Discover how power relations are expressed through gestural discourse, the spatial arrangement of people, furniture and objects, and para-language.
Do you know how many negotiations and mediations could have been less rugged and shorter if the Semiology of Gesture had been attended to? And how many others that did not conclude happily would have reached the long-awaited good signature? The Semiology of Gesture allows us to discover the map of power that underlies all negotiation or mediation, and whose ignorance, simply, makes the art of negotiating a merely intuitive exercise.
Next, we will develop the applications of this science in the negotiation / mediation processes, starting from some concepts already established in some cases, and in others, given that as a science it is just taking shape, from concepts developed by this server. It has not been my intention to make an article with an abundance of bibliographic specks, but rather easier to read.
Index
1. Conceptual details
2. Foundations
2.1. Gestural expression as code
2.2. Warnings
3. Kinesic field
3.1. General notions
3.2. Catalog of gestural signs
3.3. Heuristic methodology: gestural maieutics.
4. Proxemic field
4.1. General notions
4.2. Personal space and social space
4.3. Relative position
5. Paralinguistic field
5.1. General notions
5.2. Elocutive relief
5.3. Reiterations
5.4. Silences
6. By way of conclusion
1. Conceptual Precisions
The Semiology of Gesture (SG) is a science in the making, fundamentally started in the United States during the 60s of the 20th century (although not with this denomination, but under the name kinesia, and with a more restricted field of study: only the gesture), and whose object of study is non-verbal discourse as a communicative unit, as a linguistic product.
Although SG is often confused with Kinesia (until recently I participated in that confusion)In my opinion, it comprises three fundamental fields of study:
1º) kinesia: it studies the gestural discourse within social life;
2nd) proxemia: it studies the attitudinal relationships expressed in the spatial distribution of people, objects and furniture; and
3rd) paralinguistics: studies the set of phonetic signs that express attitudes, such as silences, elocutive relief (variations in volume, tone and rhythm or speed), repetitions, clicks, onomatopoeia (representations by means of sounds, such as clock ticking), hisses, etc.
As can be seen, the SG does not deal with verbal discourse, with words, their relationships and meanings (linguistics deals extensively with this), but with three non-verbal aspects: the gesture-meaning relationship, the body-space relationship and the paralanguage-meaning relationship.
It remains to be added that 70% of all oral communication is encrypted non-verbally, and only the remaining 30% is verbal speech, and that, in addition, verbal speech is not reliable because it is easily falsifiable, while non-verbal speech is usually, by its unconscious origin, much more authentic.
2. Fundamentals
2.1. Gesture expression as code
Every language or code has a system made up of signs and rules, by signs that we choose and by rules that tell us how to combine those signs. The inventory of signs is technically called a paradigm, and its most typical expression is dictionaries and glossaries. The use of signs, according to some rules, is known as syntagm, and its most typical expression is prayer.
SG, from the field of kinesia, considers gestural expression as a code, composed of gestural signs and rules for their use; In this sense, each gestural sign has a meaning (particular semantics), and when meeting other signs in a gestural phrase, making kinesic syntax (connection of signs), the sum of the particular semantics gives a more global result, a more meaningful complete: kinesic semantics.
For the correct interpretation of the gestural discourse, it is necessary to gather several gestures (kinesic syntax) that point towards the same global meaning (kinesic semantics); otherwise, it will be very difficult to reach a conclusive interpretation; for example: if I ask someone if they will come to my house tomorrow, and when answering they touch the earlobe subtly, I will only have a sign whose particular semantics is 'lie or insecurity'; only when I have several gestural signs (kinesic syntax) pointing to the same meaning of 'lie or insecurity', will I have a kinesic semantics that guarantees the correct interpretation of the gestural speech.
2.2. Warnings
Experience with other people in courses, workshops and conferences, as well as my own, has confirmed that in the first contact with the SG, people become obsessed with the subject, and generate a kind of scrutinizing paranoia, which leads them to distrust all from the gestures they observe. It is important, in this regard, to make some caveats.
Extracommunication gestures. In all oral communication, there are gestural signs that do not correspond to the communication itself; For example, crossing your arms could mean rejection of the interlocutor as an intracommunication sign; but as an extra-communicational sign, it could mean that the issuer is cold (generally negotiation / mediation rooms use air conditioning systems, which would be convenient to regulate if we observe this). It is therefore necessary to specify whether the sign belongs to communication.
Gestural fillets and local gestures. Just as people speak with certain fillers, gestural speech can also be constructed with gestural fillers; Thus, for example, the touch of the nose usually means 'insecurity or a lie', but in some people it is just a catchphrase, a kind of habit without aim; on the other hand, peoples tend to have local gestures (as well as local words, called regionalisms), and these local signs are generally constructed as a synonym of existential comfort by assertively feeling like part of an idiosyncratic community; Thus, for example, arms crossed in Spain does not mean 'blockade', but social comfort; In Venezuela, crossing the ankles under the chair or in front is typical, and it does not mean 'mild block', but social comfort.
Consequently, we must detect what are those few local gestures with which we express existential comfort, and which could be naively considered negative.
Do not judge. In the training of managerial resources, we usually say that top-quality information also allows us to make top-quality decisions, and the SG can provide us with high-quality and reliable information; So, for example, if we discover in a mediation process that someone is lying, let's not judge and condemn him: let's take this information as one more piece of information, and try to investigate the cause. It is, without more, that we assume observation as a scientific act, and not as a domestic activity, in which we are susceptible to taking sides.
3. Kinesic Field
3.1. General Notions
Kinesia, as we have already said, studies gestural discourse as a macrounit, composed of smaller units that we call gestural signs. Each gestural sign has a meaning that generally expresses the receiver's attitude towards the sender's message; Thus, for example, if in a sale offer, when I arrive at the exposure of the monetary investment, if my interlocutor performs the following gestural sequence: 1st) touch of the eye, 2nd) touch of the earlobe and 3rd) touch of the nape of the neck, I will know for sure that you like the product, but not the price, so the time has come to propose the credit financing plan.
Each gesture sign in the example means 'rejection', but having a sign isn't enough for me: I need a string of signs. Each sign points to a meaning that we call particular semantics, but the particular semantics is not enough, so it is necessary to bring together several gestures with the same particular semantics, to have a more global semantics that we define as kinesic semantics or semantic field.
In the example, the three gestural signs belong to the semantic field 'rejection'. The more gestural signs a semantic field has, the fewer doubts there will be about reliability.
Clear! Sometimes there will be signs so strong that the semantic field of many more will not demand.
This chain of signs is called kinesic syntax, and its logic is rather reactive, since the sequence of gestures (effect) obeys the sequence in the speaker's speech (cause); Therefore, if in a sales talk I am mentioning the benefits of my product, it is likely that gestures of interest alternate with gestures of rejection, in which case, the skill lies in recording not only the cause-effect relationship, but also the sign-semantic field relationship.
3.2. Gesture Signs Catalog
Regarding a negotiation / mediation process, we can work on various semantic fields, organized by the antinomies of authority / service, acceptance / rejection, sincerity / insincerity.
How can knowledge of this catalog of gestures be useful to us in a negotiation or mediation process? In the first place, I must make the map of power relations, starting from the authority / service field, to know exactly how the attitudes of rivalry, dominance, collaboration or self-humiliation affect the process, which will allow me to do more pleasant, and, therefore, shorter, the negotiation. Then, I must punctually specify the expressions of rejection and acceptance, with which I can better lead the acceptance of fair treatment; finally, record the sincerity or insincerity in the questions asked, to have final assurance that the signature is not only fair, but solid, or… simply, the agreement will soon be disrespected. Of course, these three instances are not consecutive, but simultaneous.
Gestures of Authority. These are expressed from the greeting with the handshake: the palm down and the arm tense or simply semi-arched, with a certain backward tilt of the head. The force (tone) with which it is pressed reveals the character (strong, moderate or weak).
The hands crossed behind, hand in hand, reveal authority and supervision.
The warhead of power (hand against hand, touching only the fingers, like a bow, in front of the chest; similar to the gesture of prayer) expresses power, all the more when it is frequently opened. In a negotiation / mediation, the appearance of these signs reveals authority, power, in who emits them, and reveals a person prone to the role of boss (we could, in a mediation, entrust the work of a subcommittee), so that When drawing my map of power, I must be clear about whether people with gestural speech of power collide.
Service gestures. When greeting, the palm down and a certain inclination of the head. Sometimes the crossing of hands forward, hand in hand. The service warhead: instead of pointing the indexes up (as in the power warhead), they point forward or down. People with this semantic field are prone to being subordinate and have a great vocation for service, so they can be assigned tasks of collaborators.
Gestures of Acceptance and Interest. When the person looks attentively, with dilated pupils, he expresses pleasure, and therefore, acceptance. If you place your index (or index and middle finger) on your temple, you express great interest; but if combined with the thumb on the chin, it denotes interest and analysis. If you place the open palm on the cheek (not the cheek on the palm), it also means interest. When our client hears us affiliated with this semantic field, it will not be difficult to lead him to a solid firm.
Gestures of Rejection and Boredom. If in a mediation, when one party expresses certain opinions, the other party listens stroking his chin, we will be in the presence of a very critical rejection (because he is analyzing with a negative and superior attitude). If the other party discreetly touches his nose, earlobe, eyelid or neck while listening, the mediator must record this information and the cause that produced it, to be clear about the underlying knots of the conflict, and then proceed to its negotiated solution. Remember that the touch of the nose is not very reliable, as it is usually a gestural catchphrase devoid of meaning.
If the other party listens with his cheek resting on the palm of his hand, or drumming his fingers, or playing with a pen or other object, he is saying that he is bored, and perhaps it is time to do something more dynamic.
Gestures of Sincerity. Basically we only know two: the gaze held assertively and showing the palms of the hands, both signs while speaking, of course. The rest, we could say in a systemic way, the absence of insincere gestures. It is no coincidence that he swears by showing the palm of his hands.
Gestures of Insincerity and Insecurity. When a person hides their hands in their back pockets, they may be expressing insincerity or insecurity. The same, but in much less intensity, if it happens with the front pockets, only that this gesture is usually a gestural catchphrase, and, therefore, not reliable. If in a negotiation / mediation someone, when speaking, discreetly touches his nose, earlobe, eyelid or nape, he will be expressing insincerity or insecurity (be careful with the gestural catchphrase of the nose touch).
If the speaker is remembering, he should direct his gaze, like a flash (in some cases longer) to his own left; If you are creating, towards your own right, so if you are remembering, apparently, why the conflict of the boundaries started, and you look towards your own right, we will know that you are creating the past (and the past is not created, it is remembered), that is, we will know that he is lying, and that will be a piece of information for our mediation blog.
3.3. Heuristic Methodology: Gestural Maieutics.
As the reader may have imagined at the end of the previous paragraph, it is quite serious to ensure that someone is lying to us (this should not be a judgment: just a piece of information). It is important, then, to develop a heuristic (research) methodology that we call gestural maieutics (recalling Socrates), which consists of asking strategic questions to observe kinesic speech in relation to verbal speech, and to draw conclusions regarding the semantic field and its signs; for example: in a mediation, the other party has lied about supposed “friendly” conversations with the other party, ensuring that the other party always responded with violence (of course, the slandered party will get angry), and in doing so, they have touched each other only once, long, the nape: I still don't have kinesic syntax!
I then proceed to elaborate two or three questions in the style of… Are you saying that Mrs. X attacked you when you went to talk to her? Could you tell me where that conversation took place? Would you mind replaying the script from that talk from memory? If the counterpart encodes one or two more signs of insincerity, added to the first, I already have a semantic field of three signs, which is already reliable, and throws me as data to consider that the counterpart is lying, which will mean the clarification of that point to move towards an agreement.
By the way, let's never say: Aha, I know you lie because of your gestures! Or we will have a sad and unfortunate ending. Just as the electrician does not explain to us the shock of electronic and protonic charges that we produce when an appliance is misoperated, the mediator should only limit himself to invoking the so famous phrase “technical reasons for mediation”.
4. Proxemic Field
4.1. General Notions
People have a personal space, less in cities, and greater in less populated centers; consequently, when two city dwellers shake hands, they do so with their bodies about 40 or 50 cms. away, while two provincials could be about 70 or 100 cms. A woman would allow her husband to invade her personal space down to 0 cm. away, but it would not allow another man, no matter how attractive he may seem, to get closer than 15 or 20 cms. Proxemia studies how human beings relate to each other in the space that surrounds us.
Three fundamental aspects in the body-space relationship are important for proxemia:
1st) the notions of personal space and social space;
2º) the relative position in front of the others and
3rd) body directionality.
4.2. Personal Space and Social Space
We all have a personal, intimate space, which is where we let in our loved ones: very special family and friends. It varies according to the demographic density of the place where the person grew up, and the degree of trust and affection enjoyed by whoever approaches. This is the space where they tend to exert the greatest influence on us: your father approaches 25 cms. In front of you, he places his hand on your shoulder, and says: Son, I know that you will finally decide not to change careers. And suddenly… all your security and reasons about why you want to leave the architecture career to study performing arts disappears or becomes a crisis.
The social space is one, beyond the personal, where other people can function without threatening us. In general, the personal sphere is estimated to be below 100 cm, while the social sphere is beyond it. Of course, it is in this sphere that mediation / negotiation processes take place, and it is important not to violate this principle of staying outside the limits of the personal sphere. However, as a mediator, it is a healthy practice to ask the parties to greet each other, and thus, in addition to observing the kinesic map of power / service-acceptance / rejection, you will be able to observe the proxemic behavior of the parties.
4.3. Relative position
People are freely and unconsciously located in space, and with this, they express their power relations, inclusion, exclusion, rivalry, collaboration, etc., and these positions have special application in mediation / negotiation as they occur around the table, depending on the type of table.
Friendship. People usually sit at an angle, that is, not facing each other or side by side, but diagonally. This position expresses informality, fraternity and friendship. It is the most advisable for a negotiation: The next time you invite your client to a business lunch (surely the restaurant table will be square), do not sit in front of her, but diagonally, and you will see better results.
Collaboration. It is the position of elbow to elbow, side by side, and expresses collaboration, interest in doing a common task. In a negotiation, do not advance to this position, if you have not been given signs of doing so, or you will spoil the process. Stay at an angle position, until you see that you can stand to the side: for example, ask: do you want us to go through the pre-agreement line by line? (Yeah) do you mind if I sit by your side? The answer will guide you.
Competition. It is the face-to-face posture. Unfortunately, it is the most typical of business lunches. It generates a powerful territorial division expressed on the table (the salt shaker and the napkin holder will always be on the dividing line). If you have no choice but to sit like this, and must pass work materials to the other party, do not deposit it in the territory of your opponent, but in the dividing line, and let the other person introduce it into your field.. If you do not attend to this, you will soon have a cranky customer, without knowing why.
Tables. Tables profoundly affect the dynamics of a negotiation / mediation process. A square table generates closed and hyper-formal groups, in addition to being very competitive and rivals. A rectangular table generates hierarchical, closed and very formal groups. A round table generates open, cooperative and informal groups. Of course! The ideal table for a negotiation or mediation is the circular. In spite of this, make your kinesic and proxemic map of the part and counterpart, and after you have it clear, just let them decide your location: give it to them by redesigning a much more harmonious power map; This will prevent the employer and the union member from always sitting face to face… even if the table is round. And don't be fooled by the new trends in furniture design: ask yourself: does this table look like a square one,rectangular or round?
Chairs. The size of the chairs reflects the status. In a mediation, everyone should have the same type of chair, including the mediator. Note that it is typical for companies that the boss's chair is a very tall and wide chair, while the chair in front (that of the employee or client) is usually small, low and uncomfortable. It all depends on what you are looking for! But… maybe there would be less conflict with clients if we give them a comfortable, tall and wide chair that elevates their status, even if it is in appearance.
Objects. On and around the negotiating / mediation table there should be no elevating objects of the mediator / negotiator's status; for example, a Bohemian crystal ashtray, or a gold-plated fountain pen, or an authentic Picasso. It is a factor that will inevitably introduce noise in the process, and can make the arrival of the agreement more disharmonious. Instead, put a simple ashtray, use an ordinary pen, and put a lithograph, or a family photograph.
5. Paralinguistic field
5.1. General Notions
When we construct an oral text, there is more than just words: there are variations in volume, tone, speed, repetitions, silences, that is, an added value to the word, where the intentional character and the emotional value of the word are mostly expressed. a message. We could basically talk about three aspects: elocutive relief, reiterations and silences.
5.2. Elocutory relief
It corresponds to variations in volume (when a phrase is strong or weak), pitch (when a phrase is high or low) and rhythm (when a phrase is fast or slow). Combinations of these three variations yield a whole range of meanings; thus, a strong, sharp and fast phrase is usually claiming, while only strong and slow is imperative, and a weak, slow and serious phrase is usually reflective. In mediation, this approach can be useful to persuade the parties of the need to understand and respect the other's position.
5.3. Reiterations
The reiterations express the desire to fix a content, and can be accompanied by elocutive relief, enunciating the phrase the first time in an imperative tone, while the second time, in a reflective tone. It is particularly useful when the negotiator / mediator wants to ensure that certain content is not accidentally, or intentionally, forgotten.
5.4. Silences
The silences enhance the forcefulness of a phrase that follows them, as well as favoring the memorial work of the parties; thus, it can be useful for a mediator / negotiator to make marked silences before certain key parts in a work instruction or in an ethical reflection. The reader will feel a great difference between these two ways of saying the same phrase by Gracián: 1) The good, if brief, twice as good; 2) The good… yes brief!… twice good.
6. By way of Conclusion
We have made a very brief tour of the three fields of study of the SG:
1st) the kinesic field, which deals with gestures and their meanings;
2nd) the proxemic field, which deals with the power relations expressed in the body-space relationship; and
3rd) the paralinguistic field, which deals with non-segmental phonetic elements, that is, intonation, volume, rhythm, reiterations and silences.
All of this applied to the processes of negotiation (two parties that negotiate) and mediation (two parties that negotiate under the tutelage of a mediator).
The reader may have noticed that 70% of all communication is non-verbal, which means that if we know the SG, and can decode it, our errors and mistakes would be drastically reduced when conducting a negotiation / mediation. Unfortunately, press releases on famous negotiation or mediation processes seem to show long and winding paths towards the long-awaited signing of the agreement.
On the other hand, many conflicts could be settled when they are just in their insipient stage, if we knew and applied not only in the communicational habits of the highest spheres, but there, where the conflicts that steal our health usually start: in our work environment, social, family, etc.
Let us end by saying that life is the largest and most complex negotiation, and sometimes mediation, that we can know; For this reason, it will be good to follow the recommendation of the expert in kinesics and proxemics Allan Peace: “… knowledge of non-verbal forms of communication serves to turn the encounter with another person into an interesting experience”.
Referential Notes
Peace, Allan: The language of the body. Caracas, Planet, p. 11.
Alayón g., Jerónimo: Theory of Communicating Leadership - Part I. Background and Introduction. Caracas, 2004.
Kinesic Syntax and Kinesic Semantics are terms of my creation.
End of my creation.
Peace, ob. cit., pp. 36 et seq.
End of my creation.
Peace, ob. cit., pp. 144 et seq.
