The singing neanderthals : the origins of music, language, mind, and body /
Mithen, Steven J . This is a very interesting look at how human language and thinking evolved in "musical" ways.
The righteous mind : why good people are divided by politics and religion /
Haidt, Jonathan . If you've ever wondered why factual research and well-reasoned arguments don't seem to change people's minds about political or religious issues, this is the book for you. His key point is that we decide what we believe based on "gut" emotions, and then we build arguments to support what we believe. This is well researched but also well written and accessible.
Friday, October 24, 2014
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
6 Key Questions to Ask for Successful Online Public Engagement
This article, posted on the blog Community Matters, offers some worthwhile tips for engaging in online public deliberation and engagement processes:
http://www.communitymatters.org/blog/key-questions-ask-successful-online-public-engagement
What do you think? Are there other questions we should be asking that are unique to online engagement processes?
This article, posted on the blog Community Matters, offers some worthwhile tips for engaging in online public deliberation and engagement processes:
http://www.communitymatters.org/blog/key-questions-ask-successful-online-public-engagement
What do you think? Are there other questions we should be asking that are unique to online engagement processes?
Friday, November 1, 2013
Blog review
The Artful Manager: This is a blog written by my former advisor, Andrew Taylor. He writes about the business of managing arts organizations, and his posts always provoke a lot of food for thought (and are likely relevant outside the sphere of arts management). Here's a great example of a great post, where he really spells out how and why a good question is a great tool:
http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/what-ive-learned.php
You can subscribe to get weekly digests of his posts.
Monday, October 7, 2013
Storytelling and Placemaking
I enjoyed our first meeting of the new year, and I'm excited about exploring the role of storytelling in public dialogue, change making and engagement. We also talked about the current buzz around Placemaking in Madison.
Here are a few resources I can offer --
http://sharinglearningstories.wisc.edu/
http://www.pps.org/reference/what_is_placemaking/
Let us know if you have other resources to share, and see you at our next meeting on October 24th.
Tuesday, July 2, 2013
Keeping this Blog Relevant
It has been quite a while (two years) since we have posted to our Blog, but we recently decided that we want to make it relevant again to our efforts. The Public Participation Learning Community (PPLC) at the University of Wisconsin-Madison continues to thrive as a community of practice. Our monthly meetings inform all of us about 'best practices' in convening deliberative processes, with our contexts ranging from small work and project teams to large-scale public meetings and complex policy deliberation processes. We come from across the University and our community, each bringing gifts and experiences that we generously and enthusiastically share with one another.
This past year, our sixth year, we started a new approach, creating three-month cycles around a specific topic: "First meeting" invites us to share what we know (or wonder about) regarding the topic, eliciting meaningful questions upon which to build. "Second meeting" closely examines a case study related to the topic, from which some questions are answered and others emerge. "Third meeting" synthesizes our insights and invites us to share tools and processes we have used in addressing the questions that have emerged.
My hope is that we now return to using this Blog to document our learning, invite readers to comment and share about their experiences addressing similar questions, and truly use this vehicle as an integral aspect to our learning together as a community. In addition, we agreed at this month's meeting to pull together some of the resources, articles, and books that we tend to cite in our discussions in a single, easily accessible manner that allows us to comment, recommend, and direct one another to them more easily. We invite readers to add their "two cents" in this area, as well... look for these later this summer.
Finally, we will use this Blog to help publicize workshops, reading groups, and other meetings we find relevant to our continued growth and learning. Again, since readers may live anywhere in the country (or around the world?), they may offer additional ideas.
With any of these comments or suggestions, please contact me directly at hwebnebehrman@ohr.wisc.edu so we can be sure your ideas are received. If you join the Blog as a 'friend,' you may comment... if you seek a greater challenge and wish to write Posts, just let me know!
Harry
This past year, our sixth year, we started a new approach, creating three-month cycles around a specific topic: "First meeting" invites us to share what we know (or wonder about) regarding the topic, eliciting meaningful questions upon which to build. "Second meeting" closely examines a case study related to the topic, from which some questions are answered and others emerge. "Third meeting" synthesizes our insights and invites us to share tools and processes we have used in addressing the questions that have emerged.
My hope is that we now return to using this Blog to document our learning, invite readers to comment and share about their experiences addressing similar questions, and truly use this vehicle as an integral aspect to our learning together as a community. In addition, we agreed at this month's meeting to pull together some of the resources, articles, and books that we tend to cite in our discussions in a single, easily accessible manner that allows us to comment, recommend, and direct one another to them more easily. We invite readers to add their "two cents" in this area, as well... look for these later this summer.
Finally, we will use this Blog to help publicize workshops, reading groups, and other meetings we find relevant to our continued growth and learning. Again, since readers may live anywhere in the country (or around the world?), they may offer additional ideas.
With any of these comments or suggestions, please contact me directly at hwebnebehrman@ohr.wisc.edu so we can be sure your ideas are received. If you join the Blog as a 'friend,' you may comment... if you seek a greater challenge and wish to write Posts, just let me know!
Harry
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Next Meeting -- August 15th on the Terrace
Our summer meeting schedule continues... on the Memorial Union Terrace (weather permitting, otherwise go into the Lakefront Cafe)... Monday, 1-3pm per usual. Our last discussion focussed on issues related to public participation in the WI political environment, a promised 'revisit' of this issue six months after things got thoroughly stirred up in our State Capitol. Several excellent points were made by the 8 PPLC members in attendence... here are a few:
* People tend to come out to participate when they feel threatened... it needs to be a shared crisis, it seems, to be a primary motivator for sustained engagement. People would not have come out over the health care provisions of the 'budget repair bill' or most of the other elements, though threatening to their interests. But the collective impact of the threat, most directly felt in the right to organize and bargain across all sectors of public employment, led to this huge response. How do we, as facilitators, tap into such energy and transform it into a constructive force?
* The concept of the 'Network of Criticality,' a small force, properly applied, can cause big changes with a disproportionately small amount of energy expended... We have many people invested in the issues here, with long histories of engagement at very personal levels... but where should the force be best applied? It appears that the Governor's allies have been masters of this approach thus far.
* The dispute has not transformed into meaningful negotiations, it appears, because it has not yet been RIPE to do so... the drama of the political story still needs to play itself out in the Recall process and pending court cases before there is readiness for any effort at a paradigm shift. It also remains questionable whether the Republicans would view it in their interests to negotiate and reach collaborative solutions...
* There is a long history of antagonism here between certain sectors, such as b/w School Boards and teachers unions, so the underlying narrative of the situation varies significantly across WI. Thus, we are not witnessing a muddy middle that looks 'purple' in polling, but a polarized set of core stories with long histories. Rhetoric simplifies the message, and elections thrive on rhetoric. To transform this situation into one of deliberation and engagement requires a willingness to accept that the current system and paradigm are broken... perhaps the national debt debate and debacle can serve as such a driver.
*The Wisconsin Idea is a pwoerful resource for the UW to become engaged as a resource here... either in hosting deliberative processes, cultivating capacity for such dialogues (as we do as PPLC members), or in other vehicles not yet explored. Our group felt this capacity should be tapped, and the 100th anniversary of the WI Idea offers a special opportunity in that regard.
Join us as the conversation continues! See you Monday... or comment here to add to the depth of our insights...
-Harry
* People tend to come out to participate when they feel threatened... it needs to be a shared crisis, it seems, to be a primary motivator for sustained engagement. People would not have come out over the health care provisions of the 'budget repair bill' or most of the other elements, though threatening to their interests. But the collective impact of the threat, most directly felt in the right to organize and bargain across all sectors of public employment, led to this huge response. How do we, as facilitators, tap into such energy and transform it into a constructive force?
* The concept of the 'Network of Criticality,' a small force, properly applied, can cause big changes with a disproportionately small amount of energy expended... We have many people invested in the issues here, with long histories of engagement at very personal levels... but where should the force be best applied? It appears that the Governor's allies have been masters of this approach thus far.
* The dispute has not transformed into meaningful negotiations, it appears, because it has not yet been RIPE to do so... the drama of the political story still needs to play itself out in the Recall process and pending court cases before there is readiness for any effort at a paradigm shift. It also remains questionable whether the Republicans would view it in their interests to negotiate and reach collaborative solutions...
* There is a long history of antagonism here between certain sectors, such as b/w School Boards and teachers unions, so the underlying narrative of the situation varies significantly across WI. Thus, we are not witnessing a muddy middle that looks 'purple' in polling, but a polarized set of core stories with long histories. Rhetoric simplifies the message, and elections thrive on rhetoric. To transform this situation into one of deliberation and engagement requires a willingness to accept that the current system and paradigm are broken... perhaps the national debt debate and debacle can serve as such a driver.
*The Wisconsin Idea is a pwoerful resource for the UW to become engaged as a resource here... either in hosting deliberative processes, cultivating capacity for such dialogues (as we do as PPLC members), or in other vehicles not yet explored. Our group felt this capacity should be tapped, and the 100th anniversary of the WI Idea offers a special opportunity in that regard.
Join us as the conversation continues! See you Monday... or comment here to add to the depth of our insights...
-Harry
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Next Public Participation LC Meeting - July 18th on the Terrace
We are meeting on the Terrace this summer… and it sounds like several of us will be there:
Next meeting is Monday, July 18th, 1-3pm
Focus (anticipated): Follow-up from our February 21st meeting in which we discussed events at the Capitol in light of public participation and engagement challenges (see below for details):
Harry
Next meeting is Monday, July 18th, 1-3pm
Focus (anticipated): Follow-up from our February 21st meeting in which we discussed events at the Capitol in light of public participation and engagement challenges (see below for details):
- How do we create spaces of engagement and dialogue in the midst of highly polarized debate?
- How do we facilitate within such spaces in light of our own biases, responses, and interests in the outcomes?
- Are there ways to support constructive dialogue and deliberation outside of the ‘main spaces’ of the formal process (we can look at Track III Diplomacy for some examples here)?
Harry
Monday, February 21, 2011
Public Participation LC Meeting to Discuss Unfolding Events at Capitol and UW
*** See Update Below ***
Today's (Feb 21st) meeting of the PPLC will be held at Fair Trade Coffeehouse in order to accomodate competing demands for members' presence in these amazing days in Madison. At the Capitol, a political stalemate over the so-called 'budget repair bill' introduced by Gov. Walker has fomented a significant political action unlike any we have seen in WI since the Vietnam War. Each day, tens of thousands of protesters are peaceably demonstrating their anger and intense frustration with the proposals of this bill, most notably the severe restrictions on future collective bargaining rights of public employees. While the Governor has claimed these changes, along with increased employee contributions to health and retirement benefits are essential for government to function in an economically responsible manner, the concerns of most of the demonstrators are that these changes will leave unchecked workers' rights that have been negotiated over the past 50+ years. There are other, less-publicized aspects to the bill, such as increasing the number of governor-appointed employees, reducing the power of the legislature, significant cuts in Badger Care Medicaid programs, the dissolution of regional mass transit systems, and the likely loss of federal aids to urban mass transit because of the lack of a collective bargaining agreement framework.
There are certainly more details to this situation. One challenge for the PPLC to consider is: What are the underlying needs, interests, and concerns of this crisis? How might they be best addressed? It appears to me that had the Governor merely sought to increase the financial contributions of state workers to their benefit plans, only a modest objection would have been raised. Indeed, both the AFSCME and WEAC leadership have publicly stated they would accept such contributions at this point, and the Democratic State Senators who left the Capitol and shut down the process have stated they would accept those changes as a compromise. The deeper issue, substantively, is clearly the loss of workers' rights to a collective bargaining agreement, and the perception that this is an effort to bust the public unions.
As strong as this issue impresses me, the larger issue I see is that the PROCESS by which all of this was introduced appears to be disingenuine, untrustworthy, incidious in its nature and delivery, and the RELATIONAL aspects of this dispute are filled with rhetoric of disrespect. The people who support this bill also feel angry and frustrated: They voted for Walker in order to bring fiscal responsibility to the Capitol, and they support his efforts to bring public employee benefits more into accord with what they view as fair compensation. They are also angry that the Democrats bolted town, and perceive many demonstrators as being irresponsible and unrealistic in terms of what Wisconsin now needs.
At this point, although the 70,000+ anti-Walker demonstrators on Saturday were tested by some pro-Walker voices, there has been a commitment among the demonstrators to be peacable, and relatively respectful in tone... indeed, the Grassroots Leadership College has taken the lead in organizing training in non-violent communication and resistance, and orange-vested peace marshalls abound in the Capitol rotunda to help maintain that peaceful spirit. However, law enforcement is properly maintaining its presence in channeling energy and intervening at any smaller confrontations that arise. Once the bill's fate is resolved, especially if passed, there is definitely potential for the situation to deteriorate.
At the UW, the Chancellor's proposal to gain greater flexibility and independence from the State has taken on some powerful drama, as faculty, staff, and students are split in their opinions. There is also much not yet known about how the plan will shape up. Once again, while there are substantive issues to consider, there are stronger emotional reactions to the PROCESS by which this plan is being advanced and the perception among some that it is going to have serious repercussions that have not been thoroughly discussed in the campus community. There is also a view that, even if UW-Madison should gain increased self-determination and authority, the consequences for UW System would be negative in ways that don't sit well with many on campus.
Enough from me at this point... I'm just attempting to get a few things out there to frame our discussion. These are 'heady times' with lots to consider on both ends of State Street.
***Updated Feb 24th ***
Ten members of the PPLC met on Monday afternoon and had an excellent conversation regarding the events of the past week (now 11+ days) and the possibilities of instilling some of the principles of facilitated, collaborative, participation and engagement into the efforts to address the political, social, and economic concerns of the Budget Repair Bill impasse. A number of excellent ideas emerged, a few of which I highlight here:
1. If we can 'hold the space' with a peaceful, facilitative presence in the midst of all of the polarizing animosity, that will be of service to the greater good. Some examples have already been quite present in the Capitol, ranging from many written reminders that "This is a Peaceful Protest" to groundrules for the Gallery to the non-violence training that occurs every night.
2. While it may not be possible on a large scale, expanding opportunities for "Tea and Coffee Tables" to be present on the Square is a great idea. They are open invitations for dialogue across the political divide and, as has also been stated in the Rotunda, the end of the dispute will not occur with shouting and coercion, but with patient discussion and civil persuasion through insight.
3. Some creative ways to retain the sense of inter-generational festivity were suggested, including the use of street theatre (how about inviting Madison jugglers, or choreographing a 'red' and 'blue' dance?). While some are portraying the thousands in the crowd as an 'angry mob,' there has actually been very little of this behavior thus far. However, that could change if the bill passes and there is an effort to disburse the crowd.
Any efforts to maintain the true intentions of the citizens expressing their concerns beyond the current debate should also consider meaningful opportunities for participation. The economic impacts of the legislation and the upcoming Budget Bill will be signficant, and a shift in workers' collective bargaining rights will have major influences on our communities. As such, creating opportunities to invite people to discuss these concerns and develop creative, effective responses to them may be one of the core opportunities of the Public Participation Learning Community.
Further comments are invited...
Today's (Feb 21st) meeting of the PPLC will be held at Fair Trade Coffeehouse in order to accomodate competing demands for members' presence in these amazing days in Madison. At the Capitol, a political stalemate over the so-called 'budget repair bill' introduced by Gov. Walker has fomented a significant political action unlike any we have seen in WI since the Vietnam War. Each day, tens of thousands of protesters are peaceably demonstrating their anger and intense frustration with the proposals of this bill, most notably the severe restrictions on future collective bargaining rights of public employees. While the Governor has claimed these changes, along with increased employee contributions to health and retirement benefits are essential for government to function in an economically responsible manner, the concerns of most of the demonstrators are that these changes will leave unchecked workers' rights that have been negotiated over the past 50+ years. There are other, less-publicized aspects to the bill, such as increasing the number of governor-appointed employees, reducing the power of the legislature, significant cuts in Badger Care Medicaid programs, the dissolution of regional mass transit systems, and the likely loss of federal aids to urban mass transit because of the lack of a collective bargaining agreement framework.
There are certainly more details to this situation. One challenge for the PPLC to consider is: What are the underlying needs, interests, and concerns of this crisis? How might they be best addressed? It appears to me that had the Governor merely sought to increase the financial contributions of state workers to their benefit plans, only a modest objection would have been raised. Indeed, both the AFSCME and WEAC leadership have publicly stated they would accept such contributions at this point, and the Democratic State Senators who left the Capitol and shut down the process have stated they would accept those changes as a compromise. The deeper issue, substantively, is clearly the loss of workers' rights to a collective bargaining agreement, and the perception that this is an effort to bust the public unions.
As strong as this issue impresses me, the larger issue I see is that the PROCESS by which all of this was introduced appears to be disingenuine, untrustworthy, incidious in its nature and delivery, and the RELATIONAL aspects of this dispute are filled with rhetoric of disrespect. The people who support this bill also feel angry and frustrated: They voted for Walker in order to bring fiscal responsibility to the Capitol, and they support his efforts to bring public employee benefits more into accord with what they view as fair compensation. They are also angry that the Democrats bolted town, and perceive many demonstrators as being irresponsible and unrealistic in terms of what Wisconsin now needs.
At this point, although the 70,000+ anti-Walker demonstrators on Saturday were tested by some pro-Walker voices, there has been a commitment among the demonstrators to be peacable, and relatively respectful in tone... indeed, the Grassroots Leadership College has taken the lead in organizing training in non-violent communication and resistance, and orange-vested peace marshalls abound in the Capitol rotunda to help maintain that peaceful spirit. However, law enforcement is properly maintaining its presence in channeling energy and intervening at any smaller confrontations that arise. Once the bill's fate is resolved, especially if passed, there is definitely potential for the situation to deteriorate.
At the UW, the Chancellor's proposal to gain greater flexibility and independence from the State has taken on some powerful drama, as faculty, staff, and students are split in their opinions. There is also much not yet known about how the plan will shape up. Once again, while there are substantive issues to consider, there are stronger emotional reactions to the PROCESS by which this plan is being advanced and the perception among some that it is going to have serious repercussions that have not been thoroughly discussed in the campus community. There is also a view that, even if UW-Madison should gain increased self-determination and authority, the consequences for UW System would be negative in ways that don't sit well with many on campus.
Enough from me at this point... I'm just attempting to get a few things out there to frame our discussion. These are 'heady times' with lots to consider on both ends of State Street.
***Updated Feb 24th ***
Ten members of the PPLC met on Monday afternoon and had an excellent conversation regarding the events of the past week (now 11+ days) and the possibilities of instilling some of the principles of facilitated, collaborative, participation and engagement into the efforts to address the political, social, and economic concerns of the Budget Repair Bill impasse. A number of excellent ideas emerged, a few of which I highlight here:
1. If we can 'hold the space' with a peaceful, facilitative presence in the midst of all of the polarizing animosity, that will be of service to the greater good. Some examples have already been quite present in the Capitol, ranging from many written reminders that "This is a Peaceful Protest" to groundrules for the Gallery to the non-violence training that occurs every night.
2. While it may not be possible on a large scale, expanding opportunities for "Tea and Coffee Tables" to be present on the Square is a great idea. They are open invitations for dialogue across the political divide and, as has also been stated in the Rotunda, the end of the dispute will not occur with shouting and coercion, but with patient discussion and civil persuasion through insight.
3. Some creative ways to retain the sense of inter-generational festivity were suggested, including the use of street theatre (how about inviting Madison jugglers, or choreographing a 'red' and 'blue' dance?). While some are portraying the thousands in the crowd as an 'angry mob,' there has actually been very little of this behavior thus far. However, that could change if the bill passes and there is an effort to disburse the crowd.
Any efforts to maintain the true intentions of the citizens expressing their concerns beyond the current debate should also consider meaningful opportunities for participation. The economic impacts of the legislation and the upcoming Budget Bill will be signficant, and a shift in workers' collective bargaining rights will have major influences on our communities. As such, creating opportunities to invite people to discuss these concerns and develop creative, effective responses to them may be one of the core opportunities of the Public Participation Learning Community.
Further comments are invited...
Monday, December 20, 2010
The Scarlet X
The Task
Think of an extremist...what are the top three things that come to mind.
Ok, now a moderate...what comes to mind?
Now that you have done that, think about each of the following people, how would you characterize each of them, as an “extremist” or a “moderate”?
Hmmm, does that make you want to change your answers to the first questions?
Is "extremist" just a label or a stereotype?
Ok, now a moderate...what comes to mind?
Now that you have done that, think about each of the following people, how would you characterize each of them, as an “extremist” or a “moderate”?
Frida Kahlo
Glenn Beck
Geronimo
Rosa Parks
Sarah Palin
Emma Goldman
Mahatma Gandhi
Nelson Mandela
MalcomX
Is "extremist" just a label or a stereotype?
Does history change the evaluation of an extremists?
And perhaps most importantly, can we separate extreme ideas from extreme behaviors?
That’s how we began what became an excellent discussion at today’s Public Participation Learning Community meeting.
Our wide-ranging discussion touched on the following points:
And perhaps most importantly, can we separate extreme ideas from extreme behaviors?
That’s how we began what became an excellent discussion at today’s Public Participation Learning Community meeting.
Our wide-ranging discussion touched on the following points:
The Diagnosis
When we call someone an extremist, might that tell us more about us than it does them? Is it just a response to the discomfort we are feeling? Are we just reacting to a difference between their world view and ours? Perhaps we are being overly diagnostic. And, does attaching that label to someone affect our own ability to work with them? Do we sometimes not let the extremists talk because their views are too different from our own? We live in a society that is very quick to judge and is often intolerant of things that make us uncomfortable. Things that threaten our worldview are “not normal.”
When we call someone an extremist, might that tell us more about us than it does them? Is it just a response to the discomfort we are feeling? Are we just reacting to a difference between their world view and ours? Perhaps we are being overly diagnostic. And, does attaching that label to someone affect our own ability to work with them? Do we sometimes not let the extremists talk because their views are too different from our own? We live in a society that is very quick to judge and is often intolerant of things that make us uncomfortable. Things that threaten our worldview are “not normal.”
The Behaviors or the Ideas
Can we separate the behaviors of people from the ideas they are proposing? Is someone an extremist because they are proposing radical ideas that fundamentally rather than incrementally change the system? Sometimes those we might label as extremists are pioneers, innovators, first movers, who see something clearly that most of us aren’t seeing. They may be people who are willing to fail, they may be willing to leave people behind, and we might even think this is OK unless we have an attachment or a stake in their failure.
Can we separate the behaviors of people from the ideas they are proposing? Is someone an extremist because they are proposing radical ideas that fundamentally rather than incrementally change the system? Sometimes those we might label as extremists are pioneers, innovators, first movers, who see something clearly that most of us aren’t seeing. They may be people who are willing to fail, they may be willing to leave people behind, and we might even think this is OK unless we have an attachment or a stake in their failure.
To Negotiate or Not to Negotiate?
Are there times when we shouldn’t be seeking consensus from a group? The example of the mediator's joke that had a mediator been on the bus with Rosa Parks it might have set back the civil rights movement by 20 years. So, if a negotiation isn’t always appropriate what kind of moral obligation does this place on a facilitator? Facilitators need to guard themselves with great vigilance so that their own discomfort doesn’t cause them to “abandon the richness of disagreement.” We must be vigilant against “the worst kind of consensus, the tyranny of mediocrity” where a consensus is foisted upon us by exhaustion or alleged deadlines.
Shopping for Extremists?
When we think of group processes, are there times when the extremist point of view is the most helpful? Maybe we should make sure the extremists have a voice at the beginning during the framing of the issue/problem. Maybe we should even "shop" for certain viewpoints to make sure they are a part of the discussion. But if someone is given the label of extremist--the big scarlet X--will they be able to help shape the discussion?
The Scarlet X
Once you are labelled an extremist it often doesn’t matter what you say anymore. It can feel quite horrible to wear the scarlet X, and we should have compassion for those who do. Presenting an extremist view point can be a courageous act. As a facilitator you should ask yourself: “Am I creating a space for courageous acts and if I am not, then what the hell am I afraid of?” The discomfort an extremist can invoke in the group can be a service to the group. Groups with a devil's advocate come up with much better solutions to the problems they attempt to solve.
Sanctuary
How do we create a safe space for courageous acts?
Start with shared values and move on from there. Make the distinction between accepted wisdom and common sense (see Sustainable Capitalism). Let people know they will feel some discomfort. Create Sanctuary. Create art spaces that catalyze a conversation--art has the capacity to help us create spaces to let go of our preconceived ideas. Remember that while some people are looking for quick answers, a lot of us are looking for more deliberative answers and that requires slowness.
How do we create a safe space for courageous acts?
Start with shared values and move on from there. Make the distinction between accepted wisdom and common sense (see Sustainable Capitalism). Let people know they will feel some discomfort. Create Sanctuary. Create art spaces that catalyze a conversation--art has the capacity to help us create spaces to let go of our preconceived ideas. Remember that while some people are looking for quick answers, a lot of us are looking for more deliberative answers and that requires slowness.
----
There were many more wonderful points made in the discussion, so those of you who were a part of it, what parts did I miss? And of course, those of you who missed it, please let us know what you think!
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Jury and Democracy
The Jury and Democracy Project blog provides great discussions, ideas, and resources regarding Juries and collaboarative processes. They have even discussed the idea of a Jury training program! Check it out.
"The Jury and Democracy Project aims to understand the impact that jury service has on citizens. Too often, people think of the jury as nothing more than a means of reaching verdicts. In fact, serving on a jury can change how citizens think of themselves and their society. Our purpose is to study those changes."
"The Jury and Democracy Project aims to understand the impact that jury service has on citizens. Too often, people think of the jury as nothing more than a means of reaching verdicts. In fact, serving on a jury can change how citizens think of themselves and their society. Our purpose is to study those changes."
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Links to Documents
Public Participators:
Here are "clickable" links to the documents posted by Deb.
Cognitive Edge, Ritual Dissent-assent: http://www.scribd.com/full/43759835?access_key=key-1opiyfw1ucc14ssgf0es
Consensus Building Tools: http://www.scribd.com/full/43760613?access_key=key-buarvmj66w84parbr08
Blake and Moulton's Conflict Grid: http://www.scribd.com/full/43760618?access_key=key-l7c9f58dpfvzabe9upl
Thanks!
Here are "clickable" links to the documents posted by Deb.
Cognitive Edge, Ritual Dissent-assent: http://www.scribd.com/full/43759835?access_key=key-1opiyfw1ucc14ssgf0es
Consensus Building Tools: http://www.scribd.com/full/43760613?access_key=key-buarvmj66w84parbr08
Blake and Moulton's Conflict Grid: http://www.scribd.com/full/43760618?access_key=key-l7c9f58dpfvzabe9upl
Thanks!
Friday, November 19, 2010
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Invitations. 11.15.10
Peter Block's book, Community: The Structure of Belonging was the inspiration for today's conversation.
After check in, Sue and Sheila started us off with the following question: What excites you about being here? The responses were quite inspiring:
Reenergizing
Learning something new
Always a strong sense of support
Connection with the group
Some validation of what I do know and practice for what I don't
Courage to go out and try it
The space and safety to experiment--connect to possibility
Stimulating and energizing
From here we focused on the idea of Invitation as Block imagines it. At this point, Harry described his experience and the effect music had on his thinking as he sat in a coffee shop while Bach was playing. Harry felt that music could be part of the invitation. Mark described a grad school experience where food played an important part of the invitation, creating an environment for conversation.
Block describes possibility as what we have come together to create. It is future oriented. Declaring something as possibility is the first step in making it happen.
Jay prefers the term engage rather than participate as it involves thought and talking about possibility, not getting lectured at or listening to the expert tell us what we should be thinking; instead, getting to generative dialogue.
Creating a cradle for dialogue: the irony is that more structure on the front end allows for creativity and generative dialogue; important to recognize and hold on to the tension found in these two opposites.
When facilitating a group, remember the following: Plan well and play loose.
How do we balance opportunities for things like the PPLC and all of the other things people need to do? Is it sustainable?
Block's view on sustainability: what can I do; what do I commit to regarding the possibility we can together talk about. The group consensus: we live and reaffirm the list at the beginning of this post every time we come together. We are being the future we would like to see.
Mark quoted a poem with a line that was meaningful to him: Peace is this moment without judgment, that is all.
Cassandra thought the group was sustainable as we use it to invite others who have similar interests. She thought it was like a pyramid scheme; others thought it was more organic, like an algae bloom, viral.
This group is an antidote for the dysfunctional politics that exist today. See The Politics of Meaning by Michael Lerner.
Melissa stated that she felt there is an abundant quality to this group.
The question was posed: Why do people come? Is it dependent on the schedule or topic-driven? Some come when they can, given their schedules. One comment (sorry, I don't know who said this: I come because I have a tremendous confidence that I will get something from this group). We need to remember that the list generated at the beginning of the meeting includes the core of why people are coming to these meetings.
We are going to use the blog to create an artifact that validates the value of this group.
We need to determine a process for generating paper handouts. Should presenter assume to bring them? Or should participants take responsibility for bringing their own copies?
For a future agenda: complete StrengthsFinder, a tool that can be used to help us uncover our talents.
After check in, Sue and Sheila started us off with the following question: What excites you about being here? The responses were quite inspiring:
Reenergizing
Learning something new
Always a strong sense of support
Connection with the group
Some validation of what I do know and practice for what I don't
Courage to go out and try it
The space and safety to experiment--connect to possibility
Stimulating and energizing
From here we focused on the idea of Invitation as Block imagines it. At this point, Harry described his experience and the effect music had on his thinking as he sat in a coffee shop while Bach was playing. Harry felt that music could be part of the invitation. Mark described a grad school experience where food played an important part of the invitation, creating an environment for conversation.
Block describes possibility as what we have come together to create. It is future oriented. Declaring something as possibility is the first step in making it happen.
Jay prefers the term engage rather than participate as it involves thought and talking about possibility, not getting lectured at or listening to the expert tell us what we should be thinking; instead, getting to generative dialogue.
Creating a cradle for dialogue: the irony is that more structure on the front end allows for creativity and generative dialogue; important to recognize and hold on to the tension found in these two opposites.
When facilitating a group, remember the following: Plan well and play loose.
How do we balance opportunities for things like the PPLC and all of the other things people need to do? Is it sustainable?
Block's view on sustainability: what can I do; what do I commit to regarding the possibility we can together talk about. The group consensus: we live and reaffirm the list at the beginning of this post every time we come together. We are being the future we would like to see.
Mark quoted a poem with a line that was meaningful to him: Peace is this moment without judgment, that is all.
Cassandra thought the group was sustainable as we use it to invite others who have similar interests. She thought it was like a pyramid scheme; others thought it was more organic, like an algae bloom, viral.
This group is an antidote for the dysfunctional politics that exist today. See The Politics of Meaning by Michael Lerner.
Melissa stated that she felt there is an abundant quality to this group.
The question was posed: Why do people come? Is it dependent on the schedule or topic-driven? Some come when they can, given their schedules. One comment (sorry, I don't know who said this: I come because I have a tremendous confidence that I will get something from this group). We need to remember that the list generated at the beginning of the meeting includes the core of why people are coming to these meetings.
We are going to use the blog to create an artifact that validates the value of this group.
We need to determine a process for generating paper handouts. Should presenter assume to bring them? Or should participants take responsibility for bringing their own copies?
For a future agenda: complete StrengthsFinder, a tool that can be used to help us uncover our talents.
o Engaged Participators
From Sheila Spear and Sue Robbins
At the PPLC meeting on November 15th we plan to use Peter Block’s advice to see if we can develop an invitation to join the Public Participation Learning Community that is so compelling that people will engage and participate actively. (See attachment; also below).
We hope you will come to share your sense of interest in this group and engage in developing its possibility.
The attachment has definitions we plan to use in this session. Please review it and bring a copy with you.
If you are interested but cannot attend this session, do let us know by responding to sspear@wisc.edu to share any thoughts you have on the topic.
Public Participation Learning Community
1 pm, November 15th 2010, Memorial Union (TITU)
Handout for our discussion on Structuring the Invitation
Source: Peter Block: Community – the structure of belonging
A. THE INVITATION (p. 113 and elsewhere)
The first critical question is who do we need in the room. But we (Sue, Sheila) are setting aside for now the issue of whom we want to be in the room.
- The invitation is the first step in creating an accountable and hospitable community. It is the means through which hospitality is created. (The need for invitation arises because we don’t just ‘run into each other’).
- Invitation counters the conventional belief that change requires mandate or persuasion.
- Invitation honors the importance of choice, the necessary condition for accountability.
- An invitation is more than just a request to attend; it is a call to create an alternative future, to join in the possibility* we have declared.
- The question is: “What is the invitation we can make for people to participate in creating a future distinct from the past?”
- P 118: There are certain properties of invitation that can make it more than simply a request.
- (the hurdle) – to make even the act of invitation an example of the interdependence we want to experience. So the invitation is a request not only to show up but to engage. “We want you to come, but if you do we want you to do something.”
The elements of the invitation are: (p 119)
- Name the possibility about which we are convening.
- Frame the choice
- Name the hurdle: specify what is required of each person should they choose to attend.
- Reinforce the invitation but be clear that not attending does not carry a cost
- Decide on the most personal form.
POSSIBILITY
The power of possibility as used here is distinguished from words like vision, goals, purpose.
A possibility is a declaration of a condition or value that we want to occur in the world.
A possibility is created in the act of declaring it, what we create when we show up.
Possibility is a statement of a future condition that is beyond reach. It works on us (we don’t have to work at it) and evolves from a discussion of a personal crossroads (I don’t quite get that bit). It is an act of imagination of what we can create together and it takes the form of a declaration, best made publicly.
The possibility is one way of speaking of the future. Declaring the possibility can itself be the transformation. Postpone problem-solving and stay focused on possibility. Once we have fully declared in it works on us.
You might also want to read “The Possibility conversation” pp125-7
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Innovation Café Focuses on "Technology & Community" on November 11th
Innovation and Collaboration Café: Technology & Community
Thursday, November 11, 8:30am-1:00pm, Pyle Center, $15
Join us at our next MANIAC Innovation Café!
This is an opportunity to explore a variety of technology tools and how they may be used to enhance innovation and collaboration in the workplace. The workshop will help participants recognize opportunities for technology tools in their workplace and projects; demonstrate the basics of web site design, social media (facebook/ twitter), blogs, surveys, and video conferencing; showcase good examples of technology use; and provide helpdesk support for real world technology questions. Register here! Or go to www.ohrd.wisc.edu, look for upcoming events.
You have MANIAC potential! Hope you can join us!
Thursday, November 11, 8:30am-1:00pm, Pyle Center, $15
Join us at our next MANIAC Innovation Café!
This is an opportunity to explore a variety of technology tools and how they may be used to enhance innovation and collaboration in the workplace. The workshop will help participants recognize opportunities for technology tools in their workplace and projects; demonstrate the basics of web site design, social media (facebook/ twitter), blogs, surveys, and video conferencing; showcase good examples of technology use; and provide helpdesk support for real world technology questions. Register here! Or go to www.ohrd.wisc.edu, look for upcoming events.
You have MANIAC potential! Hope you can join us!
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Leveraging the Power of Public Participation
I came across an excellent blog post the other day about a city government IT makeover. What is most striking is the ingenious way this vision takes advantage of a community's greatest resource, the people! I have pasted the first few paragraphs below, please click on the link to read the post:
Gov 2.0 Guide To A City Makeover
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
"Leadership" in Engagement/Transformation?
Great discussion yesterday around helping Deb engage school board members, in a short period of time, around the issue of educational reform. A word that kept being bandied about, and seemed central to the discussion (and plans) was "leadership." Yet, we did NOT make the time to talk about how leadership is/might be perceived with this group (or our group, for that matter).
As I reflected on the discussion it occured to me that one "definition" of leadership (or maybe better stated as one aspect of leadership in this area) would be facilitating the conversation between the stakeholders in the reform/transformation itself. Being a BIG believer in solutions from within (makes the whole issue of "buy in" completely absolete!) I do believe this to be one of the primary roles of leadership. Peter Block, who came up, again, in our dialog yesterday, agrees, stating that the two questions to keep in mind are always "How do we choose to come together?" and "What do we want to create together?"
Final reflection - true, sustainable change (read transformation, if you want) is an ongoing process. It is NOT wholesale change, it is not finding the "silver bullet." Acceptance of this very concept is a primary step in helping people see that change, positive change towards the world we collectively would like to see, is possible and that they (the community or any human system, from 1,000's down to the individual) can make it happen. Helping people come to this realization, in today's world of the "instant solution" is an ongoing challenge!
As I reflected on the discussion it occured to me that one "definition" of leadership (or maybe better stated as one aspect of leadership in this area) would be facilitating the conversation between the stakeholders in the reform/transformation itself. Being a BIG believer in solutions from within (makes the whole issue of "buy in" completely absolete!) I do believe this to be one of the primary roles of leadership. Peter Block, who came up, again, in our dialog yesterday, agrees, stating that the two questions to keep in mind are always "How do we choose to come together?" and "What do we want to create together?"
Final reflection - true, sustainable change (read transformation, if you want) is an ongoing process. It is NOT wholesale change, it is not finding the "silver bullet." Acceptance of this very concept is a primary step in helping people see that change, positive change towards the world we collectively would like to see, is possible and that they (the community or any human system, from 1,000's down to the individual) can make it happen. Helping people come to this realization, in today's world of the "instant solution" is an ongoing challenge!
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Introduction to Participation and Engagement Course Offered Again this Fall
For those seeking to learn more about the convening, design, and facilitation of participatory engagement processes, they are invited to take the free course we offer each fall through OHRD. The "Introduction to Participation and Engagement Processes" course provides a solid foundation for bringing together multiple stakeholder groups of various sizes and contexts to engage in collaborative deliberation regarding a wide range of issues. Registration information may be found at:
https://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/OHRDCatalogPortal/Default.aspx?tabid=29&CourseGroupKey=26287
Although the course is primarily intended for University of Wisconsin-Madison staff and faculty, students and members of the community are welcome to attend. For those interested in the "Fully Prepared to Engage" Certificate Program, this course serves as the "Level 1" point of entry into the program, as well as excellent background for participation in the Public Participation Learning Community that meets each month, or any of our other communities of practice.
Please check with me with any questions at hwebnebehrman@ohr.wisc.edu or 608-262-9934.
-Harry
https://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/OHRDCatalogPortal/Default.aspx?tabid=29&CourseGroupKey=26287
Although the course is primarily intended for University of Wisconsin-Madison staff and faculty, students and members of the community are welcome to attend. For those interested in the "Fully Prepared to Engage" Certificate Program, this course serves as the "Level 1" point of entry into the program, as well as excellent background for participation in the Public Participation Learning Community that meets each month, or any of our other communities of practice.
Please check with me with any questions at hwebnebehrman@ohr.wisc.edu or 608-262-9934.
-Harry
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)