Business Conversations Training Course

Participants can listen actively and use questions to establish accurate understanding.

• Active listening demonstrates attention through paraphrasing, summarising and minimal encouragers
• Open questions uncover context, priorities, concerns and decision criteria
• Calibrated questions invite explanation without implying blame or predetermined answers
• Funnel questioning moves from broad context toward specific facts and commitments
• Reflecting emotions tests understanding while keeping discussion focused on issues
• Silence used deliberately to create thinking time and fuller responses

Participants can state concerns, boundaries and requests directly while preserving respect.

• Assertive communication distinguishes directness from aggression, passivity and avoidance
• I-statements express concerns, needs and boundaries without assigning motives
• DESC scripts structure difficult requests: Describe, Express, Specify, Consequences
• Plain-language messages replace hedging, jargon, qualifiers and ambiguous commitments
• Boundary statements clarify acceptable conduct, decision rights and next steps
• Tone, pace and body language aligned with the intended message

Participants can give reinforcing and corrective feedback that leads to agreed action.

• SBI feedback links Situation, Behaviour and Impact using observable evidence
• Feedforward questions focus discussion on future choices and practical support
• Positive feedback names repeatable behaviours rather than offering generic praise
• Corrective feedback addresses performance gaps, standards and required improvement
• Agreement checks confirm ownership, deadlines, support and follow-up arrangements
• Documentation distinguishes coaching notes from formal performance management records

Participants can keep difficult conversations productive when emotions or resistance arise.

• Emotional triggers identified before conversations through self-awareness and preparation
• Acknowledgement validates experience without automatically agreeing with the position
• Naming the process surfaces tension, confusion or avoidance constructively
• Reframing converts accusations into needs, concerns, facts and workable questions
• Defensive responses met with curiosity, evidence and repeated conversational purpose
• Pause protocols prevent reactive language during anger, anxiety or frustration

Participants can address disagreement through interests, options and fair decision processes.

• Thomas-Kilmann modes match competing, avoiding, accommodating, compromising and collaborating responses
• Positions separated from underlying interests, constraints, fears and priorities
• Interest-based negotiation generates options before evaluating possible agreements
• Objective criteria test proposals against policy, data, standards and precedents
• Common-ground statements identify shared outcomes before addressing disputed methods
• Escalation routes clarify unresolved decisions, authority and documented rationale

Participants can gain commitment from peers and stakeholders with competing priorities.

• Stakeholder interests translated into messages relevant to their operational priorities
• Influence maps identify decision-makers, sponsors, blockers and informal opinion leaders
• Reciprocity builds cooperation through credible support, information and practical concessions
• Evidence-based recommendations connect proposals with risks, benefits and implementation requirements
• Pre-meetings test concerns and build support before formal decision forums
• Commitment language distinguishes agreement, endorsement, consultation and accountable ownership

Participants can adapt conversation methods for virtual settings, cultural differences and hierarchy.

• Virtual meeting design assigns purpose, participation, decisions and follow-up ownership
• Camera, chat and turn-taking protocols reduce exclusion during remote discussions
• Cultural preferences explored through questions rather than assumed from nationality
• Power-distance awareness shapes challenge, disagreement and invitation to contribute
• Senior stakeholder briefings lead with decision, evidence, risk and required action
• Inclusive language checks meaning, avoids idiom and invites alternative viewpoints

Participants can conduct structured conversations about expectations, performance and development.

• Expectation-setting conversations define outcomes, standards, authority and review points
• Performance gaps examined through evidence, causes, support and accountability
• Coaching questions help employees identify options, commitments and learning needs
• GROW model structures Goal, Reality, Options and Way Forward discussions
• Difficult messages delivered early, privately and with appropriate procedural fairness
• Follow-up conversations review progress, remove barriers and reset commitments

Participants can select and apply appropriate conversation methods to priority workplace situations.

• Conversation diagnosis selects methods according to stakes, relationships and decision urgency
• Preparation sheets combine purpose, evidence, questions, requests and contingency responses
• Observer criteria assess listening, clarity, emotional control and agreed actions
• Feedback from peers identifies behavioural strengths and specific adjustment points
• Personal triggers linked to pause strategies, language choices and support needs
• Thirty-day action plans schedule priority conversations, reviews and learning reflections