Mike replied to my comments on visioning
On "learn-in" ...
>I think that one of the important areas that is usually neglected is the
language that we use >to generate what we are seeking. The phrase "LEARN-IN"
that Dave has generated is one >that will transform existing thinking. It can
catch on. I'm going to use it. (Thanks Dave!)
Mike, you said better than I did what I meant in some of my comments. On
the word "learn-in", it does have some sense of transforming a person's
thinking. The interesting change is that once the person gets the concept,
they begin to develop patience with people who have not "learned-into"
another person's ideas. It has been about a three year experiment using
learn-in as a framing concept and some poelpe are starting to relate to
the words.
> Dave suggests involving others in the creation of expression. I suggest
doing that mainly >in informal dialogue rather than a formal setting.
These kinds of settings make everybody a >little weird.
Right on, Mike. I usually have just let people chat, express opinions, get
emotional, whatever direction the group wants to go. I work hard at
avoiding "decisions" on words immediately or letting confrontation occur.
Given time the words in purpose statements or visions "spring to life" as
the old words and actions disappear from the daily experiences of the
organization. A couple of groups have actually dialogued over chile,
crackers and beer after work. (Yes, this is very uncommon IMHO.)
>The caution that I have is the use of "clarity". Getting something clear
usually means >linear, rationalist and concretised. The nature of what we
are dealing with will not lend itself >to that sort of clarity. I
recommend "shared understanding" or "shared knowledge".
Yes, I really like the way Mike worded this. Perhaps it is because he hit
on the very ground rule I've tried to use in meetings. Between "shared
understanding" or "shared knowledge" I lean towards shared understanding
in the opening conversations I have with the leader and the group. When
I've used "shared knowledge" it seems to beget debate on definition of the
word KNOWLEDGE. Being part of a highly technical company, I work very,
very hard to stay away from the Cartesian rational with groups. Actually
the words I keep using are "let's understand what we are working on over a
period of time as it comes to life in each of us in a different way".
And, the new phrase I will be bringing to my company is that - "as we work
together over time and learn to work in community, ME flips upside down to
become WE." Does anyone know if there is a descriptor (is it some sort of
...nym) of this kind of word? The only other one that comes to mind right
now is that WOW and MOM become different real English words upside down.
Dave Buffenbarger
dwbuff@aol.com