[Oe List ...] ORID—A “Life” Method

Tue Oct 24 19:04:47 PDT 2017

I have been using ORID to do movie conversations once a month for 8 to 10
months a year at whatever church we attend for about the last 20 years.  I
find that participants want to jump to the interpretive fast and even the
Objective is more important to get inside the movie or issues. Two words
above strike me - "happened" and "complexity". Using What Happened as the
objective question just seems to encourage the  participants to jump to the
interpretive level. Also, with movies or books you have to get the
objective out (What lines, scenes, characters) in a comprehensive manner
especially in complex movies that have multiple plots going on at the same
time with many people that all become interrelated.  A good example of this
is the movie "Crash" that came out some years ago. Shifting from movies to
the analysis of the issues in our society today we see that they are are
increasingly complex (such as health care, immigration, terrorism, and
economics) that you have to stay on  the objective and the reflective long
enough and comprehensive enough to have any meaningful interpretation, and
decisional conversation.
David Rebstock

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 5:09 PM, Jack Gilles via OE <oe at lists.wedgeblade.net
> wrote:

> John,
>
> The problem with that short hand (4 F’s) is that the second level is about
> your interior, and that has to do with similar events, or experiences etc.
> They may have an emotional (feeling) attachment, but this is to trigger
> associations, links, patterns.
>
> Jack
>
> On Oct 24, 2017, at 16:29, John Epps via OE <oe at lists.wedgeblade.net>
> wrote:
>
> Another version I heard from an IAF Conferece in the UK some years ago:
> Facts, Feelings, Findings, Future. The process certainly does not belong to
> us, but Brian Stanfield's book "The Art of Focused Conversation" provides a
> fine explanation and 100 examples.
>
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:13 PM, Jack Gilles via OE <
> oe at lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
>
>> Bill,
>>
>> My friend Homayun Taba from India made the Conversation Method  into
>> “Well *SAID*”. *S* is for the S*ensory*; see, hear, touch, colors,
>> sounds etc. and A was for *Affect*. The second level does not have to
>> get people to talk about their emotions directly if that is not comfortable
>> as Epps says. But you can illicit emotional responses with questions such
>> as “Surprise, confuse, puzzle, ring a bell, startle, stand out, unusual,
>> find yourself saying `yes^etc. All of these are affects.
>>
>> “We don’t see the world as it is, but as we are”. (Covey)
>>
>> One can also use Stephen Covey’s terms as a short course. He puts his two
>> fists together and speaks of how we have “stimulus-response”; = “reactive
>> people”, and he then pulls them apart and shares what needs to happen in
>> between,  when you reflect, judge, weigh-up and decide; “responsible
>> people”. The method is really about Freedom and Responsibility, not right
>> or wrong decision. One needs to dialogue with the values one is holding.
>>
>> Jack
>>
>>
>> On Oct 24, 2017, at 15:10, Bill Schlesinger via OE <
>> oe at lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
>>
>> I'd ask - as a reflective question - what did it affect?
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: OE [mailto:oe-bounces at lists.wedgeblade.net
>> <oe-bounces at lists.wedgeblade.net>] On Behalf Of Randy Williams via OE
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 9:01 AM
>> To: oe at lists.wedgeblade.net
>> Cc: Randy Williams
>> Subject: [Oe List ...] ORID—A “Life” Method
>>
>> Colleagues,
>>
>> In her new book Who Do We Choose To Be: Facing Reality, Claiming
>> Leadership, Restoring Sanity, Margaret Wheatley has her own articulation of
>> ORID in four questions which she calls an After Action Review. They are:
>>
>> O—What just happened?
>> R—Why do you think it happened?
>> I—What can we learn from this?
>> D—How will we apply these learnings?
>>
>> We have always said that our methods are “life” methods,. Therefore, we
>> didn’t create them, we discovered them. Each time I come across something
>> like this from Wheatley it confirms that they are indeed “life” methods.
>>
>> I’ve seen other variations of ORID—for example from Peter Senge, in
>> Catholic social theory, and even from my old professor of church history,
>> Albert Outler. His articulation was, for me, the most memorable, in just
>> three, not four,  short questions: What? So What? Now What?
>>
>> As some of you who also sat with him will recall, Outler was not always
>> so concise.
>>
>> Randy
>> _______________________________________________
>> OE mailing list
>> OE at lists.wedgeblade.net
>> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OE mailing list
>> OE at lists.wedgeblade.net
>> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OE mailing list
>> OE at lists.wedgeblade.net
>> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> OE mailing list
> OE at lists.wedgeblade.net
> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OE mailing list
> OE at lists.wedgeblade.net
> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wedgeblade.net/pipermail/oe-wedgeblade.net/attachments/20171024/cff86af4/attachment-0002.html>