[Oe List ...] ORID—A “Life” Method

Thu Oct 26 05:46:20 PDT 2017

Dear Marilyn Crocker,
Do you still have those questions?
A.M. Noel
206-321-6274

A.M. Noel

On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 8:49 PM, Marilyn Crocker via OE <
oe at lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:

> Hi Dear Colleagues,
>
>
>
> I am jumping into this dialogue quite late in the game, but wanted to add
> my two cents. Having spent years modelling and training others to use our
> facilitation methods, I found the educator groups I worked with most
> wrestled with developing the “reflective level” questions.  Most groups
> they wanted to leap from data to interpretation to decision.
>
>
>
> As I recall from our years of using ORID (before it was given such an ugly
> acronym), the reflective level was far more than  “How did that make you
> feel?”
>
>
>
> Do you remember  the Guernica conversation on Saturday night of your first
> RSI, and how many reflective level questions were presented? It was the
> series of those kinds of questions like “where would you hang it in your
> home” and “where have you seen this in your life” etc. that  allowed us
> finally to answer the question, “What would you say to this?”
>
>
>
> Reflective practices are best understood by the religious, because they
> live them each day.  In my experience, the smartest and brightest
> organizational development stars, even Meg, don’t quite get it.
>
>
>
> Grace, peace and love, Marilyn
>
>
>
> *From:* OE [mailto:oe-bounces at lists.wedgeblade.net] *On Behalf Of *Zoe
> Barley via OE
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:41 AM
> *To:* Zoe Barley; Order Ecumenical Community; Order Ecumenical Community;
> Order Ecumenical Community
>
> *Cc:* Zoe Barley
> *Subject:* Re: [Oe List ...] ORID—A “Life” Method
>
>
>
> And - -
>
>
>
> I did find my materials if anyone is interested. One includes the
> background of the Army's use and guidance on other's use from The Systems
> Thinker. The other is more detailed guidance from the Guidebook for
> Learning Reviews. Interestingly, within the  Why did it happen? they
> include "self reflection, non-defensiveness, a willingness to see how each
> one of us participated in achieving a result none of us desired, or a break
> through that transcended our hopes."  The process only makes sense after an
> action that had an intent or purpose. On an aside I'm constantly amazed at
> how many planned events are never recruited with the intent we used for
> RSIs and then the sponsors wonder why they didn't get enough people.
>
>
>
> Zoe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zoe Barley via OE
> Sent: Oct 25, 2017 8:28 AM
> To: Order Ecumenical Community , Order Ecumenical Community
> Cc: Zoe Barley
> Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] ORID—A “Life” Method
>
>
> The After Action Review is from the Army's Delta Force, eons ago.  Meg's
> co-author Myron Kellner-Rogers trained the staff where I worked in using
> it. I may still have the original Delta Force materials. It is effective
> after a planned event to ask those questions: What happened? etc. and the
> lessons learned are then applied to the next time. Most recently I'm using
> an AAR for a research team who is doing sensitive research with school
> districts on school employee sexual misconduct. As you can imagine it is
> difficult research to do - but the lessons for prevention are important.
> They had a difficult time recruiting districts to participate - even tho
> the study is about policies and practices around an incident not the
> incident itself. Out of 459 districts, they could only get five to agree to
> participate. The AAR around recruitment was intended to surface anything to
> be done differently to engage more districts in this research for future
> studies.
>
>
>
> Zoe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Don Bushman via OE
> Sent: Oct 24, 2017 10:45 AM
> To: Order Ecumenical Community
> Cc: Don Bushman
> Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] ORID—A “Life” Method
>
> I would suggest John, that the news people who ask HOW don't get the
> reflective, but beginning interpretive, because in our culture the how
> question begs for explanation, not reaction.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 12:33 PM, John Epps via OE <
> oe at lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
>
> Yes, the Reflective level is important since our emotional responses are
> clues to what's going on. But I'm not sure how unique we are to consider
> that level. Consider the news interviews: "How did that make you feel?"
> "How did you feel when...?". Asians consider their feelings to be nobody
> else's business, but we in the West seem to relish parading them for all to
> see!
>
>
>
> Anyway it is a crucial level to address in the ORID conversation format
> and takes us below the surface.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Randy Williams via OE <
> oe at lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
>
> Jack and Seth,
>
>
>
> You are correct, and Meg even says as much. Here’s what she says about the
> second question (slightly adapted.):  People offer their *interpretations*,
> which are explored for diversity and commonalities. This reveals a great
> deal of information beyond the incident. The culture becomes visible around
> hierarchy, communications and trust.
>
>
>
> Here’s her commentary on the third question: Here is where the richness of
> diverse perceptions can be shaped into learning outcomes that build on the
> complexity of the situation rather than overly simplified analysis.
>
>
>
> I really think what she has structured here is a format for dialogue,
> which the physicist David Bohm called conversations for the sake of
> learning.
>
>
>
> I do agree that perhaps our most unique contribution to this method was
> the reflective step.
>
>
>
> Randy
>
>
> On Oct 24, 2017, at 10:24 AM, Jack Gilles via OE <oe at lists.wedgeblade.net>
> wrote:
>
> Randy,
>
> Her `R`question seems to be interpretive to me. I think it is hard for
> most people to see the necessity of the Reflective level. People don’t know
> how to process emotional responses or associative events.
>
> Jack
>
>
>
> On Oct 24, 2017, at 10:00, Randy Williams via OE <oe at lists.wedgeblade.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> 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/20171026/4c36d5ae/attachment-0002.html>