Theory U Stages of Communication
C. Otto Scharmer
This book addresses a range of social interaction theories, but the central and most interesting theme is communication in groups. The book contains many elements that seem almost like a stream-of-consciousness description of the author’s experience in developing his central theory which is that we can choose to have more meaningful communication if we understand our communication better.
One of the central ideas of the book is that productive listening proceeds through stages, and that this listening is supports four different ways of interacting. The first level is called downloading. In downloading, we hear what confirms our knowledge and beliefs. In object-focused or factual listening we hear what is new or contrary to what we already know. Empathic listening involves a shift from listening with an internal orientation, to listening while oriented to the speaker’s perspective. When people describe dialogue, empathic listening is usually involved. The deepest type is listening is called generative listening. This listening is very different from the other three types and is deeply reflective. One expression of this type of listening is “listening to the emerging future”. Listening is a personal action, but people in groups tend to use the same listening style as each other and tend to move from style to style together. Thus the individual dynamic is mirrored in the group dynamic, and groups move in response to individuals moving.
The beginning of a group discussion is usually downloading. People express their position, but everybody hears what they expect (want) to hear. Forced by lack of progress, people begin to listen to what is actually said. In many negotiations or problems solving situations, this is sufficient. But when issues are more emotional, understanding the basis for others’ perspectives and empathy is required. When emotional issues are understood, resolution can be achieved using standard approaches. However, sometimes despite an empathic understanding, a new collective perspective is needed. This is when generative listening comes into play. This may combine what is being said and what has not yet been said. Paying attention to both internal and external dialogues is involved; this is a form of intuitive or creative thinking.
When people or groups are downloading – movement or change is unlikely. Advancing one or two levels almost always leads to resolution. But for serious issues, generative listening is where real breakthroughs originate. In this summary, I will focus on the left side of this path.
The listening state is associated with other forms of attention or focus. Moving from one listening state to a deeper one requires action. Moving from downloading to factual listening requires suspension of judgment, which enables the listener to “see” what is actually being said. Moving to empathic listening requires redirecting attention from facts to emotion. The final step is letting go of “old identities” to make way for new potential identities. Presencing is an odd term and is meant to indicate that attention is now focused on the present, as opposed to the past or future. This is meant in the same sense that Zen meditation intends to focus attention on what is true right now.
When you ask an organization to make a cultural change, you are asking them to each go through this cycle. Cultural change initiatives ask people to let go of one identity in favor of a new one. Asking for this change, without participating in their experience (going through the same process as they do while listening to them), may thwart progress.
Another application of this framework is related to the nature of information exchange and relationship between participants during the four stages.
- Downloading (Stage 1) is associated with “talking nice”; people say what they are expected to say and do so to maintain the politeness. Platitudes, empty phrases, and low energy are the standard state. Some topics are “undiscussible”, and everybody knows to steer around them or to use euphemisms.
- Factual listening (Stage 2) is associated with discussion and debate. In this phase, people begin to say what they think and often assume a confrontational stance; participants take sides (us and them). If Stage 1 has excessive rule-compliance, factual listening may have strenuous rule challenging. Win-lose negotiating or positioning statements would be examples of this phase. The energy can be very high in this situation, but also stressful. Participants begin to consider new information that contradicts their own thoughts. In this stage, minds open.
- Dialogue (Stage 3) begins the focus on what people have in common, and often increases the attention of people on how they are part of a single system. Participants may begin to identify with each other and begin to inquire about issues more and advocate their positions less. Dialogue has been described as the “art of thinking together”, which indicates this shift from confrontation to collaboration. Rules evolve in this stage. In this stage, hearts open.
- Presenscing (Stage 4) involves communication about a common future. Collective creativity or “listening to the future” can be found in this stage. If stage 2 involved rule breaking, this stage involves rule forming. This stage can involve periods of reflective quiet mixed with periods of flowing exchanges (generative listening). People in this stage will feel very connected to each other and their authentic selves. In this stage, wills open.
Everyday events do not call for this sort of deep engagement, and many or most issues can be dealt with in the shallower level of discussion or dialogue. Presenscing may be a rare experience, reserved for serious situations where simple fact-finding, problem-solving is inadequate. The key may be to recognize when a group is in Stage 1 and move them on to Stage 2.
The book also describes the shadow stages that can occur in destructive interactions. Very briefly, the other way to exit Stage 1 is through silencing. When somebody begins to express a contrary opinion from the socially accepted one and is silenced – either by the group or an authority-wielding person, communication is blocked. Silencing creates the opportunity to blame. Blaming further erodes connection and communication. Finally, people absent themselves from the situation. This may take the form of submissive compliance, and may feel like self-betrayal. When groups progress through these stages, they achieve a pathological level of communication dominated by cynicism and distrust.
Absence and presence mark the opposite ends of engagement. While the initial description of Stage 2 might have sounded bad, but in comparison to the shadow stages, it is seen as a step on the path to authentic communication and engagement.
My reactions and interpretations
- Downloading is so common that we lose sight of it. So many disagreements are politely ignored in public or in meetings – but erupt through inaction, sabotage or disregard. Calls for more candor or honesty may be requests to get out of this stage, but this stage may also reflect the experience of power differentials or silencing. Hierarchal organizations may suffer from this problem more than egalitarian organizations do.
- Small groups (2-5 people) who work together for an extended time may have an easier time getting to dialogue. A number of examples in the book indicate that large groups can enter dialogue after relatively brief interactions. The catalyst for this movement is often a single person who takes a risk by dropping their own defensive behaviors. A facilitator may not be needed, but group members or the facilitator needs to keep the tensions in the group’s interaction in place long enough for an individual to take a chance. Others then follow and the group transitions. I have seen this happen myself, and it seems a bit magical. Groups often back away from this tension, but this tension supplies the “energy” for the transition in individual thinking, and the group’s movement. Strong groups seek out this tension, but don’t personalize it too deeply.
- Social innovation (culture changes) depends on engaging this sort of interaction to take the group into the rule forming mode – where the new rules reflect the culture that is to be.
Recent Comments