Dialogue, an activity that might well prove vital to the future health of our civilization. Dialogue and leadership

Bohm Dialogue

"Dialogue resembles a number of other forms of group activity and may at times include aspects of them but in fact it is something new to our culture. We believe that it is an activity that might well prove vital to the future health of our civilization."

"...it is proposed that a form of free dialogue may well be one of the most effective ways of investigating the crisis which faces society, and indeed the whole of human nature and consciousness today. Moreover, it may turn out that such a form of free exchange of ideas and information is of fundamental relevance for transforming culture and freeing it of destructive misinformation, so that creativity can be liberated." 

Dialogue and Leadership

A Dialogue is essentially a conversation between equals. Any controlling authority, no matter how carefully or sensitively applied, 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 vulnerable to being manipulated, but its spirit is not consistent with this.
Hierarchy has no place in Dialogue.
Nevertheless, in the early stages some guidance is required to help the participants realize 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, in other words, to aid the process of collective proprioception, but these interventions should never be manipulative nor obtrusive.
Leaders are participants just like everybody else. 
Guidance, when it is felt to be necessary, should take the form of "leading from behind" and preserve the intention of making itself redundant as quickly as possible.

 some extract are from: http://www.david-bohm.net/dialogue/dialogue_proposal.html

Fragmentation of thought, overspecialisation ... Are we aware? and then? Deadliest poison in town!!

A theme that is also dear to Buckminster Fuller - though maybe coming from a different perspective - though may be not... ;-) It is not indifferent that both Bohm and Buckminster come from the world of Science and both talk about higher level of conscienceness and the collective implication of raising to these... the individual is limited in scope and power, but the scope and power of what individuals can achieve together is de-multiplied when collaborative strategies are unveiled, unfolded and put into practice...

About fragmentation of thought: P359 - The Fifth Discipline Filedbook - Team Learning
"The theory of dialogue suggests that breakdown in the effectiveness of teams and organisations are reflective of a broader crisis in the nature of how human beings perceive the world. As a natural mechanism to develop meaning, people learn to divide the world into categories and distinctions into our thoughts. We then tend to become almost hypnotized by these distinctions, forgetting that we created them. "The economy is falling apart," or "The people are corrupt," becomes our reality, with a seemingly independent power over us.

... As Bohm has suggested, fragmentation of thought is like a virus that has infected every field of human endeavor. Specialists in most fields cannot talk accross specialties. Marketing sees production as the problem. Managers are told to "think", while workers are told to "act". Instead of reasoning  together, people defend their "part", seeking to defeat others. If fragmentation is a condition of our times, then dialogue is one tentatively proven strategy for stepping back from the way of thinking which fragmentation produces."

Exploring thoughts and dialogue with David Bohm

David Bohm's approach is meaningful to Peter Senge's theory of dialogue - in the section concerning team learning of the Fifth Discipline Fieldbook. As stated p359 of the Fieldbook: "As Bohm conceived it, dialogue would kindle a new mode of paying attention, to perceive - as they arose in conversation - the assumptions taken for granted, the polarization of opinions, the rules for acceptable and unacceptable conversation...the group would have to learn to watch or experience its own tacit process in action. Dialogue's purpose, as we now understand it, would create a setting where conscious collective mindfulness  could be maintained." (inspired by Unfolding Meaning by David Bohm 1985)

David Bohm - on Meaning, Purpose and Exploration in Dialogue
(Extracted from a webpage - see below - where it had been edited with permission from tapes of an August, 1990 conversation)

Communication has been ailing in the human race for a long time and Dialogue is concerned with that. But the primary purpose of Dialogue is not to communicate. It is much deeper. It addresses the blocks in communication, not merely to understand them, but to meet them directly. It is aimed at seeing resistances to communication. In Dialogue we are ready to raise topics serious enough to cause trouble. But while we are talking we are interested in being aware of what's going on inside us and between us.
The word "dialogue" has many meanings and we are giving it a particular meaning. In this Dialogue we are not trying to make our points prevail or, if we are, we need to look at that. Our challenge is to see when each of us is trying to prevail, because if anybody prevails it means the dialogue has failed. Or, if we simply agree, the dialogue may also have failed because this means that we haven't gone deeply enough into the process or into the consciousness behind it. What begins to transform culture into something quite different is that ultimately the frustration or anger or rage or hatred that arises can lead to a crisis in which these feelings are transformed giving rise to impersonal fellowship - to thinking together and participating as if we were one body - by establishing a common consciousness. The group then becomes a kind of instrument of consciousness which can function differently.
It is essential to state the theory that this is what is possible. What I am saying is that a particular kind of dialogue is needed. But, as we talk together the question of what, if anything, its purpose is keeps arising. Sometimes we say that it should not have a purpose and sometimes we seem to say that it should. If we restrict the purpose too much it is clear we are going to be in trouble. None of the purposes is fixed because we find that as we go further into it the purpose begins to change; we discover a new purpose, and so on. So really, when we set a purpose, we set it only as a beginning, as a point of departure, not as a purpose we hold to. This is the crucial point. We may at any moment have to have a purpose, but we are not holding to that purpose. Purpose flows out of significance and value and that's what we're exploring. We expect that meaning is going to change through our learning as we go along and therefore purpose changes naturally.
In Dialogue or in our own meditation, or whatever, the attitude is one of exploration and emptiness - that is, not having fixed assumptions but rather an empty space where there is the possibility of exploring all sorts of things. This is a proposal for exploration. But even this is not final. It too has to be constantly open to exploration - seeing whether the proposal, as made, is coherent. In other words, we're not even saying exploration is the answer. The purpose is constantly changing and flowing out of the meaning.
But we can't give the meaning in a nutshell. If everybody knew the meaning, we wouldn't need the Dialogue. The dialogue is not aimed at settling anything. We explore meaning together - the creative perception of meaning - thinking together and feeling together. But meaning is active. It is not merely sitting there. The consideration of this meaning may act - or it may not. The whole point of having the Dialogue is that we're not trying to produce a result. That's very important. It may never do it. Or it may do it at some moment when we least expect it. The seed has been planted. And the meaning is naturally, spontaneously active and transformative.

http://www.david-bohm.net/dialogue/dialogue_exploration.html
Copyright © 1990 by Sarah Bohm
Use only with prior permission.

Some competencies for Learning Organisations

•Some Core Competencies
–Personal Mastery
–Focusing on Mission & Vision
–Solving Problems
–Creating and Innovating
–Unleashing People Potential
–Performing as a team
–Using Heart skills
–Relationship Building
–Building partnerships

Inspiring quotes on Simplicity

‘Understanding evolves through three phases : simplistic, complex and profoundly simple’

 

William Schutz, Profound Simplicity

‘It is very difficult to teach things that are obvious (and hence difficult to learn that which is simple) because the mind takes it for granted and wants to move on to something complicated which is presumed to be more valuable.
Because we understand something, we believe we practice it. Attention to the obvious (the simple), a deliberate effort to use that which is obvious can be effective’
Edward de Bono, The Happiness Purpose

‘Small changes can bring forth great  results but these points of leverage are the least obvious’
Peter Senge, The Fifth Discipline

‘What is essential is invisible to the eye. It requires the heart to see it. ‘The gap between knowing and doing is the gap between the mind and the body.

What connects the mind and the body is the heart, the breath. Therefore, the heart of the problem is the problem of the heart’

‘The skilful are not obvious. They appear simpleminded. They know the larger patterns. To know the patterns is the subtle power’
David R. Hawkins, M.D., Ph.D

‘We are so busy trying to prove that we are okay that we forget we are magnificent’
Gay Hendricks

‘Reality is always kinder than the stories we make about it’
Byron Katie, Loving What Is


Less is More and More is Less. Slowing down can enable us to speed up. Learn to see things upside down, backside front, inside out. Embrace paradoxes. 

‘Appreciation allows depth, texture, dimension to life. Without appreciation, the world is flat. No fizz, no sparkle, no passion. To appreciate is to give life, to bestow being. Appreciation fosters connection and partnership’
Ron Bynum

Life comforts the disturbed, and disturbs the comfortable. The willingness to step out of the comfort zone simplifies life.

Learn to see how the rules of the game are shifting rapidly .. from the industrial age to  the network age. The shift from Force to Power, from hierarchical organisations to hyper-linked ecologies, from the work ethic to the play ethic, from linear, sequential approaches to non-linear, quantum realities.
Learn to see. And see to learn.
The mantra is ‘Observe. Observe.Observe’

collected by Kiran Gulrajani - writen by Kiran as well when no other mention is made

Driving Simplicity

The following work on the theme of Simplicity is the result of a co-creation between Kiran Gulrajani and myself. How to evolve your organisation from a culture of processes, initiatives, internal competition to an approach to things driven by SIMPLICITY. How to simplify?

Cultural Attribute: ENTREPRENEURIAL
Simplifier: EMBRACE PARADOXES
Slowing down can enable us to speed up

Cultural Attribute: ENTREPRENEURIAL
Simplifier: APPRECIATE THE NEW WORLD
Shift from Enforce to Empower

Cultural Attribute: PASSIONATE
Simplifier: CONTACT THE GREATNESS IN YOURSELF AND OTHERS
Authentically notice and appreciate your and other people’s strengths and contributions

Cultural Attribute: IN TOUCH
Simplifier: CONNECT THRU CONVERSATION
Shift from ‘advocacy’ to ‘enquiry’ by listening from the heart

Common sense - Something the world is lacking

As Krugmans puts it - quoting Marvin Minsky " what people vaguely call common sense is actually more intricate than most of the technical expertise we admire." And Krugman adds: "it takes common sense to deal with the physical world - which is why , even at the end of the XX century, there are still no robot plumbers."

Multiple Intelligences in the context of education

Below are some extracts that I hand picked from a book by Howard Gardner entitles Multiple Intelligence

Assessment and Beyond: Beyond Assessment: The Aims and Means of Education

“I have sought to provide some degree of focus by insisting on four elements:

(1)   the goal of an education that is geared to understanding;

(2)   a stress on the cultivation of performances of understanding, which can be assessed primarily in context;

(3)   a recognition of the existence of different individual strengths; and

(4)   a commitment to mobilize these productively in the education of each child.

To orchestrate these different elements into a seamless educational regimen is no mean task; but there are promising signs abroad that progress can be made, and that we can secure and education that celebrate our common heritage as human beings, the particular cultural backgrounds from which we come, and the ways in which each of us stands out as an individual”

(Page 207)

“Imagine an educational environment in which youngsters at the age of 7 or 8, in addition to – or perhaps instead of – attending a formal school, have the opportunity to enroll in a children’s museum, a science museum, or some kind of discovery center or exploratorium. As part of this educational scene, adults are present who actually practice the disciplines or crafts represented by the various exhibitions…”

(p 198)

“On the one hand, youngsters live in a time of unparalleled excitement, where even the less privileged are exposed daily to attractive media and technologies….

On the other hand, science museums and children’s museums have become the loci for exhibitions, activities, and role models drawn precisely from those domains that do engage youngsters….

If we are to configure an education for understanding, suited for the students of today and for the world of tomorrow, we need to take the lessons of museum and the relationship of the apprenticeship extremely seriously.”P 200

 What kind of knowledge is required in schools

“It is in rich, situation-specific contexts that intelligences are typically and productively deployed.”

“The kind of knowledge  required in workplaces and in one’s personal life usually involves collaborative, contextualized, and situation-specific thinking (Gardner, 1990; Resnick, 1987; Rogoff and Lave, 1984)”

“Schools do provide some group activities, but students are usually judged on their individual work. By contrast, in many social and occupational settings, one’s ability to communicate effectively and work productively with others is critical to a successful outcome.”

“A comprehensive effort to enhance a student’s “school intelligences” must address at least several factors:

-         Conditions particular to the environment

-         Students particular skills

-         Measurement tools to measure achievements”

“Our underlying premise was that students who thrive in school need to learn, apply and integrate both academic knowledge about subject domains and practical knowledge about themselves, academic tasks and the school system at large.”

The infusion curriculum

 “An infusion approach” rather than teaching students how to be practically intelligent in school through a separate “stand alone” set of lessons, we infuse these themes throughout the course of students’ daily work in the major subject matter areas or disciplines.”

The Practical Intelligence for School (PIFS) Projects

1-     Choosing a project

a.      “Understanding projects”

b.      “Choosing a Project Appropriate to You”

c.      “Planning a Project Appropriate to the Audience and Resources”

2-     Principles

a.      Practical intelligence skills are most fruitfully nurtured in domain-specific contexts

b.      Taught concepts are most effectively implemented when used in service of a particular purpose

c.      Students acquire knowledge best when it is related to their own sets of abilities and interests.

d.      Practical intelligence skills are most powerfully integrated when presented in both scholastic and real-world contexts

e.      Self-monitoring helps students to take responsibility for their own learning.

Evaluation of PIFS Units

1-     Do students understand the issues addressed in the project and why they are important (Definitional component)

2-     Task completion assessment as students are asked to either start or complete a task, or perhaps to work through a problem area (Task component)

3-     Reflecting on the nature of the process or skills involved in the particular tasks. Students are asked to evaluate whether their performances were successful, and if not, how they could be revised or improved (metatask component) Approaching School Intelligently: Practical Intelligence at the Middle School Level: A New Conception of Intelligence (p121)

Assessment and Beyond:

“Rather than being imposed “externally” at odd times during the year, assessment ought to become part of the natural learning environment.”

“As much as possible it should occur “on the fly”, as part of an individual’s natural engagement in a learning situation. Initially, the assessment would probably have to be introduced explicitly; but after a while, much assessment would occur naturally on the part of student and teacher with little need for explicit recognition or labeling on anyone’s part. Assessment and Beyond: Assessment in context: the Alternative to Standardized Testing: General feature of a new approach to assessment

How to Achieve and Demonstrate Understanding

“Upon closer examination, it is clear that understandings can only be apprehended and appreciated if they are performed by a student”

“Students need to begin to “practice” these performances from the first days of class. And by the same token, students ought to become partners in the process of assessmsnet as soon as possible.”

 “An individual is most likely to achive a satisfactory life – to make a contribution to society and gain self-esteem – if he or she finds vocational and avocational niches that complement his or her own aptitudes.” Beyond Assessment: The Aims and Means of Education

Conflict resolution 101

The fact that conflict exists is not necessarily a bad thing: As long as it is resolved effectively, it can lead to personal and professional growth. Effective conflict resolution skills can make the difference between positive and negative outcomes.

Benefits:
Increased understanding: The discussion needed to resolve conflict expands people's awareness of the situation, giving them an insight into how they can achieve their own goals without undermining those of other people;
Increased group cohesion: When conflict is resolved effectively, team members can develop stronger mutual respect, and a renewed faith in their ability to work together; and
Improved self-knowledge: Conflict pushes individuals to examine their goals in close detail, helping them understand the things that are most important to them, sharpening their focus, and enhancing their effectiveness.

Understanding the Theory: Conflict Styles

In the 1970s Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann identified five main styles of dealing with conflict that vary in their degrees of cooperativeness and assertiveness. They argued that people typically have a preferred conflict resolution style. However they also noted that different styles were most useful in different situations.

Thomas and Kilmann's styles are:

1- Competitive: People who tend towards a competitive style take a firm stand, and know what they want. They usually operate from a position of power, drawn from things like position, rank, expertise, or persuasive ability. This style can be useful when there is an emergency and a decision needs to be make fast; when the decision is unpopular; or when defending against someone who is trying to exploit the situation selfishly. However it can leave people feeling bruised, unsatisfied and resentful when used in less urgent situations.

2- Collaborative: People tending towards a collaborative style try to meet the needs of all people involved. These people can be highly assertive but unlike the competitor, they cooperate effectively and acknowledge that everyone is important. This style is useful when a you need to bring together a variety of viewpoints to get the best solution; when there have been previous conflicts in the group; or when the situation is too important for a simple trade-off.

3- Compromising: People who prefer a compromising style try to find a solution that will at least partially satisfy everyone. Everyone is expected to give up something, and the compromiser him- or herself also expects to relinquish something. Compromise is useful when the cost of conflict is higher than the cost of losing ground, when equal strength opponents are at a standstill and when there is a deadline looming.

4- Accommodating: This style indicates a willingness to meet the needs of others at the expense of the person’s own needs. The accommodator often knows when to give in to others, but can be persuaded to surrender a position even when it is not warranted. This person is not assertive but is highly cooperative. Accommodation is appropriate when the issues matter more to the other party, when peace is more valuable than winning, or when you want to be in a position to collect on this “favor” you gave. However people may not return favors, and overall this approach is unlikely to give the best outcomes.

5- Avoiding: People tending towards this style seek to evade the conflict entirely. This style is typified by delegating controversial decisions, accepting default decisions, and not wanting to hurt anyone’s feelings. It can be appropriate when victory is impossible, when the controversy is trivial, or when someone else is in a better position to solve the problem. However in many situations this is a weak and ineffective approach to take.

Understanding The Theory: The "Interest-Based Relational Approach"

The second theory is commonly referred to as the "Interest-Based Relational (IBR) Approach". This conflict resolution strategy respects individual differences while helping people avoid becoming too entrenched in a fixed position.

In resolving conflict using this approach, you follow these rules:
Make sure that good relationships are the first priority: As far as possible, make sure that you treat the other calmly and that you try to build mutual respect. Do your best to be courteous to one-another and remain constructive under pressure;

Keep people and problems separate: Recognize that in many cases the other person is not just "being difficult" – real and valid differences can lie behind conflictive positions. By separating the problem from the person, real issues can be debated without damaging working relationships;

Pay attention to the interests that are being presented: By listening carefully you'll most-likely understand why the person is adopting his or her position;

Listen first; talk second: To solve a problem effectively you have to understand where the other person is coming from before defending your own position;

Set out the “Facts”: Agree and establish the objective, observable elements that will have an impact on the decision; and

Explore options together: Be open to the idea that a third position may exist, and that you can get to this idea jointly.

Using the process below to resolve the conflict:
Step One: Set the Scene
If appropriate to the situation, agree the rules of the IBR Approach (or at least consider using the approach yourself.) Make sure that people understand that the conflict may be a mutual problem, which may be best resolved through discussion and negotiation rather than through raw aggression.
If you are involved in the conflict, emphasize the fact that you are presenting your perception of the problem. Use active listening skills to ensure you hear and understand other’s positions and perceptions.
Restate
Paraphrase
Summarize
And make sure that when you talk, you're using an adult, assertive approach rather than a submissive or aggressive style.

Step Two: Gather Information
Here you are trying to get to the underlying interests, needs, and concerns. Ask for the other person’s viewpoint and confirm that you respect his or her opinion and need his or her cooperation to solve the problem.
Try to understand his or her motivations and goals, and see how your actions may be affecting these.
Also, try to understand the conflict in objective terms: Is it affecting work performance? damaging the delivery to the client? disrupting team work? hampering decision-making? or so on. Be sure to focus on work issues and leave personalities out of the discussion.
Listen with empathy and see the conflict from the other person’s point of view
Identify issues clearly and concisely
Use “I” statements
Remain flexible
Clarify feelings

Step Three: Agree the Problem
This sounds like an obvious step, but often different underlying needs, interests and goals can cause people to perceive problems very differently. You'll need to agree the problems that you are trying to solve before you'll find a mutually acceptable solution.
Sometimes different people will see different but interlocking problems - if you can't reach a common perception of the problem, then at the very least, you need to understand what the other person sees as the problem.

Step Four: Brainstorm Possible Solutions
If everyone is going to feel satisfied with the resolution, it will help if everyone has had fair input in generating solutions. Brainstorm possible solutions, and be open to all ideas, including ones you never considered before.

Step Five: Negotiate a Solution
By this stage, the conflict may be resolved: Both sides may better understand the position of the other, and a mutually satisfactory solution may be clear to all.
However you may also have uncovered real differences between your positions. This is where a technique like win-win negotiation can be useful to find a solution that, at least to some extent, satisfies everyone.
There are three guiding principles here: Be Calm, Be Patient, Have Respect…

Taken from: http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_81.htm