement that had an impact on you and triggered a bioreaction. The conversation could have been a long time ago or recently.
A. Explain what happened during the disagreement by answering the following questions:
• Describe the situation that led to the conversation.
• When did you realize that there was a disagreement during the conversation?
• Describe a bioreaction(s) that was experienced during the disagreement.
• How did the conversation end?
The explanation includes contextual details of what occurred during the disagreement, including a clear description of the situation and bioreaction(s) experienced, the realization that there was disagreement, and the conclusion of the conversation.
B. Analyze the conversation by answering the following questions:
• Using the four levels of the conversation meter, what level were you listening at, and what level was the other person listening at?
• Give examples of two factors that describe how you and they were listening in at these levels in the conversation meter: feelings, behaviors, language, or tone.
• What were your points of alignment or disagreement?
The analysis of the conversation includes a description of the listening levels of both parties, according to the four levels of conversation meter. Examples of specific feelings, behaviors, language, or tone are well detailed and support the level of listening identified for both parties. The analysis also includes an appropriate discussion of point(s) of alignment or disagreement.
C. Reflect on how the conversation encouraged you to listen differently by answering the following questions:
• How could you have listened differently moving up the conversation meter, and what effect would that have had on the disagreement?
• How could you incorporate listening for needs, purpose, or concern to create value in the conversation (including describing what that would look like)?
• What have you learned about accuracy and authenticity that could be used to improve the conversation?
The reflection on how the conversation encouraged the candidate to listen differently demonstrates a thorough understanding of the effect of listening differently during the disagreement, including a feasible explanation of how accuracy and authenticity could be used to improve the conversation. The reflection includes insights on how incorporating listening for needs, purpose, or concern create value in a conversation and what that looks like in practice.
D. Demonstrate professional communication in the content and presentation of your submission.
Content reflects attention to detail, is organized, and focuses on the main ideas as prescribed in the task or chosen by the candidate. Terminology is pertinent, is used correctly, and effectively conveys the intended meaning. Mechanics, usage, and grammar promote accurate interpretation and understanding.
Place an order in 3 easy steps. Takes less than 5 mins.