How good a listener are we? A majority of us tend to rate our listening skills far higher than they actually are, so to say. For instance, listening in real sense boils down to few characteristics- nodding your head in agreement for every line spoken, or being able to reproduce the text all by yourself. However, a popular research indicated that this cliched behavior does not amount to 'good or effective listening'.
A report in hbr.org lists out certain findings of this study.
The first stresses on the demerits of being silent when the other is speaking. Only if questions are posed in return, will it mean that the message is conveyed. The study says, "Good listening is consistently seen as a two-way dialog, rather than a one-way 'speaker versus hearer' interaction. The best conversations are active".
In short, the research reveals that one must pay attention and be an active listener, rather than silently listening and nodding in agreement.
The next finding focuses on the importance of not over-doing the same. That is, talking back in a way that does not allow the other person to continue. As the report states, "poor listeners ar seen as competitive — as listening only to identify errors in reasoning or logic, using their silence as a chance to prepare their next response. That might make you an excellent debater, but it doesn’t make you a good listener".
Moving on, the most surprising finding of the lot was the need for a listener to offer suggestions. These, if put across in the right manner can lead to meaningful conversations. However, there are exceptions in this too. For instance, not all suggestions or solutions from a listener are usually accepted.
"We’re more likely to accept suggestions from people we already think are good listeners. Someone who is silent for the whole conversation and then jumps in with a suggestion may not be seen as credible. Someone who seems combative or critical and then tries to give advice may not be seen as trustworthy", states the study.
