<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">George West's book, <b><i>Creating Community: Finding Meaning in the Place We Live - A Handbook for Comprehensive Community Development </i></b>(2012 Canadian Institute of Cultural Affairs) Part One covers the pressure points and Part Two is on the Social Process triangles related to the Whistle Points. ICA Canada uses the book in their Community Development course. <div><br></div><div>Karen<br><div><br></div><div><br><div><br><div><div>On Oct 23, 2014, at 5:58 AM, Randy Williams via Dialogue <<a href="mailto:dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net">dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><div dir="auto"><div>Jim,</div><div><br></div><div>I can't find anything in the file to send you, but allow me to share a thought. We spoke of "whistle points" as those points on the SP, etc. where you could "trigger an avalanche." Likewise, we spoke of "pressure points" as those points where, when you apply pressure, you "stop the bleeding." Do both of these not have implications for strategic planning?</div><div><br></div><div>In systems theory they speak of two kinds of feedback loops--reinforcing and balancing. Reinforcing feedback loops intensify the momentum. Sounds like the same effect as whistle points. Balancing feedback loops slow things down and stabilize the situation. Sounds like pressure points. </div><div><br></div><div>It strikes me that in devising strategies one way to approach it would be to discern if the situation, in order to resolve the contradiction, calls for a reinforcing approach or a balancing approach, and then choose reinforcing strategies informed by whistle points, or balancing strategies, informed by pressure points, accordingly. Does this make any sense?</div><div><br></div><div>Randy<br><br></div><div><br>On Oct 22, 2014, at 11:42 AM, James Wiegel via Dialogue <<a href="mailto:dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net">dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: HelveticaNeue-Light, 'Helvetica Neue Light', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif; font-size: 24px; position: static; z-index: auto;"><div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1413992869059_5993" dir="ltr"><span id="yui_3_16_0_1_1413992869059_6007">It is about the 0 Whistlepoints . . . Does anyone have any material on them that you can send to me? </span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1413992869059_5993" dir="ltr"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1413992869059_5993" dir="ltr"><span id="yui_3_16_0_1_1413992869059_6009">Jim Wiegel here. I want to pull together a small collection of background material on the 9 Whistlepoints which were developed out of the Summer 71 and Summer 72 Research Assemblies. I believe they may also have been used extensively as part of lecture 5 in the original LENS course. </span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1413992869059_5993" dir="ltr"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1413992869059_5993" dir="ltr"><span id="yui_3_16_0_1_1413992869059_6013"> Jan Sanders did a brief presentation on them at the closing of the Global Archives Research Assembly last month. Embarassingly, I don't have any source materials in my files and have been unable to find anything on line.</span></div><div></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1413992869059_5897"> </div><div class="signature" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1413992869059_6011"><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://partnersinparticipation.com/?page_id=123" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1413992869059_6083">Jim Wiegel</a> <br><br></div></div></blockquote></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></body></html>