Do You Balance Initiating and Responding?

Picture this: you go to a dinner party and see an old friend you haven’t seen in months. You approach him and shake his hand, greeting him, “Hi Tom”.

What then?

Do you ask “how’ve you been?” Or do you wait for him to ask “how’ve you been?”

Interesting question, eh? Do you initiate or do you respond?

An initiator would “throw the ball” first. A respondent would wait and “catch what’s thrown”. Not that doing either is particularly positive or negative…it’s just an important feature of your communication style to pay attention to.

Let’s take another example: Jack comes home after work and Susan greets him as he comes into the kitchen. They say “hi, honey” to each other and then there is a pause. Now the stage is set for someone to be an initiator and someone to be a respondent. Jack has had an upsetting day in that he lost an important account. However, he is not initiating conversation about this, even though his unhappy mood is evident. Susan can sense his mood, but Jack’s reluctance to share his disappointment places Susan in the role of initiator. She breaks the silence and asks, “how was your day?” Jack is now in the role of respondent, and if he is not comfortable with where the conversation will most likely go and how he may wind up regarding Susan’s questions as intrusive, he might resist being honest with her about his disappointment or get irritated with her. But notice – he’s placed himself in the very role which will probably lead to his dissatisfaction.

Sometimes I sit in a discussion group and don’t offer a single comment during the entire hour. You can bet I go home frustrated with myself for not speaking up, not offering something. This ever happen to you? There’s nothing worse than wanting to contribute to the conversation but somehow feeling an inner reluctance or self-consciousness about speaking up that prevents you from sharing your point of view.

Sometimes we have to press ourselves to be an initiator and move through our discomfort to speak up. Many times it will feel like a big thing to do so, but it’s really not that big. It’s just big and daunting to us when we’re in that space.

Many folks I know are probably more comfortable operating as a respondent than as an initiator. It’s easy to be the respondent…you just “swing at what’s thrown at you”. However, being primarily a respondent means you’re not in charge of the conversation – you’re following, not leading, the conversation. As a communication style it’s positive in that it shows you’re receptive to listening to the other person and considering what they’re saying, but it doesn’t let you have much opportunity to offer your own opinions and perspectives on things. I’ll never forget when I was a Township Supervisor here in my community and I asked our municipal lawyer what I might do to increase my effectiveness at our monthly public meetings. He said “be the first Board member to speak when residents ask the Board questions. It puts you in charge of the conversation and establishes you as an authority. That helps the residents develop confidence in you”. That was one of the most helpful comments he ever gave me.

Many times you’ll find you get locked into one way of interacting and primarily engage in having conversations that way.  The drawbacks to this kind of one-sided relating are that:

• Initiator types initiate all the time and wind up not leaving room for others to offer their perspectives.
• Respondent types respond all the time and wind up appearing like they don’t have personal positions and perspectives…sort of identity-less.

I think it’s important to develop both styles of interacting and to work toward having balance in this arena. You want to be known as someone who is a good listener and also someone who has the energy to establish the topic of conversation and move forward with it. Think about it – do I balance being an initiator and being a respondent?