Participation and experience

My work with organizations these days seems to start from Open Space, scenario planning or polarities. Open Space allows us to source the most pressing issues of the moment and do something about them. Scenario planning invites us to think about the future in a bunch of different plausible ways, examining who we might be as the macro context evolves around us. And polarities invite us to engage with the paradoxes that often underscore conflict and render us disempowered. Peter Levine – to whom I often link these days – has a great post on the polarities part of this. He is using polarities to create constrained design processes for educators who are teaching civics. Worth a read

Adrian Segar is always an enthusiastic light and advocate for participatory gatherings. He’s been at an industry conference this week and blogging about some really great people and thoughtful ideas about the future pf participation in conferencing. This post and its rabbit hole of links, fills me up.

Such as this one, a summary of the Freeman Report that measures conference experiences. It talks about how the conference industry’s assumption that performance is the peak has died on the floor. Participants want meaningful connections, either facilitated or by chance. They want to share what they have experienced in short bursts of content. It’s a hyper-individualized approach to gathering, but it does meant that arguing for participation in gathering design has a leg to stand on.

Experience is everything I think. Simon Goland has a marvellous post up that charts his own long journey of building more deeply experiential containers for his coaching practice. Our lives are lived in bodies that live in the world. Good to remember that.