Jawn Lam

Conversation Convergence Process

Problem Solving & Decision MakingEssay3 min read

A tool to facilitate effective communication and problem-solving in situations where conflict arises from misunderstandings.

Builds on the restatement rule of Carl Rogers (with F. J. Roethlisberger, Barriers and Gateways to Communication, 1952) and the Speaker-Listener Technique (Howard Markman, Scott Stanley, and Susan Blumberg, Fighting for Your Marriage, 1994); the chart follows the mediator's practice of recording agreements and open issues.

What it is for

The purpose of the Conversation Convergence Process thinking tool is to facilitate effective communication and problem-solving in situations where conflict arises from misunderstandings. It is designed to guide participants through a structured dialogue that clarifies positions, fosters mutual understanding, and identifies common ground.

This tool is particularly useful in meetings or discussions where differing viewpoints may lead to conflict, and there is a need to align on objectives and understand each other's perspectives. The goal is to move from conflict or divergence in conversation to a point of convergence, where participants agree on a shared path forward or at least understand the nature of their disagreements.

By methodically exchanging views, repeating back what was heard for confirmation, asking questions to clarify, and systematically documenting points of agreement and disagreement, the tool aims to reduce misunderstandings, highlight shared goals, and facilitate a collaborative search for solutions. It ultimately aims to transform conflict into constructive dialogue, leading to actionable outcomes and improved group dynamics.

Why use it

Conflicts often happen because people don't understand each other. Here's what to do:

  • Ignore the conflict if it's not about what the meeting is for.
  • Make sure everyone knows what the problem is.
  • Make the goals of the meeting clear so that people aren't working against each other.
  • Figure out if the disagreement is really about the problem or just about how people work, their personalities, or their values.

How to use it

For this thinking tool, start a conversation about the conflict using this method to help solve it.

  1. Initial Position Statement. Participant A presents their view on the problem without interruption.
  2. Recap and Understanding. Participant B repeats what they heard from Participant A, without adding new information.
  3. Clarifying Questions. Participant B asks clarifying questions to fully understand Participant A's view. No challenges are made here; the focus is on comprehending the stance.
  4. Perspective Switch. Now, Participant B presents their perspective on the problem.
  5. Position Acknowledgment. Participant A repeats Participant B's view, ensuring accurate understanding.
  6. Deepening Understanding. Participant A asks Participant B clarifying questions about their perspective.
  7. Joint Discussion. Engage in a dialogue to explore: shared views and agreements; differences in understanding the problem; potential solutions or ideas; agreed-upon action steps or solutions; and unresolved issues and continuing points of contention.
  8. Visual Mapping. Create a Problem Difference Chart detailing the key points of agreement and disagreement.
  9. Solution Exploration. Discuss the differences charted to identify potential solutions.

The Problem Difference Chart

Write each participant's points side by side, then the agreements and what is still open; the chart is the agenda for the solution talk that follows. Copy the canvas when you are done; nothing is saved.

Participant A's View

List points here.

Participant B's View

List points here.

Solution or Agreements

Detail agreed solutions or mutual agreements.

Unresolved Issues

List remaining disagreements and explore further.

CopiedCould not copy

Where it fits

The process recommends it at Selecting the Right Decision Tools, the second step of the Evaluate phase, beside the Critical Consensus Constructor and the Ease-Impact Assessment Matrix. It selects no option itself: it clears the misunderstanding that keeps two people from weighing the options together.

Related tools

Where the Critical Consensus Constructor takes a whole group to a decision, this process clears a misunderstanding between two people and ends in a chart of where they agree and where they still differ; the Collaborative Conversation Navigator sets the way a whole team talks.