Nutshell: How to listen to understand

When we listen to understand, rather than simply to respond, we are more likely to create connection and have a meaningful exchange.

Back in 1952, Carl R Rogers and F J Roethlisberger published a seminal and, at the time, controversial article in Harvard Business Review. The authors were some of the first researchers to promote the importance of listening and empathy in the workplace, even in the strict workplace hierarchies that were the norm at the time.

They identified that “the greatest barrier to effective communication is the tendency to evaluate what another person is saying and therefore to misunderstand or to not really ‘hear’”.

We’ve probably all had the experience of trying to make a point or suggest something new, only to be shot down by the someone intent on countering with their own point of view rather than listening to ours.

And it’s all too easy for us to fall into the habit of doing that to others ourselves. When we’re giving feedback, for example, are we really prepared to listen to the other person’s story rather than sticking to what we already know – and believe to be true?

Rogers and Roethlisberger ask us to imagine how we might respond to someone commenting on what someone else has just said, such as: “I didn’t like what that person said”. Our response will invariably be either approval or disapproval of the attitude expressed.

That means that our first reaction is to evaluate it from our own point of view without further thought or engagement. Worse, our tendency to evaluate is only heightened in situations when feelings and emotions are involved: the stronger we feel about something, the less likely it is that there will be a mutual element in any communication.

We’re much more likely to make a judgement – an evaluation – from our own personal frame of reference.

When that happens, rather than an exchange of views, there will just be “two ideas, two feelings, or two judgments missing each other in psychological space”. And that, unsurprisingly, gets in the way of effective communication.

The antidote: listening to understand

The antidote, for Rogers and Roethlisberger, is to learn to check our natural impulse to judge and instead “listen with understanding”.

That means really hearing what’s being said from the other person’s point of view, sensing how it feels to that person (a much better indicator than words alone) and thinking about their frame of reference for the subject being discussed. It’s an empathetic style of listening that is about the other person rather than ourselves.

To test this out, the authors suggest that, when we find ourselves in, for example, a heated discussion, we try to restate the previous speaker’s ideas and feelings – to their satisfaction – before we make our own points.

This reflecting back, acknowledging and validating what someone has said, even if we don’t agree with it, is the key to meaningful conversation.

It forces us to consider the other person’s point of view and is also likely to take some of the emotion out of the situation.

And that create a better chance that we’ll be able to achieve mutual communication to create the understanding and connection we need.

Why listening to understand is so hard

If that sounds simple, we might ask why listening with understanding still seems relatively rare. That’s because it’s not as easy as it may first appear.

Listening with understanding takes courage because it means taking a risk.

If we really understand another person’s world view without rushing to judgment, we run the risk of our own attitudes and personality being challenged, even influenced or changed by that understanding.

In that feedback conversation, for example, it might mean having to accept that we didn’t have the whole story and that Dave from Accounts wasn’t entirely accurate when he complained about our colleague’s shortcomings and behaviour.

The willingness to be vulnerable to this kind of mental or psychological transformation is, for conversational theorist Theodore Zeldin, the entire point of ‘real’ conversation: thinking out loud, discovering we’re wrong, being challenged and often coming up with something entirely unexpected and new.

That’s quite a lot to take on. Sticking with evaluation as an approach can far too often seem easier and much less like hard work. The fact remains, though, that communication is much more likely to succeed if we are able and willing to see and accept points of view that are different from our own.

Contrast, for example, the outcomes of these two simple conversations:  

Listening to evaluate

Colleague A: As part of our new product launch, I think we should start using TikTok as one of our social channels.

Colleague B: I don’t think that’s a good idea. Isn’t TikTok just a flash in the pan? And I’m not sure it’s the right platform for us at all. Let’s stick to what we know.

Colleague A (thinks, irritated): That’s what’s so frustrating about working here; no one is willing to take a risk on new ideas.

Listening to understand

Colleague A:  As part of our new product launch, I think we should start using TikTok as one of our social channels.

Colleague B: So you think TikTok is the way to go. But isn’t that just a flash in the pan? And is it really the right fit for our brand?

 Colleague A: Well, not our traditional lines perhaps, but it’s spot on for the target market for our new stuff.

Colleague B: Ok, but can we really take on another channel? I mean, we’re pretty maxed out as it is.

Colleague A: Olivia has already done some work on how we might make it work; she’d be a brilliant lead on it for us.

 Colleague B: I see. Why doesn’t she put together a short proposal for us to take look at?

Colleague A: That’s great. Thanks!

Author Stephen Covey reminds us that, “Most people don’t listen to understand, they listen with the intent to reply.”

It’s true: we all like to have our say and, if we’re honest, we know that rushing to judgement is a natural human tendency.

But it’s one we need to resist if we’re to encourage open, empathetic and effective communication at work.

The better we try to understand the person we’re communicating with, to practice listening with understanding to what they’re saying, the fewer barriers that communication will face.

Test your understanding

• Outline a brief definition of what Rogers and Roethlisberger mean by “listen with understanding”.

• Explain why listening to understand takes courage.

What does it mean for you?

• Consider how understanding the difference between listening to evaluate and listening to understand might improve your own communication. 

• Can you think of a recent conversation where you might have rushed to judgement? How might you avoid this pitfall in future?