[Dialogue] Guernica & Conversation Roots & Shoots

[David Walters]

>From 1970 to 1984 I spent a lot time sitting around tables with a unique group of people and rank a lot of coffee. The most significant things that happened during those years grew out of conversations: Artform, ORID, scripture/news, psalms. Everything else seem to flow out from those converstions. In the last 30 years I have stumbled on many other methods. None of them seemed to have the ability to move any group I have been involved with into the future or to make decisions that evoked positive change.

In regard to your link to the Dreyfus model, I found a new verb - problematized. I wonder how or if it relates to the noun - problemat?

-David Walters  

Steve wrote:

To my taste nurturing roots and growing new shoots is actually a
timely task in the face of a 50 year vision.

Nurturing roots and shoots for ways of leading in complex situations
is a good thing.

Debating the reliability of ORID with facilitators is like listening
to a group of carpenters argue about whether hammers put nails in
boards.

Studying Brian's new version of Chapter 10 would be delightful,
especially online with generous hearts and open inquiry

What new shoots for 50 years?

Building a house with only a carpenter and a hammer seems silly.
Plumbers and Roofers would be good.

Bending history with only a facilitator role and an ORID conversation
seems daunting as well.

I'm thinking more roles, conversations and tools are needed:
Facilitators facilitate knowing
Pedagogues and Story-Makers grant being
Navigators, Coaches, Mentors cause  action outcomes

Mathews's NRM and Jenkins's 9D book don't only belong to facilitators.
Might be a good point of departure for some new thinking.

Did you read Kaze Gadway's post this morning? She's hard at work in
the Being-Doing mode. She is mentoring those indian kids on behalf of
the next generation. She's granting new being side by side with those
kids. There is no facilitation in sight.

Not everyone needs to think, be, do it al, all the time either. Seems
like it is a time for more appreciative inquiry and more innovations
not less.

--re presuppositions--

The assertion that ORID is THE way the mind thinks doesn't pass the
"no-smiling allowed" test in Buddhist circles. It would be a topic for
generous respectful inquiry, maybe a testable hypothesis.

Heidegger asserted that most people don't actually know much about
hammering, especially carpenters,  they are just being in the world
hammering. Not too much reflection goes on until the hammer hits the
thumb for most carpenters. Kind of sets those Cartesian abstractionist
back a step or two.

Carpenters have skillful means they don't need to do an ORID they just
have the experience of hammering skillfully. Some people focus on
knowing, some on doing, some on doing.

I assert that the world needs more leadership roles, and facilitators
have great skill set. It isn't the only leadership skill set.

Mathews had a fine insight when he separated out the phenomena of
knowing being and doing. What new leadership roles and conversations
and skillful means?

What happens when you take up a practice like facilitating, teaching,
coaching, mentoring, story-making skill sets? You practice being
skillful until you get it right and you get it automatic.
 See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreyfus_model_of_skill_acquisition

If you plot leadership roles on Mathews's NRM triangle as updated by
the Jenkins it might look like this
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DlNTut28MXqLnv-_Xd2yPoHONBHlOAJLC8AmwL_O2B8/edit

Seems like some new skill sets might evolve too.

What do you think?

Steve
_______________________________________________
Dialogue mailing list
Dialogue at lists.wedgeblade.net
http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net