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@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@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@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@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@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@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
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@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@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@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@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@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@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@lists.wedgeblade.net
http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
_______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
_______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
_______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
_______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
Hi Dear A.M., They are in the RSI Manual which I’m sure is available via the Archives team. It was the “pedagogue’s bible” during the 60s and early 70s when we were teaching RSI and PLC everywhere. I might have a copy somewhere, but jettisoned many of the files we had carried with us for decades when we downsized and moved a year ago. The Archives team will be able to help you. If not, Nan and Bill Grow could probably rattle off all the questions from memory, even now. J Grace, peace and love, Marilyn From: OE [mailto:oe-bounces@lists.wedgeblade.net] On Behalf Of A.M. Noel via OE Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2017 8:46 AM To: Order Ecumenical Community Cc: A.M. Noel Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] ORID—A “Life” Method 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@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@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@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@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@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@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@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
😊😊 as we say here... Onya Marilyn! xx To you all, Isobel We live in hope Sent from my iPhone
On 27 Oct 2017, at 7:50 am, Marilyn Crocker via OE <oe@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
Hi Dear A.M.,
They are in the RSI Manual which I’m sure is available via the Archives team. It was the “pedagogue’s bible” during the 60s and early 70s when we were teaching RSI and PLC everywhere. I might have a copy somewhere, but jettisoned many of the files we had carried with us for decades when we downsized and moved a year ago. The Archives team will be able to help you. If not, Nan and Bill Grow could probably rattle off all the questions from memory, even now. J
Grace, peace and love,
Marilyn
From: OE [mailto:oe-bounces@lists.wedgeblade.net] On Behalf Of A.M. Noel via OE Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2017 8:46 AM To: Order Ecumenical Community Cc: A.M. Noel Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] ORID—A “Life” Method
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@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@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@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@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@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@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@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
_______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
_______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
_______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
_______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
_______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
Try this: https://wedgeblade.net/gold_path/data/meth/101018.htm and other documents on the Golden Pathways.Marshall On Thursday, October 26, 2017 4:46 PM, Marilyn Crocker via OE <oe@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: #yiv6405534047 #yiv6405534047 -- _filtered #yiv6405534047 {font-family:Wingdings;panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;} _filtered #yiv6405534047 {font-family:Wingdings;panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;} _filtered #yiv6405534047 {font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv6405534047 {font-family:Tahoma;panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;} _filtered #yiv6405534047 {font-family:Georgia;panose-1:2 4 5 2 5 4 5 2 3 3;}#yiv6405534047 #yiv6405534047 p.yiv6405534047MsoNormal, #yiv6405534047 li.yiv6405534047MsoNormal, #yiv6405534047 div.yiv6405534047MsoNormal {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;}#yiv6405534047 a:link, #yiv6405534047 span.yiv6405534047MsoHyperlink {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv6405534047 a:visited, #yiv6405534047 span.yiv6405534047MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:purple;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv6405534047 p {margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12.0pt;}#yiv6405534047 p.yiv6405534047MsoListParagraph, #yiv6405534047 li.yiv6405534047MsoListParagraph, #yiv6405534047 div.yiv6405534047MsoListParagraph {margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;}#yiv6405534047 span.yiv6405534047EmailStyle19 {color:#1F497D;}#yiv6405534047 .yiv6405534047MsoChpDefault {font-size:10.0pt;} _filtered #yiv6405534047 {margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}#yiv6405534047 div.yiv6405534047WordSection1 {}#yiv6405534047 Hi Dear A.M., They are in the RSI Manual which I’m sure is available via the Archives team. It was the “pedagogue’s bible” during the 60s and early 70s when we were teaching RSI and PLC everywhere. I might have a copy somewhere, but jettisoned many of the files we had carried with us for decades when we downsized and moved a year ago. The Archives team will be able to help you. If not, Nan and Bill Grow could probably rattle off all the questions from memory, even now. J Grace, peace and love, Marilyn From: OE [mailto:oe-bounces@lists.wedgeblade.net] On Behalf Of A.M. Noel via OE Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2017 8:46 AM To: Order Ecumenical Community Cc: A.M. Noel Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] ORID—A “Life” Method 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@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@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@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@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@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@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@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
Margaret Wheatley's process seems to leave out the reflective step. Our decision to insist on going through the reflective level was critical to our way of thinking and our collective presence in the world. I was reminded of Jung's statement when listening to Meryl Streep recently- C.G. Jung: *“There is no change from darkness to light or from inertia to movement without emotion* I am also reminded of what Rebekah (daughter) was quoted in the NEW YORKER as saying about the election. *“Bernie and Hillary tend to use concrete language,” she explained, “whereas the Republican contenders—with the possible exception of Kasich—tend to use descriptive language. I think that’s partly why Trump’s speech is so resonant with his supporters: he’s speaking to them on an emotional plane."* Allowing the reflective to be an integral part of our lives and standing present to it provides a more inclusive context. G & P Paula "The meaning of life is to find your gift, the purpose of life is to give it away." Pablo Picasso
A slightly different aspect – the practice of stating our intention for a conversation with both Rational and Experiential Aim(s) sets the stage for exploring the reflective / reflexive / gut level questions and thus tapping the vast resource of personal reactions, memories and experience of the participants. If only Rational Aims / purpose / objectives are stated then O / I / D will do just fine, and miss the potential depth to emerge. / Sherwood From: OE [mailto:oe-bounces@lists.wedgeblade.net] On Behalf Of Paula Philbrook via OE Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 6:53 AM To: W. J. <synergi@yahoo.com>; Order Ecumenical Community <oe@lists.wedgeblade.net> Cc: Paula Philbrook <paula.philbrook@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] ORID—A “Life” Method Margaret Wheatley's process seems to leave out the reflective step. Our decision to insist on going through the reflective level was critical to our way of thinking and our collective presence in the world. I was reminded of Jung's statement when listening to Meryl Streep recently- C.G. Jung: “There is no change from darkness to light or from inertia to movement without emotion I am also reminded of what Rebekah (daughter) was quoted in the NEW YORKER as saying about the election. “Bernie and Hillary tend to use concrete language,” she explained, “whereas the Republican contenders—with the possible exception of Kasich—tend to use descriptive language. I think that’s partly why Trump’s speech is so resonant with his supporters: he’s speaking to them on an emotional plane." Allowing the reflective to be an integral part of our lives and standing present to it provides a more inclusive context. G & P Paula "The meaning of life is to find your gift, the purpose of life is to give it away." Pablo Picasso
For those interested, here is the Guernica conversation from the RS-1 manualhttps://wiki.wedgeblade.net/pub/Main/SoarHawk/Guernica%20Conversation%20Guid... For those interested, here is the RS-1 Movie conversation from the manualhttps://wiki.wedgeblade.net/pub/Main/SoarHawk/Movie%20Conversation%20guideli... See also attached: suggested questions for each of the 4 levels focused on each of the "multiple intelligences" David Lazear's work For those of you wanting to use the method, a fillable pdf (like Federal Income Tax) you can type into the form and print it out with your questions. via Jean Watts and her work with a variation -- the Focused Dialogue method Sort of lost to the past: Does anyone remember the PAX program? PAX membership, PAX leadership, PAX stewardship? I believe these data base programs were developed out of the Los Angeles House. Perhaps Doug Haman was involved. The Leadership module was a very simple program that walked you through designing an ORID conversation, explaining each step with examples and then letting you enter your aims and questions and then printing it out. Would be a wonderful app -- I still have the original code, but it is in dBase 2 or something Oh, one more thing. See also attached some work from the ToP network trying to show the Objective, Reflective, Interpretive, Decisional in a whole bunch of other methods.Jim Wiegel “That which consumes me is not man, nor the earth, nor the heavens, but the flame which consumes man, earth, and sky." Nikos Kazantzakis 401 North Beverly Way,Tolleson, Arizona 85353 623-363-3277 jfwiegel@yahoo.com www.partnersinparticipation.com On Friday, October 27, 2017, 6:27:31 AM MST, Sherwood Shankland via OE <oe@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: A slightly different aspect – the practice of stating our intention for a conversation with both Rational and Experiential Aim(s) sets the stage for exploring the reflective / reflexive / gut level questions and thus tapping the vast resource of personal reactions, memories and experience of the participants. If only Rational Aims / purpose / objectives are stated then O / I / D will do just fine, and miss the potential depth to emerge. / Sherwood From: OE [mailto:oe-bounces@lists.wedgeblade.net] On Behalf Of Paula Philbrook via OE Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 6:53 AM To: W. J. <synergi@yahoo.com>; Order Ecumenical Community <oe@lists.wedgeblade.net> Cc: Paula Philbrook <paula.philbrook@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] ORID—A “Life” Method Margaret Wheatley's process seems to leave out the reflective step. Our decision to insist on going through the reflective level was critical to our way of thinking and our collective presence in the world. I was reminded of Jung's statement when listening to Meryl Streep recently- C.G. Jung: “There is no change from darkness to light or from inertia to movement without emotion I am also reminded of what Rebekah (daughter) was quoted in the NEW YORKER as saying about the election. “Bernie and Hillary tend to use concrete language,” she explained, “whereas the Republican contenders—with the possible exception of Kasich—tend to use descriptive language. I think that’s partly why Trump’s speech is so resonant with his supporters: he’s speaking to them on an emotional plane." Allowing the reflective to be an integral part of our lives and standing present to it provides a more inclusive context. G & P Paula "The meaning of life is to find your gift, the purpose of life is to give it away." Pablo Picasso _______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
The Pax programs were written in 84-85 Conna Schropshire designed the Leadership component, I designed the Stewardship component and Doug Hamon did most of the programming. Gonna gave me a copy of the attached list of questions that Ive used as a resource for movie conversations along with THE ART OF FOCUSED CONVERSATION by Brian Stanfield. I've modified the conversations and saved many for lots of movies thru the years. Gonna may have a copy of the leadership module David Rebstock On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 6:57 PM, James Wiegel via OE < oe@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
For those interested, here is the Guernica conversation from the RS-1 manual https://wiki.wedgeblade.net/pub/Main/SoarHawk/Guernica% 20Conversation%20Guidelines%20from%20RS-1.pdf
For those interested, here is the RS-1 Movie conversation from the manual https://wiki.wedgeblade.net/pub/Main/SoarHawk/Movie% 20Conversation%20guidelines%20from%20RS-1.pdf
See also attached: suggested questions for each of the 4 levels focused on each of the "multiple intelligences" David Lazear's work
For those of you wanting to use the method, a fillable pdf (like Federal Income Tax) you can type into the form and print it out with your questions. via Jean Watts and her work with a variation -- the Focused Dialogue method
Sort of lost to the past: Does anyone remember the PAX program? PAX membership, PAX leadership, PAX stewardship? I believe these data base programs were developed out of the Los Angeles House. Perhaps Doug Haman was involved. The Leadership module was a very simple program that walked you through designing an ORID conversation, explaining each step with examples and then letting you enter your aims and questions and then printing it out. Would be a wonderful app -- I still have the original code, but it is in dBase 2 or something
Oh, one more thing. See also attached some work from the ToP network trying to show the Objective, Reflective, Interpretive, Decisional in a whole bunch of other methods. Jim Wiegel <http://partnersinparticipation.com/?page_id=123>
“That which consumes me is not man, nor the earth, nor the heavens, but the flame which consumes man, earth, and sky." Nikos Kazantzakis
401 North Beverly Way,Tolleson, Arizona 85353
623-363-3277 <(623)%20363-3277>
jfwiegel@yahoo.com <marilyn.oyler@gmail.com>
www.partnersinparticipation.com
On Friday, October 27, 2017, 6:27:31 AM MST, Sherwood Shankland via OE < oe@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
A slightly different aspect – the practice of stating our intention for a conversation with both Rational and Experiential Aim(s) sets the stage for exploring the reflective / reflexive / gut level questions and thus tapping the vast resource of personal reactions, memories and experience of the participants. If only Rational Aims / purpose / objectives are stated then O / I / D will do just fine, and miss the potential depth to emerge. / Sherwood
*From:* OE [mailto:oe-bounces@lists.wedgeblade.net] *On Behalf Of *Paula Philbrook via OE *Sent:* Friday, October 27, 2017 6:53 AM *To:* W. J. <synergi@yahoo.com>; Order Ecumenical Community < oe@lists.wedgeblade.net> *Cc:* Paula Philbrook <paula.philbrook@gmail.com> *Subject:* Re: [Oe List ...] ORID—A “Life” Method
Margaret Wheatley's process seems to leave out the reflective step.
Our decision to insist on going through the reflective level was critical to our way of thinking and our collective presence in the world.
I was reminded of Jung's statement when listening to Meryl Streep recently-
C.G. Jung: *“There is no change from darkness to light or from inertia to movement without emotion*
I am also reminded of what Rebekah (daughter) was quoted in the NEW YORKER as saying about the election.
***“Bernie and Hillary tend to use concrete language,” she explained, “whereas the Republican contenders—with the possible exception of Kasich—tend to use descriptive language. I think that’s partly why Trump’s speech is so resonant with his supporters: he’s speaking to them on an emotional plane."*
Allowing the reflective to be an integral part of our lives and standing present to it provides a more inclusive context.
G & P
Paula
"The meaning of life is to find your gift, the purpose of life is to give it away."
Pablo Picasso
_______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
_______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
Colleagues, Marilyn's comment on questions like Where have you seen this in your life? reminded me of conversations that started out as debates and shifted to depth dialogue. Instead of folks arguing about each others ideas, they were caught in sharing their life experience or the life experience of someone else around that idea and wow the energy shifted . Doesn't always work of course but sometimes the magic works. Peace, Jeanette On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 8:49 PM, Marilyn Crocker via OE < oe@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@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@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@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@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@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@lists.wedgeblade.net
http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
_______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
_______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
_______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
_______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
participants (10)
-
A.M. Noel -
David Rebstock -
Isobel Bishop -
James Wiegel -
Jeanette Stanfield -
Marilyn Crocker -
Paula Philbrook -
Sherwood Shankland -
W. J. -
Zoe Barley