Uncategorized – Page 3

The value shapes of conversation

As I am getting ready to host, with fellow Albertans, a conversation about how to unleash Albertans’ collective ingenuity, I enter into an experience with diverse people interested in a collective learning opportunity.As part of this process, I will enjoy exploring the value of conversation in our communities and the role values and conversation play in our communities’ well-being.

A recent conversation with a fellow learner rekindled a curiosity:How do values shape conversation?

Value systems – whether in a person, family, organization, community, nation or even in the human species – evolve from egocentric, to ethnocentric and worldcentric.These value systems themselves change as the conditions of our lives change.A person who places great emphasis on the health of the entire planet (world centric) may find a distinct shift in focus to self (egocentric) when grappling with the aftermath of Haiti’s earthquate, for example.While this is simplistic, knowing, or simpliy noticing, where myself and others are coming from in terms of our value systems is useful when I enter into conversation – with myself or with others.(For an example of the kind of value systems contemplated here, please refer to http://www.enlightennext.org/magazine/j22/beck.asp.)

On February10-12, 2010 I am gathering with other Albertans to explore the art of hosting and harvesting conversations that lead to renewed and sustained communities.Such a conversation can not take place without consideration of the values in play – the values within the conversation, as well as the values that shape the decisions we make about how to design for conversation.

Generally, the physical shape of an “Art of Hosting” conversation is the circle. We sit in circle of various sizes, we seek to collaborate as equals, we seek to unearth the collective wisdom that sits with us: we make the assumption that the information we need to know to tackle the changes we are facing resides is readily available.We each bring a piece of the puzzle, and only in deep conversation – that may or may not even be with traditional words and language – will the pieces we bring begin to emerge, and the picture we create together begin to emerge.We are fellow travelers in inquiry.

In this vein, I am curious about how to create the conditions for people to fully engage with each other – at our gathering, but also out in the world.Not in a shallow, skirting converation, but in a way that reaches deep into the soul. Values come in when we meet the challenge to meet people where and how we find them, recognizing the values in play, each with expectations of conversation.I imagine these values in the form of shapes and texture of conversation, a critical piece in designing for conversation.I explore these below, first with egocentric value systems, then ethnocentric and worldcentric.

Value shapes of conversation concept

Survival– Staying Alive There are times when sitting in circle to contemplate and inquire is not the right thing to do. Drawing on the example of the Haiti earthquake, for the individual fighting for survival, the shape is a dot – the survival self. A point that focuses on the self and what it needs to survive. There is no conversation. (There is no reason this is bold – I can’t stop it.)

Tribe – Safety and Security For the family or a collection of people supporting themselves as they survive together, the dot simply becomes larger in to a solid circle.It is a solid shape with afocus on the group as the self – the well-being of everyone ensures the well-being of each member.A solid circle, as opposed to the dot, takes into account a sense of collective, of looking after each other and a sense of belonging and connection.This is a tight-knit, solid group with a clear sense of leadership in the group (sage/elder/chief).Conversation takes place in circle form with an intense sense of belonging.There is clear protocol and deference to a leader and the spirits.

Empire – Power and Action The solid circles in isolation realize that there are others competing for the same resources to meet their groups’ needs.Power and action are critical elements to meet the needs of a group – those who have proven trustworthy, are respected and revered (or even feared) rise to power.Agression, anger and shame keep individuals in check. The shape I imagine here is a solid, tall triangle.A clear hierarchy of power with power at the top.Status (power) will determine where you fit, and there is clamoring to reach the top.The conversation is “top-down” messages within the triangle. The tall solid triangle, the climax of ego-centered perspective does not contemplate the needs of others.Between triangles there is minimal conversation per se, but rather comptetive positioning, war, agreession.There is great pride and identity (of self and the group) invested in this shape.This shape snaps into place when there is an emergency.

Authority Structure – Stability and Salvation The intense comptetion and fueding within and between the Power God triangles is an existence of aggression, assertion of independence and control to respond to danger.A shift from this focus on self to the collective results in order and dignity, stability and a sense of right and wrong that is established by an authority – there is “One True Way”.

The shape of the tirangle again, but now with authority – there is protocol in place for the purposes of efficiency.With a purpose in mind, the pieces of the system know just what to do to respond in a timely fashion.Everyone has their place and role, and when the boss says it is time to go, it is time to.This is the shape of agencies stepping in to help in Haiti.This is the shape of the Red Cross.This is the shape of our food banks, soup kitchens and our police forces.Authority and control for the purposes of some greater public service.

This triangle is less solid in texture in that it opens itself up to a broader collective purpose, but the power and hierarchy are still needed to deliver on that purpose.Communication is still “top-down”, but it is more from authority, than power.Communication between triangles, when it occurs, is filled with protocol.Other Authority Structure triangles with a different purpose/method are not tolerated. These triangles appear in isolation – or in silos as we describe our institutions.

Strategic Enterprise – Success and Material Gain Eventually, the urge to connect silos and solitudes leads to strategic thinking, and a shift is made to think strategically.The need to allow for more flow around an organization is noticed.The need for less authority to let an entrepreneurial spirit emerge is also present.There is still hierarchy and protocol, but is is relaxed and purposefully allows, and expects, the interconnection of interests without the traditional rules and protocols.Ideas flow from top to bottom and bottom to top as the power is dissipated and the self reemerges – as a creative, competitive, rule-breaking self.

The triangles are more stout again and no longer in isolation.They are also more porous, denoting a decrease in power and authority and the movement of information around the organization.The focus of conversation is getting problems solved creatively through the effective use of networking – people are connecting with each other in cooperation but not as equals.

Social Network – Inclusive Community When the desire for material goods and gain wanes and the need to address social gaps surfaces, the shape of conversation shifts to reflect a new sense of equal human rights.Sensitivity to others is heightened. A deeper spirit of cooperation emerges and displaces entrepreneurial desire.A sense of responsibility to look after the needs of others in addition to the needs of me is noticeable.

As equals, the shape is a circle, one that elicits and supports the gifts that everyone offers for the collective good.The circle is less solid than the triangles, denoting more inclusivity.This circle is also less solid than the Tribe values, again because of its inclusivity.It welcomes all, seeking peaceful resolution of conflict in support of the whole. The circle supports the full development of each individual as well as the whole.Hierarchy is not present and may be vilified.

In the End it is Flex and Flow – Shifting Shapes

In the first collection of ego-centred shapes, I see them existing simultaneously, ultimately as self centered entities. As solid shapes, there is little room for identities beyond the identity of the entity itself.They must be so to meet their needs in the world as they experience it.As life conditions change, with more security and room for creativity, the shapes become less solid and more inclusive.

In considering the above, there are some questions that surface for me:

What is the impact of these value shapes on hosting and designing for conversation?
Under what circumstances is it appropriate to sit in circle?
Are well hosted conversations always in circle?
As the purpose of conversation changes, does the shape of conversation change?

In the Art of Hosting community, we make the assumption that there is great wisdom among us – we just need to release it.We must recognize that from a values perspective, this is a Social Network question that will not resonate too well with the Fire Department in the middle of putting out a fire.

There is a time and place for each shape.The questions I find myself reglarly exploring are:

What values are surfacing in me?
What values are surfacing in others?
Is the shape for conversation I envision coming from me, or the field?

The obstacle is not the objective

In my acting class last night an interesting parallel to my learning to be a coach.We’ve been exploring the notion of a basic objective in scene work for several weeks.My attention was grabbed yesterday when we stopped to have a conversation as a class about the exercises we have been doing.The simple meaning of our conversation was this: knowing specifically the objective of a scene, and the specific obstacles to that objective that need to be worked through is crucial.But the focus is not the obstacle – it is the objective that pulls me through the scene, but it the obstacle that makes me want to do so.This makes for a good scene.

On the spot as we were digesting our learning, I immediately thought of some meaningful coaching conversations I have had over the last year.The meaningful part being that a coach will offer opportunities for the coachee to explore how to move through obstacles to opportunities and the objective.It is not enough to simply identify obstacles.

In the coaching models I have been exploring, I have been paying particular attention to a continuum where at one end the coach “puts in” to the coachee, and at the other end the coach “pulls out” of the coachee.To be done well, both require heightened listening skills.Specific to the latter, the coach listens intently to the coachee, minimizing the filters and analysis as much as humanly possible.What the coach thinks simply gets in the way of what is wanting to come out of the coachee.While there is a time an place for coaching models that “put in”, there is an unbalance in that respect.People seem to be hardwired to have to tell others what to do.Even in our listening that comes through in the questions we ask.

So what would happen if in conversations we served as guides to wisdom that just sits in us?What if we rest in wonder about what is wanting to come out?

Whether as a coach, facilitator, parent, spouse, manager, that there are times to “put in” and times to “pull out” of the people I am with.I am starting to notice more specifically what I need in this respect.Being skillfull in conversation requires being attentive to your actions, your default patterns, what others need and, of course, having conversations with others around what they need and what you need from each other.

In my work as a community planner, conversation is needed everywhere.Quality conversation to ensure interests are understood and priorities arGovernment, communities, developers, not-for-profit organizations, school and health systems, food production systems, energy systems, are poorly integrated in their thinking and behaviour.Unresolved and deep-seated conflict is everywhere.I don’t imagine for a moment that it is possible to get rid of it.I do imagine, however, that if by identifying what it is we wish to accomplish together, and noticing the objectives that are in our way, we then have a choice to make about where we spend our time: focus on solving the obstacles and fixing he problems, or to focus on moving through them to welcome our objective.To do either, conversation that mover far deeper than the superficial is needed.

To make our desires a reality, we have to simply note the obstacles and move past them.Just as on the theatrical stage, they are not our focus.

Plan a meeting, or plan a harvest?

Isn’t it funny how even when you have heard it before, it doesn’t actually “hit” you until some later date? While it rang true before, the noise is a lot louder today for the meaning of this statement: when planning a meeting, we are really planning a harvest.

4 mates and I are preparing for an Art of Hosting (and Harvesting) gathering in Edmonton, Alberta next week http://berkana.org/pdf/AoH_Edmonton_Feb_2010.pdf. And of course, now that we are getting into the design of the gathering, we are contemplating what it means to harvest the conversations we will be having. We are contemplating this diligently in service to the invitation we have extended to explore how to cultivate Albertans’ collective ingenuity in order to renew and sustain Alberta’s communities.

When in conversation with anyone, including myself, meaning is generated. There is the tangible meaning, such as a record of what decisions are made. In addition, there are the impressions we make of each other, the conflict we carry, the assumptions, the sabotage, the agendas, as well as goodness and love. Yet we struggle with our conversations – especially the ones we choose not to have. Bad feelings are clearly a pattern, and this leaves a lot of conversations never held.

But what if we are more than that? What if instead of leaving the fruit to rot on the tree, we choose to enjoy it? What if we consider every apple, blemishes and all, as a sweet treat? What if we planned for that when we gather? More importantly, what if we planned to explicitly expose those sweet treats for us all to see? What if we held the intention to fully harvest the abundance that is just sitting there – each apple, and all the things we can make together?

A harvest is about both content and process, the tangible and the intangible. The content is not about a message to be delivered to others, but about pulling out of ourselves what is just sitting there waiting to emerge. Our unconscious, or semiconscious knowledge. In terms of contemplating a harvest, content is about knowing what the conversation is for: is it to explore ideas, or to nail down a plan for action. To build a common sense of direction, or generate a diverse range of options? Knowing the overall purpose of the conversation assists greatly with ascertaining the appropriate design for the conversation – the process- as well as sense of harvest (to design for) that is in service to the intention. Intention provides clarity for both content and process.

The form of a harvest is various and unlimited: photographs, a movie, a song, a poem, a report, a picture, a performance, a document. The harvest at times tangible and explicit (such as a report or document) or more intangible and implicit (a song or poem). Both add value and meaning when aligned with the purpose and context of the people gathering.

Skillful design for conversation is the process, and when aligned with the purpose/intention, conversation will provide wonderful fruit for harvest. Our design choices dictate whether we gather effectively the collective wisdom. The quality of our presence in the gathering will dictate what we notice – whether one apple, the whole tree, the whole orchard, the ecosystem, etc.

Whether from an individual or as a collaborative effort, the harvest takes the unarticulated and unconscious to the articulated and conscious that is an expression of value and meaning. It is an expression of learning.

In times of abundance or scarcity, just like an apple, the harvest of conversation is nourishment.

I dream of growing and learning in new ways

When planning practitioners reflect on their practice, they notice that their own behaviour is unusual when their communities find success – they seek and embrace challenges, they are aware of strengths and weaknesses in themselves and others, they endlessly seek opportunities and the place trust in others. There are, indeed, emerging essential non-technical competencies that make a planning practitioner effective.

As an effective individual planning practitioner, the following elements are emerging as essential:

Find your passion and spend your time there
Be self aware
Be open to any communication
Be comfortable with being uncomfortable
Seek to understand

Further, it is useful to consider what could make a collective planning practice effective. The following elements are emerging:

Get on the radar vs. duck the radar
Be political and get political
Build coalitions
Generate allies and advocate
Step forward

There is a gulf between what we know we ought to do, and what we actually choose to do. The Greek work for this phenomenon is Akrasia. The leadership challenge for the planning profession is to step through and over the gap – to what is possible for us in service to Alberta communities. As individuals and as a collective, we will find our voice if we dare to dwell on what we dream. While the collective voice for planning practitioners is unknown, it will only emerge as we seek our collective leadership capacities. This is our challenge for 2010.

I dream of growing and learning in new ways.

The full article can be found at – http://www.aacip.com/public/AACIP_JournalComp_Issue3_Revised.pdf

Cities: A Needed Part of Alberta’s New Story

As the United Nations Climate Change Conference draws to a close this week, there is parallel summit that is of significance for Alberta political decision makers: the Copenhagen Climate Summit for Mayors.

In Canadian and world politics, the buzz around the Copenhagen UN gathering is Alberta’s oil sands – for which we are tarred and feathered. But there is a parallel, and perhaps more dramatic issue at hand that we ought to pay attention to: 75% of global CO2 emissions come from the worlds largest cities.

In Canada and Alberta, it is time to recognize and support the role local government has in creating a future where Albertans will thrive – economically, socially and culturally. To do that, consideration of our development practices, and the impacts direct and indirect on the environment we rely on, is paramount. A new political will in Alberta is needed that creates partnership between the Government of Alberta and its “children” municipalities. A new Alberta that will meet the needs of generations to come starts with a new political climate that allows mayors, reeves and councils (and all other forms of local government, like school boards) to thrive. This is whole new conversation for Alberta, and one that I am committed to supporting.

The opportunity before Alberta – create a new story. If interested, check out Reboot Alberta, an endeavour to cultivate a new political compass – http://rebootalberta.org/

(For a snapshot of mayors of Copenhagne, you may be interested in the Mayors in Copenhagen Panel – http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/2009/200912/20091214.html)

November Knitting

Two media items resonated with me today, starting my November knittings.

The first media item was on CBC Radio’s The Current: a warm up debate to the Munk Debates in Toronto tonight, with debaters George Monbiot and Bjorn Lomborg.The proposition: Be it resolved: climate change is mindind’s defining crisis and demands a commensurate response.A timely debate leading up to the climate negotiations starting next Monday in Copenhagen, to lay the groundwork for a global treaty to cap greenhouse gas emissions and stem climate change.(The debate is about how grave the threat is, and how much needs to be done to fight the threat, and what cost.)

The second media event spurring reflection is Annie Leonard’s new film: The Story of Cap and Trade: Why You Can’t Solve a Problem with the Thinking That Created It (http://storyofstuff.com/capandtrade/)

The bottom line, as I watch this debate, is this.Even the old-school form of debate is not going to convince anyone to do anything different than argue, rather than take action.Monbiot and Lomborg agree that there is a challenge we are facing in climate change.The fact that there is a challenge is not contested.What to do about it is.

While I surmise that no one actually thinks that the Munk Debates this evening will actually solve climate change, the format is indicative of the thinking that created the problem to begin with: state your position and stick to it all costs.The value of the debates is, in fact, in seeing clear positions.We benefit from seeing options as we make our way through the morass of information relating to climate change.

It is time, however, to get to the heart of what is really at issue, and find a way through the mess and seek doable, practical actions that will make a difference.But before I describe what this might look like, there is another consideration that should be raised with respect to climate change.James Lovelock is on to something: this is not about fixing Earth, but rather that we ought to adapt to the change that is occurring.It is the same, old thinking trap if we let ourselves think that climate change is a problem for us to fix, as if fixing Earth is something as simple as a lawnmower for a mechanic.Earth is not a simple system, but is rather dynamic.She has been around a lot longer than us, through many climate changes, and she will look after herself.Our job, then, is to look after ourselves.We don’t have anything to fix, rather we have to focus on what we need to adapt to, and how we will adapt, and, of course, when we will adapt.We might also wish to consider who will adapt.

Exploration of these considerations does not occur through debates about how to fix the problem.This simply merges two simplistic tactics to tackle climate change: debate and fix.

Two opposite approaches?How about ongoing generative dialogue and co-creation?For this, there is a whole new skill set required.We are no longer in an era where it is appropriate to set a goal and action plan and expect it to work.The variables are too variable.We need to be constantly sensing what is happeing in our world through information exchanges and conversation that welcomes diversity of insight.We need to be constantly sensing and noticing what is working in our world and what is not, which means constantly changing and adjusting the “plan”.The world is not longer a place where simple solutions will remotely address dynamic challenges like climate change.

This is the conversation I am hungry for in Alberta.We have at our disposal a prosperity that puts us in a place of responsibility.What can we do with our ingenuity that rests behind old ways of thinking and problem solving?

The place to begin is on the ground, with people practicing new ways of engaging in conversation.This is not about throwing away old ways of doing things, but broadening out our means to learn and adjust.We have the world in Alberta and Canada, and we are in a unique position to offer a wonderful ingenuity to meet the challenges we face.

What is within us that is waiting to be unleashed?

The Art of Professional Practice

I have an addiction confession: I watch all episodes of So You Think You Can Dance that I can find on TV. What pulls me in time after time are the magical moments when the dancers pour themselves completely into their craft. In these instances, I don’t have to rely on the discerning eye of the judges to notice that something special has happened. Even I, who trained as a dancer only for a few months when I was 4, can tell the difference.

In these moments, the dancers, who are already noticeably amazing, find a sweet spot. Jean Marc Genereaux, one of the Canadian judges, refers to it as “the pocket”. Mary Murphy will put you on the coveted “hot tomale train”. L’il C will say that the performance was “buck”. Invariably, in these spectacular moments the judges are in awe of the commitment the dancers make. And from time to time, another descriptive word is used: “professional”. And in the context of all the other descriptions, we can see that professional performance has a little “extra”, it is a notch above the rest.

I have been exploring with two professions, city planners and educators, how we go about our work and what we notice when we our work is getting unexpected, wonderful results. They notice that their own behaviour is unusual in these cases – they seek and embrace challenges, they are aware of strenghths and weaknesses (own and others), they look for opportunities, and place trust in others. This sounds remarkably like the comments the judges make of the dancers. If they shy from what a choreographer is asking them to do, the performance will be flat. They, as well as their choreographer, builds on their strengths to make a wonderful performance. The dancers that stand out look for opportunities to add their own flavour to the choreography – they “make it their own.” Finally, the dancers that stand out fundamentally trust others for their own success: their choreographer, their partner(s), wardrobe and set design people, producers, judges, audience, etc.

So what does this offer those of us working in the “professions”, whether city planners, lawyers, health professionals, engineers, teachers, landscape architects, social workers or geologists? I offer some questions that I am exploring about professional practice:

Do we seek the risks of new challenges?
Do we willingly exposing ourselves to feedback, trusting its truth and value to our personal growth?
Do we look for opportunities to inject our personal desires into our work?
Do we know what it feels like to be in the pocket? Do we notice if we get different results when in the pocket?
What is the commitment we are making to the work we are doing?

Embedded in all this is a chicken and egg scenario – do I/we become “professional” from learning, or do I/we learn from being “professional”? I look forward to exploring how the art of conversation will serve the art of professional practice.

auto-matic impact

we transport

from land to land

by moving

with auto-matic impact

the dice are loaded for the car

in the city we’ve been building for 100 years

awake or not

in a perfect world we’d plan

simultaneously

staging practical problems

coincidentally

to shift the dream from

white picket fences

with exemplars built from opportunity

trusting in learning and adapting

striving for alternative

futures, knowing risks

of doing nothing

the style of life we choose is up to us

by design

(harvest from Eric Miller’s presentation September 28, 2009 with the City-Region Studies Centre, University of Alberta)

The Audacity of the Autocity

If you build more roads, they will be immediately filled with cars. So think about how people move around and the options you can provide to them. This is one of the messages I gleaned from the latest installment in the speakers series hosted by the U of A’s City-Region Studies Centre. The presenter was Eric Miller, a professor of civil engineering at the University of Toronto, and the Director of U of T’s Cities Centre.

We have been building autocities for 100+ years in Edmonton. There is no denying the impact the car has had on how people move from place to place in their communities. The car is prominent in new subdivisions, where the home is attached to the two-car (minimum) attached garage. The car is prominent in our investment in freeway construction. The car is prominent in older neighbourhoods as we complain about the state of potholes. The car is prominent as we move all over the city to get to the services we need. The car is prominent as we complain about how many cars are out there with us and the time it takes to get to where we want to go. The car is prominent as municipal and provincial capital budgets are consumed by the need to create and maintain roads. The car is prominent in the declining health of people – and Earth. The car is even prominent in government efforts to revitalize failing economic systems.

Please do not infer that I am against the car – I own a car and I enjoy it. I have to confess that I am hungry for some balance, however. And this requires rethinking how we think about our city experience and providing transportation options. As my engineer friend would put it: mode split.

First question is why would a city want to look at transportation options. Immediate response is that the more people use alternatives to the car, there is more room on the roads. Providing options actually makes the investments we have made more effective. Further, providing options improves the health of people in cities by creating opportunities to walk or wheel to some of our destinations. Or carpool or use public transportation, which decreases pollution levels, hence our health again. All of these improve the bottom line for municipal budgets – less money spent on building endless bigger and bigger roads and bridges (that we eventually add to the list of capital assets that we have to maintain when cities have difficulty maintaining what we already have).

The big question is around what will it take to generate viable opportunities? Again, it means rethinking what we think about the city by asking what it will take to make the options viable. We should be asking ourselves what makes a place worth walking in? What makes a place safe to cycle in? What are the destinations that need to be on the LRT line for me to want to use it? What makes a place worth living in? This isn’t about what comes first, the planning or the engineering. They ought to occur simultaneously – this is the new conversation. That is the ultimate form of planning.

There are questions that should be explored in every planning decision – Are the connections within communities created and strengthened? Are places to enjoy the city and each other created and strengthened? Are our choices in the city healthy for us?

Making Monster Stories

This is the closing debrief in yesterdays creative process session at the Authentic Leadership in Action Institute in Halifax. We were exploring story:

Our similar stories

Got better as we told them

When I wrote mine

It was all about me

When I told it

I found some distance

I can see the monster

When I get out of the way

When I whisper

Transported to a garage and toolbox

A love of listening

With sadness

Pure negativity is not evil

It is the pleasure we find in negativity

That is

We make decisions

About our personal stories

The evil and the good in our hearts

The passion without definition

Random meaning

In our lives

When we get out of the way

With imagination and insight

The storyteller is a guide

Letting the story unfold

Each time

With the prince

The wolf and the horse

What do I do now?

That’s up to you?

Crush the Giant’s heart

Or put it back?

And live happily

Alchemically

ever after…

SIte Logo

Category: Uncategorized