So it’s been more than thirty days that I have been on my 30 day learning journey, but here is a harvest from some significant conversations. Consider this the tender early sproing greens. There is more to follow.
I began this learning journey leaning into thinking about what role I can play in taking change to scale. My reasons for this inquiry have to do with the fact that I am increasingly working with systems, beyond organizations and beyond groups. Also, some of us in the Art of Hosting community and the Berkana Institute are deep in this inquiry as well, wondering how we extend to influencing systems.
Two major insights have come to me this past month. First, working with my deep friends Toke Moeller, Monica Nissen, Tuesday Ryan-Hart, Phil Cass and Tim Merry on the Food and Society conference in Phoenix back in April we found ourselves very much playing at various levels of scale. This was a gathering of the Good Food Movement, and our intention as designers and process artists was to create a container in which the movement could experience itself as a movement, as a learning community working towards shifting a large food system. We were brought in not just to work with the conference as facilitators, but to help build a field among the hosting team and the organizations involved to do this work of having the movement expereince itself. For a number of years, Kellogg has had an intention to shift the percentage of healthy, fair, affordable and green food from 2% to 10% of the total amount of food in the American system. It is the Good Food Movement, such as it is, that is doing this work.
Moving from pioneers to systems of influence.
On the final day of the conference we had Debbie Frieze and Tom Hurley share the Berkana perspective on taking change to scale. Debbie and Meg Wheatley cracked a very simple model, called the “Lifecycle of Emergence” of doing this that names four phases in evolving a system of influence. First, pioneers in an emerging system give themselves a NAME which makes it much easier to find one another. Before the local food movement started to take hold there was no name for the people that were running farmers markets, creating community shared agriculture, and promoting local menus. Through the 1990s, a movement sprang up, which we now know as the local food movement (and some people are becoming increasingly “locavores,” promoting 100 mile diets and such). Once a network of practitioners is named it can find itself and begin to CONNECT.
Humberto Maturana is quoted as saying that the way to make a system more healthy is to connect it to more of itself. In this model of emergent scale, connecting is how the network emerges. Think of all the networks that have propagated through web technology since blogging began a new practice of naming, which Google helps along by making it easy to find one another. Networks themselves are useful, but it is only when they deepen to communities of practice, do they begin to exert influence. Community of practice form when people NOURISH networks, by offering to a shared centre for example. A network is relationship neutral, a community has a quality of relationship that takes it to another level. At this level we are able to do work together, support each other and create opportunities for new things to happen, born in the social space of collaboration.
As communities of practice do more and more, and they tell their stories and ILLUMINATE their work, they become systems of influence. A system of influence is able to do more than a community of practice, and it strikes me that it is less intentional. There are however, a set of practices that are useful for journeying through this ever scaling world. Tom Hurley spoke to those at the Food and Society conference, and Toke, Monica and I have been thinking about them from the perspective of what Hosting practice has to offer.
The journey of the practitioner at increasing levels of scale
As people move from facilitation to organizational development and beyond, I think there are five kind of archetypal levels on which facilitators or hosting practitioners work. There is a strong correlation between our own learning journey and through the ways in which works moves to scale. Of course there are many ways that people come to the work of large sclae change, through management, activism, advocacy, spiritual tradition and systemic analytics. he journey I am describing here is the one I am on and seems widely shared by people who learn about organizations and systems by first working with groups.
So this journey can be summarized by five basic archetypal fields. in short these are individual, one on one, group, organization, system.
In many Art of Hosting retreats we talk about hosting oneself. This basically means being in active inquiry with oneself. A thirty day learning journey is one way of hosting oneself, as is Byron Katie’s work, Otto Scharmer’s Presencing and Angeles Arrien’s Four Fold Way. These are all ways of conversing with oneself, staying open and in inquiry and noticing what is alive.
When we bring ourselves from this space into conversational space, we show up present and open and able to see new things emerging, even in small one on one conversations. We enter these conversations as open listeners, which is what Adam Kahane’s work has been about. To enter a social space as a listener is to attend to what could be born in the possibility of open social space. This is the beginning of a journey that takes us to a different place than if we show up talking.
The next level, the level of hosting the group, is the first experience we have of letting go. If we host as listeners, we begin to cultivate the practice of holding space, which is fundamentally different from showing up in a group as a directive, authoritarian presence. The host – the one who can hold space – practices a form of leadership that is able to attend to the emergent, exactly the capacity that is needed to see how work can scale. As we move through these levels we begin to let go more and more into these social spaces, while staying very rooted and present to our own self.
Once we have worked with groups, a consciousness emerges that asks the question about whether what we know about groups can apply to organizations. Harrison Owen made this leap with his Inspired Organization, seeing the scaling up from one Open Space meeting to a way of working together. Michael Herman did the same with the Inviting Organization. The Appreciative Inquiry world seeks to apply this worldview to asset-based community development and positive organizational scholarship. We start seeing that the things we know about self-organization, emergence and collaborative creativity can actually be encoded into organizational structures. Chaordic design becomes possible.
Finally there comes a time when we begin to ask if large systems can operate this way, and of course many do. Harrison points to the work of Stuart Kaufman who has studied self-organization for decades as evidence that Open Space is the operating system of the universe. Juanita Brown and David Isaacs and the World Cafe community are exploring the implications for conversational leadership and “the world as cafe.” Systems CAN and DO operate according to these principles, but at the level of the practitioner, we fall further and further away from controlling outcomes.
Instead, what we need to learn to do is to give up entirely to “the field.” My friend Monica has been saying “only a field can hold a field” and this is our experience from the Food and Society conference. We are still holding space for the emergent results of the Food and Society gathering, and we are finding it impossible to do this except in a field of practitioners. No one person is capable of this work alone.
And so our journey comes to this: host oneself into inquiry, listen with others, host conversations that matter, co-create organizations together, and participate in the field that can host the field, doing work that is greater than any one person can do. This is how we can show up in initiatives that begin to scale quickly to the level of systems of influence. Control will act as a brake on the acceleration of scale, letting go propels it forward.
There is a saying in the Tao te Ching: know the male, but keep to the female. In other words, know power and creativity, and keep to the receptive and open. Know creation, be open to emergence. This small phrase sums up everything I have been learning about how to practice to create shift. If you want to change the world you have to be able to disappear into the field that is doing the work without losing your capabilities, your contributions and your gifts and without being tied to your personal vision for what the shift will be.
Share:
Myriam Laberge and Brenda Chaddock have further developed their facilitation learning offerings and now offer a three tier learning program towards facilitation mastery. You can find out more at Myriam’s blog: Co-Creative Power: Masterful Facilitation Institute:Becoming An Inspired Facilitator.
I like these two women a lot, and have worked with both of them. It’s cool to see them diving deeper and deeper into crafting amazing learning opportunities to share what they have discovered on their own journeys to mastery.
Share:
This week is Conversation Week.
I’ve known Vicki Robin for a few years now. She’s a lovely, lively and curious soul, not shy about standing up and taking responsibility for leading shift in the world. She developed the Conversation Cafe methodology, and conceived of Conversation Week in 2001.
Vicki was with us at the Art of Hosting on Whidbey Island in January, where she did something I’ve never seen before. She stepped out of her own methodology and facilitated an Open Space gathering. She was skeptical about Open Space, not having had great experiences in Open Space gatherings, and she is a developer of process, and in my experience, those who have devoted their lives to developing and polishing methodologies rarely step out of their cherieshed processes and try something new. Vicki held space beautifully for us and was incredibly generous with the group about her learning and observations. I have never seen a person so closely identified with one methodology step out and practice in another one. It was really very cool.
You can now hear for yourself some of these observations and learnings from Vicki’s many years of experience. She recently produced a short podcast on Conversation Week and the art of hosting, which is a lovely summation of the role of a host and ways that you can host everywhere. This is a great way to get into Conversation Week and contemplate a deeper practice of hosting.
Share:
Photo of the rock wall at Window Rock, on the Navajo Nation, where I was visiting and working last month.
Links that I have come across recently:
- A comprehensive list of theories about how we think, feel and behave.
- From Vision in Action, a long piece by Elisabet Sahtouris on a Tentative Model for a Living Universe – parts one and two. Thanks to Dave Pollard.
- Otto Scarmer on The Blind Spot of Leadership.
- Jordon Cooper prints his list of useful (and mostly free) tools for Windows machines.
- Peter Merry’s blog. This is my friend Tim’s brother. Helen Titchen-Beeth is also on Gaia. Plenty of good reading at both.
- More Samurai wisdom: the Hagakure
- Kurt Hahn’s writings, via Michael Herman, who writes more here.
- Dustin Rivers explains Skwxwu7mesh leadership.
- A really good guide to formal consensus decision making. My own method for decision making follows this map, although I rarely have call to use a process this formal. Still, it’s a great redux. Another hit from Pollard.
- Dave Snowdon on archetypes and stereotypes.
Share:
A design for a recent workshop, based on Theory U.
Three years ago, I spent some time reflecting on the principles that underly my work in an effort to describe authentic facilitation practice. Lately I have revisited this question because I have been asked to design and deliver several facilitation training workshops and I have found myself wanting to go deeply into the core of facilitation practice, rather than focusing on tips and tricks. As a result, I have been reflecting a lot on what is at the core of my practice: how to I design and then sit in the flow of a group’s process in a way that can be useful to the group’s needs?
Thanks in large part to some prodding by my friend Ashley Cooper, who asked me something about how I do what I do, I have been thinking about this question in detail over the past couple of weeks and I’m reaching the following conclusion: I work primarily with maps, and secondarily with tools.
When I first began facilitating groups, I started collecting exercises and methodologies and practices that help groups do certain things. This “toolkit” seemed to be essential to my practice. In truth, these tools are important, but it didn’t take long to realize that tools themselves are not all that is required to do good group work. I learned that you have to have a few other things as well, including a basic underlying theory and some maps that seem to help us transect the terroitory between where we are and where we want to go.
My basic underlying approach to facilitation is rooted in these assumptions:
- The wisdom we need right now is in the room.
- Facilitation is not a directive practice, but rather a practice of creating and holding a container for the group’s wisdom to emerge.
- To get to truly creative solutions we must invite chaos and order to play together.
- Leadership is about inviting passion and responsibility into the process and supporting connections for action.
- The process serves the group and needs to be carefully planned but should remain totally invisible.
- Co-creation is the best way to get to wise action
- Process and content are equally important.
- For a system or a group to function well it needs to be learning from its experience.
- Groups are living systems, not mechanical systems.
- All good work done in the world depends on good collaboration. Good work therefore is about both quality content and quality process.
I also have an assumption that any group I am working with is trying to get to “better” whether that means a better set of services, a better product, better relations, better work. This is an important assumption, and it is the basis for my utilizing an appreciative worldview in general, a worldview that seeks to build on what works rather than remain stuck in problem solving.
Once you have a handle on your worldview, it becomes very useful to have a map to understand the journey that any group is on. Over the years I have worked with many maps, using them for different reasons. Some of my current favourites include:
- Sam Kaner et. al.’s Diamond of Participation for groups that are moving from a question to emergent insight or learning.
- Otto Scarmer’s Theory U for working with groups who are trying to lead from the emerging future.
- The emergence of the inviting organization, Michael Herman’s take on Ken Wilber’s integral quadrants to chart how action emerges from purpose using invitation as a carrier.
- Appreciative process design through the four-D cycle of apprecitive inquiry.
- Chaordic stepping stones, a take on the chaordic lenses for designing organizational structures that are as light as they have to be to work in a complex world.
- The five breaths of large scale change, a map that helps us find our way through large scale projects.
Most of these I have integrated in a “mother map” which links together several of these maps, even as I continue to use them each more specifically for designing precise meetings.
Now, why are these maps important? The maps I use are generative. They invite us to consider evolving in specific ways and they create design conversations that bring some real clarity to the tools we might employ in the service of the group’s needs. When I design with a group using this map, it helps us choose exercises that allow us to be in th emoment while having our sights set on where we are going. If we need to change our work mid-stream, having a map helps us to figure out where to move in the moment. When I facilitated an appreciative summit in 2005 on Aboriginal youth suicide in Prince Rupert, we were confronted with a problem of keynote presentations and introductions going way over time. We needed to change mid-stream on the day to allow the voices of the youth to be heard. Knowing that our process was intended to take us on an appreciative journey towards designing and destiny helped us to pare away what was not essential to the gathering, so that the youth could offer their dreams in a way that made sense. Without that map, we would have been lost, probably tied to our process and tools and unable to let go in the moment.
Having a map allows you to be incredibly flexible because you can abandon a path that is no longer serving your journey and pick a new one. If conditions change, you can adapt. This doesn’t mean you don’t need to know your tools – being a skillful practitioner of group process is an art that becomes a life time learning practice. It does mean however, that you can become more skillful in selecting which of those tools to use and when. It makes you a better improviser, and more importantly, of much higher service to the group.
So while I would continue to advocate for aspiring facilitators to learn tools and processes and practice them as much as they can, I want to also send a strong recommendation to any and all that you also explore some of the maps that are out there that describe specific kinds of journeys that groups take. Use these as your basis for designing group work and the tools will fall into place. The more tools you know and are capable of using, the more flexible you will be.
For those of you that use maps, which ones are valuable for you these days?