>>>>>>
I've just been discussing with a colleague an opportunity to try to bring
together an industry with it's public to increase the quality of dialogue.
I think this has remarkable potential for impact, but it's a long shot
(low probability). I solicit thoughts about creating learning organizaiton
on a very large scale.
I won't name the industry, but think of an industry with public relations
issues and a history of conflict with consumer groups. ...
... And, as I'm writing, I'm thinking, is this a suicide mission?
>>>>>>
This situation seems ripe for improvement - the parties are so distant
that even relatively small movements toward a consensus could be
encouraging. (For example, in Ireland people agreed to stop shooting at
each other, and there is now a lot more hope and potential for
improvement. They remain divided on many issues, but everyone agrees the
situation is much better.)
_very_ simplisitically (no reference to specific issues)
Dialogue is improved when members share a common set of concepts and terms
for discussing the issues. Typically this is missing (or latent) when
there are conflicting, polarized views, as each side tries to discredit
the other's view. In nearly all situations, both views have considerable
validity. Getting members of each "side" to acknowledge that validity is a
basis for building better communication is a first step.
One approach would be to develop contrasting perspectives that represent
the views and attitudes of the different stakeholders (e.g., industry,
environmental groups). Design a microworld environment - including
problems to be solved - in which each view offers something necessary for
a solution to the issues. Allow people to try to "solve" those problems in
the microworld (and of course make it fun so they are movtivated to put in
the effort that learning requires !)
It is very difficult for people to hold two views at the same time. But a
microworld can support them in adopting different views sequentially and
in seeing there is some value in each. This is a key benefit of
microworlds.
They will see there is validity in each view. They will learn that a
well-functioning social system requires all parties to participate to some
degree, and that all are better off with a "well-functioning" system than
with, for example, warfare (or the legal equivalent). They will also learn
concepts and terms in a specific context that will be a reference for
building understanding and additional shared meaning in future dialogue
efforts.
-- Terry Schumacher European Computer-Industry Research Centre Arabellastrasse 17 D-81925 Munich GermanyTel: 49 89 92699 162 Fax: 49 89 92699 170 e mail: terry@ecrc.de