This book includes a plain text version that is designed for high accessibility. To use this version please follow this link.
them connect. The lengths of responses are differ- ent as well. Women often say, “I am sick and tired of communicating long messages to men and get- ting back one-word responses.” I observe changes, of course, but not relating to talk so much. Women see more options for them- selves today than they did 20 years ago. However, women still want to talk about problems; men still want to talk about how to fix the problems.


Your book Talking From 9 to 5: Women and Men at Work explores how ways of speaking affect who gets heard, who gets credit, who gets ahead, and what gets done in the workplace. Why are women often seen as less confident and competent than they really are? One way to handle situations in meetings is for women to watch out for each other. If a woman says something and it is ignored, it is hard for her to say, “Hey, I just said that, it was my idea.” It is better for someone else at the meeting to say,


“Ashley just said that.” Women can team up with a woman or a man in advance to help make sure they are heard. In a work relationship, a man may say, “Have this project ready by three today.” And a woman


may say, “Do you think you could have this ready by three?” Instead, a woman can say, “I need to have this by three. Will you be able to do that?” Women apologize often — more frequently than men. However, what women mean is that they are sorry that something happened, but they are not really apologizing for the situation. Moni- tor your own style. Pay attention to intonation patterns. For example, women’s voices often go up in tone at the end of a statement. They can remind themselves not to do that and keep intonations level at the end of a sentence. Stop saying disclaimers such as, “I don’t know


if this is a very good idea, but….” That’s why it is so important to monitor and get feedback on your own style.


In your book The Argument Culture: Stopping America’s War of Words, you say that everywhere we turn, there is evidence that in public discourse, we prize contentiousness and aggression more than cooperation and conciliation. Associations operate based on consensus, and, for the most part, dislike debate and confrontation. So how does the argument culture of today fit into association communication and deliberations?





Word Doctor Deborah Tannen has made it her life’s work to understand face-to-face communication — ‘language in context.’


PCMA.ORG


AUGUST 2012 PCMA CONVENE


77


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116