Creating communication and community

[Ollie]

Rather than take up too much space on the Creating a New World thread, below are some notes I made about seven years when I first became interested in creating communication and community. However, the project fell fallow, in terms of DOing anything practical or theoretical, until now. Curiously at about that time I found the Cassiopaea site! Also, Scott-Peck stooped doing Community Building Trainings.

What I was attempting to do was to put several models together to come up with one model that combined the best bits from each of the contributing models. The primary models were the work of Tuckman, back in 1965, ‘Development sequence in Small Groups and Scott-Peck.

I’m posting the notes now because they may be pertinent to the posts on the Creating a New World thread.

I’ll post in seven stages. The notes for each of the stages of the group (or community) building stage focuses on: a description of the each stage, processes, interpersonal dynamics, task orientation, group structure, facilitation tactics, possible ways of assisting the group (or community) through the process, and actions for each stage.

General
There is an acute need for the reawakening of the sense of community. There is a strong sense that humans who live in clusters with each other are meant to look out for, and look after, each other, rather than living in isolation while near each other.

The most intimate community is the community of understanding. When you are you are at home. (Eternal Echoes)

… in a spirit of harmony and co-operation, identifying respect, honesty, integrity and transparency as key values in the conduct of our business. (The Quest notes (pre-publication) Findhorn)

The perfect community would be a place of justice, equality, care and creativity. Humans have wonderful abilities and gifts. Yet our ability to live together in an ideal way remains underdeveloped. All community seems to have its shadows and darkness. The ideal of creation is community, ie a whole diversity of presences which belong together in some minimal harmony. Nature is a wonderful community that manages to balance light and dark, destructfulness and creativity with incredible poise.
A new sense of community could gradually surface if we called upon some of these virtues (care, sympathy, justice, confidence and loyalty) to awaken.
If humankind could only let its fear and prejudices go, it would gradually learn the inestimable riches and nourishment that diversity brings. Community can never be the answer to all our questions or all our longings. But it can encourage us, provoke us to raise questions and voice our desires. (Eternal Echoes)

Perception is most powerful when it engages both memory and experience. This empowers conversation to become real exploration. Real conversation … creates community. (Anama Cara)

… community to be a group of people that have a commitment to lean how to communicate with each other at an ever more deep and authentic level … group secrets, whatever they are, become known – they come out to where they can be dealt with. (Joy of community)
Participatory communication, … can give people a new sense of human dignity, a new experience of community, and the enjoyment of a fuller life. (Christian Principles of Communication)

The principles of good communication are the basic principles of community building – appreciating and respecting differences – effective consensual decisions – overcoming obstacles in working together (The Road)
B
eing inclusive and respectful of diversity whilst neutral between different ideas, different ways of doing things and specific … paths.
Being inclusive through collaboration and partnerships between different groups, and organisations, each bringing complementary and valued contributions that together create something more than, and different from, what one could do alone. (The Quest notes (pre-publication) Findhorn)

Others need to be considered and accommodated. The community also challenges us to inhabit to the full our own individuality. No community can ever be a total unity which embraces and fulfils the longings of its individuals. A community can only serve as a limited and minimal unity. (Eternal Echoes)
Number one principle of community is ‘inclusivity’
Community accepts and celebrates individual differences – we are not and never can be all the same
Seek people who are different to you (race, religion, etc) … as community is inclusive, remain so, avoid elitism … focus on what ‘for’, relate to others … true community is an adventure
Community is realistic
Realistic as different points of view and freedom to express them (appreciate the whole) … humility – (appreciation of other’s gifts / own limitations) … interdependence / contemplation (know thyself)
Community is a group that has become able to transcend its individual differences for the good of the whole – whilst the primary aim of such sacrifice and submission is even greater variety, freedom of expression, creativity, vivacity and joy as well as peace.
community – gets to roots of things – basic issues – requires courage and integrity resulting in radical innovation (The Different Drum)

When there is an affinity of thought between people and an openness top exploration, a real community of understanding and spirit can begin to grow. Where equality is grounded in difference, closeness is difficult but patience with it brings great fruits. Such a community is truthful and real. (Eternal Echoes)

Wisdom comes from sitting together and truthfully discussing our differences – without the intent to change them. (Bateson)

A community is a group of two or more people who have been able to accept and transcend their differences regardless of the diversity of their backgrounds … This enables them to communicate effectively and openly together and to work together towards goals identified as being for their common goal. (The Joy of Community)

The more explicit equality becomes in human interactions, the more easily communication occurs. (Christian Principles of Communication)
… strives to understand and emphasise with others. People need to be accepted and recognised for their special and unique spirits. One assumes the good intentions of co-workers and does not reject them as people, even while refusing to accept their behaviour or performance. (Servant Leadership)

Each of us is a member of several communities simultaneously. Such communities develop naturally around us. … Community offers us a creative tension which awakens us and challenges us to grow. Community refines our presence, teaches us compassion and care.
There is incredible power in a community of individuals who come together because they care, and who are motivated by ideals of compassion and creativity. (Eternal Echoes)

Human beings of different cultures are the same the world over
Jesus overturned the whole social order at the last supper (symbolic form of community – ‘together’ – ‘love’) – served … this form of community led to phenomenal success until it became a legal (official) religion – safe, crisis over community faded
Christianity – to be true is to live dangerously, in risk (of outcast) – different, of seeking peace … to follow in Jesus’ footsteps – in deed as well as word – fully humane and fully divine
Jesus’ legacy of community (Maunday Thursday Revolution) lost with legalisation of Christianity (crisis over?) became a ritual rather than a way of life … to be a true Christian one must live dangerously ‘I am the way’ – Jesus’ way is dangerous
All called to be peacemakers – community – individuals (be outspoken) of integrity (overcome helplessness)
Community is invariably spiritual – help individuals seeking help arising from a lack of community
The dynamics of spirituality are the same the world over – simultaneous uniqueness and similarity of human beings
Community is nothing more than love (The Different Drum)

Community is a feeling of belonging together (The Road)

Communities have a natural lifespan (a spirit) according to the reason for their creation
Start communities – first before deciding, what to do beyond that, it may not be easy persuading people to do it, to commit to, to join you … hang in and push towards emptiness.
Set community in a contextual setting – eg church in church, business in office … some people you think are right will be afraid – and not join … others doubted will be interested get gleam - and join … be wary of people with big axe to grind (OK lay little (bracket/transcend) aside) (The Different Drum)

The ideal of community is not the forming together of separate individuals into the spurious unity of communion – community somehow exists. When we come together in compassion and generosity, this hidden belonging begins to come alive between us … allow community to emerge … we do not make community, we are born with it. We enter as new participants into a drama that is already on. We are required to maintain and awaken community. (Eternal Echoes)

In a real sense, what executives have been referring to as culture building has, in essence, been an attempt to build community all along. … Building community is possible, meaningful attainable and realistic – focus on culture is, at best, akin to trying to change the ecology of Lake Ontario. There are a number of elements that need to be considered … building blocks of community building. Each building block should, however, be considered as essential – exclude or misalign one of the elements and the (inevitable) dysfunctional stress will weaken the whole – mission, identity, beliefs, values; assumptions; knowledge, information/skills, delivery – within a vision and a context. Clearly values are an important and pivotal element of community building but they are not the end of the story. It is difficult to imagine an environment where significant lack of misalignment between personal and organisational values results in anything other than the community breaking apart. On the other hand a degree of difference may in fact be a healthy dimension of creative tension. What binds talented individuals to such organisations will depend in part on their buy-in into the overall corporate values; even more important, however, will be a sense of fit at a personal level, the degree of collaborative support from colleagues, … a journey where community becomes not only desirable but essential. (Beyond values)

… organisational change is first accomplished through interpersonal, social change. To function effectively, … knowledge society needs community rather than culture, where individual freedom, active involvement and responsibility is directly assessable. Social integration and community is accomplished through trust, collaboration and open communications between people engaged in organisations. … community provides the vehicle for influencing the larger system of society, the ‘butterfly effect’ …

Dialogue is a way of observing, collectively, how hidden values and intentions can control our behaviour, and how unnoticed cultural differences can clash without our realising what is occurring. It can therefore be seen as an arena in which collective learning takes place and out of which a sense of increased harmony, fellowship and creativity can arise. (Dialogue – a proposal)

… a theory and method of ‘dialogue’, … in special conversations that begin to have a ‘life of their own’, taking us in directions we would never have imagined nor planned in advance. Bohm’s recent work on the theory and practice of dialogue represents a unique synthesis of … the systems or holistic view of nature, and the interactions between our thinking, and internal ‘models’ and our perceptions and actions.
… bring about a constant ‘mutual participation between nature and consciousness’. … seeing thoughts as ‘largely collective phenomenon.’ ‘Out thought is coherent,’ Bohm asserts, ‘and the resulting counter-productiveness lies at the root of the world’s problems.’ … thought as a systemic phenomenon arising from how we interact and discourse with one-another. … two primary types of discourse, dialogue and discussion. Both are important … their power lies in their synergy. … discussion … hitting the ball back and forth between us. … purpose … ‘to win’ … not compatible … with giving first priority to coherence and truth. (The Fifth Discipline)

… ‘dialogue is not about building community, but about inquiring into the nature of community’ (Isaacs). (Robert Hargrove on Dialogue)

… openness … decision-making could be transformed if people become more able to surface and discuss productively their different ways of looking at the world.
… real openness, of seeing our own thinking and cutting the crap. … the skills of engaging difficult issues so that everyone learns. (The Fifth Discipline)

Creating community in the context of an organisation permits … tensions to be surfaced and dealt with as best they can, rather than being latent under the table. (The Joy of Community)
Movement out of an age of excessive specialisation into an age of integration – community building.
Business is only just beginning to incorporate some of these principles of community – the problem of vulnerability to each other - clients as untouchables at the bottom of the heap (perpetuation of rules antithetical to community) … community is active recognition of common humanity – communication.
Capitalisation, in and of itself (self-centred, self-interests), has a profound tendency to ‘refuse progress’… how do you transform it – appropriately – learn community (for survival) values and emotional profits - joy of operating with such values .
Capitalisation – pride – refusal to change that which proud of (‘pride before the fall’)
Pride is healthy for identity purposes (accomplished in adolescence) – ‘I-entity’ – notion of self as a separate entity is an illusion as we are all interdependent … merge identity with that of humanity and divinity – the journey of spiritual growth. (The Different Drum)

… much has been lost in recent human history as a result of the shift from communities to large institutions as the primary shaper of human lives. This awareness causes the servant-leader to seek to identify some means for building community among those who work within a given institution. … true community can be created … ‘All that is needed to rebuild community as a viable life form for large numbers of people is for enough servant-leaders to show the way, not by mass movement, but by each servant-leader demonstrating his own unlimited liability for a quite specific community-related group.’ (Servant Leadership)

no structure = chaos, total structure = no room for emptiness
Excessive organisation is antithetical to community (The Different Drum)

Structure and community are not incompatible. To the contrary, they mutually thrive on one another. … the greater the structure in an organisation, and the clearer that structure is, the easier it is for us to introduce community into the organisation. If a task-oriented business group that is not well-structured builds itself into community, it will discover, I think, that their very next task is to define roles. Invariably, these roles are going to be in sort of hierarchy. The purpose of community is not to get rid of hierarchy. Again, part of all this is for an organisation to learn how to function in a hierarchical and highly structured task-oriented mode, and learn how to function in a community mode. It also needs to learn the technology of switching back and forth. The more clearly defined the roles and, the more structured the organisation actually is, the easier this switching back and forth becomes. The more blurred the structure, the harder it becomes. … The only obstacle to building and maintaining community in an organisation is not structural. It’s political. … ‘it’s much easier to build community among unsophisticated people than among the sophisticated. … because you have to penetrate their sophistication to get their innocence. (The Joy of Community)

Crisis (drama of ‘human spirit’ (life)) – danger/hidden opportunity (meet and resolve) – in daily life – to see limitations etc
Existence of crisis can facilitate community development – sustainable? - once crisis passed … Impelled to relate to one another for survival – but not relate with inclusivity, realism, self-awareness, vulnerability, commitment, openness, freedom, equality and love of genuine community – transform from mere social creatures to community creatures (The Different Drum)

Edit as requested.

 

[Oxajil]

Hi, Trevrizent, maybe it is better if you put the text in paragraphs for easy reading. :) (fwiw)

 

[Ollie]

Logistics of the process
Four stages of community making – pseudo-community, goals (forming); chaos, roles (storming); emptiness, processes (norming); community, relationships (performing) (The Different Drum/Tuckman)

Isaacs talks about different things happening in the container at different stages. If you want to create change, recognise an uncomfortable reality: there will be instability in the container. According to Isaacs, activity within an effective container moves through these stages:
1. initially, there are concerns for safety and trust, which you have to move through
2. next, you must uncover polarisation so you can move towards a common group
3. the next level is inquiry to understand the polarisation, the fragmentation. People experience collective pain as the degree of dissonance is held within the group. We see why this relates to the first stage – it is fear of this anticipated pain that keeps people concerned about safety. But we must move through this stage to meet the next level
4. the next level is creativity in the container – based on collective perceptions, as people engage with one another, which reaches a generative power or energy (Dialogue on
dialogue)

Structure/Circle
Getting started is a simple as setting people in small circles and asking them to talk about ‘What’s really important to them?’ (The Fifth Discipline – Openness)
… the size of groups involved in dialogue (20 – 40) and the duration of the process (it takes some time for it to get going). (Dialogue and Conversation)
Numbers – a dialogue works best with between 20 – 40 people seated facing one another in a simple circle … (Dialogue – a proposal)
… the circle is the fundamental geometry of open human communication. There is no … higher or lower, simply people being with people face to face. … Place people in rows … and they all face the source of power and authority, and it is clear who will talk and who will listen. … Circles create communication.
… groups of five have found the approach quite effective and intact management teams of 12 to 20 have discovered OST as an excellent way to build their teams and transact a great deal of business in a remarkably short time. (In the beginning)

Duration
Need at least two days to achieve (genuine) community – need to go through and experience
each stage to transform to the next (The Different Drum)
Duration – a dialogue needs some time to get going. It is an unusual way of participating with others and some sort of introduction is required in which the meaning of the whole activity can be communicated. But even with a clear introduction, when the group begins to talk together it will often experience confusion, frustration, and a self-conscious concern as to whether or not it is actually engaging in dialogue. … optimistic … to assume that a dialogue will begin to flow in or move forward in any depth in its first meeting. … perseverance is required. It is useful at the start to agree a length of the session and for someone to take responsibility for calling time at the end. … about 2 hours is optimum. Larger sessions risk a fatigue factor which tends to diminish the quality of participation. Many T-groups use extended ‘marathon’ sessions which use this fatigue factor tom break down some of the inhibitions of the participants. Dialogue … is more concerned with exploring the social constructs and inhibitions that effect our communications rather than attempting to bypass them. The more regularly the group can meet the deeper and more meaningful will be the territory explored. … weekends … allow a sequence of sessions … but if dialogue is to continue for an extended period of time … at least a one week interval between each succeeding session to allow time for individual reflection and further thinking. (Dialogue – a proposal)

Subject matter
Subject matter – any topic of interest to the participants.
In (dialogue in existing organisations) the process of dialogue will change considerably. Members of an existing organisation will have already developed a number of different sorts of relationship between one another and with their organisation as a whole. There may be a pre-existing hierarchy or a felt need to protect one’s colleagues, team or department. There may be fear of expressing thoughts that might be seen as critical to those who are higher in the organisation of norms within the organisational culture. Careers or the social acceptance of individual members might appear to be threatened by participation in a process that emphasises transparency, openness, honesty, spontaneity, and the sort of deep interest in others that can draw out areas of vulnerability that may have long been kept hidden. (Dialogue – a proposal)

Participants
Participants should be prepared for commitment they will be required to make … a commitment
to stay with the process and ride out the storm – each responsible for the success of the group …
responsibility to speak and voice dissatisfaction
Stories as a means of giving experience
Remember dreams to recall next day – someone will (The Different Drum)

The process
And, the commitment to openness, passion and responsible self-organisation begins with the invitation process itself.
… the Four Principles. … ‘Whoever comes is the right people’ acknowledges that the only people really qualified are able to do great work on any issue are those who really care, and freely choose to be involved. ‘Whenever it starts is the right time’ recognises that spirit and creativity don’t run on the clock, so while we’re here, we’ll keep a vigilant watch for great ideas and new insights, which can happen at anytime. ‘Whatever happens is the only thing that could have’ allows everyone to let go of the could haves, would and should haves, so that we can give our full attention to the reality of what is happening, is working and is possible right now. And finally, ‘When it’s over, it’s over’ acknowledges that you never know just how long it will take to deal with a given issue, and reminds us that getting the work done is more important than sticking to an arbitrary schedule. Taken together, these principles say ‘work hard, pay attention, but be prepared to be surprised. (Working in Open Space)
I feel quite confident that the phenomenon of self-organisation lies at the heart of Open Space.
The essential preconditions are:
• a relatively safe environment
• high levels of complexity, in terms of issues to be resolved, and high levels of diversity, in terms of the people needed to solve it
• high levels of conflict (potential or actual) and an inner drive towards improvement
• living on the edge of chaos (action required) and a decision time of yesterday
• sparcity of connection (few prior connections (no more than two) between participants), groups with a long standing history of association took … a marginally slower rate than groups only recently come together (Emerging Order in Open Space)
Dialogue is not a new name for T-groups or sensitivity training, although it is superficially similar to these and other related forms of group work. Its consequence may be psychotherapeutic but it does not attempt to focus on removing the emotional blocks of any one participant nor to teach, train or analyse. Nevertheless, it is an arena in which learning and the dissolution of blocks can and often do take place. It is not a technique for problem solving or conflict resolution, although problems may well be resolved during the course of dialogue, or perhaps later, as a result of increased understanding and fellowship that occurs among the participants. It is as we have emphasised, primarily a means of exploring the field of thought.
Dialogue resembles a number of other forms of group activity and may at times include aspects of them. … it is something new. (Dialogue – a proposal)

Facilitation
In the absence of a skilled facilitator, our habits of thought continually pull us towards discussion and away from dialogue. … We take what ‘presents itself’ in our thoughts as literal, rather than as a representation. We believe in our own views and want them to prevail. We are worried about suspending our assumptions publicly. The facilitator of a dialogue session carries out many of the basic duties of a good ‘process facilitator’. … helping people maintain ownership the process and the outcomes – we are responsible for what is happening. … facilitator … must keep the dialogue moving. If any one … divert the process to a discussion … identified … group asked whether the conditions for dialogue are continuing to be met. The facilitator always walks a careful line between being knowledgeable and helpful in the process at hand, and yet not taking on the ‘expert’ or ‘doctor’ mantle that would shift attention away from members … and their own ideas and responsibility. … in dialogue the facilitator also does something more … to influence the flow of development simply through participating. Beyond such reminders of the conditions for dialogue the facilitator’s participation demonstrates dialogue. The artistry of dialogue lies in experiencing the flow of meaning and seeing the one thing that needs to be said now. … facilitator says only what is needed at each point in time.
(The Fifth Discipline - Dialogue)
We should see this (may unintentionally send an inaccurate message) as almost a downside in not having an explicit facilitator. It required each member to act as facilitator. … it’s most important to have an expert facilitator at the beginning of a group, while members are learning about each other. … But if we acted on our own initiative – if we were mindful of each other – then you don’t have to have a formal facilitator. (Dialogue on Dialogue)
… facilitation for dialogue requires an advanced form of group process, systems work, and leadership development. Facilitators need the abilities to create the level of openness and attention necessary for dialogue to happen. (W N Isaac’s take on dialogue)
… in the early stages some guidance is required to help the participants realise the subtle differences between dialogue and other forms of group process. At least one or, preferably two, experienced facilitators are essential. Their role should be to occasionally point out situations that might seem to be presenting sticking points for the group … to aid the process of collective proprioception, but … never be manipulative or obtrusive. (Dialogue – a proposal)

Facilitators/Leaders
Community - a group of all leaders – need to be willing and able to die for group (crucifixion) …
leader must discourage group’s dependency – by refusal to lead … leader’s strength is
willingness to risk/welcome accusation of failing to lead (The Different Drum)
As teams develop experience and skills in dialogue … facilitator becomes … gradually … just another one of the participants. Dialogue emerges from the ‘leaderless’ group once team members have developed their skills and understanding. (The Fifth Discipline - Dialogue)
Leaders are participants just like everyone else. Guidance … take the form of ‘leading from behind’ and preserve the intention of making itself redundant as quickly as possible. (Dialogue – a proposal)
Features to concentrate on in the group process:
Participation – high and low levels of involvement / changes in level / silent members and how
other react to them / ‘subgroup’ interactions (who talks to whom)
Influence – high and low / changes in level / leadership rivalry and its effects
Decision making process – decisions taken without consultation / drifting / mutual support /
majorities / consensus seeking / contributions that are ignores
Task functions – questioners / summarisers / giving and asking for facts, ideas, opinions,
feedback etc / chairpersons
Maintenance functions – those who help others contribute / those who cut others off / way ideas
are received or rejected
Group atmosphere – those seeking congeniality / conflict / overall atmosphere – work/play
/interest/ sluggishness
Membership – subgroups / insiders, outsiders / movement ‘in’/’out’
Feelings – signs of anger, irritation, affection, excitement, boredom, competition, etc
Norms – topics avoided / way behaviour approved/disapproved / any particular methods of
participation

 

[Ollie]

Stage 1 – pseudo-community (forming)

Beware of instant community – requires time, effort, and sacrifice … beware of faking by
sophisticated people – white lies/withhold truth/feelings to avoid conflict … pseudo-community
= conflict avoidance (v conflict resolving) (The Different Drum)
One indicator of a team in trouble is when … there are few, if any, questions. … until a team or an individual learns to combine inquiry and advocacy, learning skills are always very limited. … just asking lots of questions can be a way of avoiding learning – by hiding our own view behind a wall of incessant questioning. … (The Fifth Discipline)
Particularly in hierarchical organisations people manipulate situations to avoid dealing with how they actually think and feel, and thereby push other people into preferred responses.
You have to pay attention while interacting with members in your group otherwise you may unintentionally send an inaccurate message. When people say what’s on their mind, it creates dissonance, discomfort causes people to rethink why they’re there. But while people are being kind and nice, you’re not going to move. So you work towards a point when people can be up front about their experience. (Dialogue on dialogue)
Phases for the evolution of the container (in which dialogue can take place)
instability of the container – is the initial phase when participants have concerns for safety and trust which they must move through, … (William N Isaac’s take on dialogue)
… groups go through five stages on their way from unproductive discussions to dialogue.
Stage 1 – Polite discussion – diplomatic communication, avoidance of open conflict, leading to mixed messages (Robert Hargrove on Dialogue)
… dialogue is not consistent with any such purposes beyond the interest of its participants in the unfoldment and revelation of the deeper collective meanings that may be revealed … in its early stages, the dialogue will often lead to the experience of frustration.
A group of people invited to give their time and serious attention to a task that has no apparent goal and is not being led in any detectable direction may quickly find itself experiencing a great deal of anxiety and annoyance.
… dialogue … probably … begin with an expression of all the doubts and fears that participants will certainly raise. … may have to begin with a fairly specific agenda from which they eventually can be encouraged to diverge. This differs from the approach taken with one-time or self-selecting groupings in which participants are free to begin with any subject matter.
Many organisations have inherent, predetermined purposes and goals that are seldom questioned. At first this might also seem to be inconsistent with the free and open play of thought … intrinsic to the dialogue process. However, … consideration of such subjects can prove essential to the well-being of the organisation and can in turn help to increase the participants’ self-esteem along with the regard in which s/he may be held by others. (Dialogue – a proposal)
… Open Space starts with open-minded leadership, an issue that really matters, and an invitation to co-create something new and amazing. (Working in Open Space)

Denial (shock):
Interpersonal relationships – fragmented
Intergroup relationships – disconnected
Communications – random
Assumptions, misinterpretations and misunderstanding
Ignore emotional pain
Deny/ignore individual differences, not offend, or act as if nothing happened (pretend not
happened/bothered) … speak in generalities (destructive to genuine communication (keep
defences up) (The Different Drum)
Confusing, chaotic, testing of water

Source of resistance:
Fear of unknown, fear of failure, fear of looking stupid, lack of information, misinformation
Individual response to change:
Fear and confusion
Discussion of symptoms or problems peripheral to the tasks
Minimal task accomplishment
Objectives inadequately set and communicated
Poor listening
Anxiety about change
Little caring for others
Initial pairing
Problem handling – none
Task avoidance assumptions in groups – flight/fight/pairing/dependence … community requires
love and commitment, sacrifice and transcendence
Flight – flee from troublesome issues and problems … pseudo-community or in chaos by fleeing
into organisation (subgroups)
Fight – assumption of purpose (task avoidance) – trying to heal or convert
Pairing – cliques/alliances (whispering to each other, ignoring rest of the group) … romantic
relationships – care only for each other (The Different Drum)

Task orientation:
What is task? / grumbling about setting / intellectualisation / irrelevant issues discussed /
attempts at defining the situation / mutual exchange of information / suspicion, little work
Primary concerns are goals
Attempts to identify tasks and how group will accomplish them
Decisions on styles of information required
Planning and goal setting – dormant
Structure – chaotic

Group structure:
Considerable anxiety / Testing relationships / Dependency on leader / Attempts to structure the
group / Hesitant participation / Will they let me join?
Dependency on a leader (desire for a figure of authority), rather than accept that everyone is a
leader (The Different Drum)
Prevalent conflict style is avoiding (‘ritual sniffing’)
Hesitant participation
Authority central
Conform to party line
Feelings kept hidden
Weaknesses covered up
Enthusiasm v wait and see
Leadership and decision making – paralysed
Uncertainty and suspicion, too much dependence on leader
Mutual exchanges to create a favourable image (often misleading)

Tactics:
Communication, empathy, support, allow baggage ‘dumping’

Possible ways of assisting group through process:
Clear introductions / ‘safe’ structures / visibility of leader / opportunities to contribute (ccdu) Getting started is a simple as setting people in small circles and asking them to talk about ‘What’s really important to them?’ (The Fifth Discipline)

Actions:
Communicate what change means, inform leaders, convince opinion makers
Community building leaders restrict intervention to interpretation of group behaviour – rather than tell, awaken their awareness … to teach others to think in terms of group as a whole (we)
or to make only those interventions that the other members are not yet capable of making … there is a lot of waiting to see what happens – if others pick up the signs (need to have emptied self of need to control) (The Different Drum)
Ask open questions, listen attentively and be assertive in key matters

 

[Ollie]

Stage 2 – chaos (storming)

What chaos doesn’t say (what is unresolved) is more important than what he says (The Different Drum)
Chaos and confusion
Chaos – confront ideas openly – ‘fighting’ and struggle – effectively swat each other with little effort – going nowhere, accomplish nothing (The Different Drum)
… participants treat each other with respect, that conflict inevitably seems to yield deeper outcomes, and high energy – often experienced as playful, …
The outrageous is now commonplace. Somehow incipient (or actual chaos) is productive of order. Regularly. (Emerging Order in Open Space)
Fight is the task-avoidance assumption that predominates during chaos – attempts to heal / convert one another that doesn’t work – people don’t think they are doing this, but group assumes that purpose together is to squabble … fruitless conflict going nowhere – ‘uncreative’ fighting … pairing (alliances) also likely to interfere with group’s development
Community is a ‘battle to change the rules of human communication – towards understanding
‘fight gracefully’ (without physical/emotional bloodshed) – there are no sides in community – listen and understand (struggle together for conflict resolution) / give up cliques (The Different Drum)

Isaacs stresses the need to build a ‘container’. We experienced the value of creating an environment in which people commit to the conversation, then dialogue about something could have lots of conflicts. (Dialogue on dialogue)

Phases for the evolution of the container (in which dialogue can take place)
instability in the container – when members struggle with polarisation and conflict due to the clash of personally held beliefs and assumptions. It may take a lot of time to surface these conflicts. …(William N Isaac’s take on dialogue)

… dialogue is not consistent with any such purposes beyond the interest of its participants in the unfoldment and revelation of the deeper collective meanings that may be revealed … in its early stages, the dialogue will often lead to the experience of frustration.
In an assembly … 20 – 40 people, extremes of frustrations, anger, conflict or other difficulties may occur, but in a group of this size such problems can be contained with relative ease. In fact, they can become a central focus of the exploration in what might be understood as a kind of ‘meta-dialogue’, aimed at clarifying the process of dialogue itself. (Dialogue – a proposal)

… groups go through five stages on their way from unproductive discussions to dialogue.
Stage 2 – Rational debate – issues put on the table, rational agreement, suppressed emotions
Stage 3 – Chaotic discussion (war) – realisation of conflicts that are not easily resolved and which could blow up
An ongoing theme of Hargrove’s view of collaborative conversations is the way of improvement and learning. He sees the usual business conversation as focused on winning a position, or at least on not losing. Even in regular listening … we don’t really seek to understand other people, but rather to constantly assess what they say so that we can hold onto our own preconceived notions. (Robert Hargrove on Dialogue)
Flight – flee from troublesome issues and problems … pseudo-community or in chaos by fleeing into organisation (subgroups) (The Different Drum)

This can lead to the desire on the part of some, either to break up the group or to attempt to take control and give it direction. Previously unacknowledged purposes will reveal themselves. Strong feelings will be exposed, with the thoughts that underlie them. Fixed positions may be taken and polarisation will often result. This is all part of the process. It is what sustains dialogue and keeps it constantly extending creativity into new domains. (Dialogue – a proposal)

There are two ways out of chaos – organisation or into and through emptiness (of barriers to communication – internal and external)
Organisation and community (eg committees) are incompatible (The Different Drum)

… Open Space can only fail for two reasons: if people show up with no passion and/or if somebody tries to control the process in order to achieve some sort of pre-determined outcome(s). (Working in Open Space)

And there is a further learning about control.
The only way to bring an Open Space gathering to its knees is to attempt to control it. It may, therefore, turn out that the one thing we always wanted (control) is not only unavailable, but unnecessary. ‘Order is free.’ After all, if order is for free we could afford being out of control and love it. Emergent order appears … when the conditions for self-organisation are met. Perhaps we can now relax, and stop working so hard. (Emerging Order in Open Space)

Avoid need to heal, convert, fix, solve during chaos – as usually self-centred/serving (feel good about self) – comfort … most loving thing to do is share pain – offer presence … convert calls ‘own’ into question – so extend self to understand other (The Different Drum)

One of the great strengths of servant-leadership is the potential for healing one’s self and others. … ‘There is something subtle communicated to one who is being served and led if, implicit in the compact between servant-leader and led, is the understanding that the search for wholeness is something they share.’ (Servant Leadership)
‘We are programmed to create defensive routines’ says Argyris, ‘and cover them up with further defensive routines.’
Often, the stronger the defensiveness, the more important the issue around which people are defending or protecting their views. (The Fifth Discipline)
… ‘defensive routines’ that insulate our mental models from examination … Argyris … recall not only what was said, but what we were thinking and did not say … each of us contributes to a conflict through our own thinking … how we make sweeping generalisations about the others that determine what we said and how we behaved.
‘The paradox is that when (defensive routines) succeed in preventing immediate pain they also prevent us from learning how to reduce what causes the pain in the first place’ … defensive routines are ‘self-sealing’ – they obscure their own existence. This comes in large measure because we have society-wide norms that say that we should be open and that defensiveness is bad. This makes it difficult to acknowledge defensive routines … One way of weakening the symptomatic solution is diminishing the emotional threat that prompts the defensive in the first place. … If we perceive a defensive routine operating, it is a good bet that we are part of it. … (The Fifth Discipline)
People need to become aware of how they build defensive layers around themselves to avoid embarrassment and threat, covering up their predominant thought patterns, basic assumptions and repressed emotions.
… work with other people through bringing clarity to communications, mutually seeking insights through sharing understandings and realising that defences are joint creations.
learn to confront defensiveness without producing more defensiveness. … do so by self-disclosure and by inquiring into the causes of their own defensiveness. … statements acknowledge the speaker’s experience of uneasiness and invite a joint inquiry into its causes. The skills of defusing defensive routines are essentially the same skills for strengthening the ‘fundamental solution.’
… learn to recognise the signals and learn how to acknowledge the defensiveness without provoking more defensiveness. (The Fifth Discipline)
… the skills of reflection and mutual inquiry. By inquiring effectively into the causes of the problems at hand … reveal your own assumptions and reasoning, make them open to influence, and encourage others to do likewise … defensive routines sre less likely to come into play. … teams have unique capabilities for transcending defensiveness – if there is genuine commitment to learning. What is required … is a vision of what we really want … and a ruthless commitment to telling the truth about our ‘current reality’. In the presence of a genuinely shared vision, defensive routines become just another aspect of ‘current reality’. … defensive routines can actually become a source of energy rather than inertia. … providing a signal when learning is occurring. (The Fifth Discipline)
Defensive routines … drain energy and sap people’s spirits. … the transformation of potentially divisive conflict and defensiveness into learning, (The Fifth Discipline)

Resistance (defensive retreat):
Interpersonal relationships – proactive, cohesion
Intergroup relationships – alienated
Communications – ritualised
Leadership and decision making – autocratic
Problem handling – mechanistic
Planning and goal setting – expedient
Structure – traditional

Source of resistance:
Threat to core skills and competences, threat to status, threat to power base

Individual response to change:
Anger
Personal agendas uppermost
Dispute about focus/priorities
Resistance to task demands because they interfere with personal needs
Minimal task accomplishment
High energy or withdrawal
Lack of method and method
Tensions, disagreements, anger, anxiety, cynicism, scapegoats
Hidden agenda
Disillusion
Power games
Disagreements, conflicts and arguments
Who is in charge? Who does what? How? In what order?
Members are resisting and challenging tasks to achieve harmonious functioning state
Degree of tension and anxiety
Members sensitive and defensive

Task orientation:
Resisting validity of task / people react emotionally towards demands of task / experimental hostility where high personal commitment is required
Primary concerns are roles
Designated leader leads and controls as little as possible so as to encourage others to lead, task is to keep group as focused as possible – often needs to admit weakness and risk accusation of failing to lead
Refuse to be the leader group clamours for – empty self of need to control – need to talk / provide answers – enter a state of helplessness – allows group to learn how to go into emptiness (The Different Drum)

Group structure:
Conflict emerges between subgroups / ambivalence to leader / fighting/flighting / defensiveness, competition, jealousy
Prevalent conflict style is competing (‘infighting’)
Infighting, defensiveness and competition
Polarisation of team members
Experimentation
Relationships becoming significant
Alliances and cliques
Personal strengths and weaknesses known
Team leader’s performance evaluated
Team needs emerge
Climate volatile
Informal leaders may emerge, be toppled
Small cliques/factions may form

Tactics:
Allow ‘baggage dumping’ sessions, avoid the personal, maintain control
Possible ways assisting group through process:
Open recognition of conflict, anger / opportunities to express ideas, which are valued by leader if not whole group / allow constructive challenge

Actions:
Recognise power sources – get them on side, analyse forces for/against change, recognise feelings, avoid threats to autonomy and security, obtain top management support, avenues of appeal
Ask with diplomacy and sensitivity, negotiate in healthy way and maintain assertiveness
The degree of turbulence necessitates, as a first step, that leaders focus on values, approach problems with an elegant simplicity and think holistically. Little will be possible, however, if the bonding needed to allow team members to move into unsafe territory, is not firmly affixed – if community is not central to the human chemistry. (Beyond values)

 

[Ollie]

Stage 3 – emptiness (norming)

Sacrificial stage of emptiness (feels more like jumping into a void) is bridge between chaos and community
Emptiness makes room for the Other – the Stranger/other person … Emptiness: let Other in and listen; silence – use to lead to emptiness in community building; needs discipline and courageous honesty and self-knowledge; decentralisation of ego.
Prejudice – judge without experience at unconscious level or basis of brief, limited experience – need time to become conscious and then empty
Emptiness is an ongoing process
… empty of old (past experiences/differences) for new to enter – to be transformed (in different ways) – capacity makes us different people (variability)
Emptiness (the hard part) of barriers to communications, feelings, assumptions, ideas and motives (impervious)
ie expectations and perceptions, prejudices / ideology, theology and solutions / need to heal, convert, fix or solve / need to control (The Different Drum)

Need to examine motives for acting as if task to heal/convert – people cannot by themselves heal/convert … need empty self of desire to fix people – allow others to be self (atmosphere of respect and safety) for healing/conversion to effortlessly occur without anyone pushing it (The Different Drum)

Phases for the evolution of the container (in which dialogue can take place)
inquiry in the container – with people inquiring into polarisation and fragmentation. At this phase people often experience collective pain as the depth of disconnection is held by the group. … (William N Isaac’s take on dialogue)

… groups go through five stages on their way from unproductive discussions to dialogue.
Stage 4 – Community dialogue or embracing the enemy – authenticity and vulnerability. Discarding of biases (Robert Hargrove on Dialogue)

Celebrate and appreciate interpersonal differences … empty self of own solutions and work together
‘Little death’ of individuals – when complete, open and empty – community – laughter and joy
Bridge between chaos and community – emptiness, depression and psych-death ie remove limiting beliefs and accept own part in cause – ‘give up’ and surrender (The Different Drum)
Does communication lead to greater/lesser understanding among human beings? Overall purpose of communication is reconciliation – remove barriers of misunderstanding between people – ultimate purpose is love and harmony (The Different Drum)

Perception is most powerful when it engages both memory and experience. This empowers conversation to become real exploration. Real conversation … creates community. (Anama Cara)

… participants treat each other with respect, that conflict inevitably seems to yield deeper outcomes, and high energy – often experienced as playful, …(Emerging Order in Open Space)

… ‘openness’ – both the norm of speaking openly and honestly about important issues and the capacity continually to challenge one’s own thinking.
… a sense of trust that comes naturally with self-disclosure and honestly sharing our highest aspirations. Getting started is a simple as setting people in small circles and asking them to talk about ‘What’s really important to them?’ When people begin to state and hear each other’s visions, the foundation of the political environment begins to crumble. … the process of committing to live by certain basic values also undermines internal politics.
… openness is a complex and subtle concept, which can be understood only in light of the disciplines of working with mental models and team learning. (The Fifth Discipline)

Participative openness, the freedom to speak one’s mind, is the most commonly recognised aspect of openness. … participative management is widely espoused … yet, little real learning takes place … people only feel safe sharing their views to a degree. … on a deeper level, no one’s view is changing or being effected. After stating our opinions, if we don’t agree, we simply conclude that ‘people are different’ and go our separate ways. Participative openness leads to more ‘buy in’ on certain decisions, but by itself it will rarely lead to better quality decisions because it does not influence the thinking behind people’s positions. … it focuses purely on the ‘means’ … not on the interaction (quality and action over time). (The Fifth Discipline)

Reflective openness starts with the willingness to challenge our own thinking, to recognise that any certainty we ever had is, at best, a hypothesis about the world. … subject to test and improvement.
Reflective openness is based on the skills of reflection and inquiry. … recognising espoused theory from theory-in-use, and becoming more aware of and responsible for what we are thinking and not saying. These are also the skills of dialogue and dealing with defensive routines.
The key … is both making it safe to speak openly and developing the skills to productively challenge one’s own and other’s thinking.
… how subtle openness can be … reflective openness is based on skills, not just good intentions. … being able to distinguish ‘facts’ (direct observations) from generalisations. Nothing undermines openness more surely than certainty. Once we feel as if we have the answer, all motivation to question our thinking disappears. (The Fifth Discipline)

To search for understanding knowing that there is no ultimate answer, becomes a creative process – one which involves rationality but also something more. … the state of being open. … any answer is at best an approximation – always subject to improvement, never final.
Then curiosity … is free to surface. We come to peace knowing that we do not know. (The Fifth Discipline)

Openness goes beyond a personal quality. It’s a relationship you have with others. It is a change in spirit, as well as a set of skills and practices. … openness as a characteristic of relationships. … openness emerges when two or more individuals become willing to suspend their certainty in each other’s presence. They become willing to share their thinking and susceptible to having their thinking influenced by one another. … they gain access to depths of understanding not accessible otherwise. … building relationships characterised by openness may be one of the most high-leverage actions to build organisations characterised by openness.
The impulse towards openness, … ‘is the spirit of love.’ … the type of love that underlies openness, … It has everything to do with intentions – commitment to serve one another, and willingness to be vulnerable in the context of that service. … the full and unconditional commitment to another’s ‘completion,’ to another being all that she or he can and wants to be. … notion of ‘ruthless compassion’, which brooks no compromise in sharing one’s feelings and views and being open to having those views change. (The Fifth Discipline)

Openness requires us to be vulnerable (Jesus – salvation) – emotional pain – to be ‘hurt’ but not ‘damaged’ (healing)
Decide with whom, when, and how to be vulnerable and to what degree to live life to its fullest – be willing to share self with and for others – including risk of rejection and being taken advantage of (in weakness, strength) – ‘honesty’
Community is ‘a safe place’ – free to be self – accepted and acceptable – able to be vulnerable
A safe place to experiment with love and trust – drop barriers (The Different Drum)

Through mostly informal means we found ourselves building a sense of trust, of commitment to each other. This enabled us to speak our minds, examine our assumptions, and open up to one another. … For dialogue to happen, participants must create a place where people can allow themselves to be vulnerable – a safe place. (Dialogue on dialogue)

Need for ‘soft individualism’ – cannot truly be ourselves until able to share freely things have in common – weaknesses, incompleteness etc (self seeps out and other seep in)
Learn to lower defences, accept and rejoice in differences, transform them into golden harmony (The Different Drum)

There is a deep need in each of us to belong to some cluster of friendship and affinity in which the games of impression and power are at a minimum and we can allow ourselves to be seen as we really are, where we can express what we really believe and where we learn to see who we are, what our needs are and the unsuspecting effect our thinking and presence have on other lives. The true realisation of individuality requires the shelter of acceptance and the clear pruning blade of criticism. Individualism is the enemy of real individuality. (Eternal Echoes)

Contemplation is awareness, an essential part of community (we, our)
True communities (an ‘organisation’) are self-aware – contemplative and empty
Be empty and listen – make it a habit … empty requires negation of self and need to know; a sacrifice … ‘trust’ unconscious mind (it is always one step ahead of conscious mind) – be comfortable with ambiguity – paradox, ie both/and (The Different Drum)

... (communication and decision-making skills) need to be reinforced by a deep commitment to listening to others. … receptively to what is being said (and not being said). Listening also encompasses getting in touch with one’s own inner voice and seeking to understand what one’s body, spirit and mind are communicating. Listening, coupled with regular periods of reflection, is essential …
General awareness, and especially self-awareness, strengthens … Awareness also aids one in understanding issues involving ethics and values. It leads itself to being able to view most situations from a more integrated, holistic position. (Servant Leadership)

… a combination of articulating my views, and learning more about other’s views – balancing inquiry and advocacy. … advocates … debate forcefully and influence others. Inquiry skills … tap insights from other people. … advocacy can be stopped by beginning to ask a few questions. … ‘What is it that leads you to that position?’ and ‘Can you illustrate your point to me?’ (Can you provide some ‘data’ or experience in supporting it?)
productive learning normally occurs when … combine skills of advocacy and inquiry. Another way to say this is ‘reciprocal inquiry’. … everyone makes his or her thinking explicit and subject to public examination. … creates … genuine vulnerability. … goal is to find the best argument.
… when both inquiry and advocacy are high, we are open to disconfirming data as well as confirming data – because we are genuinely interested in finding flaws in our views … expose our reasoning and look for flaws in it, … understand others’ reasoning. … patience and perseverance needed to move towards a more balanced approach.
… practising inquiry and advocacy means being willing to expose the limitations of one’s own thinking - the willingness to be wrong. Nothing less will make it safe for others to do likewise. … recognising the gap between our ‘espoused theories’ (what we say) and our ‘theories-in-use’ (the theories that lie behind our actions) is vital. … Until the gap between our espoused theory and current behaviour is recognised, no learning can occur. (The Fifth Discipline)

… first stage was learning how to inquire into others’ views when I do not agree with them. … asking the other person to say more about how he came to his view, or to expand further on his view. … second stage of stating my views so as to invite others to inquire into them as well. … when there is inquiry and advocacy, creative outcomes are much more likely.
… guidelines (to keep in mind while mastering the discipline of balancing inquiry and advocacy)

When advocating your view:
• make your own reasoning explicit (ie say how you arrived at your view, on what data based)
• encourage others to explore your view (eg ‘Do you see any gaps in my reasoning?’)
• encourage others to provide different views (ie ‘Do you have either different data or different conclusions, or both?’)
• actively inquire into others’ views that differ from your own (ie ‘What are your views?’ ‘How did you arrive at your view?’ ‘Are you taking into account data that are different from what I have considered?’)

When inquiring into others’ views:
• if you are making assumptions about others’ views, state your assumptions clearly and acknowledge that they are assumptions
• state the ‘data’ upon which your assumptions are based
• don’t bother asking questions if you are not genuinely interested in the others’ response (ie you’re only trying to be polite or show the others up) (The Fifth Discipline)

When you arrive at an impasse (others no longer appear to be open to enquiring into their own views):
• ask what data or logic might change their views
• ask if there is any way you might together design an experiment (or some other inquiry) that might provide new information
When you or others are hesitant to express your views or to experiment with alternative ideas:
• encourage them (or you) to think out loud about what might be making it difficult (ie What is it about this situation, and about me or others, that is making open exchange difficult?’)
• if there is mutual desire to do so, design with others ways of overcoming these barriers (The Fifth Discipline)

… dialogue … flow of meaning between people … accesses a larger ‘pool of common meaning’ which cannot be accessed individually. ‘The whole organises the parts.’ The purpose of a dialogue is to go beyond any one individual’s understanding. … not trying to win … pool of common meaning, which is capable of constant development and change. In dialogue, … explores complex difficult issues from many points of view. Suspend their assumptions but communicate their assumptions freely. ‘The purpose of dialogue is to reveal the incoherence in our thoughts.’ ‘Thought denies that it is participative.’ Thought stops tracking reality and ‘just goes like a program.’ … establishes its own standards of reference for fixing problems, … which it contributed towards creating in the first place. ‘… presents itself (stands in front) of us and pretends that it does not represent.’ … like actors who forget they are playing a role. We become trapped in the theatre of our thoughts. … This is when thought starts … to ‘incoherent.’ ‘Reality may change but the theatre continues.’ … losing touch with the larger reality from which the theatre is ‘generated. Dialogue is a way of helping people to ‘see representative and participatory nature of thought … to become more sensitive to and make safe to acknowledge the incoherence in our own thought. In dialogue people become observers of their own thinking. ‘… our thoughts and the way we hold on to them that are in conflict, not us.’ … begin to separate themselves from their thought. … begin to take a more creative, less reactive, stance towards their thought. ‘Language, … is entirely collective.’ ‘And without language, thought as we know it couldn’t be there.’ … ‘thinking’ is an ongoing process as distinct from ‘thoughts’, the results of the process.
We misperceive the thoughts as our own, because we fail to see the stream of collective thinking from which they arise. … dialogue … capable of constant development and change. … capable of gathering in the subtle meaning in the flow of thinking. Through dialogue people can help each other to become aware of the incoherence in each other’s thoughts, and in this way the collective thought become more and more coherent. … all … work together to become sensitive to all the possible forms of incoherence. … our thinking is producing consequences that we don’t really want. … three basic conditions are necessary for dialogue:
• all participants must ‘suspend’ their assumptions, literally to hold them ‘as if suspended before us’;
• all participants must regard one another as colleagues;
• there must be a ‘facilitator’ who ‘holds the context’ of dialogue.

These conditions contribute to allowing the ‘free flow of meaning’ – by diminishing resistance to the flow.
… suspending assumptions must be done collectively … assumptions … held up and contrasted with each others’ assumptions.
Thought continually deludes us into a view that ‘this is the way it is.’ Dialogue can only occur when a group of people see each other as colleagues in mutual quest for deeper insight and clarity. … In dialogue people actually feel as if they are building something, a new deeper understanding. … this feeling of friendship developing even towards others with whom they do not have much in common … necessary … willingness to consider each others as colleagues. … acknowledges the mutual risk and establishes the sense of safety in facing the risk, Choosing to view ‘adversaries’ as ‘colleagues with different views’ has the greatest benefits. Hierarchy is antithetical to dialogue.
Dialogue is ‘playful’, it requires the willingness to play with new ideas, to examine them and test them. (The Fifth Discipline)

In an assembly … 20 – 40 people, extremes of frustrations, anger, conflict or other difficulties may occur, but in a group of this size such problems can be contained with relative ease. In fact, they can become a central focus of the exploration in what might be understood as a kind of ‘meta-dialogue’, aimed at clarifying the process of dialogue itself.
As sensitivity and experience increase, a perception of shared meaning emerges in which people find that they are neither opposing one another, nor are they simply interacting. Increasing trust between members of the group – and of trust in the process itself – leads to the expression of the sorts of thoughts and feelings that are usually kept hidden. There is no imposed consensus, nor is there any attempt to avoid conflict. No single individual or sub-group is able to achieve dominance because every single subject, including domination and submission, is always available to be considered.
As this (‘impersonal’) fellowship is experienced it begins to take precedence over the more overt content of the conversation. It is an important stage in the dialogue, a moment of increased coherence, where the group is able to move beyond its perceived blocks or limitations and into new territory. But it is also a point at which a group may begin to relax and bask in the ‘high’ that accompanies the experience. This is the point that sometimes causes confusion between dialogue and some forms of psychotherapy. Participants may want to hold the group together in order to preserve the pleasurable feeling of security and belonging that accompanies the state. This is similar to that sense of community often reached in therapy groups or in team building workshops where it is taken to be the evidence of the success of the method used. Beyond such a point, however, lie an even more significant and subtle realms of creativity, intelligence and understanding that can be approached only by persisting in the process of inquiry and risking re-entry into areas of potentially chaotic or frustrating uncertainty.

How to start dialogue:
Suspension – of thoughts, impulses, judgements etc, lies at the heart of dialogue. … It is not easily grasped because the activity is both unfamiliar and subtle. Suspension involves attention, listening and looking is essential to exploration. … the actual process of exploration takes place during listening – not only to others but to oneself. Suspension involves exposing your reactions, impulses, feelings and opinions in such a way that they can be seen in such a way and felt within your own psyche and also be reflected back by others in the group. It does not mean repressing or suppressing or, even, postponing them. It simply means, giving them serious attention so that their structures can be noticed while they are actually taking place. … give attention, …sustain that attention, the activity of the thought process will tend to slow you down. This may permit you to begin to see the deeper meaning underlying your thought process and to sense the often incoherent structure of any action that you might otherwise carry out automatically. Similarly, if a group is able to suspend such feelings and give its attention to them then the overall process that flows from thoughts, to feelings, to acting – out within the group, can also slow down and reveal its deeper, more subtle meanings along with any of its implicit distortions, leading to what might be described as a new kind of coherent, collective intelligence.
Leadership – dialogue is essentially a conversation between equals. Any controlling authority, … will tend to hinder and inhibit the free play of thought and the often delicate and subtle feelings that would otherwise be shared. Dialogue is invaluable to being manipulated, but its spirit is not consistent with this. Hierarchy has no place in dialogue.
The creative potential of dialogue is great enough to allow a temporary suspension of any of the structures and relationships that go to make up an organisation.
The spirit of dialogue is one of free play, a sort of collective dance of the mind, that, nevertheless, has immense power and reveals coherent purpose. Once begun it becomes continuing adventure that can open the way to significant and creative change. (Dialogue – a proposal)

Social change requires co-operation, an opening up of people’s thinking to others for challenge, a willingness to change mindsets to see situations more accurately from different perspectives and developing a collective awareness of when people are avoiding reflecting their own defences. … dialogue is required for people to become observers of their own, and others’ thinking processes ad opening up their views to influence. A process to help this happen is … Argyris’ left-hand column exercise, enhanced by Satir’s family therapy process.

Facilitator to both A and B
‘What is your experience of being here now?’
‘How do you feel about being here now?’
‘Is this relationship worth improving and getting (a positive contextual outcome)?’
‘Is it worth both of you doing whatever is necessary to achieve this?’
B sets the specific context
A talks about how she’s been trying to get a solution, trying to decide a way forward.

Facilitator to B
‘What are you seeing and hearing, give examples’ (selection)
‘What meaning do you make of what you are seeing and hearing?’ (creation)
‘What are your feelings about these meanings?’ (activation)
‘What are your feelings about these feelings?’ (activates survival rules, self-esteem)
‘What are you thinking whilst A is talking?’ (hidden assumptions)

Facilitator to A
‘What are you thinking whilst you were talking?’ (hidden assumptions)
Now A sets the specific context
B talks and repeats the above process, reversing the roles of A and B
Facilitator to both A and B
‘What defences are you using: protection; denial or; ignoring?’ (old learnings)
‘What are your rules for commenting: see what I should; say what is expected; feel what I ought; wait for permission or; choose to be secure?’
‘What is learnt from now?’
‘What are the prevailing assumptions?’

For dialogue to be successful, participants must be schooled in the process. Users (those who choose to use dialogue as a method of collaboration) must understand the goals and potential of this process (Overview of the underpinning dialogue)
As teams develop experience and skills in dialogue … facilitator becomes … gradually … just another one of the participants. Dialogue emerges from the ‘leaderless’ group once team members have developed their skills and understanding. In a discussion, decisions are made. Through dialogue, … gain tangible experience of the deeper intelligence that can operate. … the skills for seeing rather than obscuring current reality. … committed not only to telling the truth about what is going on ‘out there’ .. but also about what’s going on ‘in here’ (The Fifth Discipline)
But if we acted on our own initiative – if we were mindful of each other – then you don’t have to have a formal facilitator. (Dialogue on dialogue)
… experience the mystery and power of self-organisation …
… our learnings will not be of the sort we have experienced in the past. No longer will it be necessary to learn the fundamentals of self-managed work groups, empowered and distributed leadership, community building, and appreciation of diversity as a resource and not as a problem to be managed. We might … learn to do them better, but when the essential conditions of self-organisation are met, all of the above seems to happen, almost in spite of ourselves.
(Emerging Order in Open Space)

Initial guidelines for dialogue:
• suspend assumptions and certainties
• observe the observer
• listen to your listening
• slow down the inquiry
• be aware of the thought
• befriend polarisation (William N Isaac’s take on dialogue)
… dialogue … at heart a kind of social relation that engages its participants. It entails certain virtues and emotions. … lists some of the these:
• concern – in being with our partners in conversation, to engage them with us, there is more going on than talk about the overt topic. There is a social bond that entails interest in, and a commitment to the other.
• trust – we have to take what others are saying on faith, and there can be some risk in this.
• respect – while there may be large differences between partners in conversation, the process can go on if there is mutual respect. This involves the idea that everyone is equal in some basic way and entails a commitment to being fair-minded, opposing degradation and rejecting exploitation.
• appreciation – linked to respect, this entails valuing the unique qualities others bring.
• affection – conversation involves a feeling with, and for, our partners.
• hope – while not being purely emotional, hope is central. We engage in conversation in the belief that it holds possibility. Often it is not clear what we will gain or learn, but faith in the inherent value of education carries us forward.
… dialogue could increase and enrich corporate activity – in part through the exploration and questioning of ‘inherent, predetermined purpose and goals.’ (Dialogue and Conversation)
As in many senior management groups, the agenda for the weekly Chief and Staff meetings was guarded as closely as Fort Knox, all in the name of efficiency. The gain in efficiency, however was often balanced by a loss in effectiveness, as only those things officially on the agenda could be discussed. The rest remained unspoken, and possibly unspeakable.
… but when the ‘unspeakable’ remains unspoken, important business may be neglected. Worse yet, everybody knows, but nobody can do anything, for the issues can never come up officially. OS can change all that. Everyone has the right and responsibility to place items on the agenda, which allows the unspeakable to be spoken.
… Nothing had worked. They sat like bumps on a log. Then he tried OST, and his problem was reversed. The people became involved, and he had but one option. Get out of the way.
… All the leadership came from the trenches.
… the critical element necessary for their resolution was set in place: communication. People found they could talk and work together. (In the beginning)
Mystic – communal stage of spiritual development
Mystics extol the virtues of emptiness … Mystics most aware of world as a community (lack of awareness is division of warring camps) … Mystics empty perceptions and prejudices to perceive invisible – unity the underlying fabric connecting (The Different Drum)
Talk about God with humility and a sense of humour. (The Different Drum)
Exploration (reality acceptance, acknowledgement):
Interpersonal relationships – confrontation (supportive)
Intergroup relationships – mutuality
Communications – searching
Leadership and decision making – participative
Problem handling – explorative
Planning and goal setting – synthesising
Structure – experimenting

Source of resistance:
Custom bound, reluctance to let go, reluctance to experiment
Individual response to change:
Refusal to accept
Acceptance of team, team norms and own roles
An attempt to achieve maximum harmony by avoiding conflict
Moderate task accomplishment
Question performance
Assertiveness
Problems are identified and aired
Members constructively start to ask for and give opinions
Members push themselves to be as vulnerable as possible - expose selves, listen to others with emptiness of judgement and openness
A sharing of ‘brokenness’(vulnerability to show weaknesses) – defeats, failures, fears, etc (The Different Drum)

Task orientation:
Asking and giving opinions / Ability to express feelings to help the task / Plans are made and work
Primary concerns are processes
Review goals and objectives
Review team and individual performance
Open up risky issues
Question assumptions and values
Question commitment
Deal with animosities
To be an effective leader sit back, do nothing, wait, let it happen, as need for control is rooted in fear of failure – empty self of this … increase capacity for surrender – ‘life is not a problem to be solved but a mystery to be lived’ (The Different Drum)

Group structure:
Group cohesion develops / norms merge / authority problems resolved / members identify with the group
Prevalent conflict style is compromise (‘experimentation’)
Sense of team cohesiveness
Establishment and maintenance of team boundaries
Leadership/management discussed
Sense of cohesiveness and purpose starting to emerge
Boundaries of group are more clearly established and maintained
Authority problems resolved
Unity and solidarity grows

Tactics:
Question concerns, paint future picture, test own reality
Possible ways assisting group through process:
Allow time for work/talk to begin / draw up plans, make preliminary decisions
Integrity – what is missing, left out?
Meditation (‘beyond our control’) provides a means to empty minds – ‘no mind’ a means to an end (as nature abhors a vacuum) – fills with learning (unforeseen, unexpected, new)
Exercises to assist towards greater trust, intimacy, sensibility and communication skills – silence, stories, dreams, prayers, song, liturgy, confronting re-entry (The Different Drum)

Actions:
Break change into bite size chunks, model new way of doing it, set the stage for change, training, simplicity, small steps
For emptiness to work ask – ‘How is it doing?’ ‘Where does it need to go (community)?’
‘Silence the familiar’ – empty self of semantics (expectations) and traditional (culture) images … empty: go against flow of need to know; submit self to not knowing, put self aside to help others; to understand others, to listen for empathy (foreign to ego)
Silence is the ultimate facilitation of emptiness – for reflection and emptying
Need to give up all that stands in the way – ‘sacrifice’(The Different Drum)

 

[Ollie]

Stage 4 – community (perform)

Paradox in being social creatures and needing others for meaning
Appreciate differences as gifts and slowly incorporate them into self (and thus whole) see differences as individual limitations leading to interdependence ie continuums (paradoxes) of:
wholeness --- incompleteness
call to power --- recognise weaknesses
individual --- interdependence
individualism --- social community
Jesus is both human and divine (today people acknowledge divinity and not humanity – live it) (The Different Drum)
‘Individuation’ (Carl Jung) – goal of human development – becoming fully individual self – unique and different – wholeness – self sufficiency (work on weaknesses for balance) – call to power – responsibility, autonomy of self-determination – independent thought and action – separate self (‘out of step’) from parents and culture etc (ie get out of step with crowd) (The Different Drum)
Communities experience more tension (vibrancy, full life) than other organisations – people hunger for genuine community … causing parameters of tension: size; structure; authority; inclusivity; intensity; commitment; individuality; task definition; ritual
Constant competitiveness, hostility and distrust are anti-community … ‘friction’ is OK – serves to refine the behaviour of the whole creating balance and wisdom
Community is a safe place for ‘appropriate’ conflict (doubt, disagreement, criticism and confrontation) welcomed and faced – ‘graceful fighting’ (turmoil and struggle) – love
A submission to humanity – peace over power (rugged individualism) ‘game playing’ (The Different Drum)
After everyone has expressed feelings only then can spirit of joy return to group
Community – laughter, peace and joy
Truly successful community laughs and celebrates with frequent gusto (The Different Drum)
A basic purpose of community is support of all individual members
Socialisation ‘learning to do what we have to do’ – culture values and transcending them (human differences)
Real community – honesty and openness prevail
True meaning of community – group of individuals learnt how to communicate honestly with each other, deep relationships, developed some significant commitment to … inclusive, commitment and consensus – freedom to speak mind. … consensus, its process is an adventure (mystical and magical)
Key to community is acceptance – celebration – of individual/cultural differences (as become more adept at recognising our flaws to cure them, so also recognise flaws in others – to accept (love) others, flaws and all – ‘love one another’
People working together in love and commitment (The Different Drum)

The perfect community would be a place of justice, equality, care and creativity. Humans have wonderful abilities and gifts. Yet our ability to live together in an ideal way remains underdeveloped. All community seems to have its shadows and darkness. The ideal of creation is community, ie a whole diversity of presences which belong together in some minimal harmony. Nature is a wonderful community that manages to balance light and dark, destructfulness and creativity with incredible poise.
A new sense of community could gradually surface if we called upon some of these virtues (care, sympathy, justice, confidence and loyalty) to awaken.
If humankind could only let its fear and prejudices go, it would gradually learn the inestimable riches and nourishment that diversity brings. Community can never be the answer to all our questions or all our longings. But it can encourage us, provoke us to raise questions and voice our desires.
When there is an affinity of thought between people and an openness top exploration, a real community of understanding and spirit can begin to grow. Where equality is grounded in difference, closeness is difficult but patience with it brings great fruits. Such a community is truthful and real. (Eternal Echoes)

… reliance on persuasion, rather than using one’s positional authority, in making decisions within an organisation. (Servant Leadership)

In a dialogue, complex issues are explored. … discussions converge on a conclusion … dialogue are diverging … seek a richer group of complex issues. A unique relationship develops among team members who enter into dialogue regularly. They develop a deep trust that cannot help but carry over to discussions. They develop a richer understanding of the uniqueness of each person’s point of view. … experience how larger understandings emerge by holding one’s own point of view ‘gently’ ... master the art of holding a position, rather than being ‘held by their positions.’ When it is appropriate to defend a point of view, they do it more gracefully and with less rigidity, … dialogue … ‘focusing down’ type of consensus that seeks a common denominator in multiple individual views, and an ‘opening up’ type of consensus that seeks a picture larger than any one person’s point of view. … Each person’s view is a unique perspective on a larger reality. If I can ‘look out’ through your view and you through mine, we will each see something we might not have seen alone.
… reflection and inquiry skills provide a foundation for dialogue and discussion. … most reliable indicator of a team that is continually learning is the visible conflict of ideas. In great teams conflict becomes productive. The free flow of conflicting ideas is critical for creative thinking. Conflict becomes, in effect, part of the ongoing dialogue … (The Fifth Discipline)

Participants find that they are involved in an ever changing and developing pool of common meaning. A shared content of consciousness emerges which allows a level of creativity and insight that is not generally available to individuals or to groups that interact in more familiar ways. This reveals an aspect of dialogue … ‘impersonal fellowship’, which was originally used to describe the early form of Athenian democracy in which all the free men gathered to govern themselves. (Dialogue – a proposal)

The process of revealing rather than exposing promotes collaborative learning, releases energy to tap into people’s creative potential and develops social responsibility over individualism.
… individuality free from the dogma of religion and nationality
… interaction between participants in dialogue enables authentic existence. (Overview of the underpinning dialogue)

Phases for the evolution of the container (in which dialogue can take place)
creativity in the container – where new understandings based on collective perceptions emerge and people engage in more generative thinking together (William N Isaac’s take on dialogue)

… groups go through five stages on their way from unproductive discussions to dialogue.
Stage 5 – Generative dialogue – creating something new (Robert Hargrove on Dialogue)

Is humanity moving out of age of excessive specialisation into an age of integration? … to ecology
Unity is the underlying connectedness between things – we are all integral parts of the same unity
Community is wholistic, welcoming diversity and integrating human beings into a functioning mystical body (integrity and integration) (The Different Drum)
Co-operative level of functioning – servant leadership (The Different Drum)

Commitment (adjustment change, growth):
Interpersonal relationships – interdependent
Intergroup relationships – co-ordinated
Communications – authentic, congruent
Leadership and decision making – task-centred
Problem handling – flexible
Planning and goal setting – exhaustive and integrated
Structure – organic

Source of resistance:
Strong peer pressures
Individual response to change:
Bargaining
Proactive problem solving
Collaborative conflict resolution
Members experience insight into personal and interpersonal processes
Flexibility
Learning and growth
Strong drive towards group goals
Personal issues kept out of the way
Ask for, and give suggestions to improve performance

Task orientation:
Strong goal orientation / insight and understanding
Primary concerns are relationships
Goals are achieved and exceeded

Group structure:
Clear but flexible roles / pragmatism in support of task / satisfaction on achievement
Prevalent conflict style is collaborations (‘maturity’)
Looking for improvements in team efficiency
Leadership style determined by situation
Open relationships
Effective boundary maintenance with other groups
Compatibility of individual and team roles
Mutual trust
Confrontation
Risk taking
Pride in group
Concern for people
Commitment, loyalty and objectivity
Members performing effectively for good of group re task in-hand
Settled existence with clear but flexible roles
Share common insight – who are, what doing and reason
Group feeling / common task or purpose / norms of behaviour / values, attitudes and expectations / roles / role relationships
Structure clear but informal – eg no agenda to meetings – vulnerability is only rule
Genuine community has no leader – consensual decision making –facilitating lack of structure – authority structure is destructive to community
Elected official (leader) empowered only to represent group externally … decision making remains consensual, with a lack of authority structure – community is autonomous
Individuality – activity sanctioned by community to happen … alliances between individuals is highly discouraged … high degree of commitment required (The Different Drum)

Tactics:
Nip it in the bud, confront concerns, maintain focus on reality
Possible ways assisting group through process:
Let them do it and join in if appropriate
Share clear objectives and goals: clarify roles, agree differences are tolerable, discuss values and underlying philosophy of team
Climate of support and trust: Respect, Empathy, Genuineness, feelings recognised and dealt with, build on strengths, people give and ask for support, spend time together
Open lines of communications: feedback given, contributions recognised, horizontal discussion of issues, work discussions same in/outside work, people open to influence
Recognise conflict is inevitable and can be constructive: issues dealt with immediately and openly, assertive, encouragement to contribute ideas, problems are normal and dealt with constructively, unhelpful competition minimised, discussion problem centred (not blame), people use ‘I’ not ‘you’ statements
Clear procedures: decision making, delegating responsibilities, meetings

Leadership processes with people:
Offer ideas but not treat these as more important than those of other groups
Check from time to time whether people are happy with how things are going
Uses fun to make work more enjoyable
Helps people talk about disagreements and look for what they can agree about
Makes sure everyone has a chance to take part
Let group members decide instead of just pushing own ideas
Uses names when speaking to people
Share appreciation of what has been done
Checks everyone happy with what has been achieved

Actions:
Pay the price for change, new blood, offer new worthwhile experiences, reduce not increase burdens
Sort a ritual to end with both drama and grace – help return to ‘life’ outside the group – re-entry (The Different Drum)

 

[Ollie]

Stage 5 – maintenance

Community (flow in and out) needs maintenance due to entrenched patterns of behaviour/thoughts that people fall back into (every organisation exists in tension – required for life
Chaos will return – sort what needs to be changed – emptied, then, turn outwards into larger society – social action (‘being takes precedence over doing’)
Contemplation is awareness, an essential part of community (we, our)
Inclusivity of genuine community is never total or absolute (The Different Drum)

It takes a significant amount of effort to build community, but it takes even more effort – ongoing effort - to maintain it. The biggest problem with community maintenance, as with community start-up is the problem of organisations simply being willing to pay the price – which is primarily, a price of time.
It’s also a price of ongoing vulnerability. And it is the price of being willing to continually re-examine your norms. Sometimes the price is having to repeat the work of community-building workshops, or having consultants work with you.
What characterises a healthy on-going sustained community is the rapidity with which it is able to say, ‘Hey we’ve lost it. We need to get back and work on ourselves.’ (The Joy of Community)

This is our purpose for being together. And that statement has to be re-examined, ritualistically, every couple of years. Doing this requires that the organisation’s cultural values be explicit ... These values (FEC’s) include openness, being willing to be challenged, to re-look at norms, being willing to change. There has to be love and respect … but there also has to be valid data. There has to be a kind of tension between caring and a terrible dedication to reality.
A critical part of the art of sustaining community is integration of task and process. Task is working on … mission, and process is working on yourselves as a community. This art requires an enormous amount of practice. (The Joy of Community)

… we work by doing the community process first and then going on to the task. … one exercise that is not gentle. For groups that are interested in issues of sustainability, and task versus process, we will them work on themselves as a community for 15 mins. … at 15 mins the leader will snap his or her fingers and say ‘Now start working on your task, your mission statement’. … after a while … the leader can make a snap of his or her fingers and say ‘Now back to your process.’ Now in reality, you want to be much more artistic than that, rather than switching by rote every 15 mins. But we use this rather brutal exercise just to demonstrate to groups how they can overcome their inertia. It shows that it is possible for a group of human beings to switch like that at a moment’s notice. (The Joy of Community)

… now it’s not enough to go into an organisation just to build community, because if you do that and leave, the whole thing collapses two days later. So when we work with organisations, our initial intervention is at least three days. We build community in the first two, then spend a third day have the group make written, consensual decisions about what they are going to do to maintain themselves as a community.
… not sure how sustainable community is unless it has a pretty clearly defined task. (The Joy of Community)

And finally, Robert Hargrove on Dialogue
Collaborations, in contrast, are based on inspiring visions and are deeply purposeful but are focused on practical, down-to-earth day-in/day-out accomplishments that are carried out in conversations.
… collaborative conversation encompasses and builds upon dialogue rather than being a synonym. … dialogue … as a component. Collaborative conversations, in turn, are highly practical, goal related activities. Dialogue is important because it is the primary way by which people think and interact. Lack of dialogue leads to poor decisions, lack of team learning, and a general deterioration of the group. It is more solution oriented than Bohm’s use of dialogue. Collaborative conversations are those in which people in groups seek to realise their noblest aspirations with others from divergent views and backgrounds. This involves reframing the way people think and operate as well as looking for specific implementation solutions.

In order to accomplish collaborative conversations …five phases …in a collaborative conversation:
• clarify the purpose of the conversation
• gather divergent views and perspectives
• build shared understanding of divergent views and perspectives
• create ‘new’ options by connecting different views
• generate a conversation of action

Four levels of collaborative conversations:
1. Conversations in which the group clarifies its purpose.
In reality the only time people will collaborate is when they have a lot at stake. Therefore, the first level of collaborative effort for a group is to have a free and informed discussion about its vision, purpose and goals. Then, the group must create a mission statement. This should be done even in the case of a group assigned to a project by top management.

2. Conversations in which the group builds a community of commitment
On one level, creating a community of commitment involves speaking to the personal visions and purposes that live in people’s minds and hearts. On another level, it involves encouraging people to step back from the front line and engage in a different kind of conversation. The conversations that build community are those where people speak with authenticity and vulnerability about themselves, about one another, and about the problems they are faced with. Building community becomes the cornerstone for productive conversations on issues and problems and makes possible decisions, plans, and strategies that everyone can stand behind.

3. Conversations in which the group learns to think and interact better together.
People normally operate from a ‘cook alone’ or ‘potluck’ model of conversation. ‘You bring your ideas and opinions to the table and I’ll bring mine.’ … People do not disclose the reasoning processes or data that led to the views. In the ‘cook together’ model of conversation people bring their different views and backgrounds along with all the ingredients of their thinking and enter with a shared creative process. Instead of serving up finished products, people take their raw ideas, cook them together with other’s thoughts, question the reasoning process, and perhaps come to a new idea or insight.

4. Conversations in which powerful commitments are made.
It’s important to help them make a distinction between a promise and ‘I’ll try’, between a request and a complaint, and between an offer to do something and an opinion on how things should be done.
The total effect is to provide a solid background to answer questions such as ‘What is dialogue?’ and ‘What good is it?’ along with pragmatic questions such as ‘How do I make it happen?’

And now finally from, Emerging Order in Open Space
One of the more surprising gifts is the Law of Two Feet is the apparent contribution to conflict resolution. … intensely conflicted groups of people find effective and amicable solutions in Open Space without benefit of formal conflict resolution procedure, or any intermediate facilitators.
… participants intensely engage up to the point that they can’t stand it any more, and then exercise the Law of Two Feet. They will walk away, cool off, and come back for more. Apparently the common concern to achieve resolution keeps people together, and the law allows them to separate when things become too hot to handle.
… appear to function more descriptively. … simply acknowledge what people are going to do anyhow. If there is a substantive contribution derived from either principle or law, it is merely to eliminate all guilt. After all, people are going to exercise the law … mentally if not physically, but now they do not have to feel bad about it. … Truthfully, the elimination of major pieces of guilt and blame can go a long way towards the enhancement of group function.

 

[gotogo]

Hi Trevrizent,

I read the first 2 posts (just before the 1st stage).
In fact, it is quite fascinating...

I read 'On Dialogue' by David Bohm just after I left "Fellowship of Friends" last year and start having 'Dialogue' with co-workers who were mostly in leaving process also (we built a IT company together). It was great learning process for all of as to examine what 'assumptions' we had/have and try to See them together through 'Dialogue'. We still have 'Dialogue' time to time but I feel things are changing...

I will continue to read but I am having a difficulty in reading your posts.
The difficulty is from your writing style, I can not distinguish clearly your thoughts from what you quote from books.
Is it intentional for some reasons?

 

[Ollie]

Hi GotoGo

Before answering your question on my ‘writing style’, an aside re your comment about David Bohm and ‘Dialogue’:

Before the Create a New World thread started, I had an intention to start a thread that focused on Bohm’s ‘Dialogue’ work and attendant work from Chris Argyris, both of whom are quoted in the Fifth Discipline in length. This was to be the basis of the post with my comments on how I saw the forum partially using this work, and might wish to use it further in some way. I may still do that. I had forgotten how much of it I had embedded in the above ‘work’. It is sometime since I have had the opportunity to engage in Bohm’s ‘Dialogue’, etc.

To answer your specific question re ‘my writing style’, let me set the context for the start of the work/project, that eventually led to this posting.

One recommendation from my MBA dissertation was: '… To function effectively, it is recommended that the knowledge society needs community rather than culture, where individual freedom, active involvement and responsibility is directly accessible. Social integration and community is accomplished through trust, collaboration and open communications between people engaged in organisations. … ' (2001)

It was after coming to this conclusion that I started to collate material on what I called; creating communication and community’, as a way of moving myself and others forward, in what I perceived as what I wanted to do at that time. Then I came across the Cassiopaea material and reading it at home (I didn’t have access to the internet at home then), took up a lot of my ‘free time’.

The ‘intentional for some reason?’ style results, in part (the reason it is as it is, I will get to later), from my (habitual) way of working over the years. Let me explain the meaning behind that statement: ‘way of working over the years’.

There is an historical pattern in which I come to the end of a number of years of work (work-life) on a specific topic, which may have started from scratch, that I write a ‘book/report’ of what has emerged as ‘best’ practice for others to use as a reference. This ‘reference’ is based on what has on what has worked and the reasons behind the processes involved. In other words, what was learned by both myself and the team that I worked with. The output could be called a ‘process handbook’, for people who have asked me questions about what to do, how to go about what there are doing.

My way of operating is to scour many, relevant, and often irrelevant, sources of theory and practice. I make notes from these as I go along. I usually end up with pages of these notes.

The next stage is to go through these notes and look for patterns, quotes/notes that fit together; that have a form of commonality, fit together. I pool all of these notes together that relate to a particular aspect of the work. Then, I look to find the ‘skeletal framework’ that underpins it all, to use as a base for the work. In this particular case it was Scott-Peck’s and Tuckman’s work . What I then do is ‘flesh out’ the skeletal framework with what goes with (or hangs off the skeleton), each part of the skeletal structure, ie, the individual common findings that fit together in a particular way. Hence, the different topics/posts I used in each post.

Interspersed with the quotes I put in my own practical experience, either as a member of a group undergoing the process or, in this case, as a facilitator as well. In other words, I fit in what knowledge and experience I have personally picked up over the years.

And, the final stage is applying the ‘skin’ to encase the flesh/organs. This is the stage that is missing in the material that I have posted. It is in this stage that I put it all together into a coherent, ‘readable’ form, clearly accrediting quotes as required, and then the rest is my thoughts and understandings, etc. I liken the process to building a mosaic from the individual tiles.

I failed to get this final stage of my project completed; it is where the project stalled seven years ago. In ‘team building’ terminology, I am other than a ‘completer-finisher’.

I have the intention of doing this completion work when I am into my ‘early retirement phase of life’. However, I thought that getting the ‘raw information’ onto the forum was pertinent and important for the reason that you give in your posting on the Creating a New World thread: so it was a case of ‘doing it now’. Perhaps, in doing it this way I have failed in my intention.

Further to ‘The difficulty is from your writing style’, I confess that as an introvert (perhaps that is only a lame excuse, and I expect to get hit for this comment and the next - or is it because I’m an OP?) I am other than a gifted orator or writing. In life, I tend to be a man of few words: pragmatic and to the point (although I am aware that my writing may tend to appear to ramble as I am ‘anxious’ to ‘cram in’ as much information as I have available). In my writing I tend to use quotes a lot, if they resonate with me, and as an example: to quote Psyche in a post (a thread in the Swamp started by mada85) on keeping a journal, that resonates with me, especially the latter part.

“And then I write a passage from a book, I even imagine that it is something that I came up with, like advice from the higher self so to speak.

I could add that probably this is how my higher self has communicated with me in the past, and may still be doing that today, even before I learned how to do ask myself. For as long as I can remember, during my working life I have carried a small notebook around with me, to jot down my thoughts and anything that I come across when I don’t have access to a larger pad of paper. When I was younger, I confess that I didn’t always attribute the author, and possibly still don’t do that enough, as the notes were made on the basis of them being for my own use. I do know that I have improved on that over the years. Having completed an MBA, and working in a Higher Education setting I am all too aware of the problem of plagiarism. In fact, as often as not I have tended to overdo the quote attributes to cover myself.

My perceived difficulty is in reworking quotes in such a way as to avoid losing the original impact of the words. Once I’ve pondered and redrafted and then written, I find it difficult to write it any other way (I guess I’ve identified with the words). Even though involved with computers from an early part of my working life, I am happiest thinking and working with a pencil in my hand. I find putting prose, calculations straight on to the computer less than easy, much to the consternation of my work colleagues.

It was other than intentional to blur my thoughts with what I had quoted from books/journals. It was merely my intent to get the information out into the forum for use, as I felt that the way that interpersonal and group dynamics work in the scenario we are considering was important.

So, in summary, if there is a passage of words/notes with a bracketed quote at the end, that is a book/journal article quote. Otherwise the words/notes are my recall at the time of personal observation and practical experience, or possibly even what I’ve picked up from numerous bits and pieces I’ve read and taken in over the years.

Perhaps I should have taken more note of a line I recall in a children’s book that I read at bedtime as a child. When Noddy was caught speeding in his car; the policeman said ‘… more haste, less speed’. I never did accept that comment as a child! It stuck with me. The lack of acceptance of that statement is probably still there.

 

[gotogo]

Hello Trevrizent ,

Thank you for answering my questions (I meant for your answer on Creating a New World as well). :)

We have very smiler interests, it seems. ;)

Further to ‘The difficulty is from your writing style’, I confess that as an introvert (perhaps that is only a lame excuse, and I expect to get hit for this comment and the next - or is it because I’m an OP?) ...

For clarification, I meant only for:

I can not distinguish clearly your thoughts from what you quote from books.

I think your writing looks great although I can not judge from 'mother tongue' point of views. In fact, I printed what you wrote and would like to study more since I have also been very interesting in 'Dialogue' and 'communication' in a 'community' (also 'communication' between 'communities').

So, in summary, if there is a passage of words/notes with a bracketed quote at the end, that is a book/journal article quote. Otherwise the words/notes are my recall at the time of personal observation and practical experience, or possibly even what I’ve picked up from numerous bits and pieces I’ve read and taken in over the years.

Thank you for clarification from your side. I kind of figured it out so but not clear so I wanted to clarify it.

Actually I have another question to explore with you, if it is possible and if you like (so no offense).
It is interesting to see a 'fact' that you presented a very deep report about "Creating communication and community" and you got a request from Oxajil:

Hi, Trevrizent, maybe it is better if you put the text in paragraphs for easy reading. :) (fwiw)

and my question mentioned above. It seems 'contradicted' for me and made me curious.

It is my 'self-referencing' but for me WHY I am interesting in 'Dialogue' and 'communication' is BECAUSE I am not good at that. Sometimes I am puzzled why so many misunderstandings occurred in my communication with co-workers and friends. I suffered a lot in this area. And this is a strong motivation for me to understand more 'objectively' what is going on in people's 'communication'.

By the way, you quoted Bateson once in your report. Is it Gregory Bateson? I just bought Communication: The Social Matrix of Psychiatry by Jurgen Ruesch and Gregory Bateson from the same motivation.

For me, one of the 'trickiest' point is External and Internal Considering. I chose the term 'tricky' because it really looks like a magical 'trick' to me when one shifts from 'internal considering' to 'external considering'.

When I 'internal considering' instead of 'external considering', a 'communication' becomes complected and difficult.

OK, so my curiosity is what are your thoughts on this 'External and Internal Considering' point of view.
How do you 'observe' (and What is your 'observations' of) this 'mechanical' tendency to 'internal considering' instead of 'external considering' in 'communication'?


Edit: clarification & grammar

 

[Ollie]

Hi GotoGo

I will reply to you soon, having internet problems.

 

[gotogo]

Hi GotoGo

I will reply to you soon, having internet problems.

It is nice to hear you :). No hurry. I am going to bed with EE meditation now (1:45am in CA) so...

 

[Ollie]

Hi GotoGo

With regard to Oxajil’s request, I did go back and from then on include ‘put some text in paragraphs for easy reading’, as much as I could, although with notes it is less than easy to do. Certainly a lot of quotes on the forum ‘are dense’ in terms of reading. I suppose it depends on the underlying motivation to read the topic, whether one continues and struggles with it or not.

In terms of your ‘interested in ‘Dialogue’ and ‘communication’, … I am not good that. Sometimes I am puzzled why so many misunderstandings occurred in my communication with co-workers and friends.’ I think that elements of that statement may apply to a lot of people, including the forum. And, all too often we take for granted the meaning (ours) of words of what someone says to us.

The quote from Geoffrey Bateson is (1972), Steps to an Ecology of Mind, NY, Ballantine Books.

External and Internal Considering is an interesting subject.

What are my thoughts on this ‘External and Internal Considering’ point of view. Well, I think that the shift from ‘internal considering’ to ‘external considering’ is ‘tricky’ for a lot of us, and may not yet be possible, until much later in the ‘Work’.

When I joined the forum I was aware of the ‘repeated’ importance of ‘External and Internal Considering’ and read threads on this topic. Almost at the same time, through a remark of Laura’s re circumcision (Cruise on Birth Control, and quoting the Wave) – ‘…They are not able to really understand what other people are feeling or what can happen in the future in regard to relationships, given a certain present situation. They only understand what is happening "now," and they can only feel what THEY feel. They cannot accurately grasp what others feel because they relate to others only as sensory objects.’

From this I realised that perhaps I could not ‘grasp what others feel’ (despite thinking otherwise up to that time), so in one sense I could not do External Considering, certainly not from my historic understanding of what I had been doing (unless, somehow I had bypassed the problem). This was rather disturbing, and raised some other issues in me on how one could do External Considering over the web with people of whom you knew practically nothing about (I’ll explain this more in a later reply to one of your questions). So seeking a way to get round this problem, I searched further on the web, and came across this article on ‘Teaching of Inner Transformation’ by Rebecca Nottingham (www.geocities.com/fourthwaysystem/practices/practices12.htm)

Regarding your question, you may find some of the following quotes of interest, or not.

A few particular remarks struck a chord, resonated, with me. And I quote from the above article: Rebecca Nottingham responding to a question from a student re practicing External Consideration, the student who on attempting to do it, found herself instantly switching back into Internal Considering (just as you have found).

… the power of your Features and Personality is stronger than your ability to practice External Considering. This is because Self-Observation, Inner Separation, Non-Identification have to be functioning long enough for Personality to be made passive and intentionality therefore to be present. The foundation for External Considering is based first on the elimination of wrong work in the Emotional Center, second on other people’s needs. …

Well, I don’t think that I’ve overcome Non-Identification yet. Wrong working of the Emotional centre, i.e., Man No 3 resonated with me. (S)He/the wrong working of the Emotional centre, or more importantly the ‘take-over’ by the Intellectual centre is where I have been for a considerable period of time.

Continuing,

What the Work desires to accomplish in you is a transformation from Mechanicality to an authentic Self of Intentionality which consists of External Considering. [Where] External Considering is the un-self-interested state of being in which everyone else’s welfare becomes more important to you than your own. That is self-transcendent Work. This involves the death of the False Personality (ego). …

The ‘un-self-interested state of being ’ tends to be what is referred to as External Considering, the putting of self in another person’s shoes’. That’s fine.

Yet, how many of us have experienced the ‘death of the False Personality (ego), or the merging of Personality with Real ‘I’? Well, certainly not me, yet.

Continuing,

Whatever actions constitute External Considering, none require being appreciated or even recognized. […] External considering has nothing to do with getting anything, even acknowledgement, understanding, appreciation, merit or reward for self. …

… Vanity, Fear, Power features do not exist in External Considering and therefore cannot be assailed.

[…]

… the first line of work is ALL ABOUT divesting oneself of selfishness. […] False Personality and External considering cannot co-exist. And the focus of External Considering is not on the thoughts and opinions of others, not on their needs. […] External Considering would know what they need before acting …

[…]

… Inner Consideration is always concerned with how it appears. This is only sometimes Vanity. External appearances, position, appropriate deference, merit, status, valuation are all emotions in Inner Considering.

[…]

… First, you must work diligently on cleansing the Emotional Center of its wrong work. Then you can practice External Considering rightly.

I don’t know how any of this fits with your past experience in dealing with co-workers and friends.

Now from quotes on the forum (unfortunately I didn’t make a note of the particular threads that I took these quotes from at the time – it was for my own personal research),

Quoting from the Cassipaea Glossay,

The key concept is to be aware of and adapt to the level of being and knowledge of others. […] letting the environment be as it wishes and responding to its requests in a manner that honors its right to be as it will.

That concept stacks up fine with me.

In some cases, external considering may involve withholding information that is seen as inappropriate, dangerous or simply unlikely to be well received. An internally considering person may also do this, but then again the motivation is different.

Once again, it is seen that motivation crops up as important as a factor.

Internal considering can be likened to man’s inner predator. It feeds itself by engaging in subjective fantasies where it thinks it is other than it is. It will also seek to gain external confirmation for its distorted self-image by manipulating others to confirm it in its views. …

Inner predator is again referring to one’s False Personality (ego).

… Claiming to Work while engaging in internal considering is a contradiction in terms. The forms of internal considering can however be extremely subtle and one cannot always detect them, thus constant vigilance is required. …

Exterior man needs the support of a group in order to help him detect the many tricky ways in which internal considering inserts itself in his perception and actions.

Quoting anart,

Maybe it would help to consider that the state of ‘inner considering’ is basically the default setting fro most of humanity when they interact with others. …’

From what you have said, GotoGo, this may be the cause of this ‘When I ‘internal considering’ instead of ‘externally considering’, a ‘communication’ becomes complected and difficult. And, ‘… ‘mechanical ‘ tendency to ‘internal considering’ instead of ‘external considering’ in ‘communication?’

Continuing my notes and quoting PepperFritz,

… the MOTIVATION behind one’s actions and behaviour that tell the tale. …

In order to begin to learn what “External Consideration” is, and begin to practice it, it is necessary to work on observing oneself as objectively and honestly as possible. It might help to initially think mainly in terms of gradually identifying (and only later weeding out} one’s “Internal Consideration” behaviour. When you interact with others, think about your motivation for doing and saying certain things. …

In other words, in order to learn how to be Externally Considerate with others, you must first be able to see the ways in which you are routinely Internally Considerate when interacting with them. After that comes issues such as how do you “help” others without violating their Free Will and/or interfering with the lessons they are here to learn: … do your intended actions have the potential to truly “help” or potentially hinder or harm another? All questions with no quick and easy answers.

And, quoting on External Considering from Gurdjieff’s Views from the Real World, p95

… internal ad external considering must be different. In ordinary man the external attitude is the result of the internal. If she is polite. I am also polite. But these attitudes should be separated.

Internally one should be free from considering, but externally one should do more than one has been doing so far. An ordinary man lives as he is dictated to from inside.

Now, quoting from Ouspensky’s ‘In Search of the Miraculous’, p153

“ … external considering is based upon an entirely different relationship towards people, to their understanding, to their requirements. By considering a man does that which makes life easier for other people and for himself. External considering requires a knowledge of men, an understanding of their tastes, habits and prejudices. At the same time external considering requires a great power over oneself, a great control over oneself. … But if a man really remembers himself he understands that another man is a machine just as he is himself. And then he will enter into his position, he will put himself in his place, and he will be really able to understand and feel what another man thinks and feels. …

Secondly, you asked ‘How do (I) ‘observe’ (and What is (my) ‘observations’ of) this ‘mechanical’ tendency to ‘internal considering’ instead of ‘external considering’ in ‘communication’?’

Let me start by answering this question by way of how I succeeded in ‘externally considering’ when I was doing breakthrough coaching with individual middle managers who were engaged in business activities.

Now this breakthough coaching was done on a one-to-one basis, face-to-face, and based on knowledge of their individual ‘mind filters’ (meta programmes).

Where a meta programme is defined as (quoted from my MBA dissertation):

‘… the most unconscious and content free filters that leave neurological traces (James and Woodsmall, 1988). Culturally independent, meta programmes are the beginning of the process of developing a psychology for every person that is met. However, meta programmes are context dependent, and are just one way of maintaining identity by either preserving or breaking down the generalisations that people make over time. Meta programmes are patterns that determine what people pay attention to, how they form internal representations, how they make meaning from sensory experience, and influence what they do. Jung was interested in determining if thought processes could be used to predict behaviour (Georges, 1996), these processes … are called simple meta programmes in NLP.

… Additionally, the four simple meta programmes interact to produce twenty complex meta programmes (James and Woodsmall, 1988; Georges, 1996). … It should be noted that, whilst people have a preference for processing information, people are influenced by their meta programmes within a range of a continuum. Meta programmes can be determined conversationally through carefully worded questions. People leave linguistic clues to their preferences (Georges, 1996). Knowledge and the use of linguistic structures allows a manager to develop deeper, unconscious rapport through naturally matching the structure of people’s thinking patterns and pacing people’s experience (Hall, 1993). Thus managers can both predict and influence with reasonable success the behaviour of others with whom they communicate (Lewis and Pucelik, 1982).’

‘To enable the researcher to critically reflect, perceptual positions (Grinder and DeLozier, 1987) are used, … This technique allows the researcher to analyse his own observations observations, interpretd into internal perceptions of reality; to gain an insighgt into the actor’s internal perception and her meaning of her actions (Moreno, 1986) and; to take an objective observer’s consciously, dissociated stance, Husserl’s (1970) inferred meta-level of study. To move in and out of each position to gather information from the different perspectives, outside of his own limited ‘world view’ (Kets de Vries and Miller, 1984) and, to reflect from more than one perspective on a situation may be demanding to manage and uncomfortable for the researcher (Hawkins, 1988; Jermier, 1991).’

References:
James T and Woodsmall W, (1996), time Line Therapy and the Basis of Personality, Cupertino cA, Meta Publications.
Georges, D P, (1996) Improved employee selection and staffing through meta programmes, Career development International, 1/5. pp5-9
Hall, C, (1993), The Art of Neuro-Logical Leverage, Santa Cruz, The NLP Connection
Lewis B and Pucelik F, (1982), Magic of NLP demystified, Portland OR, Metamorphous Press
Grinder J and DeLozier J, (1987) Turtles All the Way Down, Grinder DeLozier Associates
Moreno J, (1986) Psychodrama, Vol 3, New York, in Hawkins P, (1988) A Phenomenological Psychodrama Workshop, in Reason, P, Human Inquiry in Action: Developments in New Paradigm Research, London, Sage
Husserl E, (1970) The Idea of Phenomenology, The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff, in Hawkins, P, (1988) A Phenomenological Psychodrama Workshop, in Reason, P, Human Inquiry in Action: Developments in New Paradigm Research, London, Sage
Kets de Vries M F R and Miller D, (1984) The Neurotic Organisation, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass Inc

In essence, there are three positions: first position, researcher (associated) ‘self-perception’; second position, actor (associated), ‘empathy’; and third position, observer (dissociated), ‘meta-view’. What did I do? To prepare myself before meeting the client manager, I would sit in my car and recall the client-manager’s meta programmes and put myself into them, to experience his map-of-the-world, as it were – in effect ‘Externally Considering’. Only after this would I then go and meet the client-manager for a breakthrough coaching session. In the session itself, I would mentally (unconsciously) hop between the three perceptual positions, primarily staying in the ‘observer’ position. Those were the only times when I ‘properly’ did External Considering, in my consideration.

So, coming back to your question. You asked ‘How do (I) ‘observe’ (and What is (my) ‘observations’ of) this ‘mechanical’ tendency to ‘internal considering’ instead of ‘external considering’ in ‘communication’?’

To start to answer your questions, in summing up the various quotes (and they resonate with me) above:

Default setting is Inner consideration – the Predator’s Mind/False Personality and required elimination of the wrong working of the Emotional centre for External Consideration
Putting yourself in other people’s shoes, is External consideration
The motivation that lies behind one’s actions and words determines whether you Internally or Externally consider.

That is my observation of ‘this mechanical’ tendency to ‘internal considering instead of ‘external considering’ in ‘communication?’, i.e., until the first point (elimination of wrong working of the Emotional centre) is achieved, I am of the opinion that a person cannot truly (100%) Externally consider. Also, knowing practically nothing about the other forum participants and their specific meta-programmes (other than analysing their posts for individual word patterns) and even that other than addresses ‘mass’ communication and External consideration to all readers of a particular post. Hence, of necessity a person is, to a certain extent, always Internally considering, rather than Externally considering, even when the motivation is for External considering.

Then, ‘how do I observe’, comes down to objective and honest Self-observation.

Does this post answer your questions?

 

[ana]

That is my observation of ‘this mechanical’ tendency to ‘internal considering instead of ‘external considering’ in ‘communication?’, i.e., until the first point (elimination of wrong working of the Emotional centre) is achieved, I am of the opinion that a person cannot truly (100%) Externally consider. Also, knowing practically nothing about the other forum participants and their specific meta-programmes (other than analysing their posts for individual word patterns) and even that other than addresses ‘mass’ communication and External consideration to all readers of a particular post. Hence, of necessity a person is, to a certain extent, always Internally considering, rather than Externally considering, even when the motivation is for External considering.

Then, ‘how do I observe’, comes down to objective and honest Self-observation.

Does this post answer your questions?

Don't you think if you were really being objective and honest self observing, you were also being externally considerate?