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.

This is an incrediby interesting deep dive into how the most effective among us communicate. Hint: it's not just through talking, but through listening--sharing, really, in a process that is intended to benefit both parties to the conversation. Fascinating!

Read it. Just read it. Whether you are a working professional or stay at home parent this book is for you. It helped me refine my skills and I truly felt it helped me land my huge promotion at work. loved it!
I just reviewed Supercommunicators by Charles Duhigg. #NetGalley

This is a fantastic book that everyone needs to read. Particularly in the divisive and judgemental world that we are currently living in, the ability to communicate is more important than ever. This book not only gives information that is easy to understand and assimilate, the examples and case studies cited are fascinating and relevant to our lives today. I sped through every chapter, and look forward to being able to use this information in my own life. Thanks to Netgalley and Random House for the advance digital copy!

*thank you to NetGalley and Random House for a copy of this eARC in exchange for my review*

This is one of the most fascinating books on communication I’ve ever read. And Charles Duhigg wrote it out of curiosity? That’s my kind of book.

To put it plainly, all of us could use a lesson in how to avoid communication breakdowns, and it starts with how we think about and approach our own patterns of communication. This book unites problem-solving research with colorful anecdotes and relevant examples. Duhigg wastes no time in getting right to the heart of what works and what doesn’t. And I won’t lie—I was super challenged by some of his findings. Even as a communications professional myself, there is so much room to grow.

If you’re interested in improving how you connect with the people around you, and (as the author puts it) unlocking the secret language of communication, don’t wait to read this one. It’s honestly riveting. Give it a go.

(Will share on Instagram @alwreads on release day)

I think the premise of this book and much of the information contained it was very important and helpful. The idea of supercommunicators and the skills and practices that make them was intuitive in a sense, but Duhigg also presented new insights in this regard. I also liked his ideas of the three different types of conversations and how to best communicate in each was different. All that being said, I think for at least 2/3 of this book, I would rate it very highly. However, for the final third or so I felt like the book took on subject matter and delved into areas of communication that have been covered better in other books that I have read. These parts dragged on a bit for me, which is why I ultimately did not rate this book higher. Still, there is great information and new insights here that I think make this a solid read.

4.5 — Not sure if I picked this book up to assess my level of communication, learn tips for improvement, better understand communication discourse, or enjoy the appealing cover art. Perhaps it was a little of all which Duhigg made me realize as I made my way through this instructive & insightful look into how humans connect through transformational communication.

Written in an easily accessible tone & chock-full of anecdotes from various walks of life, this exploration into communication & connection contains many nuggets of wisdom. I’m an educational technology professional working in a school system that has been doing lots of thinking around the concept of hospitality. This book provides much of the “how might this work” practicality that I crave when reading about abstract ideas while remaining rooted in a clear exploration into why “this” — namely love & an innate desire for authentic connection — matters. I also appreciate its nod to online communication & nuance within the framework in this medium. I can’t help but wonder how this book might be the same or different in a few decades after generative AI becomes more embedded in common human experience.

Ultimately I enjoyed it with the exception of the hard conversations/Netflix chapter (hence the 4.5 ⭐️). Although there is mention of stopping hard conversations that re-traumatize individuals, I don’t know that this point was emphasized enough. There was more talk about working through discomfort & the reward being greater than the risk (based on the Sanchez experiment, at least). However, I felt this was minimizing the impact racism, sexism, & other forms of discrimination have on an individuals which places one party at much greater risk during said conversations which can lead to significantly consequential actions (including potential physical, emotional, & psychological harm). At risk of going against a major premise outlined in this book (i.e. the importance of not trying to control others’ goals in communication through one’s clouded perspective), I could see a potential misinterpretation from readers regarding a desire to push vulnerability & perseverance of discomfort upon certain members of identity groups in the name of “trying to be a supercommunicator.”

Never mind that even the framework of three conversations may or may not favor a certain cultural interpretation of what it means to negotiate. There was also little-to-no mention of the influence of a performative culture on these difficult exchanges which in application have a significant power to derail, distract, or even defile such communication. I applaud Duhigg for approaching “Who are we” conversations with optimism & an attempt at measured objectivity, but I believe it is a disservice to suggest to readers that we are all approaching hard conversations with equal positions of control & autonomy over even establishing guidelines/what it means to be safe.

Despite those concerns, I do highly recommend it — and not just because I really like the cover design. If you are a fan of Adam Grant’s Think Again or Daniel Kahneman’s Thinking, Fast and Slow, I think you’ll appreciate this one as advancing an important glimpse into human behavior & our own self-actualization.

Grateful to NetGalley & Random House for the ARC.

This book was so interesting! One of the best non-fiction books I've read in a while. It was full of great information and stories that could actually be used everyday. I just loved it. Thank you to NetGalley and the publisher for a digital ARC of this book.

This was my first Charles Duhigg book, so I wasn't sure what to expect, but I was pleasantly surprised given my history with these sorts of "how to" books. Duhigg is expert at dissecting complex topics and distilling them into actionable insights, seamlessly blending engaging anecdotes with well-researched principles. From dissecting successful public speakers to decoding the strategies of influential leaders. Duhigg draws on a wide array of examples, making the content relatable and applicable to diverse audiences. It is easily readable, entertaining, and approachable. Will this book alone dramatically change your communication style and turn you into the supercommunicator you've always dreamed of being? I doubt it, but it certainly can't hurt.

(Thanks to the author and NetGalley for an advance copy of this book!)

So many people feel disconnected today. Our communication often lacks understanding and feels superficial. Can we improve the way we listen and speak? Charles Duhigg thinks so and provides a how-to guide on being a better communicator. His book will get you thinking about the conversations you have. It did for me! I learned a lot, took many notes, and put some of Duhigg’s advice into practice. Am I a Supercommunicator? Probably not, but I learned some skills that have improved how I listen and speak. Thanks to NetGalley, the publisher and author, for an advanced copy. All opinions are my own.

I never really read books that I would consider "self-help", but this title spoke to me, and I grabbed it on NetGalley.

Duhigg's advice on how to connect with others seems pretty straightforward and in some ways, intuitive, but he uses fascinating examples to illuminate the lessons. I like case studies, and Duhigg doesn't boil them down to the point where all you get is a synopsis. These cases really do show the reader the pitfalls of not being more conscious, more thoughtful about how you communicate.

I found the afterward to be the best part of this book. Duhigg shares a story about a longitudinal study that tracked people over a lifetime, and he selects two people's lives to highlight the importance of relationships to happiness. This beautiful afterward reminds us why communication is so critical to our lives and why being more cognizant about how we do it can be life altering.

This isn’t a book about super communicators as much as it’s a book about to understand and connect with one another in the best way possible. Duhigg has studied what makes for effective conversations and, in his usual entertaining way, broken that info into understandable chunks.

I am a social psychology junkie, and I loved every bit of this book. Everyone interested in making better, deeper connections with people should read it.

There is possibly no book we need more than SUPERCOMMUNICATORS by Charles Duhigg. With spare, enjoyable prose and terrific stories, Duhigg shares the means and methods by which the best communicators among us connect, ultimately uniting individuals in sharing a moment, a relationship, and possibly changing the world one conversation at a time. Ridiculously, stratospheric praise? I think not. Having read his well-written book with heart-pounding mind shifts, I have used his suggestions to great effect. What he demonstrates is ultimately a way of making the world a smaller, more joyous place for everyone. The organization was straightforward and logical, the progression of ideas a natural unfolding of a fresh approach to age-old frictions, and the entire book a positive learning experience. It is his finest work yet -- and I loved his prior books. I received a copy of this book and these opinions are my own, unbiased thoughts.

As someone who works in communications for a living, the way Duhigg bridges gaps between the different ways in which people can approach conversations and how to ultimately create a conversation that's inclusive (in all meanings of the word) is EXTREMELY useful. Will be recommending this book!

Thank you to Penguin Random House, NetGalley and Charles Duhigg for an advanced ebook copy of Supercommunicators in exchange for my honest review.

I give this 4 stars because it provided a clear and simple framework for approaching conversations (3 kinds = What’s this really about? How do we feel? And Who are we?) and ways to improve. I have read Duhigg’s Power of Habit and Smarter, Faster, Better, and enjoy his conversational style. He provides good stories, from spies to surgeons. He emphasized that communication is a skill we all can improve upon to become more rhetorically sophisticated communicators. And to that end, I appreciated the numerous examples he provides of “typical questions” and then shows us how to transform those into better questions that deepen the conversation and connection with others. Additionally, he focuses in on better listening skills and follow up questions which are central to communication.
I didn't give this book 5 starts because he failed to incorporate/cite decades of excellent research in the COMMUNICATION field. Given the title of this book, I found it odd that he didn't review the top scholars in that field. As someone in the communication discipline, much of what he wrote about was researched and published in the mid-1990s. Yet, his conversational style and flair for storytelling makes this a good read for someone who wants to improve their communication skills.