[tchaffee]

In a waiting culture people almost never talk at length like that. They are eager to listen to other ideas. In fact, meetings are usually shorter.

It's also less stressful. And I almost never hear the kind of skeptical sarcasm you're using here. Both of which are nice.

[kansface]

Both modes are subject to failures. Waiting is subject to live locks and interrupting is subject to thrashing. The socially maladroit or power tripper will misuse or abuse either system.

[tchaffee]

Yes, of course there is no silver bullet. The point is that the parent comment thinks only an interupting culture can work which anyone who has worked in a functional waiting culture knows is false.

There are pros and cons to both approaches. My personal experience has been that waiting cultures are more efficient at communication and get more work done. It would be interesting to see what actual instead of anecdotal data would show.

[c0mptonFP]

Could you tell me more about your experiences with effective waiting culture?

I'm having a hard time believing that a e.g. a high-level manager/exec with 20 meetings per day, and a 60 hour work week is able to be on time with a purely waiting approach.

There are so many people that you need to align with this culture. If it worked for you, wherever you are, I respect that a lot.

[tchaffee]

The detail it deserves doesn't fit in an HN comment. But I'll drop some observations here. You really need to experience it to get it though. Body language and so many other nuances all come into play in any communication style.

I'll suggest that it's the interruption culture itself that is motivating the tendency for monologues.

When an executive regularly says "John please let Mary finish, I wanted to hear the rest of her thoughts" it sends at least two signals:

1. The obvious that interrupting is not welcome here. 2. The less obvious but easy enough to figure out that listening is valued. The vast majority of folks are smart enough to figure out that a monologue is just as unwelcome as interruptions in a culture where listening is valued.

At the the end of the day what everyone wants is a dialog. In a non-interupting culture folks tend to pass the baton far quicker which takes the place that interruptions used to serve. Once people understand that they will get uninterrupted time to speak, they relax and aren't so desperate to get everything out all at once before someone interrupts and shuts them down.

Imagine a manager who tells you that she can give you 30m max, no interruptions. That's a lot of trust and responsibility they've put on you. You pretty quickly figure out how to make effective use of that time, and it's for sure not a monologue.

And it's also manageable over a series of meetings. It's easy enough for a manager to start a meeting with "Kevin, please hold off your thoughts until the end of the meeting because we heard mostly from you last meeting".

People catch on very quickly if it's coming from the top. Which it almost always has to.