One of my hobbies revolves around friendly competition. Several times a year, we gather at shows in which judges evaluate our latest exhibits, place them in order of quality, and give out awards like Best in Show.Â Inevitably, the exhibitors compare notes about judges too.
This kind of talk is a two-edged sword. On the one hand, good judges help exhibitors get better at their hobby, so itâ€™s important to know whose judging to take with utmost seriousness and whose to, well, take with a grain of salt. On the other hand, as with any small group of human beings, the conversation often turns negative and personalâ€”evaluation as bitch session. â€œI donâ€™t like the way she handles the exhibitsâ€ can degenerate into â€œsheâ€™s a terrible judgeâ€ and, in some cases, â€œI donâ€™t like her.â€
In the last couple of days, a thread on this very topic has popped up on Facebook. It is remarkable for its civil, constructive toneâ€”and for that I credit the person who started the topic and how she framed it:
While at the show [last weekend], there was a discussion on judges. Who we liked to show under and who we didn’t and WHY. I personally have judges I will never show under again, and others I will travel way far to be judged by. â€¦ So, what I am asking is for everyone to take a moment and share what draws and what repulses you from judges. I am not asking for names, just qualities you are looking for. Perhaps we can all learn from this. And judges, please weigh in with your comments as well!
Dialogue experts talk a lot about framing: how we use language to present a concept so that people can discuss it without feeling threatened. Â I see several sterling examples of framing here:
- â€œI am not asking for names, just qualities.â€ Two words here signal that the conversation will not be about people. By itself, â€œI am not asking for namesâ€ could possibly have led to comments like â€œNot naming names here, but thereâ€™s one left-handed brown-haired judge from a certain part of New York whoâ€¦.â€ By asking for just qualities, our poster guided future comments into a discussion that any judge could useâ€”without putting this or that judge on the spot.
- â€œTake a moment and share.â€ Contrast this with the headline Iâ€™ve seen in local newspaper columns that print call-in comments: Sound Off! The posterâ€™s language indicates the tone desired in the comments to comeâ€”reflective, offered as one personal perspective among many, no authoritative pronouncements or pointless complaining.
- â€œPerhaps we can all learn from this.â€ The point is not to find fault, but to learn and thereby improve the hobby we all love. The word learn itself reflects a virtue I believe is essential for dialogue: humilityâ€”the ability, in this case, to recognize that we do not have all the answers.
- â€œJudges, please weigh in with your comments.â€ Â The invitation extends to both sides of the table. Judges can learn from exhibitors here (and, as a recently licensed judge, I learned a ton) and vice versa.
Good framing often yields good results, and that was certainly the case here. The conversation was long and fruitful, and Iâ€™ll bet it results in a better hobby all the way round.
Where have you seen examples of good framing like the one above? Please share your experiences here.