Up
Jan 09 No 1, Sec 1
Jan 09, No 1, Sec 2
Feb 09, No 1, Sec 1
Mar 09, N0 1, Sec 1
Mar 09, No 1, Sec 2
Apr 09, No 1, Sec 1
Apr 09, No 1, Sec 2
May 09, No 1, Sec 1
May 09, No 1, Sec 2
June 09, No 1, Sec 1
June 09, No 1, Sec 2
Sep 09, No 1, Sec 2
Sep 09, No 1, Sec 2
Dec 09, No 1, Sec 1
Dec 09, No 1, Sec 2

The Stress Doc Letter
Cybernotes from the Online Psychohumorist ™


JUN 2009, No. I, Sec. I

Fight when you can
Take flight when you must
Flow like a dream
In the Phoenix we trust!


Table of Contents

Section I


New Program:  Bridging Cultural Diversity through Interactive 4 "H" Humor

Shrink Rap I:  The Four “R”s for a PROductive Relationship

Shrink Rap II:  The Science and Art of Active Listening:  The Doc's CPRS Method
----------------------

Section II

Main Essay:  Psychologically Coping with the Metrorail Aftershocks

Readers:  Comments on Metrorail Article

Testimonials:   Workforce Technology Center/DORS, Baltimore; Booz Allen Hamilton/IT Dept., Herndon, VA

Offerings:  Books, CDs, Training/Marketing Kit:  Email stressdoc@aol.com or go to www.stressdoc.com for more info.
 



Overview:

1) Shrink Rap I:  The Four “R”s for a PROductive Relationship:  Being Respectful, Real, Responsible and Responsive.  The Stress Doc presents a four step, “Four 'R'” communication guide for building successful “give and take” professional relationships.  The Four “R”s are dramatically illustrated in his recent encounter with an ENT surgeon.

2) Shrink Rap II:  The Science and Art of Active Listening:  The Doc's CPRS Method.  There are several ways to enhance listening effectiveness, especially when engaged in a complex or emotional exchange.  A fundamental technique is "Active Listening."  Here's an acronym to help transform less than attentive or self-centered listening into clear, concise and compassionate communication.

3) Main Essay:  Psychologically Coping with the Metrorail Aftershocks.  The Stress Doc reflects on the recent Metrorail tragedy and outlines key steps and strategies for those of us not directly injured but nonetheless still dealing with lingering dis-ease or any post-trauma effects.
 


New Program:

Bridging Cultural Diversity through Interactive 4 "H" Humor:
Building Creative Teams and Communities through Healing and Humanizing,
High-Performing and Harmonizing Humor


If "people are more open to a serious message when it's gift-wrapped with humor" (sayeth the Stress Doc ™), then let Mark Gorkin, the Stress Doc, acclaimed speaker, "Motivational Humorist" and team building consultant help your team or organization turn cultural challenges and communicational/relational barriers into team and community building bridges. And his programs are always high energy, interactive, inspiring and FUN.  Through thought-provoking, people- and performance-motivated group exercises, you'll apply cognitive-communication-camaraderie building skills and strategies.  Use 4 "H" Humor to connect heads and hearts both between individuals and within and between groups. The Doc enables systems of all kinds to better appreciate, laugh together and innovate by playfully and purposefully coordinating the organizations's cultural diversity and its common (and uncommon) humanity.  Help your organization mine its diversity -- release individual creativity and interactive synergy.  As the Doc says:  "There's no "I" in TEAM...but there are two "I"s in WINNING!"

Consider these three "diverse" testimonials (and a "lagniappe" testimonial as a final close):


NOAA/National Weather Service

[1.5 hour "Creatively Managing Stress and Conflict through Interactive Humor" Program for 120 Diversity Managers, Counselors and Team Reps]

U.S. Dept of Commerce
National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE
1325 East-West Highway
Silver Spring, MD  20910-3283

May 8, 2009


Dear Mark:

On behalf of the National Weather Service's Equal Opportunity and Diversity Management, I want to thank you once again for your participation at the National Weather Service's Equal Opportunity and Diversity Management Training Summit in Atlanta. GA on April 28, 2009.  The Summit was a success.  The presentation you provided was well-received.  It lifted their spirits and gave them an opportunity to laugh and learn how to release any tension they may have been feeling.  Your training style is very engaging.  On behalf of the National Weather Service's Equal Opportunity and Diversity Management, thank you.

Sincerely,

Charly Wells, Director
NWS Office of Equal Opportunity
& Diversity Management

Charly.Wells@noaa.gov
-------------------

Workforce Technology Center/Division of Rehabilitation Services

[2 hour "Values- Based Teaming" Program for 125 attendees]

We did thoroughly enjoy the training and appreciated your flexibility and creativity with infusing your teambuilding exercises into our Core Values program ("Values-Based Teaming") here at the Workforce and Technology Center.  Your ability to energize 125 staff in an auditorium and keep them focused while having fun and learning all at the same time is truly remarkable and a reflection of your skills as a trainer and commitment to ongoing professional development.  Thank you again for all of the preparation you did to customize our event.

Melissa C. Pemberton,M.A.Ed.,CRC
Division of Rehabilitation Services
Staff Specialist, Human Resource Development
2301 Argonne Drive
Baltimore, Maryland 21218 mpemberton@dors.state.md.us

------------------

Skylink Travel Stress and Team Building Workshop
[2 hour program for 25 attendees]


For the entire SKYLINK staff I want to thank you for your presentation during our training workshop. It is exactly what we needed in our multicultural group. I have not experienced such a cooperation and participation in many years with the staff. You truly know how to reach your audience.

I am hoping that we can use your insight in future meetings with our other offices, and wish you continued success in all the people you help.

Thank you very much for your time. Teamwork & communication are key elements to our managing our daily work ethic. You were able to express these values in a most acceptable way and open everyone’s mind.

All the very best in your ongoing effort to keep us sane.

Sincerely,

Milchen

Ms. Milchen de Vasconcelos
Regional Sales Manager
Skylink Travel
mvasconcelos @skylinkus.com
------------------------

Bridging Cultural Diversity through Interactive 4 "H" Humor Program Objectives:


1.  Explore cognitive complexity, cultural connection and team problem-solving through the cognitive contradiction and cultural nicknames exercises

2.  Learn to disarm power struggles and defuse critical aggressors through empathically assertive communication and trust-building intervention exercises

3.  Discover both the general functions of humor and laughter as well as the 4 "H" Humor Functions (differentiating healing vs. hostile humor) and how they bridge head and heart barriers to cultural connection

4.  Confront the "Intimate Foe with the "Fear of Exposure into the Fun of Embarrassment" exercise

5.  Channel stress/conflict barriers to cultural connection and team coordination while building bridges to team camaraderie and creativity through the Doc's acclaimed 3-D -- Team Discussion-Drawing-Diversity -- exercise

6.  Discover the real meaning of the "Serenity Prayer," "Shrink Rap" ™ and the "Secret of Wisdom"


Seek the Stress Doc's Higher Power Humor:  May the Force and Farce Be with You!

Don't miss your appointment with the Stress Doc!



Mark Gorkin, MSW, LICSW, "The Stress Doc" ™,
a Licensed Clinical Social Worker, is an acclaimed keynote and kickoff speaker and "Motivational Humorist" known for his interactive, inspiring and FUN speaking and workshop programs.  In addition, the "Doc" is a team building and organizational development consultant for a variety of govt. agencies, corporations and non-profits and is AOL's "Online Psychohumorist" ™.  Mark is an Adjunct Professor, No. VA (NOVA) Community College and currently he is leading "Stress, Team Building and Humor" programs for the 1st Cavalry and 4th Infantry Divisions, Ft. Hood, Texas.  A former Stress and Conflict Consultant for the US Postal Service, the Stress Doc is the author of Practice Safe Stress and of The Four Faces of Anger.  See his award-winning, USA Today Online "HotSite" -- www.stressdoc.com -- called a "workplace resource" by National Public Radio (NPR).  For more info on the Doc's "Practice Safe Stress" programs or to receive his free e-newsletter, email stressdoc@aol.com or call 301-875-2567.
---------------------


Dept. Of Homeland Security/Federal Women Employees Month

["Creatively Dealing with Change and Conflict" -- 1.5 hour Keynote for 150 attendees]

May 4, 2009

"Mark Gorkin did a fantastic job of keeping the audience energized in an afternoon presentation entitled "Creatively Dealing with Change and Conflict"!  The group exercises were rousing and well-received.  Mark was a refreshing change from the usual lecturers and talking heads.  One participant stated that he was "quirky but very knowledgeable and interesting".  Numerous laudatory comments were received regarding Mark's delivery methods.  He was definitely the right choice to revitalize the participants right after lunch.  Mark is lively, energizing, and informative.  He definitely knows his stuff!"

Linda Fresh
Federal Women's Program Manager
Department of Homeland Security
Headquarters Equal Employment Opportunity Office

Linda.Fresh@associates.dhs.gov

(202) 447-0252
 


Shrink Rap I:

The Stress Doc presents a four step, “Four 'R'” communicational guide for building successful “give and take” professional relationships.  The Four “R”s are dramatically illustrated in his recent encounter with an ENT surgeon.

The Four “R”s for a PROductive Relationship:

Be Respectful, Real, Responsible and Responsive


Many of us “Boomers” grew up with an alliterative academic mantra as educational foundation, that is, the Four “R”s – Reading, Writing, Rithmetic and Religion.  Let’s just say I focused more on the first two “R”s and sort of made a nominal wave at the latter.  (For example, I am a self-professed Jewish Atheist; of course, my biggest fear is being accused of redundancy.)  However, I continue to make up for slighting this upstanding letter.  For example, I prominently share a burnout scenario caution flag in many of my Practice Safe Stress programs.   It’s called “The Vital Lesson of the Four ‘R’s”:  If no matter what you do or how hard you try, Results, Rewards, Recognition and Relief are not forthcoming, and you can’t say “No” or won’t “let go,” that is, you can’t step back and seek a new perspective…trouble awaits.  The groundwork is being laid for apathy, callousness and despair.  (And especially when overcommitted, I also extol this Stress Doc truism: Do know your limits and don’t limit your “No”s.)

Recently, I have designed a new Four “R” mantra.  It’s called the Four “R”s for a PROductive – Professional, Reciprocal and Ongoing – Relationship.  Let’s first examine the PRO acronym.  By “Professional” I mean there are certain standards and expectations for behavior on the part of both parties.  “Reciprocal” means that despite different levels of expertise or authority there is meaningful give and take; one party is not perceived to be inherently or psychologically subordinate to the other, despite differences, for example, in age, rank or professional standing.  Each person has the freedom and choice to speak their minds and speak from the heart (though, naturally, it may be harder for the “junior” partner).  And “Ongoing” speaks for itself:  this is not a one-time encounter; the relationship has mutual significance as well as a past, present and future.

Now to those “R’s.  Especially in work-related arenas, to engage others PROductively in our increasingly complex, diverse and wired world, it is necessary to navigate and negotiate emotionally charged, “T ‘n T” – Time- and Task-Driven – organizational settings and interpersonal situations.  Effective engagement requires blending both “high task” (performance focus) and “high touch” (people focus).  A good communicator is able to connect with his or her own needs and emotions, goals and hopes.  This individual is not afraid to share personal flaws and foibles and then use such connective-collective, head and heart understanding for building a relationship bridge with the other – whether ally or antagonist. 

And a PRO communicator knows the value of injecting some humor.  For example, Daniel Goleman, in his ground-breaking work on Emotional Intelligence, found that the best managers used humor three times more often than their less successful counterparts.  As I like to say:  “People are more open to a serious message when it is gift-wrapped with humor.”  So let’s see if I can walk my talk with an en-light-ening argument for PROductive engagement requiring a “Four ‘R’ Foundation”:  Being Respectful, Real, Responsible and Responsive.

The Four “R”s for a PROductive Relationship

Using the online ARDictionary, let’s examine the Four “R”s:

1.  Respectful.  PROductive relating starts with a capacity to truly “take notice of; to regard with special attention; to regard as worthy of special consideration; hence to care for.”  This conception goes beyond formality and even civility.  The process of relationship building requires mutual interest and investment:  in the context of being a PRO, respect means a willingness to take the time and energy to understand (or at least care about) the other’s lived experience and world view. And, certainly, one can respectfully disagree.  (Of course, in the face of an all-knowing, egomaniacal, “You don’t seem to realize, I really am as important as I think I am stress carrier, it can be a challenge remaining respectful.  At these times I try to quietly recall the words of French novelist, Andre Gide:  “One must allow others to be right, it consoles them for not being anything else.”)  Perhaps it’s time to move to the second “R.”

2.  Real.  A relationship that is real is “true; genuine; not artificial, counterfeit, or facetious”; it also connotes “having substance or capable of being treated as fact,” e.g., the “real reason.”  However, your position on an issue doesn’t necessarily have to stand up in a court of law to be real.  Sometimes it’s a willingness to initially speak from the gut or heart, but then be committed to verify when possible or to separate fantasy from reality when desirable.  For me, one defining quality of “being or keeping it real” is a willingness to express a belief or take a position that may challenge, disappoint or even anger the other person(s).  Now the position taken isn’t simply defiance for defiance sake. (Though I’m a big believer of irony whereby you say one thing but obviously mean the opposite to skewer a position or person that deserves some ego-deflation, or at least needs some help in getting real.  For example, the notion of FOX News being “Fair and Balanced” seems to me a wonderful example of unintended irony.)   And unless you are in a relationship of great power disparity, as well as potential for abuse, preserving your sense of self through passive-aggressive resistance does not meet this standard of being “real.”  (Civil disobedience, of course, does meet this standard.)

When PROductively “real” you are sharing something that reflects a core belief or value and/or are challenging a position that you believe threatens to undermine a climate of respect and authenticity.  Ultimately, you are both affirming your own integrity and the honesty of the relationship, whether this involves one other person or the authenticity of a larger group dynamic.  Trumping loyalty with reality, you refuse to be trapped in an asymmetrical “Loyalty Loop”:  Those who never want you to answer back always want you to back their answer.  Clearly, a “real” relationship is “not to be taken (or given) lightly.”

3.  Responsible.  As a PRO, being “responsible” means “likely to be called upon to answer; to be answerable.”  It involves “a degree of accountability on the part of the person concerned.”  You are seen to have impact upon if not be in charge of a person or situation as an “agent or cause.”  You are “worthy of or requiring responsibility or trust.”  Clearly there is a connection between being responsible and being professional and conscientious, especially regarding one’s exercise of decision-making powers.

Conversely, one common example of not being responsible is when a person simply blames another for a problem or for his or her compromised performance.  To do this means forsaking your “Authority, Autonomy and Accountability” – what I call the “Triple ‘A’ of Personal/Professional Responsibility.”  Ideally, people should be encouraged to reasonably and ethically exercise their “Authority” and be given sufficient “Autonomy” to do so.  At the same time, PRO relating is synonymous with being held “Accountable” by some monitoring process for one’s decisions and actions.

In a PROductive relationship, not taking responsibility too frequently means you are accepting that another party has the power to define your competency, your identity and the problem-solving dynamics of a situation.  And from such a vulnerable if not victim-like position, not surprisingly some people become defensive, too quickly seeing provocative or even mere problematic interaction as an issue of respect.  I think the words of the universally admired first lady, Eleanor Roosevelt, have much relevance:  “No one can take away your self-respect without your active participation.”  So don’t be responsible for an unhealthy power transfusion.

4. Responsive.  The foundational word for responsive is “sensitive” – “being susceptible to the attitudes, feelings or circumstances of others.”  For me, responsive is the counterpoint to being reactive – where sensitivity has less to do with feeling with and for the other and more to do with defending an insecure or injured self.  My conception of responsive equates with a strong capacity for empathy, an ability to walk in another’s shoes, and especially a capacity for feeling those bunions.  In contrast, reaction is frequently an overemotional state.  And when someone is chronically reactive (think fight or flight on steroids) he or she perceives events as darkly threatening.  Often other people are held in suspicion and are to be quickly attacked or avoided.  Reaction has a primal if not primitive quality; responsive is a complex and compassionate blend of head and heart.  When responsive you are processing both text and context, seeing both the individual trees and the bigger forest.

At the same time we must go beyond a psychological perspective.  Being responsive means you are “ready or inclined to respond…to people or events; you show effort in return to a force.”  You are willing to consider and act upon “suggestions and influences.”  Yet, the most effective response mechanism does not necessarily involve strategic assertion or a dramatic display of knowledge or authority.  Sometimes being responsive means knowing when and how to ask the right question, or when to be silent and simply touch the other’s shoulder.

Case Example

Let me share a recent exchange that captures the Four “R”s of PROductive relating.  I was in the office of an ENT doctor.  Recently, a tissue growth was discovered inside my ear.  It does not appear to be cancerous (a biopsy was performed).  However, the condition is potentially serious as it could compromise the inner ear bone structure.  So some kind of surgery is needed.  And, there’s a constant ringing in the ear and decided hearing loss in the problem ear.  Whether any of the loss is reversible remains to be determined.  (Still, I did manage to come up with one good line.  Upon hearing about my tinnitus (ear ringing), a friend, trying to be helpful, suggested that I might want to get a white noise machine.  My immediate reply:  “I am the walking white noise machine!”)

Just before reviewing my CAT Scan the doctor shared some good news.  The growth is outside the eardrum, making the surgery less dicey though, at this point, there's still potential for some diminished hearing or ringing aftereffects.  I still had some questions, and proceeded to raise them.  Perhaps I interrupted him as he was about to view my CAT Scan, for suddenly the doctor raised his hand and said, I was “coming across with too much intensity.”  I was taken aback by his confrontation.  To myself I wondered, “Where’s the boundary between being direct and being intense?”  Clearly, I don’t want to antagonize my doctor.  Keeping my cool, I finally said, “Perhaps the uncertainty this past month (we couldn’t schedule an earlier appointment) has something to do with my intensity.”  I was acknowledging my behavior without apologizing directly.  (Being Respectful to other and self; being Real and taking some Responsibility.)  The acknowledgement seemed to free up the doctor to respond in kind:  “I’m pretty intense myself.  Perhaps your intensity helped bring out my intensity.”  (Being Real, taking some Responsibility and being Responsive.)

We had no trouble communicating the rest of the appointment.  The doctor wanted me to get a second opinion with a more experienced colleague.  Before leaving, I told the doctor that I valued our previous “open” exchange.  He then said, “I’m here as your partner and advocate.”  (And he even responded within twenty-four hours to a susequent email.)  We both ended up being PROs.  (Being mutually Respectful, Real, Responsible and Responsive.)

Closing

Hopefully, with the concepts and case example you now have a Four “R” template for building Professional, Reciprocal and Ongoing relations.  Be "Respectful, Real, Responsible and Responsive both personally and with others and you will be a PROductive communicator.  And you’ll also be on a four step path for helping one and all…Practice Safe Stress!

[Ed. Note.  The next article provides some tools and techniques for putting into operation those Four "R"s.]

 


Shrink Rap II:


The Science and Art of Active Listening:
The Stress Doc's CPRS Method


There are several ways to enhance listening effectiveness, especially when engaged in a complex or emotional exchange.  A fundamental technique is "Active Listening."  Here's an acronym to help transform less than attentive or self-centered listening into clear, concise and compassionate communication.  Are you ready to revive a give and take relationship; are you ready to be an assertive and empathic communicator; are you ready to practice CPR and S?

Key CPRS Components of "Active Listening":
 
C.  Clarification and (Be) Concise

a. Clarification.  Clarification involves asking the other party to provide more information, to elaborate upon a statement or answer specific questions.  A clarification attempt is not an inquisitorial, "WHY did you do that?"  It's more a recognition that something is not clear; perhaps the listener has some confusion and desires more information, again, for better understanding.  And clarification should not be the springboard to a harsh or blaming "You"-message and/or a dismissive judgment, e.g., "You're wrong" or "You don't really believe that, do you!"  A much better response is, "I disagree," "I see it differently" or "My data says otherwise."

Asking questions that gives the other party a chance to speak his or her mind (and if desired, to also speak from the heart) defines another "c"-word - concern.  Yet showing empathy doesn't mean there isn't room for difference.  As I like to say, "Acknowledgement does not necessarily mean Agreement."  That is, a communicator can both listen attentively and respectfully and after taking in the message share his or her differing and even "troubled-with-what-I'm-hearing" perspective.

b. (Be) Concise.  I believe over-talking or rambling on, especially when the communicator is basically conveying the same message over and over, is a dis-ease of epidemic proportions.  Perhaps I'm hypersensitive:  as a professional speaker I know the importance of keeping messages clear, brief and to the point.  Occasionally, I repeat a phrase purposefully for emphasis.  I immediately see two parts to this communicational excess:  1) the egotist who believes he is enlightening the world with his never-ending pearls and 2) an insecure communicator faced with the absence of immediate acknowledgement from his or her audience keeps trying to get the original message across (and likely audience approval), sometimes through repetition, sometimes through telling another story.  My suggestion:  in the latter scenario, stop trying so hard; better to find the pass in the impasse by asking, "Am I being clear?"  And don't put the burden on the other with, "Do you understand?"  (Of course, a mature message receiver knows to provide some kind of responsive -- verbal or nonverbal -- feedback.)

P.  Paraphrase and Pause


a. Paraphrase.  Paraphrasing involves repeating the other's message in the person's words or in your own distillation, to affirm, "Message sent is message received."  Sometimes, especially if a sender has conveyed a significant amount of information or complex instructions, it's wise to say, "I know I just said a lot.  Would you paraphrase back what you heard?"  Again, the motive is not to catch the other but to have both parties on the same page.

b. Pause.  In a "T n T" (Time- and Task-driven) world, communicators often feel they have to cram in the info as time is limited.  Providing people with a lengthy, seemingly endless laundry list almost assures that key issues and ideas will be lost in the verbiage.  Learning to pause, to segment or chunk your message helps the receiver catch the gist without fumbling the ideas, intentions or implications.  (The communicational analogy might be writing concisely, using short and to the point paragraphs.)  Momentary breaks from the back and forth also allow the parties to ponder and posit new possibilities.  Now active listening may morph into creative listening.

R.  Reaction vs. Response and Reflect Feelings


a. Reaction vs. Response.  Reactive listening usually occurs when you feel threatened or angry and then immediately engage in a counterargument (covert or verbalized).  Unbiased or flexible listening has ended.  Upon sensing an opening, for example, perceived inconsistency or irrationality in the message, you reject or talk over the message and basically dismiss the messenger.  Or, some end a contentious listening process with a quick and reactive retreat:  "You've hurt me" or "You made me upset" and the receiver vacates the communicational field and avoids an honest exchange.  (Clearly, if one party is being abusive, and it does not feel safe to voice your position, then retreating is a wise strategy.)  In contrast, a response often blends both head and heart and involves the use of an "I" message:  "I'm concerned about what I'm hearing" or "I sense there's a problem.  Is my assessment on target?"  An "I"-message response is the opposite of a wildly emotional or knee-"jerk" reaction; it takes personal responsibility for both receiving and giving feedback.  Shifting from blaming "You" messages to assertive and empathic "I"s transforms a defensive reaction into a reasoned response.  So "count to ten and check within."

b. Reflect Feelings (Tentatively)/Reveal Feelings (Appropriately).  To reflect someone's feelings means to lightly or kindly ask about or to acknowledge overt or underlying feelings that are attached to the other party's communication.  A tentative or tactful approach is often best:  "I know you are on board, still it sounds like you may have some frustration with the decision.  Care to discuss it?"  Sometimes you may not know what the other is feeling.  Instead of trying to guess or saying, "Gee you must be angry," if you want to comment, better to say, "When I've been in a similar situation, I found myself becoming…"  (Be careful; don't suddenly shift the focus and make yourself the center of the conversation.)  And then pause; give the other person time to respond or not.  Also, especially regarding the emotional component of messages, both listening and looking for verbal and nonverbal cues -- voice tone and volume, facial and other bodily gestures, for example, lowered head and eyes or arms crossed over the chest -- will facilitate more accurate reflection or discretion.

S.  Strategize and Summarize


a. Strategize.  Strategic listening takes active listening to a next level.  The goal is more than awareness and empathy.  Now you want to invite the other to engage in a mutual, problem-solving dance. Common and disparate, structured and spontaneous ideas and emotions as well as goals and objectives are freely shared, akin to a brainstorming.  Though in this strategic interplay give and take questioning for understanding and for triggering imaginative possibilities is encouraged.  The purpose of such strategic back and forth is "synergy" - a sharing-listening-sharing dialogic loop yielding an expanded understanding:  the consciousness whole is greater than the sum of the communicational parts.

b. Summarize.  Finally, you are ready to review and pull together such problem-solving elements as mutual agreements, outstanding differences -- factual as well as emotional -- broad strategies and action plans to be executed (including the parties responsible for implementation), time frames, ongoing monitoring or interim report back and follow-up procedures.  And depending on the communicational context, a written summary is often advisable.

In the spirit of walking the talk, here's a succinct summary of the "Keys to Active or CPRS Listening":

Clarification
-- clear up confusion and foster greater understanding without passing premature judgment
(Be) Concise
-- keep messages clear, brief and to the point; beware egotistical or insecure rambling 

Paraphrase
-- two-way repeating or distilling of the message so that "message sent is message received"
Pause
-- take time to chunk your message, allowing the other to get the gist and ponder possibilities

Reaction vs. Response
-- "count to ten, check within" to respond with assertive "I"s not blaming "You"s
Reflect/Reveal Feelings
-- tactful questioning or sharing acknowledges self/other and invites exchange

Strategize
-- generate mutual listening-sharing loop for both idea generation and insightful imagination
Summarize
-- review and record agreements, unresolved differences and future problem-solving steps.
 


Mark Gorkin, MSW, LICSW, "The Stress Doc" ™,
a Licensed Clinical Social Worker, is an acclaimed keynote and kickoff speaker and "Motivational Humorist" known for his interactive, inspiring and FUN speaking and workshop programs.  In addition, the "Doc" is a team building and organizational development consultant for a variety of govt. agencies, corporations and non-profits and is AOL's "Online Psychohumorist" ™.  Mark is an Adjunct Professor, No. VA (NOVA) Community College and currently he is leading "Stress, Team Building and Humor" programs for the 1st Cavalry and 4th Infantry Divisions, Ft. Hood, Texas.  A former Stress and Conflict Consultant for the US Postal Service, the Stress Doc is the author of Practice Safe Stress and of The Four Faces of Anger.  See his award-winning, USA Today Online "HotSite" -- www.stressdoc.com -- called a "workplace resource" by National Public Radio (NPR).  For more info on the Doc's "Practice Safe Stress" programs or to receive his free e-newsletter, email stressdoc@aol.com or call 301-946-0865.  And to view web video highlights of a Stress Doc Keynote, go to http://www.stressdoc.com/media_downloads.htm
.

(c)  Mark Gorkin  2009

Shrink Rap™ Productions