This is the second episode of a three-part series focusing on strategic communication. In today’s episode, we wrap up our conversation on the Socratic Method as a kind of strategic action in disguise; we discuss the value of intra- and interpersonal audits to unveil hidden interests prior to engaging in negotiation, debate, or conflict; and we compare strategic communicative techniques—namely, Harvard Business School’s “principled negotiation” (Getting to Yes) versus Chris Voss’ psychological trickery (Never Split the Difference). Through all this, Jason argues that strategic communication is tied to a selfish substrate. In other words, we cannot not do it. But we can refine our strategic communicative skills to build stronger, more collaborative relationships that generate mutual value. Juan Pablo cross examines Jason’s argument and observes that strategic communication requires some level of deception that is ultimately anti-democratic. Alternatively, shouldn’t we aim to create more understanding, not less, through communication?
Today’s episode offers a healthy combination of critical analyses and practical insights applied to situations that you frequently encounter in the workplace and everyday life. Stay tuned for part three, where Juan Pablo presents the full Habermasian critique of strategic communication, culminating in our most heated debate yet. We recommend listening to each part in chronological order.
The views expressed on this podcast are our own.
If you enjoy what you're hearing, please follow/support us through any of the below media: