Negoziazione interculturale: riepilogo didattico (Lezione 2)

Riepilogo didattico Lezione 2 Prof. Daniele Trevisani
Presso Campus Ciels Padova, Laurea Magistrale in Traduzione per la Gestione delle Crisi, delle Emergenze e delle Catastrofi.
Corso di Tecniche di negoziazione degli ostaggi, vedi Trevisani Daniele – Campus Ciels

Parole chiave della lezione:

  • Incomunicabilità
  • Comunicazione costruttiva
  • Semantica
  • Common ground
  • Terreni comunicazionali difficili
  • Patto d’aula
  • Nucleo emotivo
  • Escalation
  • De-escalation
  • Setting
  • Team leadership
  • Mission negoziale
  • Empowerment
  • Tentativo empatico
  • Entropia dell’informazione
  • Entropia comunicativa

I concetti fondamentali trattati durante la lezione sono i seguenti:

  1. Incomunicabilità: stati di difficoltà comunicativa che possono toccare qualsiasi tipo di relazione, sia personale che professionale. Il suo opposto è la comunicazione costruttiva. Nell’incomunicabilità, spesso emergono problemi di semantica: la scienza dei significati.
  2. Escalation negoziale: salita progressiva del tono di voce che porta ad un conflitto. Un negoziatore professionale è in grado di gestire la conversazione tramite una de-escalation negoziale, la quale permette di ridurre la portata delle emozioni negative che potrebbero entrare nel setting (contesto negoziale).
  3. Trigger o grilletto emotivo: un’affermazione che va a toccare emozioni profonde e delicate.
  4. Regola del 75/25: in una buona negoziazione, il negoziatore dovrebbe parlare per il 25% del tempo, mentre l’altra parte dovrebbe parlare per il 75% del tempo.
  5. Entropia dell’informazione: il grado di confusione o caos informatico.
  6. Entropia comunicativa: una conversazione negativa e densa di fraintendimenti, di stati emotivi pessimi, di grigiore. Presenta confusione sui significati e scopi del comunicare e produce il drenaggio delle nostre forze e delle nostre risorse più preziose: le energie personali, le emozioni, il tempo.
  7. Scala dei livelli di ascolto:
  • Ascolto schermato: c’è una distorsione nel dato percettivo.
  • Ascolto giudicante: il negoziatore ascolta ciò che dice l’altro e utilizza le informazioni che acquisisce per contrariarlo.
  • Ascolto apatico o passivo: non c’è energia di ascolto.
  • Ascolto a tratti: il negoziatore viene spesso distratto e non comprende a pieno ciò che dice il proprio interlocutore.
  • Ascolto attivo o supportivo: prevede l’incoraggiamento a proseguire e vi è una forte partecipazione del body language, attraverso il quale il negoziatore dimostra all’altro di capire e ascoltare ciò che dice.
  • Ascolto empatico: il negoziatore riesce a connettersi agli sfondi emotivi che emergono durante la negoziazione e riformula le emozioni.
  • Ascolto simpatetico: il negoziatore dimostra al proprio interlocutore di essere molto interessato a ciò che egli dice; si tratta dell’ascolto che produce più risultati per il negoziatore.

Sintesi del mio apprendimento:

  • Ho appreso che, per ottenere una comunicazione costruttiva durante una negoziazione, l’aspetto culturale è fondamentale.
  • Ho capito che esercitarsi in terreni comunicazionali difficili è fondamentale per imparare a gestire le emozioni in tali situazioni.
  • Ho imparato che è importante ridurre il grado di entropia dell’informazione, in modo tale che l’interlocutore apprenda esattamente le intenzioni del negoziatore.


  • dott. Daniele Trevisani, Parliamoci Chiaro, Gribaudo, 2019.
  • dott.ssa Pilli Laura, appunti di Tecniche di negoziazione degli ostaggi, Lezione 1 di prof. Trevisani D., Padova, 25/02/2021.

1. Speak clearly and use positive communication. The 4 Distances Model

Articolo tradotto dal libro “Parliamoci chiaro”, estratto e pubblicato con il permesso dell’autore Prof. Daniele Trevisani, – Articolo redatto a cura di: dott.ssa Laura Pilli, CIELS Padova

… if you do not accept a life of mediocricity, a mediocre communication, among empty, dull lives, masks and shadows, you will find your way… because you will seek it every day as a flower seeks the light.

Daniele Trevisani

What is a positive conversation? It is a form of meeting from which we come out happy. And not so much for what we brought home, but for how we felt, for what we managed to build, for that positive future of which that piece of conversation became a piece, and for the pleasure that piece of life itself gave us.

On the other hand, a negative conversation is full of misunderstandings, bad emotional states, greyness. It is ‘communicative entropy’ (confusion about the meanings and purposes of communication), and it produces a drain on our most precious strengths and resources: personal energies, emotions, time.

Today’s words are often ‘sick’, they have lost the deep and strong meaning they used to have. Abused and forced, they went off.

The word ‘Love’ has many meanings; we say we love ice cream, a pair of jeans or a particular movie. We have abused that word and now we have to heal it: words can get sick and can lose their original meaning; we have to detoxify them and bring them back to health.

Thich Nhat Hanh[1]

An healthy, well-functioning communication succeeds in getting messages across with words, gestures, symbols, and succeeds in getting the original meaning across ‘cleanly’, without misunderstanding. A sick communication, on the other hand, causes the original message to arrive ‘distorted’, amputated, modified, even opposed to the sender’s intentions. From here to the arrival of misunderstanding, conflict, between people, groups and even nations, it is a short step.

We need a model to guide us through the meanders of what goes on in a conversation, which is difficult but not impossible, and the Four Distances Model is designed to do that.

Decide to ‘take charge’ of your own communication skills, and work on them, is a courageous, noble act, worthy of people with a strong moral character.

“When a man decides to do something, he must go all the way but he must also take responsibility for what he does. Whatever he does, he must first know why he does it, and then he must go ahead with his actions without doubt or remorse. In a world where death is chasing us, there is no time for regrets or doubts. There is only time for decisions.”

Carlos Castaneda, “Teachings of Don Juan”

“To build” something positive with communication is not obvious, very often one word, one look, is enough to build, and another is enough to destroy or damage.

Communication is an act that can generate a wonderful, positive, happy experience of great sharing beyond all forms of separation and barriers. But it is an achievement.

Those who ‘pretend’ that differences between people do not exist or do not matter are hiding the reality of the situation. Much better to consider this reality and treat it for what it is, with courage.

A fundamental point to be clarified immediately is that communication is not a message “thrown into space” that will never be answered, but a form of continuous interaction, a real conversation in which senders and receivers are always active. Hundreds and thousands of micro-communications take place between them, each of which may be clear or may lead to confusion, misunderstandings or negative emotional states.

To start a positive communication, therefore, we have to take care of the individual communication ‘frames’, just as someone takes care of a delicate flower in a greenhouse, flower after flower, plant after plant.

Each of us has his or her own interests, needs, requirements, and these ooze and seep into our every interaction. The human communication is a tool, and sometimes it is the only tool we have, to get the resources for our survival, or to get what we want in life, to achieve goals, and to rejoice for the results that communication can bring us.

Take away a man’s ability to communicate, and he will become a stone.

But as we all know, it is not enough to communicate “just to do”, it is not enough to ask in order to receive. Those who think that everything will come automatically, that everyone will always say yes and agree, perhaps have in mind a communication model in which a master commands and the slaves silently execute. A condition of communicative submission that has a little room in our hearts.

In the real life, the possibility of enslavement is fortunately increasingly remote, though not eradicated. The probability that it is necessary to be clear, or persuasive, or to communicate clearly and assertively, is much more concrete and real, especially in business and family environments.

Also because slavery today takes subtle and new forms, such as living in emotionally toxic climates without being able to get out of them, or psychological dependence on people we would like to do without, and the inability to be clear and convincing about our rights, and in the projects we work on. For this reason, it is good to take advantage of the methods we will learn about here.

Communication only ever makes sense when it is done to increase happiness, satisfaction, pleasure, positivity, and helps us to identify them, and not to fuel division, conflict, disease.

It is a first big step towards self-knowledge to be able to recognise what makes you happy.
(Lucille Ball)

In communication, the possibility of a misunderstanding, disagreement, communication difficulty or problem is always real and concrete. On the contrary, we are certain that communications can give rise to misunderstandings and conflicts, even serious ones, precisely because they take place in conditions of cultural differences, even slight ones, or in any case of diversity between people, and this, if attention and sensitivity are not paid, will happen.

Talking clearly is therefore also an invitation to confront the psychological and communicative distances that can exist between us and other people, in order to find that ‘effective relational distance’ in which we can communicate well, with respect for ourselves and others. The Four Distances Model helps us precisely to understand what the four major “traps” can be, the types of relational distance we can encounter in communication, but also, and consequently, the drivers of positive communication and strategies to communicate better.

Every time we interact with a person who is even slightly different from us, a few years older than us, a different geographical origin, a different school attended, a different education, a different emotional state, we are in the presence of a certain degree of diversity and this imposes on us the need to adjust our communication. If there are strong ethnic, religious and cultural differences in the underlying ideologies, it becomes even more difficult.

The differences between communicators do not end there. There can be strong differences in the emotional states that I experience and the other person experiences, different personality types that interact with each other and sometimes embrace and make sparks. While communicating, we have diversities in mood, in emotions, in how we feel even physically, diversities and barriers that interact with each other, complicating everything.

Rather than a ‘simple communication’, with even a moderate amount of diversity between people, we should speak and think in terms of ‘strategic communication’.

In a communication that becomes strategic, the concept of “Information Operations” or “Info-Ops” makes its way in, a concept of military derivation, but which gives a good picture of the situation: information and communications, in conditions of diversity, have an aim, they work better if they are planned, if they are architected, and when there is a certain attitude of attention, sensitivity and planning, at least to how to make sure that the message can be accepted by the cultural and ideological filters of those who receive it, and not blocked immediately.

Strategic communication requires models. Models that help to analyse communication, models for constructing messages, models for refined listening and understanding.

Acknowledging that diversities exist and require courage. To want, despite this diversity, to try to build something together is an act of courage.

Courage cannot be counterfeited; it is a virtue that escapes hypocrisy.
(Honoré de Balzac)

To deny diversity between people, and cultural differences on the basis of good ideologies, is instead a great act of intellectual falsehood.

Behind communication there is a huge amount of misunderstanding, miscommunication and misinterpretation, both in the issuing and in the listening phase.

There is not yet a ‘model of incommunicability’ that examines and clarifies this rising tide of unintentional and intentional leaks, communication errors and gaffes, and helps to recognise them, and a step in this direction is the purpose of this volume.

It is an even more urgent purpose because this globalised world puts us face to face with the challenge of a constantly globalised communication, between people thousands of kilometres apart, but also people who are physically close, but culturally and emotionally light years apart.

If we do not accept this reality as a fact, we will never include in our analyses the real elusive factor: the latent diversity between people, the cultural differences and distances between people, and how these factors impact on communication, turning it into – on the one hand – a smooth and pleasant communication, producing agreement and understanding – on the opposite side an unpleasant, conflictual, difficult to digest communication, and its outcomes: disagreement, misunderstanding, incommunicability, mutual hatred and conflict.


Dr. Daniele Trevisani

– Master of Arts in Mass Communication, University of Florida (USA)

– Fulbright Scholar, Intercultural Communication, American University of Washington, DC (USA)

– Certified Advanced Coach by STEP™

– Certified Counselor by STEP™

– Certified Coaching Supervisor by STEP™

– Certified Counseling Supervisor by STEP™

– Master Trainer HPM™ Human Potential Method

– Master Trainer ALM™ Business Coaching Method

– Master Trainer 4DM™ Intercultural Communication Method

[1] Thich Nhat Hanh (2014). Sono qui per te. Per una relazione d’amore duratura e consapevole. Terra Nuova Edizioni, p. 76

The four great relational distances

Article translated by dott. Marco Recalenda, CIELS Advanced Degree in Strategic Communication (“Laurea Magistrale in Comunicazione Strategica”), extracted with the author’s permission from the book “Let’s be clear” (original title: “Parliamoci chiaro”), written by Daniele Trevisani, published by Franco Angeli, Milan.

1.1.             The four great relational distances

Distance between people is a physical fact, but physicality is nothing compared to psychological distance. The Four Distances Model examines the main factors that create relational distance, grouping them into four large classes, which are useful for any purpose, both in building relationships but also in identifying existing incommunicability.

These large classes are:

1. distances and differences in roles and identities between communicators, including differences in personality or state of mind;

2. distances and differences in communication codes and styles;

3. distances and differences in values, attitudes and beliefs held;

4. distances and differences in various types of personal experience, both physical and emotional.

Just one of these variables is enough to create incommunicability. The combination of these is even more difficult to manage, because it can create strong relational distance.

Relational distance is a real fact. We can be very close to a person (e.g. in a lift, or at a traffic light) and be completely disinterested in that person’s life, and he/she in ours. That person will be “distant” to us.

Everyone will go their own way, everyone in their own life.

It also happens in the streets. We pass by a person on a pavement while walking, or in a lift. A fleeting flash of physical closeness, but no real relational glue, rather the frost. Often not even a glance.

You may live in a building with dozens of families and not have gone beyond ‘good morning’ with some of them, and with some not even that. In other situations, there are people with whom you feel you can tell them everything about yourself, or you make yourself totally available for a deep, true, interested listening.

At what distance are we then with the people we care about? And at what relational distance are we with the people we have to work with or want to work with, be it for years or for a single project lasting a few hours?

Even when a project is single and limited in time, the phenomenon of team communication inevitably arises. In this team there will be diversity, there will be people who have to work side by side, people from different professional backgrounds, different cultures, different ideologies, communication codes that are only partly shared, and the risk of failure and conflict – if not anticipated – becomes very high.

Relational friction is a fact, even in engaged couples, married couples, friends, colleagues, and between children and parents, and it increases as the distance increases. It is this friction which, taken to the nth degree, has generated disasters, struggles, wars and devastation throughout history.

If recognised early, however, it can be managed, and human relationships can take a completely different turn, moving towards Constructive Communication, which develops projects, ideas and value. They can also generate Positive Communication, relationally nurturing, warm, welcoming, emotionally clean and enriching. And at the same time, under these conditions, listening becomes a pleasure, not an almost impossible task.

Sometimes we experience relationships that are only apparently ones of psychological closeness, but which in reality demonstrate all their falseness as soon as a critical incident brings to light the real sidereal distance of values in human relationships.

This distance may be largely unconscious: we may believe we are close and yet be very far away. A false indicator of closeness is, for example, confidence, the elimination of the ‘courtesy form’ or other kinds of linguistic distancing.

We all know, however, how one can converse amiably with someone who seems to be a friend and in reality is not.

Even marriages and friendships experience moments of apparent distance or apparent remoteness, people “approach” and “move away” relationally, like comets, in trajectories that are sometimes very predictable, sometimes people appear in our lives like bright meteors in the sky and then disappear.

So let us make it clear that distance is not just a matter of appearance but something deeper.

Relational distance exists, it creates incommunicability and, with it taking place, no project can really go the distance.

Principle 1 – The elements that affect effective communication and incommunicability

Communication becomes difficult when:

1. people do not accept each other’s roles in communication, there is a lack of acceptance in the mutual identities that people want to assume, parties do not recognise and legitimise each other as accepted counterparts;

2. distances in communication codes and styles are wide, making it technically difficult or impossible to understand the meanings of the communication itself. Languages are poorly understood, there are unfamiliar terms, and meanings are not shared;

3. there are value divergences, attitudes and values, both superficial and in depth, and the degree of difference (how much difference) is amplified the more the communication touches on the core values of one or more communicators, to the point where the other’s position is perceived as inconceivable and contrary to one’s own values;

4. the parties are characterised by different types of personal experience, both physical and emotional, with increasing incommunicability as this diversity increases, and do not have common physical or emotional experiences that could act as facilitators.

Communication becomes positive and effective the more

1. people accept each other’s roles in communication, acceptance is created in the mutual identities people give each other (“I accept your role as you present it to me”), the parties recognise and legitimise each other as worthy of a fruitful relationship;

2. distances in communication codes and styles are reduced or are progressively reduced, making it technically easier to understand meanings, based on shared signs, comprehensible languages, and shared meanings;

3. there are few differences in values, or these are only superficial, while deep values are shared.

4. parties are characterised by a certain degree of ‘Common Ground’ in personal experience, both physical and emotional, and this increases through shared experiences, making communication more positive and effective.

It is quite understandable and natural that as the psychological distance between people increases, incommunicability increases, but becoming aware of this is not enough.

It is necessary to understand where to work on incommunicability. So what variables should be used? How can the real distance that exists at a certain moment be understood? How can it be reduced?

In what areas is it important to work on the Four Distances? This theme deserves to be explored in greater depth.

Article translated by dott. Marco Recalenda, CIELS Advanced Degree in Strategic Communication (“Laurea Magistrale in Comunicazione Strategica”), extracted with the author’s permission from the book “Let’s be clear” (original title: “Parliamoci chiaro”), written by Daniele Trevisani, published by Franco Angeli, Milan.

Other online material available in these sites:
Sito Studio Trevisani Formazione Coaching Consulenza (Italian & English)
Sito Daniele Trevisani (Italian)
Website Dr. Daniele Trevisani (English)
Comunicazione Aziendale
Comunicazione Interculturale
Medialab Research
Intercultural Negotiation (English)
Operational Negotiation (English)
Linkedin Profile Dr. Daniele Trevisani
Other available online resources
Pubblicazioni e libri dott. Daniele Trevisani (Books published)
Rivista online gratuita di Comunicazione, Potenziale Umano e Management
Iscrizione gratuita al Blog tramite Email
Canale YouTube
CIELS Institutional Website: