Really interesting, especially if you are studying this topic for school. Thank you to NetGalley and the publisher for an ARC. #sponsored

This book was awesome! It laid out how not only how vital communication is, but why it is so important and how to best utilize it. Incredibly easy to read and understand. It’s more beneficial than just a regular self help book. This book can help individuals, organizations, families, companies, etc!

Few people may be born super communicators — but we can all become better at having meaningful and productive conversations. This book offers invaluable guidance.

One of the key points I take from it is the importance of recognizing the kind of conversation you’re having. Are you talking about what’s going on? Or is it a conversation about emotions, or identity? Mismatches here undoubtedly lead to many of life’s frustrations.

The book has inspired me to recognize and inhabit different conversations differently.

As I’ve mentioned in previous reviews, books classified under the “self-help” category can be very much a hit or miss for me. This is partly because overall, it already takes me longer to read nonfiction books and with so many books on my TBR, the time pressure can be quite palpable. More significantly though, when the book contains a “self-help” element, I feel even more pressure to actually “get” something out of the book in order for me to feel like it was worth my while to read. This last part depends a lot on how the “self-help” element is presented, which could go in either the “yes, this resonates with me” or “no, most of this doesn’t apply to me” direction (of course I always hope for the former).

In this case, Charles Duhigg’s newest book Supercommunicators definitely fell into the “resonant” category for me, even though I will admit that I was a tad hesitant about the subject matter at first. I actually decided to pick up this book not because of the subject (believe me, as an introvert with social anxiety who prefers to be alone rather than be around others, reading about how to better communicate is the last thing I want to do, lol), but rather because I had really enjoyed Duhigg’s The Power of Habit (which was massively popular when it first came out in 2012) and so was hoping to find more of the same. While I have to say that this book turned out to be quite different from the habit book in terms of scope and topic, there were some similarities that made it as enjoyable and interesting a read as that one. First and foremost, I like that the book is written in a straightforward, easy to understand way, with practical, real world examples that felt both realistic and familiar. I also like how he formatted the book (similarly to his habit book) where he would structure each chapter around a case study and present details that tied the study to the particular concept he was discussing. Most of all though, I like the journalistic format where it felt at times that I was reading a series of well-written articles (the type of long-form story-like narratives often found in newsmagazines) — of course this is not surprising given that Duhigg is a Pulitzer Prize winning reporter / journalist (and yes, he writes for newsmagazines in addition to newspapers).

For me, one of the things that can be a “deal-breaker” when I read self-help books is the author’s tone, which comes across in their style of writing. Personally, I can’t stand self-help books that make me feel like I’m being lectured or talked down to or that subtly imply that I’m missing out if I don’t apply the concepts from the book right then and there. I’m the type of person who needs to let concepts and ideas sink in slowly and gradually before I can derive meaning from them, so I’m not keen on books that feel pushy or overly-preachy. Duhigg writes in a way where his enthusiasm for the subject shines through, but there’s also enough neutrality and restraint where it doesn’t feel like he’s trying to push me toward one direction or another (at least not overtly anyway, lol). He also writes with a sense of humor, which I always appreciate, especially in nonfiction books.

Even though some of the concepts covered in this book I felt wouldn’t necessarily apply to me, there was plenty that I resonated with…and to me surprise, one of the concepts that Duhigg advocated in the book was something I was already doing for years — I guess I was applying “super communicator” techniques without even knowing it!

This is a book that fans of Duhigg’s works will undoubtedly enjoy. Even if you’re not a fan though, there’s still plenty to enjoy. If you’ve read The Power of Habit , the structure of the book will definitely be recognizable (and if you liked that one, most likely this one will appeal as well). I just found out that Duhigg also wrote a book on productivity and few years after the habit one — I’m definitely interested in checking that book out at some point!

Received ARC from Random House via NetGalley.

This book gets a solid three stars. It is informative, and the points it makes are valid and helpful, absolutely; but it does go on a bit too much with the anecdotal examples of proving the points being made. There are three main parts of the book (= the 3 important aspects to understanding conversations), and toward the end of each section, I found myself impatiently waiting to just get through it and move on. The points were interesting and the first few stories or examples were interesting to demonstrate the effectiveness of the suggestion. But in general, this could have been shorter. Another reason for the "low" rating is because it wasn't the most engaging in its writing style, it was too easy to put down and disengage.
Pros: the main points made seem valid and helpful, some examples of using those points were interesting
Cons: it went on too much discussing those points and was written in a dry manner

I want to thoroughly thank NetGalley for this ARC and the opportunity to read this book. This review will be published on Goodreads on March 5, 2024.

Fantastic look at how the most effective communicators work and how to emulate them. Truly a fascinating read and one that gives lots of practical advice for communicating better in your personal and professional lives. The anecdotes range from spies recruiting agents to a Hollywood writer's room to a Harvard longitudinal study...so many interesting people are interviewed and their stories are all fascinating!

Let me acknowledge the obvious that still may need to be said: This is NOT the Power of Habit. People who want it to be, be warned.

What it is a really good look at what makes some people shine and some people fizzle.

As a reformed fizzler, I'm here for it. I learned something, and while I expected to highlight more, I DID highlight, and that counts for something.

I've left many other books not being able to say the same.

Duhigg is a nonfiction mega-writer, and while it may not be the runaway that Habit was, it's still good.

3.9, rounded.

I received an advance review copy for free, and I am leaving this review voluntarily.

I was really excited to read Charles Duhigg's Supercommunicators as I am always fascinated by the ways in which people interact with one another. While there were some good examples depicting the various types of communications that Duhigg was trying to highlight, there were some that I feel equally missed the mark. Some of the stories felt dated and not particularly relevant for the current time. While none of the material was new to me, it was presented in a well written, clear and concise manner. What I would have liked to see were examples that walked the reader through a potential conversation using each technique that was taught; the book is good on the why and how, but falls short on the do. Overall a good book, especially for those who are new to learning communication skills,

As a sales professional, I have heard the importance of mirroring and matching when building rapport with a prospect. Often, the approach of matching actually created the opposite of the desired result. Leave it to Charles Duhigg to take the approach to a deeper and more effective level.

Understanding the 3 types of conversations is critical in the actual art of communication. This book is full of ideas to recognize the type of conversation being had, how to develop the conversation beyond surface level, and how to truly connect with people ... even during difficult, high risk topics.

This is a must read ... and study ... for anyone looking to improve their ability to communicate. Which is arguably, one of the most critical skill to develop in today's complex world.

This is my new go to book for work place communication!!
The information in this book was a great read and applicable to real life. Such an amazing tool everyone should have in their tool box.

Thank you to NetGalley and Random House Publishing Group for the advanced copy.

According to a research by Sievers and his co-authors, individuals with high centrality are more likely to adjust their brain activity to the group and play a major role in fostering group alignment by promoting discourse. They guide others gently, prodding them to listen to one another or provide clearer explanations of who they are. They encourage others to match them by matching the conversational tenor of their groupmates, creating space for humour or seriousness.

Somehow this book reveals that there's a skill for everything we do, no matter how negligible it looks. As for communication, the author has done superbly well in writing this piece, kudos, it worth's a read.

SUPERCOMMUNICATORS by Charles Duhigg (The Power of Habit and Smarter, Faster, Better); describes "How to Unlock the Secret Language of Connection." Duhigg, a Pulitzer Prize–winning investigative journalist and author, writes that this book "is an attempt to explain why communication goes awry and what we can do to make it better. At its core are a handful of key ideas." He continues by describing three kinds of conversations (practical or decision-making; emotional; and social) which he says primarily addresses one of three broad questions: What's this really about? How do we feel? Who are we? Duhigg stresses that we need be more skilled at determining which type of conversation is occurring and then also in applying the different skills needed for each. I found myself thinking about this recently when talking to a friend and was able to ask a version of "Do you want me to help you solve this problem, or just listen?" After several years of studying the topic, Duhigg believes that anyone can become a super communicator and can have more meaningful discussions or "learning conversations." First step: ask yourself "Why am I opening my mouth?" He acknowledges that this is very difficult and employs real-life examples to illustrate several rules in a well-organized series of guides. To gain a better overview, see an essay (link below) by Duhigg that outlines his thinking, particularly about listening, sharing, and connecting (recently published in The Wall Street Journal). SUPERCOMMUNICATORS received a starred review from Publishers Weekly. Much advice worthy of reflection, perhaps in conjunction with David Brooks' How to Know a Person. 4.5 stars

LINK: https://www.wsj.com/lifestyle/how-to-become-a-supercommunicator-4d97dd5d

This was well-reasoned and explained clearly. I love the idea of being able to identify the type of conversation that each participant wants to have. I found my mind wandering a lot while reading. Perhaps the medium prevented me from really connecting with the material. I read this in ebook format, and I think an actual book might work better for me.

***Thank you to Randon House and NetGalley for the ARC!

Short, well paced, and well written from a technical standpoint. However, all of the examples of "supercommunicators" felt shallow and repetitive, never really presenting innovative solutions posited in the blurb. Thank you to NetGalley and the publisher for the free advance copy.

This was such a good book! I loved the characters, and their story. The dialogue was realistic and enjoyable. I was very surprised by the ending!

Charles Duhigg’s Supercommunicators impressed the heck out of me. This book is an exploration not just about communication but also how to connect with people. We all know that one person who is easier to talk to than others, that we trust, that we turn to, that we always feel better after talking to. Ever wonder why that is? Why is that person easier to talk to than everyone one else, why do you trust them so much? Ever wanted to be more like that person? Charles does a wonderful job of exploring the subject in a way that is easy to comprehend. This is a book I’ll definitely be rereading. Not only that, but I enjoyed Duhigg’s style so much I’ve already picked up another of his books: The Power of Habit and am looking forward to diving into it. I’d like to thank Random House Publishing Group and NetGalley for the opportunity to read and review an eARC of Supercommunicators.

https://www.amazon.com/review/RKDWLSW1XNG17/ref=pe_1098610_137716200_cm_rv_eml_rv0_rv

“whether we call it love, or friendship, or simply having a great conversation, achieving connection—authentic, meaningful connection—is the most important thing in life.”

This is a really insightful book on how we can better communicate with others. Duhigg uses lots of research studies and real life examples from places like Netflix, a jury room, The Big Bang Theory, NASA, and the CIA to show the principles in action.

By looking at typically controversial conversations on topics like gun control, vaccines, and race, we can see how employing these principles really changes the dialogue and allows people who normally disagree to understand each other and bring meaningful connection where we desperately need it.

With the increase of internet use we see a decrease in civil discourse. Everywhere you look you see hatred, people talking past each other, and a complete disregard for people’s humanity, values, and experiences. It’s all about winning, shaming, or forcing belief assimilation by threatening social reputation calamity if you don’t.

I think every human should read this book. We may not be able to change the world, but it will do a lot to make our relationships better and stronger and will help us be people who desire and can put into practice peace and consideration in our conversations in a highly polarized environment.

(Plus it’s just really interesting!)


That’s why Duhigg ultimately wrote this book.

“Why was it that, at times, I had so much trouble hearing what someone was trying to tell me? Why was I so quick to get defensive, or to glide past the emotions people were clearly trying to share? Why, sometimes, did I talk so much and listen so little? Why hadn’t I understood when a friend needed comfort rather than advice? How could I put my kids aside when they so clearly wanted to be with me? Why did I struggle to explain what was inside my own head? These struck me as meaningful questions, worthy of exploration, and I wanted answers.”

Research that studied people over decades of time (that has been replicated in other studies) shows that one of the main factors correlated to a long and happy life is deep connections with family and friends.

How do deep connections happen but in meaningful conversations and communications.


The biggest takeaway from this book is to use these principles to make deeper connections and to see the humanity and hear the experiences of those we disagree with.


“Over the past two decades, a body of research has emerged that sheds light on why some of our conversations go so well, while others are so miserable. These insights can help us hear more clearly and speak more persuasively.”

The principles he talks about in this book are not just for familial relationship or just for the workplace. They can be universally applied. Some of them were new to me and others I’ve read in other books or heard from my own therapist and I can attest that they do make a difference when I use them.

The principles can be broken down into three major areas:

- What’s This Really About? (practical, decision-making conversations)
- How Do We Feel? (emotional conversations)
- Who Are We? (social conversations that involve our identities)

Conversations are fluid so these may overlap in a conversation as you get deeper. But if we aren’t ‘in’ the same conversation as the person we’re talking to, we’re not going to make a connection and we’re not going to get very far before things start to devolve.


It’s no surprise that to communicate well requires listening, asking questions, and talking about our feelings.

“to become a supercommunicator, all we need to do is listen closely to what’s said and unsaid, ask the right questions, recognize and match others’ moods, and make our own feelings easy for others to perceive.”

In this book Duhigg gives some guidelines on what kinds of questions are helpful and what kinds aren’t. For example:

“Questions about facts (“Where do you live?” “What college did you attend?”) are conversational dead-ends. They don’t draw out values or experiences. They don’t invite vulnerability. However, those same inquiries, recast slightly (“What do you like about where you live?” “What was your favorite part of college?”), invite others to share their preferences, beliefs, and values.”

We may hear ‘share our feelings’ and bristle about what that means or looks like, but when you read the examples in the book it’s not so bad and it turns conversations of small-talk (which no one really likes) into conversations that actually move someplace.

I also liked that after each chapter he included a section called ‘A Guide to Using These Ideas’ that reiterated the points he had made earlier and what it would look like in real conversation. There were often graphs to illustrate as well.

The flow of the book was easy to follow and I thought he used a lot of really interesting research studies and case-studies to exemplify each point which keeps those engaged who don’t typically enjoy psycholgoical concepts.



There are aspects of this topic that feel borderline manipulative, especially when we think of negotiations or persuading someone. One example he uses is about vaccinations (which may put some people off). He talks about a doctor who had patients that were anti-vaxxers and he struggled with communicating to them the reasons and data as to why they should vaccinate their children.

He realized it wasn’t necessarily about the facts, but about their mistrust of doctors or their resistance to government control. He found that when he made personal connections and they were able to see him as a father too, not just a doctor, and when he set aside his tendency to think or talk in a way that says ‘I’m smarter than you’, they were more willing to hear his advice.

I get that, but I also feel like knowing someone is figuring out the best way to persuade you also makes you feel distrustful about their motivations. Which is why, though I’m not anti-vax, I opted not to do the Covid vaccine.

They claimed data, but it was still new and long-term data was not available. Not only was the ‘choice’ framed in a way that made it seem like taking the vaccine was the only choice and the absolute right choice, but that anyone who chose not to didn’t care about humanity.

While I’m willing to consider that the vaccine may have helped, I’m not convinced. And the sheer force and condescension that went along with it does not help someone trust but feels rather like manipulation.

I admit that distrust is often hard to overcome and not all persuasion is manipulation or immoral, but I just think that some of these conversations might start to feel that way. Playing to emotions to convince someone to trust you.

So an essential component to all of this is genuine care and concern and desire to know someone, not creating a good communication as a means to an end.



This labeling of groups of people (as above) is another major component of communication. And I think that comes into play most prominently in political discourse.

I think this tactic has been employed by both right and left-wing groups and only keeps people polarized.

“Over the last decade, the number of Americans who say they are “deeply angry” at the other political party has increased sharply, to almost 70 percent of the electorate. Roughly half the nation believes those with differing political beliefs are “immoral,” “lazy,” “dishonest,” and “unintelligent.””

It goes like this: you think that one thing? Then you are this kind of person and all these other things are true about you.

For example: I saw on a book review Facebook group a person shared the book Irreversible Damage by Abigail Shrier and commented that they thought it was a thought-provoking and alarming book. I read the book and think the same thing, but I knew the comments section would have some dissenters. I was shocked by the things people were saying about the person who shared it. They called the person hateful, demanded they be blocked, that this person was what was wrong with the world and more of the same vitriol. They placed this person in a group called ‘Hateful, evil bigot’ simply because they shared their opinion of a book that happens to contain beliefs they don’t share. They didn’t know anything about this person’s values, emotions, or experiences.

And to offer an example from ‘the other side’: Someone shares that they believe abortion should be a legal right. You will see people commenting that that person is a murderer and that they hate Jesus and don’t believe in the sanctity of human life. That also puts them in a group without any knowledge of that person’s values, emotions, or experiences.

Good communication is not really about proving yourself right, but about seeing the people you’re talking to as human beings with their own values, emotions, and life experiences that we should seek to understand. It diffuses a controversial conversation and helps you see them as the complex and nuanced person they are, not a one-dimensional caricature or stereotype.

“Identity threats typically emerge because we generalize: We lump people into groups (“Lawyers are all dishonest”) or assign them traits they loathe (“Everyone who voted for that guy is a racist”). These generalizations take us—our unique perspectives and complicated identities—out of the conversation. They make us one-dimensional.”

Tribal mentality and in-group, out-group psychology is proven stuff and hard at work in our cultural climate. We can’t help but group and label people, trusting and thinking highly of those who share our beliefs or look like us and mistrusting and looking down on those who do not.


Duhigg shares an experiment people conducted to see if people on both sides of the gun control debate could be in a room and have civil conversation. Long story short- they could! When they shared about vulnerable parts of their lives and heard and saw each other as human beings, even though they didn’t change their minds, they changed HOW they communicated with one another. The other side was no longer ‘evil’ but were good people just like us that wanted good things too. There was just disagreements on how those good things would come to be.

“They think listening means debating, and if you let someone else make a good point, you’re doing something wrong. But listening means letting someone else tell their story and then, even if you don’t agree with them, trying to understand why they feel that way.”


I do think there are some limitations here. In a lot of conversations decisions have to be made and laws need to be written. At some point we have to come to an agreement. We have to determine what is true or right.

If we’re just making connections with people to gain understanding and learn about them, there are no stakes or decisions. But we still have to make decisions about who can own guns or who can get married and not all viewpoints are equal.

This is where I start to have questions. As I read this book I pondered-

What is ‘understanding’?

I would argue that understanding doesn’t require agreement but I think perhaps we operate out of a different definition of understanding than we think. I think a lot of people don’t feel understood unless someone ends up agreeing with them- ‘They must have misunderstood me or I must have said it wrong if they still don’t agree with me, because if they really understood, they would see why I’m right or why this is true.’

What does it look like to come to an understanding when the topics being discussed are identity conversations and the disagreeing parties are approaching the topic with very different worldviews and standards of morality?

How do we move forward in good conversation if we listen to people’s feelings but their feelings are based on lies?

And I think I’m reaching outside the scope of this book, especially since I am trying to look at this information through a biblical lens which is not what the author was attempting to do. But definitely gives you some things to think about.



A couple things that stood out to me because I’ve used them in my own marriage are looping and narratives.

A woman enrolled at Harvard Law school shared that she realized that the purpose of talking about conflict wasn’t about winning but determining “why this fight has emerged and what is fueling it, as well as the stories they are all telling themselves about why this conflict persists.”

‘The stories they are telling themselves’ is such a big but subtle thing. An example from my personal life- My husband looks at the dinner I made and says ‘is this what it usually looks like?’

The story I tell myself, which is rooted in my own insecurities about being a good wife, is that my husband is criticizing the meal I worked hard to make and doesn’t appreciate what I’ve done and thinks it’s a bad meal. That’s the narrative I tell myself and then respond from. Is that going to go well? No.

I have to realize that I’ve created that narrative and need to evaluate if it’s true or reasonable. Turns out, he was not feeling any type of way about me making a good or bad supper but was genuinely wondering what was different about it. The conversation looks a lot different, right?

Paired with this is the importance of looping which is listening and then proving we have listened by repeating back to them what they just told us but in our own words.

This brings clarity and understanding and gets everyone having the same conversation. It also builds trust because the person won’t feel like the ‘listener’ was just trying to come up with their own rebuttal but was genuinely processing what they were hearing so that they are all dealing with the right information and feelings.

If I had used this method with the above example (which I didn’t), it could have looked like this: “What I’m hearing you say is that you don’t like what I made and you’re frustrated that I don’t make you better meals.” Then he can say, “No, I really appreciate that you’ve made supper and it looks good, I just thought it looked different and wondered if there was a different ingredient in it.”

Hopefully looping looks more accurate then this, but even though I wasn’t hearing what he was really saying, by telling him what I heard, he can correct my understanding. Plus I’ve shared my feelings which alerts him that we’ve moved from a practical conversation to one that deals with both feelings and identities and we need to adapt and address those things because the meal isn’t really what the conversation is about.



A Couple Other Takeaways

He offers four things to keep in mind when communicating online and these should pop up every time someone opens up a comment box:
- Overemphasize politeness.
- Underemphasize sarcasm.
- Express more gratitude, deference, greetings, apologies, and hedges.
- Avoid criticism in public forums.


We could also get into a conversation about freedom of speech and tolerance. I can’t help but plug the book “The Coddling of the American Mind” which talks about that very subject on university campuses where people were not allowed to come speak on campus because students thought their beliefs were hateful.

If communication requires being heard then we have to allow for freedom of speech. Diversity in thought is a good thing to have healthy and intelligent debate. If we were all homogeneous in our beliefs it would probably mean we were under Communist rule and not allowed to believe anything different.

Understanding does not require agreement in belief. It requires the ability to be heard; it requires a sense of humility; and it requires a tolerance for another’s differing beliefs.


When conversations start to devolve it is often as a result of one person trying to control it too much by making spoken or unspoken rules about what the other person is allowed to say, feel, do. They tried to control their language and their behavior- ‘don’t use that tone, don’t roll your eyes, don’t walk away, etc.’

“If we focus on controlling the right things in an argument—if we focus on controlling ourselves, our environment, and the conflict itself—fights morph into conversations.”

Self-control and self-awareness are key to good communications.


And lastly, though it’s been said, it bears repeating- ask questions. Good questions. Questions that tap into someone’s values, emotions, or experiences.



Recommendation

I recommend this book for all people.

It will help you have more meaningful conversations and avoid small-talk. It will help you ‘argue’ with your spouse or siblings better. It will help you diffuse controversial conversations. And it will help you start to see people as complex human beings who desire to be heard and considered rather than ignored and talked over or denied entrance altogether.

It’s not going to solve all the disagreements, convince people to change their minds, or establish world peace, but it will hopefully change your perspective of conversations and your part in them.

[I would also recommend this book to authors who write about negotiators because I think it would help flesh out a character study and dialogue options for conversations in the book.]

It’s pretty short so it’s a quick read as well!

Incredibly interesting!
Written in a way that is accessible and engaging!
Fantastic practical applications!
Useful breakdowns/graphics that you can take to remember the key points.

I would recommend this to many people, and could see it being used in professional and personal development.

I really enjoyed reading this book. It was well written and I connected with a lot of the stories he shared. One of the stories was about a being on a jury which was fascinating to see how that played out. Another one was the writers working to get The Big Bang Theory show to work with the concept of the show they wanted. I was interested in the stories about the doctor and vaccine conversations and lastly the story about Netflix and it's company culture. I thought the book had a lot of great advice and it was presented in a way that it can easily be followed. I liked the afterward and how it shared that in the end it's about talking to people and being willing to hear them out and share a little about yourself. The concept of the three conversations (practical, emotional and social) is something I will be thinking about some more. This is a book that I will be working through and will continue to improve my communication skills.

Thank you to Random House and NetGalley for the advance copy in exchange for an honest review.

This was a very interesting and thought provoking insights on effective communication and what makes a person exceptional when it comes to connecting with others even through difficult conversations. It goes over the science of tools and techniques that can be used in real life, how it can be applied practically and the scientific study of each. It circles around 3 questions / concepts: "What's this really about?", "How Do We Feel?", and "Who Are We?".

I like the story telling style used and it eases up on the very straightforward approach of just laying out the studies and information. This is very informative and highly recommended for anyone who wants to improve their communication skills.