Mr Krogerus, what makes good communication?

The Museum of Communication in Bern is loud and colourful: there are flashes and movement everywhere, you can hear sounds and speech. But one room is different: black walls and 66 simple chalk drawings that visualise the most well-known theories of communication research. Mikael Krogerus, who designed the room with his colleague Roman Tschäppeler, thinks it's great that there is so much peace and quiet here. He talks lightly about Watzlawik, Luhmann, Schulz von Thun and all the other theorists that many a student has cut their teeth on. And in the middle of it all, there is a drawing that addresses the topic of communication in education. «Here you can see how our children grow up,» says the journalist, pointing to the drawing in which a globe circles around the child. «At school, they then learn that the earth orbits the sun.»

Mr Krogerus, how do you know so much about communication that you can design an entire exhibition?

Two years of work went into it. We practically had to complete a short degree programme. But I love familiarising myself with new topics, I'm interested in everything I still know little about.

What fascinated you about communication theories?

That they are obvious at first glance, because each of us is confronted with these issues every day, but that if you take a closer look, a great complexity is revealed.

Which is probably difficult to capture in humorous drawings ...

The drawings are exaggerations, they are intended to arouse curiosity - they are like an amuse bouche for the actual theory. If you want to go further, you can read the accompanying text; if you want to delve even deeper, you will find the corresponding literature reference.

Language has always been your field - whether as an advertiser or later as a journalist. And as a man who has lived in Germany, Sweden, Denmark, the USA, Finland and Switzerland. How many languages do you actually speak?

Oh, actually only German and Swedish. English still.

So your studies in Denmark were in Swedish?

No, in Danish. That's right, I can still do that. And Norwegian. But that sounds so much like a language talent - and I'm not at all.

Well, yes: at least you inspire our readers with your subtle columns - which you don't write in your native language!

Thank you. (smiles sheepishly)

Is that all there is to say?

I have learnt to tell stories. I'm still embarrassed that my texts sometimes have grammatical errors. I often have my wife read texts so that she can prevent the worst mistakes (and sprinkle in a few clever ideas) before they go to the editor and then, fortunately, there's proofreading, otherwise I'd be lost.

What languages do you speak at home?

I speak Swedish with the children, my wife speaks Bernese German. We speak High German with each other.

Why was it important to you that the children learn Swedish?

That wasn't a conscious decision. I simply didn't know how to speak to babies in German or sing songs to them. When something is associated with strong emotions, the mother tongue often breaks through. And then it just stayed that way.

Does multilingualism sometimes lead to misunderstandings at home?

Not really, but my daughter says many sentences twice in quick succession. In Bernese German to her mum, and in Swedish to me. That probably sounds funny to others.

Do you communicate differently with your children now that you've been studying communication so intensively?

(ponders for a long time) I try - but I fail miserably. I know from Paul Grice's principle of cooperation that a good dialogue can only happen if you don't judge the other person's statements. Nevertheless, I ask when my daughter gets a line at school (editor's note: teacher's warning system, three lines means a penalty): «What did you do?» Instead of asking: «What happened?». However, as soon as you comment on a statement in this way, you lose contact because the other person gets the feeling that they have to justify themselves. The theories about good communication in a relationship sound so banal. But putting them into practice is extremely difficult.

As everyday life shows ...

Yes, for example the thing with the I-messages. I know that, according to the «theory of non-violent communication», I should say «it bothers me when you slam the door» instead of «don't slam the door». But it takes effort to speak in «I» messages, presumably because it makes you feel vulnerable. But if it works, this so-called giraffe language is a great tool: it gives the other person the opportunity to show themselves to be vulnerable.

Is there anything you wish you had known earlier about good communication?

Many things were intuited - for example, that questions are more effective than answers. This could certainly have been refined with more knowledge. From the interview technique, for example, we can learn for the next small talk that you shouldn't just ask a question and then wait for a counter-question to be allowed to speak yourself, but can ask a follow-up question to make the conversation more interesting. For example, if you have asked: «Where did you grow up?» A good follow-up question could be: «What would your life have been like if you still lived there?» This suddenly gives the conversation an unexpected depth.

What else have you learnt from the theories for everyday life?

A very good tip comes from the researchers Carl Rogers and Richard Farson: When someone tells us that their mother has died, we often feel the impulse to tell them about ourselves, about the moment when we lost someone close to us. When someone tells us about problems at work, we often tell them that we hate our job too. We do this out of embarrassment and misunderstood empathy. We want to show it: I understand you, I've experienced the same thing. But it's not the same. It's never the same. Nobody has the same experience. But above all, when someone talks about their problems, it's not about us, it's about the other person.

Asking questions is a topic that has been with you for some time: You have written several books with questions that can stimulate communication.

Yes, first «The Question Book», which was basically a kind of cheat sheet for myself so that I don't always ask the same questions in company, such as: «What do you do for a living?». But maybe something different, for example: «When was the last time you did something for the first time?». We often pulled out the book at home when friends were visiting and communication had fallen asleep. My son then saw how much fun we had with the book and wanted to join in - so we also wrote a book with questions for children.

Doesn't asking questions go too far for some people?

It's not an interrogation, you don't have to answer any questions. But in my experience, everyone likes to talk about themselves. If you really listen to them. Listening is probably the most important skill you should learn. I would say that listening is more important than talking. In general, discussions are somewhat overrated in our society.

In what way?

Well, take a look at the comment columns on the internet. Everyone has their own opinion and they just bash it around without really listening or questioning their own opinion. In any case, I've never read anyone write under a long comment: «Well, that's convinced me now.»

So there's not much discussion at home?

Yes, we like to talk and argue a lot, but I don't think you have to discuss everything with children either.

Nowadays, rules should be found together with the children through dialogue.

I actually disagree with that. If everything is always negotiable and can be called into question, then the supposed freedom becomes terror. I believe that some rules are not fences, but railings that you can hold on to.

Do you have an example of such a rule that your whole family is happy about?

Oh, it's these little things that you no longer recognise as rules because they have become a matter of course: Taking your shoes off before you enter a flat, clearing your plates, brushing your teeth, making your bed in the morning, looking the other person in the eye when you apologise, no smartphones at the table. Things like that.

Speaking of smartphones: how have these devices changed communication in your family?

The smartphone is certainly one of the major paradigm shifts in modern communication, comparable to the printing press or the invention of the telephone. For us, for example, this is reflected in the paradox that my wife and I use our smartphones a lot and at the same time explain to our children that we shouldn't always be glued to the device. It's the great parenting contradiction of the 21st century. I don't have a sensible answer to it.

Do children actually use communication strategies?

Sure, a classic goes like this: they keep asking «Why?» until they drive their parents crazy. And they intuitively sense where you are weak and target that.

And good arguments come to nothing, which is certainly difficult for parents ...

Absolutely. This irrational argumentation - logic simply doesn't count.

How do you react to this?

I haven't the slightest idea. (laughs) Anyone who has a hot tip here should definitely share it with me. I love reading parenting tips, including Jesper Juul and Fabian Grolimund in Fritz+Fränzi. I agree with everything they say, but putting it into practice is a completely different matter. We certainly don't bring up our children in the best possible way.

Nevertheless, you also give parenting tips in your golden communication book, which was published alongside the exhibition. For example, parents shouldn't ask how school was.

The approach comes from an American study. Essentially, the idea is that children perceive a school day as being very long and also very long ago. «How was school?» is like asking: «How did you feel from February to May 2016?». It's easier if you ask specifically: «Who did you play with at break time today?» or «What did you go through in English today?».