Fwd: [WC] Re: dialog, choice-creating, etc.

[Jim Rough]

This is a conversation happening on the Wisdom Council listseve that really relates to Dynamic Facilitation. I'll just pass it on. Patricia Pfost said she'd like to comment on it when I told her about it. 

Jim

Begin forwarded message:

From: DeAnna Martin <dea...@wisedemocracy.org>

Date: July 22, 2010 9:42:48 AM PDT

To: Wisdom Council Enthusiasts <wisdom...@googlegroups.com>

Subject: Re: [WC] Re: dialog, choice-creating, etc.

Reply-To: wisdom...@googlegroups.com

Hi Ted and others,

I thought I would add the National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation’s definitions of the terms to the mix:

You can read them online here: http://ncdd.org/rc/what-are-dd

I’ve copied and pasted the text from their post “What Are Dialogue & Deliberation”

“Dialogue is a process that allows people, usually in small groups, to share their perspectives and experiences with one another about difficult issues we tend to just debate about or avoid entirely. Issues like racial disparities, youth violence and gay marriage.

Dialogue is not about winning an argument or coming to an agreement, but about understanding and learning. Dialogue dispels stereotypes, builds trust and enables people to be open to perspectives that are very different from their own. Dialogue can, and often does, lead to both personal and collaborative action.

Deliberation is a closely related process with a different emphasis. Deliberation emphasizes the use of logic and reasoning to make better decisions. Decisions about important public issues like health care and immigration are too often made through the use of power or coercion rather than a sound decision-making process that involves all parties and explores all options.

Dialogue and deliberation processes tend to use skilled facilitators and carefully constructed ground rules or agreements to ensure that all participants are heard and are treated as equals.

Dialogue often lays the groundwork for deliberation. The trust, mutual understanding and relationships that are built during dialogue enable participants to deliberate more effectively, and to make better decisions. For groups that want to move from talk to a decision or action, NCDD recommends starting with dialogue and encouraging deliberation after people have had the chance to tell their personal story (in relation to the issue at hand) in a respectful environment.

Dialogue and deliberation are used for a variety of reasons:  to resolve conflicts and bridge divides; to build understanding about complex issues; to foster innovative solutions to problems and launch action; and to reach agreement on or recommendations about policy decisions.”

These definitions were created by “leaders in the field” per the website’s authors... But, I’m not sure who that included.

Neither of these definitions is what we claim DF’s purpose or the experience of the process is... With “a field” getting more specific about what the terms dialogue and deliberation mean, it’s curious where our position lies in terms of advocating DF as a process option. To what extent are we in a position to educate the general public about what these terms mean versus just getting them to understand what we’re doing in terms familiar to them? At our May gathering a shift I heard was that we need to be clear within our own community about the terms we are using (i.e. Choice-creating, Dynamic Facilitation, Wisdom Council, and Creative Insight Council) and when we are “selling” our approach that becomes less important.

I talk about it in word used by my colleague Rosa... Dynamic Facilitation is a method that reliably assures Choice-creating...

More food for thought...
DeAnna

On 7/18/10 1:18 PM, "Ted Heinz" <t...@snaptab.com> wrote:

Jim,
Sure, I would like to enter my own present understanding of these terms into this discussion, particularly if others can lend their ideas and sophistication to help us all improve, together, our individual, and ultimately, collective thinking.
 
I am adding debate to the list as a contrast to the nature of the other terms.
 
Conversation
Discussion
Dialog
Deliberation
Debate
Choice-creating

A Conversation is, above all, social in nature. It’s a search for connection, relationship, using our capacity to use language.  The content is not so important. It’s the social bonding we seek through conversation.

A Discussion is interested in the content; it is a sharing of perspectives and data to amplify each other’s grasp and understanding of the content in question.  Shared conclusions might or might not occur.

A Dialog is a kind of discussion that supposes some difference or conflicting points of view that need to be worked out.  It expects that each participant will gain a broader perspective and greater understanding of the other’s points of view and come to some kind of cooperative consensus to be able to work together.
 
A Deliberation is a systematic consideration of the “facts” in order to come to some kind of agreed-upon “best” decision.  Discussion is an essential part of the process and an attitude of dialog is expected when conflicting points of view arise.
 
A Debate is a competition of ideas.  It is largely vested in “winning” by logic or emotion, and little, if any change, or growth in thinking occurs except sometimes changes in onlookers’ thinking, for whom the debate is often performed.   It is thought to offer a way to arrive at the best idea but, in general, it is more concerned with the proponents’ political or emotional security [ego] than with improved thinking.
 
Choice-creating happens when enough psychological security and openness is present that creative ideas are allowed to come to the front and feed off each other to develop truly new, satisfying conclusions.

Thanks for the opportunity
Ted



On 7/18/10 5:52 AM, "Jim Rough" <j...@tobe.net> wrote:

Ted,

I appreciate your interest in seeking answers to this question. However, rather than framing the question as a Q and A aimed at Richard and I, let me suggest that you rephrase your inquiry to involve everyone more conversationally. How about defining these words for yourself and then asking this community for comments and improvements? I'd love to review what you come up with.

Jim


On Jul 16, 2010, at 8:14 AM, Ted Heinz wrote:

Jim, Richard and all,
I find this conversation very interesting. And potentially very helpful and important.

It seems to me that as new concepts are developed one has to either invent entirely new terms and/or define existing terms in particular ways to differentiate the new concepts from older ones.

I would like to know how each of you define each of these terms and any others you want to add to this list:

Conversation
Discussion
Dialog
Deliberation
Choice-creating

Thanks,
ted



On 7/16/10 6:16 AM, "Richard Moore" <r...@quaylargo.com> wrote:

Hi Jim,

I like your metaphor. There are several kinds of grains, including wheat, rice and corn. In my terminology there are several kinds of dialog processes, including Roberts Rules of Order, Open Space, and DF. I need to create a context, within which I can compare choice-creating with other things people are familiar with, so I can point out its multi-dimensional virtues.

My thesaurus gives these synonyms for dialog:
chat, colloquy, communication, confab, confabulation, conference, conversation, converse, discourse, discussion, duologue, interlocution, lines, parlance, parley, powwow, remarks, repartee, script, sides, small talk

Each of those is too specific to be used as a generic term.

ok?
richard
______


Jim Rough wrote:

Richard,

You make the point that the word "dialog" refers to just "talking" as well as to the high quality, transformational conversation process I've been referring to. But even so, I think it is a disservice to our cause for you to use the word "dialog" instead of some other general word like "talking," if that's what you mean to say. But I don't think you mean to say that, anyway. For example, one of your highlighted sentences in Chapter 5 is ...
An empowered community is a community that manages its own affairs by means of inclusive dialog processes.
When you write "dialog processes" in this sentence you seem to be referring to something more than where everyone "gathers together" and "exchanges words." You are referring to a transformational kind of talking that can empower a community. But "dialog processes" cannot empower a community. Choice-creating is required for that.

Maybe if we look at a metaphor it will help.  ... Let's say we've identified three grains: corn, wheat and rice. We need corn in order to be healed. Wheat and rice are good, but we need a purified form of corn, because a mixture can ruin everything.  It's difficult to achieve that when people don't notice the distinction, when they call corn "rice" ... or "wheat". How are we going get the corn to heal ourselves if we don't acknowledge that we need corn, not rice?

I'm sure there are better metaphors to use but I think it's important to acknowledge that the kind of "gathering together" and "exchanging words" we need must be transformational if it is to "empower a community." And it needs to be transformational in a certain way, where we face the big, impossible-seeming issues collaboratively and creatively, and determine unanimous solutions that work for everyone. Then we can have a voice of "We the People" in addition to a great conversation experience.

Jim

DeAnna Martin
Co-Founder & Executive Director
Center for Wise Democracy
(206) 459-8429
dea...@wisedemocracy.org

Visit us online at www.WiseDemocracy.org or http://blog.tobe.net

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wisdom Council Enthusiasts" group.
To post to this group, send email to wisdom...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wisdomcounci...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wisdomcouncil?hl=en.

---------------------    

Jim Rough

Dynamic Facilitation Associates. | 360-385-7118 | j...@dynamicfacilitation.com | 

See www.DynamicFacilitation.com

Sign up for Public Dynamic Facilitation seminars

[Ted Heinz]

Jim,

Thanks for pointing out that this discussion is not reaching the DF list serve.  But how can we change that to include DF?  I notice that Georges story and then Richards response only say [WC]

Ted

On 7/22/10 11:34 AM, "Jim Rough" <j...@tobe.net> wrote:

This is a conversation happening on the Wisdom Council listseve that really relates to Dynamic Facilitation. I'll just pass it on. Patricia Pfost said she'd like to comment on it when I told her about it.

Jim

Begin forwarded message:

From: DeAnna Martin <dea...@wisedemocracy.org>
Date: July 22, 2010 9:42:48 AM PDT
To: Wisdom Council Enthusiasts <wisdom...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [WC] Re: dialog, choice-creating, etc.
Reply-To: wisdom...@googlegroups.com

Hi Ted and others,

I thought I would add the National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation’s definitions of the terms to the mix:

You can read them online here: http://ncdd.org/rc/what-are-dd

I’ve copied and pasted the text from their post “What Are Dialogue & Deliberation”

“Dialogue is a process that allows people, usually in small groups, to share their perspectives and experiences with one another about difficult issues we tend to just debate about or avoid entirely. Issues like racial disparities, youth violence and gay marriage.

Dialogue is not about winning an argument or coming to an agreement, but about understanding and learning. Dialogue dispels stereotypes, builds trust and enables people to be open to perspectives that are very different from their own. Dialogue can, and often does, lead to both personal and collaborative action.

Deliberation is a closely related process with a different emphasis. Deliberation emphasizes the use of logic and reasoning to make better decisions. Decisions about important public issues like health care and immigration are too often made through the use of power or coercion rather than a sound decision-making process that involves all parties and explores all options.

Dialogue and deliberation processes tend to use skilled facilitators and carefully constructed ground rules or agreements to ensure that all participants are heard and are treated as equals.

Dialogue often lays the groundwork for deliberation. The trust, mutual understanding and relationships that are built during dialogue enable participants to deliberate more effectively, and to make better decisions. For groups that want to move from talk to a decision or action, NCDD recommends starting with dialogue and encouraging deliberation after people have had the chance to tell their personal story (in relation to the issue at hand) in a respectful environment.

Dialogue and deliberation are used for a variety of reasons:  to resolve conflicts and bridge divides; to build understanding about complex issues; to foster innovative solutions to problems and launch action; and to reach agreement on or recommendations about policy decisions.”

These definitions were created by “leaders in the field” per the website’s authors... But, I’m not sure who that included.

Neither of these definitions is what we claim DF’s purpose or the experience of the process is... With “a field” getting more specific about what the terms dialogue and deliberation mean, it’s curious where our position lies in terms of advocating DF as a process option. To what extent are we in a position to educate the general public about what these terms mean versus just getting them to understand what we’re doing in terms familiar to them? At our May gathering a shift I heard was that we need to be clear within our own community about the terms we are using (i.e. Choice-creating, Dynamic Facilitation, Wisdom Council, and Creative Insight Council) and when we are “selling” our approach that becomes less important.

I talk about it in word used by my colleague Rosa... Dynamic Facilitation is a method that reliably assures Choice-creating...

More food for thought...
DeAnna

(206) 459-8429
dea...@wisedemocracy.org <x-msg://88/dea...@wisedemocracy.org>

Visit us online at www.WiseDemocracy.org <http://www.WiseDemocracy.org>  or http://blog.tobe.net <http://blog.tobe.net/>

[Jim Rough]

Hi George,

This is a great story about choice-creating, George. Thank you. In this post I'm sharing it with the DF listserv as well as the Wisdom Council group.

Jim

On Jul 23, 2010, at 9:38 AM, <gsr...@shaw.ca> <gsr...@shaw.ca> wrote:

Hi Richard – I’m glad my story struck a chord with you – please feel free to share with others.

 

Cheers, George

 

PS: Many years ago I wrote a longer story that you might be interested in - “All in the Same Boat” -- http://www.islandnet.com/plethora/mai/rowboat1.html  

 

From: wisdom...@googlegroups.com [mailto:wisdom...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard Moore
Sent: July-23-10 7:23 AM
To: wisdom...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [WC] Re: dialog, choice-creating, etc.

 

 

Thank you George for a very inspiring story, so poignant that it becomes a metaphor for transformation. Would you have any objection to the story to being shared more widely?

 

cheers,

richard

________

 

George Sranko wrote:

one of those times when I experienced extraordinary learning in a very short time

 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wisdom Council Enthusiasts" group.
To post to this group, send email to wisdom...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wisdomcounci...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wisdomcouncil?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wisdom Council Enthusiasts" group.
To post to this group, send email to wisdom...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wisdomcounci...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wisdomcouncil?hl=en.

[Simon d'Orsogna]

(sorry for x-posting to the 2 lists if you are listed with both, but I am not sure how to include both threads otherwise…)

 

Hi Ted,

 

I like your attending to what is specific here in DF with your take on DF as “a creative process shared in a group”.

 

Without prejudice, I too feel drawn to define what is the unique set of strengths or characteristics of DF rather than to distinguish from the existing paradigms and definitions (though I am happy to read some of these too).

 

You say, “the preconditions include the need for acceptance, openness to ideas…” , and that “choice-creating happens when enough psychological security and openness is present that creative ideas are allowed to come to the front and feed off each other to develop truly new, satisfying conclusions.” I’d add something about a commitment to an open-ended process, and to following the energy wherever it travels.

 

For me (and I am talking about how I do it, not prescriptive nor possibly ‘standard’), I also note something distinctive about how the DF’r is prepared (practice in ‘holding space’, not-knowing, ‘waiting before words come’, etc), and prepares herself (intentionally quiets self, with an expectation of being on each person’s side, supporting and following the process without having an outcome in mind… and maybe more here?)

 

A final point, when the process is allowed to find its’ own form, the outcome is recognised as ‘the place where a deep gladness meets the world’s deep need’, and it is known in your body, as well as recognised by everyone present (aka ‘a breakthrough’).

 

 

 

Just my 3c, glad to hear from others how they see it, smell it, hear it…

 

 

                               

Simon

 

 

---

From: wisdom...@googlegroups.com [mailto:wisdom...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Ted Heinz
Sent: Friday, 23 July 2010 4:27 AM
To: wisdom...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [WC] Re: dialog, choice-creating, etc.

 

Diana and others,

I feel comfortable with most of the definitions even though there are differing connotations or specifics, but I wonder if we have thought enough about the nature of Choice-creating…

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wisdom Council Enthusiasts" group.
To post to this group, send email to wisdom...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wisdomcounci...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wisdomcouncil?hl=en.

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.441 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3022 - Release Date: 07/22/10 18:36:00

[Ted Heinz]

Simon,
I really appreciate your rich reflections on the nature of choice-creating.  It may very well be the thing to talk more about how it comes about in DF.  What is it in the individuals’ experience during DF that allows them to open their hearts/minds to each other in a shared choice-creating process?  

For example how important is it, in setting the stage for the individuals choice-creating capacity that certain rules and procedures are the responsibility of the facilitator and not the group members?

I am looking forward to more thoughts about choice-creating.

Ted

PS: By the way, is this on both [wc] as well as[df] list serve?  If not maybe someone can help me.

On 7/23/10 10:23 PM, "Simon d'Orsogna" <sim...@optusnet.com.au> wrote: