What Deborah Tannen taught me about conversation & interruption

tannen you just dont understand

I was recently invited to attend a charity event in Washington DC. Dinner was a catered affair of 300 with a few senators & Muhammad Yunus there to talk about micro financing.

After dinner we broke up into some smaller groups, and had great conversations into the night. It was interesting to me as I don’t often rub elbows with lobbyists & political animals. While we were all talking, the subject of language came up, and in particular how different people’s styles affect how they come off.

Join 30,000 others and follow Sean Hull on twitter @hullsean.

I became really engaged, as this topic has always interested me. I was introduced to the ideas of Deborah Tannen. She’s a professor of linguistics from Georgetown University, and an expert on the topic.

Afterward, I went straight to my kindle & bought here seminal book “You Just Don’t Understand”.

Boy do I understand a lot more now.

1. Conversational style varies by culture & gender

Across cultures, from europeans to Asians, North to South Americans, conversational styles vary. Some pause longer between breathes, while others make briefer pauses. Some deem conversation more like judge & jury, where each should be afforded carefully the chance to take stage, while others prefer the casual chance to jump in, and constant overlap.

These differences lead to the sense of pushiness versus interest, interruption versus dominance. Interest versus boredom. Since all these cultures have a different style, it can get rather complicated interpreting someone’s intentions if you’re not from that culture.

What’s more these vary quite a bit between men & women.

Also: What I learned from Jay Heinrichs about click worthy blog titles

2. Report & rapport talk are different

Report talk is in public, perhaps at a lecture, or out with a large group of friends around the dinner table. There stories & conversation revolves around a larger group.

Rapport talk on the other hand is at home, among intimates.

She says that women tend to prefer the latter while men prefer the former. So in different circumstances it can appear that one or the other has “nothing to say”, when it actually revolves around their preferences of when to speak.

Related: Is automation killing old-school operations?

3. Like & respect

Women’s behavior & style of speaking is rooted in the goal of being liked. So there are many cases where they may downplay themselves, to reach a more equal state with those around them.

Men’s behavior & conversational style is based around seeking respect. This can often mean emphasizing differences, and not parity.

Read: Do managers underestimate operational cost?

4. Contest or connection?

Men often see the world through the lens of contest, especially in relationships with others. Women on the other hand tend to see it as an interconnected network. By building bonds you strengthen that network.

These two styles inform dramatically different behaviors in similar situations.

Also: Is Reid Hoffman right about career risk?

5. Interest or independence

Here’s another example of how men & women may see things differently.


When men change the subject, women think they are showing a lack of sympathy — a failure of intimacy. But the failure to ask probing questions could just as well be a way of respecting the other’s need for independence.

So it seems styles & priorities inform intention & interpretation of a lot in conversations.

Although all of this doesn’t resolve or put to rest these differences, being informed can certainly help a lot towards understanding.

Also: What I learned from the 37 Signals team about work & startups

Get more. Grab our exclusive monthly Scalable Startups. We share tips and special content. Our latest Why I don’t work with recruiters

Are open source projects run like a democracy or an oligarchy?

aristocracy

I was reading Fred Wilson’s comments recently on The Bitcoin XT Fork. In it he discussed how open source developers manage their projects.

“A group of open source core developers are a democratic system.”

I was surprised by this comment because I had never thought if it as democratic. Here are my thoughts…

Join 28,000 others and follow Sean Hull on twitter @hullsean.

1. Indefinite tenure

Open source projects typically have a leader with indefinite tenure. He can’t be voted out. When developers are unhappy with how things are run, or how they’re evolving, they typically “fork” the project and go their own way.

That would be where Texas secedes from the union if they’re not happy with how things are run in Washington.

Also: Is the difference between dev & ops a four-letter word?

2. Inherited rights

Like an aristocracy, leaders of an open source project typically have rights inherited. This could be due to merit, or seniority. They are the ones with admin rights on the git account.

Divine rights indeed!

Related: Is automation killing old-school operations?

3. Appointments made by merit

Developers join open source projects, and move through the ranks mostly by merit. Sure there’s some back scratching, and massaging that helps too. Personality surely matters, but primarily skill at contributing code & architecture ideas are paramount.

Read: Do managers underestimate operational cost?

4. Power rests with a small elite

For sure, all people cannot vote on open source project direction. It’s a small group of elite, who are admittedly closest to it, and most knowledgable. These are the ones who control it’s direction.

Also: Is the difference between dev & ops a four-letter word?

5. Oligarchy or Aristocracy?

From wikipedia an Oligarchy is “a form of power structure in which power effectively rests with a small number of people”. That sounds closest.

While open source projects do have the indefinite political tenure of an authoritarian regime, they lack the strict obedience aspect.

However, open source projects do look a bit like an Aristocracy. Aristocracy is “a form of government that places power in the hands of a small, privilged ruling class. The term derives from the Greek aristokratia meaning ‘rule of the best’. ”

Also: Are SQL Databases dead?

Get more. Grab our exclusive monthly Scalable Startups. We share tips and special content. Our latest Why I don’t work with recruiters