“The use of space has a profound effect on the audience”

I am reflecting on the use of space and how it influences dialogue, and more broadly communication (though they are essentially the same thing… flow of meaning.) Found an interesting article:

UNDERSTANDING THEATRE SPACE
Lloyd Llewellyn-Jones (2002)

I have been wondering how courts and juries fir into the history of all of this… and there is a clue here!

How might a restorative justice space look?

The biggest question on my mind though is how we use space in cyberspace – and how we can create more intentional dialogue.

Quote follows

Continue reading ““The use of space has a profound effect on the audience””

The difference between Brainstorming and Choice Creating

Jim Rough

The approach recommended here, choice-creating, is richer than what is normally meant by decision-making, problem-solving, or even “Creative Problem Solving.” Using choice-creating, not only can we solve impossible to solve issues, but we also introduce the possibility of transforming our feelings about such problems. Choice-creating transforms us and the situation. It changes the problem, empowers the person, and can transform the organization, as well.

Process Design

I am excited to make a leap from seeing a whole lot of different approaches as all being part of a lager enterprise: Process Design. Each design will have different values on the same list of variables. Each design has its place and purpose. The history of process design would be a bit like the history of architecture.

Great process designers & designs:

Freud – couch

robert’s rules

Juries

Restorative justice

Rogers mirror

Moreno – psychodrama stage

Perls – hot seat

Satir – family therapy

Hendrix – couple dialogue. communalogue

Jim Rough – Dynamic Facilitation

World Cafe

Open Space

~

Online there are various processes with their own design:

email

web – (a bit like drawings on a wall – perhaps that is the metaphor FaceBook uses?)

Mailing Lists

Hipbone Games

Blogs – and Blogs with comments.

Twitter

Facebook

Wiki

Instant messaging

Wave

The science and art of process design – a book i’d like to write!

I have some drafts for this book, but this post renames it from “Varieties of Dialogue”, to “process Design”.

Here is a link to a post by Jim Rough I want to put somewhere, it mat be behind a password. His distinctions made me think of this.

Theming

Wonderful Piece about listening to a theme in a group.

Go to Brad’s bolg, but the full text follows as I don’t want to loose this.

Learning To Theme | Brad Rourke’s Blog

Learning To Theme Daily Moleskine by Flickr user koalazymonkey “Daily Moleskine” by Flickr user koalazymonkey One of the most important skills in working withe the public is, I believe, one of the most often overlooked. People whose work is public facing — community benefit organization leaders, public agency heads, journalists — need to be able to theme what they hear. Put simply, this means “making sense” of what they hear, but it’s a bit deeper than that. People don’t talk in sound bites. They don’t necessarily have coherent frameworks through which they view the world. In talking about difficult issues, their comments may be all over the map. Put a group of them together, and it can feel like anarchy. The great public leaders are able to take these divergent strands of conversation and theme them — to extract the handful of important themes running through the conversation. The truly great ones can do it on the spur if the moment, there in the room during the conversation. This can take the discussion to a whole new level, as people see these threads and can then build off of them. Much of my career has hinged on the ability to theme what people are saying. I listen in a focus group for the important elements to include in a discussion guide. In a strategic planning session, I listen for the places where the group thinks they have agreement but really don’t. In a marketing meeting, I listen for a clients needs — both the ones they acknowledge and the ones that, perhaps, they don’t. I can only remember one time where I was taught anything explicit about themeing. It was all on-the-job. I was talking about this with a colleague the other day, and he said the same thing. Some people just seem to pick it up. Few organizations try to teach it. I think this should change. It is one of the most useful skills you can have — at a minimum, it allows you to take better notes. Here’s a way to get started. It’s a very loose exercise — on purpose. The best way to learn themeing is just to do it. A lot. You’ll need tto get together a few friends (4 or more) in order to do this: 1. Get your friends together and ask them to talk about a public issue. You are going to listen and take notes. If you need an idea, try talking about health care using this discussion guide. Or talk about poverty using session three (starts on p.12) of this one. Spend about 60 to 90 minutes on the discussion. 2. As people talk, take notes. You can take part, but make sure you are paying enough attention to get the notes down. Pay attention to key points that people bring up. Listen for: 1. Where people get stuck 2. What people’s starting points are 3. What values are underlying their statements 4. Trade offs they would be willing to make 5. Where there is agreement 6. What people are not saying 3. At the end of the conversation, and no more than four hours afterward, write yourself a memo of no more than 1.5 pages, recapping what you saw as the major themes. It should be in bullet form, something like this: * This group was highly concerned with the cost of health care, especially with routine costs. One man said ‘The nickel and dime you to death.” Catastrophic costs were a concern too. “Five days in the hospital, and it cost $30K,” a woman said. “Thank God I had insurance.” You’ll end up with a series of bullets that recap the major themes of the conversation. Show it to your friends and ask if you captured the session fairly. This sounds like an odd exercise, I know. But try it. Most people who do it find it fun to really be pushed to think through and organize what they hear. I can remember the first time I listened to and themed a conversation, it was like a light bulb turned on. Once this kind of listening — and recapping for yourself — become second nature, you’ll find all sorts of uses for it. And, you will find your ability to really hear people and act on what you hear to increase exponentially.

Dynamic Facilitation & Creativity

Reflection on Creativity.

I am impressed by the philosophy of creativity Jim presented (see link to podcast in last post). He draws on a Jungian idea of the unconscious being purposeful. If we let things bubble up then something useful will emerge. Similar to Moreno, creativity is always there, the art is to find the spontaneity, the catalyst to let it emerge. There is much thinking and experimenting that has led him to this understanding. He explains how “brainstorming” brings along an agenda. The stormed material is seen as not as valuable as the material that has been refined. Makes sense to me, the unconscious images need full attention.

Maybe it is the underlying creativity philosophy in Dynamic Facilitation that draws me to it. Of course I reflect on how this all ties in with Psychodrama & Moreno’s Canon of Creativity.

~

I am thinking that when a group faces a particular task, or problem, that needs an outcome, the Dynamic Facilitation approach is a tool that can be used. It is a good way to create a warm-up to creativity.

A related post on this blog:

Creativity, spontaneity and something Blake said

Dynamic Facilitation

I am still intrigued by Dynamic Facilitation. I was recently asked a question about it: What about facilitator bias? Made me think and I discussed this question in various places. Clearly there is a lot of skill needed in the facilitation, however it is a clearly prescribed process.

Several things guard against excessive dependence on the facilitator, and prevent bias.

  • The focus on the creative output. I imagine this is facilitated by the charts.
  • The equal weight given to divergent perspectives.

Then as I was pondering this a podcast arrived – probably had been on the ipod for a while:

Click to play, right click to download Psychologist interviews Jim Rough.  Shrink Rap Radio

 

It is an excellent interview, it is not full of technical details, the simplicity of the method continues to impress.

And on facilitator bias, Jim at one point shows how he does not say “I hear you … ” too much “I”, we want to leave that out. ”

Jim’s presentation makes what he does seem so ordinary and invisible that it is worth looking at Rosa Zubizarreta’s Manual for Jim Rough’s Dynamic Facilitation Method.

Creativity Encounter

I am somewhat disturbed by the Hellinger material I read. However there new clarity around the creativity inherent in dialogue (see the last Bhom quote in this post.)

Here are two snippets which I find illuminating. Especially if we hold in mind that reality includes an observer.

No two people can have the same insight about the same thing. If they both have an insight about the same thing, that of one differs slightly from that of the other.

… when awareness meets awareness both are enhanced by the encounter.

Hellinger

That “enhancment” is the new, something is created.


Later: Sunday, 6 December 2015

Why two way sends are useful: difference – enhancement of the relationship – creativity i.e. Newness. Spontaneity? The Visitor/Host creates Love Maps, heals, and role development in the listener.