Conversation Covenant Creating a psychologically safer space for impossible conversations

When discussing a controversial topic, it is easy for the discussion to become hostile and for the participants to launch ad hominem attacks, thus creating a climate of fear. Participants need to agree to a set of rules upfront that helps create a safer psychological environment to explore ideas openly.

What is a conversation covenant?

A conversation covenant is an agreement between two or more persons to abide by a set of rules when engaging in conversation.

The rules are intended to help people work in harmony to create a psychologically safer space for difficult or seemingly impossible conversations.

Credit: David Gurteen and David Creelman

What is an impossible conversation?

An impossible conversation is held on a controversial or emotive topic that feels futile because it occurs between people with radically different ideas, beliefs, moral values, or political views. Without some constraints, almost invariable, it results in hostility and shuts down dialogue. Relationships are jeopardized or even destroyed in the process.

The Covenant is not meant to eliminate emotion

It is essential to note that a covenant is not meant to eliminate passion, emotion, or even irrationality from an argument. These are natural human traits that help fuel a productive conversation. Its purpose is solely to create an environment for a productive conversation.

When might a covenant be used?

A Covenant can be used in a variety of situations.

• It could be a standard operating procedure for a whole organization, division, or department.
• It could be adopted by a project team.
• It could be an agreement between a university lecturer or professor and their students.
• It could be used by a conversational club or some regular meetings.
• It could be for a short series of meetings to discuss a complex topic.
• It could even be an agreement with yourself.

How is a Conversation Covenant created?

A Conversation Covenant is best discussed and designed collaboratively by the people involved.

How is a covenant agreed upon?

Depending on the context, a covenant may be a document — a formal written agreement — or a less formal verbal agreement. Participants in the conversation may sign the document or utter a verbal pledge to abide by its rules.

How is the Covenant enforced?

A central authority may enforce the Covenant in some contexts, such as a University professor or lecturer running a class or discussion group. In other settings, everyone may take responsibility.

Customizing the Covenant

You should customize this document for your situation. The rules listed below can be used as a template, a starting point, to create a covenant of your own, suited to your context and purpose.

We like the word “covenant”. You might prefer “agreement” or “ground rules”. We ask people to “pledge”. You might prefer “agree” or “promise”. We have many rules, and you can add, remove, or edit rules as you see fit.

The Covenant is exclusionary, but that’s OK

One of the objections to a Conversation Covenant is that it is exclusionary. It effectively says that you are not welcome if you disagree with the rules, and no one likes to be told they are not welcome. Every organization or club has rules. They could not function otherwise.

Potential members choose to join or not, but they need to abide by the rules if they do. Without the rules, members can attack each other in various ways, undermining the space’s psychological safety, instilling fear, and killing the openness and creativity of the conversation.

The Pledges

The following are suggested pledges necessary to create a safe conversational environment for discussing difficult or emotional topics.

I pledge:

1. To act in good faith.
   I will engage in good faith. I will be sincere, fair, open, and honest, regardless of the conversation’s outcome.
2. To show respect.
   I will show respect. I will be polite and give due regard to others’ feelings, wishes, rights, or traditions. I understand that I do not have to respect (admire) someone to show them respect. (See Lashon Hara.)
3. To give the benefit of the doubt.
   I will “give the benefit of the doubt” when someone says something that sounds ridiculous to me, recognizing that they may know something I don’t. I will ask them to explain in more detail rather than accusing them of being stupid. (This is sometimes called Rule Omega.)
4. To not talk behind someone’s back.
   I will never say anything behind someone’s back that I have not already spoken to their face. (See Rule Delta.)
5. To disagree constructively.
   I will refrain from name-calling and ad hominem attacks and engage in carefully reasoned arguments. (See Paul Graham’s Disagreement Hierarchy.)
6. To speak the truth.
   I won’t use rhetorical tricks to try to win an argument. I will speak what I genuinely believe is the nuanced truth.
7. To aim to discover the truth.
   I will not enter into a conversation to change anyone’s mind to my way of thinking but to learn and get close to the truth of matters jointly.
8. To focus on what we can change.
   I will focus on what we can do differently in the future since we cannot change what we did in the past. (See Marshall Goldsmith’s FeedForward process)
9. To take responsibility for the conversation.
   I will take responsibility for the quality of the conversation and the abidance of the rules, both in principle and in spirit. I will gently call out anyone I feel breaks a rule and be happy to be called out if I violate any rules myself. I will help ensure that everyone is included in the conversation.
10. To not be overly polite and apologize for things I did not say.
    I will not be overly polite and say sorry for things that I did not say.
11. To follow the Covenant, even when others fail to do so.
    I will abide by the rules regardless of whether another person breaks them. If someone launches an ad hominem attack on me, I will not take it as an excuse to respond in kind.
12. To lighten up and approach the conversation in good humor.
    I recognize that humor is a hallmark of a constructive, generative conversation and take the conversation in good humor.
13. To abide by the Chatham House Rule.
    I will abide by the Chatham House Rule. I accept that I am free to use any information I receive, but neither the identity nor the other participants’ affiliation may be revealed.
14. To not weaponize the rules.
    I will not twist or distort the rules to my advantage.

Credit: This post was jointly authored by myself and David Creelman of Creelman Research.

Resources

• Book: Difficult Conversations by Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, Sheila Heen
• Book: How to Have Impossible Conversations by Peter Boghossian and James Lindsay
• Blog Post: How A Few Simple Ground Rules Can Help Polarized Groups Hold Civil Conversations With Each Other by Nancy Dixon
• YouTube: Having a real conversation, Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying (In this video, Bret and Heather talk about the Covenant they used at Evergreen State College to allow the students in their classes to have safe conversations when discussing evolutionary biology).

Posts that link to this post

•  Together • Ensemble: Dream Big for Europe David Gurteen, Obhi Chatterjee & Julie Guégan
•  Knowledge Café Principle: Create a Safe Space Where conversation can flourish
•  Impossible Conversations Navigating conversations across ideological divides
•  Rethinking Our Beliefs It is not easy to change our beliefs
•  Conversational Leadership Framework ** A framework to help understand the concept
•  Engaging in Impossible Conversations Impossible conversations are different from difficult conversations

POST NAVIGATION

CHAPTER NAVIGATION

SEARCH