Finally settling into Peter Block’s book, Community: The Structure of Belonging. My partner has been hoarding it since it arrived a couple of months ago.
In the opening chapters, Block takes inspiration from the likes of John McKnight, Robert Putnam, Christopher Alexander and others to crate some basic patterns for collective transformation. These are beautiful and quite in line with the work I do and the things we teach through the Art of Hosting. In fact, I’ll probably add this list to our workshop workbook.
Here is the list, with my thoughts attached.
From John McKnight:
- Focus on gifts. Look at what people are willing to offer rather than what people are in need of.
- Associational life. There is great power in the associations that people form to come together to do good work
- Power in our hands. Who do you think is going to change things? In doing Open Space action planning, I sometimes make reference to the fact that there will not be an angel that parachutes in and saves us. It’s up to us to find the way to make things work.
From Werner Erhard:
- The power of language. What we say about things and people makes a huge difference. Speaking and listening (and therefore conversations) is the basis of changing things.
- The power of context. Contexts are the worldviews which we employ to see things. Powerful contexts enable powerful transformation. For example, in First Nations the context of self-government vs. Indian Act government represents a powerful context for community development.
- The power of possibility. Once a possibility is declared, it comes into being and with skillful invitation, work can organize around it.
From Robert Putnam:
- Work with bridging social capital. Social capital is the relatedness between citizens We express this through bonding social captial, which helps us find others like us, andbridging social capital which helps us find relations across groups. Bridging social capital is the holy grail that takes us from insular groups, to true communities.
From Christopher Alexander:
- Work with aliveness and wholeness. One of my favourite ways to think about work that changes minds is to ask “How does a forest change a mind?” How do you react in a forest? How does it happen so suddenly? Why do old growth forests leave a permanent mark on us? How can we transform minds like a forest does?
- Transformation as unfolding. What is known by the whole of a group or community cannot be exposed all at once. You have to journey to the centre of it, one small step at a time. As you go, you harvest more and more of it, and as it becomes visible, it accelerates the collective consciousness of itself.
From Peter Koestenbaum:
- Appreciating paradox. Paradoxes help us to see the creative tension that lies in complexity. Chaos and Order, Individual and collective, being and doing, work and relationships…all of these contribute to our understanding of the kinds of questions that take us to collective transformation.
- Choosing freedom and accountability. Freedom is not an escape from accountability. “the willigness to care for the whole occurs when we are confronted with our freedom, and when we choose to accepts and act on that freedom.”
- Accountability and committment. What I, and Harrison Owen, calls “passion and responsibility.” Don’t just ask what is important, ask what people are willing to do to make it come to pass.
- Learning from one another. Co-learning rather than experts preaching to students is the way to build the capacity for collective transformation.
- Bias towards the future. We leave the past where it is and focus on now, and the conditions that are arising to produce the futures we want.
- How we engage matters. Or, as we were fond of saying at VIATT, the system is the conversation. How we relate to each other in every instance IS the system.
From David Bornstein:
- Small scale, slow growth. Big things begin from very small ideas. Cultivating the Art of Calling, whereby we learn to issue and embody invitations, and find the people to work with who will bring these into being, is the key practice here.
From Allan Cohen:
- Emergent design. Everything is in flux, and constantly adapting. Ask why the organization hasn’t been moving naturally in the direction that it desires and convene conversations on what you discover. Feed those back to the whole and the course corrects. Cohen also says that he CAN herd cats…by tilting the floor. Deeper contexts often have more leverage.
I realize that I have just provide a precis of Peter’s first chapter, but it is such a cogent summary of all of these ideas, that I couldn’t resist the temptation to add thoughts and links to his synthesis.
Share:
Overheard…
FLIGHT ATTENDANT
Something to drink?
PASSENGER
Tea please.
FLIGHT ATTENDANT
Sorry, we’re out of tea.
PASSENGER
Damn these hard economic times.
——-
PASSENGER ONE
Hi there! Where have you been?
PASSENGER TWO
Travelling around the United States by train. I made it as far as Arkansas!
PASSENGER ONE
Really?
PASSENGER TWO
Yeah…I did the Arkansas trifecta: the Bill Clinton library, Wal-Mart headquarters and…and…what was the other one…? (scratching head)
PASSENGER ONE
Texas?
—–
CHECK IN CLERK
Are you staying for two nights with us?
GUEST
No just one.
CHECK IN CLERK
Would you like a casino pass?
GUEST
If I wanted to take my chances, I’d have stayed here for two nights.
Share:
From my dear friend Peggy Holman:
A few weeks ago, I spontaneously created a new form of convergence with a group of about 20. I think it can work well with groups of 60 or less, and perhaps with groups up to 100 or so.
I was intending to do what I always do these days – follow the energy and re-open the space for what has heart and meaning for taking a next step. Instead, because the meeting was intended to both give the group a chance to bond as well as set priorities for their work, something else emerged in the moment.This was a first meeting of a diverse group that was dealing with a challenging subject: the transformation of the field of corrections throughout the USA. They had spent an evening sharing stories about their work and a day in Open Space, exploring, “How can corrections, in collaboration with other human services, help cultivate a strong and healthy society?”. The last morning, we began with a conversation about their work together as a prelude to opening the space to identify their priorities (as established by the sessions that were called).One participant was very concerned whether this “arbitrary” approach of following the energy would lead to the best priorities. I suggested that we see what emerged and then determine whether a more rational approach should be employed. Given the culture of the group, I sensed in that moment that the people in the room needed to know where each other stood – what each of them would choose as a priority. And since bonding was part of the purpose of the gathering, I asked each of them to write on a sheet of paper the inquiry they felt was more important to pursue, the subject they personally felt most passionate about. No one hesitated.Once they were done writing, each read his or her topic aloud. Then they physically got up and moved to join with others who had said something related to their topic. The landed in 2 groups, split about 1/3 and 2/3rds. This degree of coherence was quite stunning for them. They went off to talk about their topics. When they returned, we checked in, as promised, on whether these were the best priorities. The group was almost giddy with excitement. No question. They were clear they had the right priorities.another great day (or two) in Open Space,
Share:
I was just putting together some materials for an Open Space training workshop I’m doing in Prince Rupert, BC on Friday and I compiled three useful approaches to facilitating action planning in Open Space. The first is my own version of moving to action, the second is Diana Larsen’s approach to prioritizing ideas by impact and energy and the third approach is Jack Martin Leith’s approach to project planning, which he blogged here.
The three are in an easy to download .pdf. Enjoy.
UPDATE: I would be remiss not to point to Lisa Heft’s site, where she dilligently collected dozens of variations on convergence and action planning.
Share:
|A question to ask always is whether or not your conversation design is breeding possibility or impossibility. Are we asking questions that look at what is possible, that look at overcoming our fears, or are we looking for things that emerge out of fears.
And example of the later is when clients ask me to design conversations around proposals or presentations. It seems to happen most commonly with government clients that they want to ask a variation of a question like “What do you notice is wrong with our proposal? What are we missing?”
Now it’s not a problem to explore new ideas, but questions like this invite people to come from a place of fear and anger and negativity. Instead, seek to design conversations around naming fears and exploring ways around them. “What ideas do we need to include to strengthen this proposal? How can we mesh those ideas with what we have already proposed?”
And of course none of that precludes people from calling out a completely wrong-headed approach. But the responsibility to tank something always comes with the caveat that a better proposal should be offered so that we can move forward. –