Dialogic Change Workshop Handbook (11/4/2011) - bilingual

2011 Dialogic Change Workshop
Embracing Community through Dialogue
and Unleashing Synergy of Change

Facilitator: Philip Thomas, D3 Associates
Sponsor: CP Yen Foundation
Tian Mou International Conference Center, Taipei , Taiwan

2011

: , D3

2011. 11.4-6

Philip Thomas | November 2011

Guest Facilitator: Philip Thomas
Philip Thomas is a social change facilitator who over the past 20 years has worked on social change in Latin America, specializing in dialogue
facilitation in cross-departmental, interethnic and cross border public interest issues; solving problems, building consensus, creating actions, and
promoting social, organizational and community desire for change. This process often includes the government, private sector, and civil society
groups in multi-stakeholder discussions on complex issues.
! In 2007, he and Dr. Bettye Pruitt wrote Democratic Dialogues - A Handbook for Practitioners. This Handbook was a joint effort of the
United Nations Development Program (UNDP), Organization of American States (OAS), Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA),
International IDEA, and received valuable input from a wider network of organizations. Philip and Bettye are co-founders of the Generative
Change Community (a Society for Organizational Learning member), a community comprised of advanced practitioners of peace building,
negotiation, mediation, participatory action research, and multi-stakeholder dialogue in various ﬁelds of endeavor, such as global network building,
inter-sectoral collaboration, conﬂict prevention, and democracy building.
! Philip currently lives in the United States working as an international consultant and as a professor at at Goshen College, a Mennonite
college in Goshen Indiana. He is in the process of completing his doctoral dissertation at the Fielding Graduate University’s School of Human and
Organizational Systems. He is the founder and senior consultant of D3 Consultants.
! His specialty is: public dialogue process design, breakthrough analysis and shift, multiparty negotiation, facilitation and mediation, participatory
decision making systems and consensus-building processes, organizational development and institutional strengthening, Strategic planning
processes, Program evaluation processes, Systems thinking, design and delivery of adult education programs, training for trainers, and more!

:
20

(stakeholders)
2007
( Generative
Change Community)
Philip
3D


Learning objectives
! Become familiar with concepts and language that explains how
dialogue and taking a dialogic approach contributes to change.
! Explore our understandings of how change happens.
! By identifying & exploring our assumptions and the approaches we take to
contribute to change.
! By exploring the interdependencies between different approaches.

! Experience different elements of process design and explore common
challenges and possible strategies to deal with them.
! Apply the frameworks, concepts and skills to your own working
context to explore their usefulness.

1 Philip Thomas | November 2011

!

!

!

!

!

!


Agenda

! Day 1: Exploring our understanding of dialogue and change
! What is dialogue and why is dialogue increasingly recognized as an important
vehicle for change?
! What assumptions do we hold about how change happens?
! Day 2: Designing good process
! What are the indicators of success for change processes?
! What are the different elements a process design should consider?
! What are common challenges faced change processes and what strategies can be
useful to deal with them?
! Day 3: Application
! Flex time for emergent issues and interests
! How can these concepts and tools help me in my current context?


! :
! ! ?
! ?

! :
! ?
! ?
!

! :
!

! ?


Promoting a learning environment

! Listen with respect and curiosity.
! Seek to understand rather than persuade.
! Invite and honor diversity of opinions.
! Speak from the heart about that which really matters.
! Seek depth and honesty while trying to remain as brief as possible.
! Take the opportunity to observe and explore your own thoughts and
assumptions that shape how you approach your work.
! Raise hand to center us as a group.


!

!

!

!

!

!

!


“Dialogic Change Processes”

! Dialogic
! needs an inclusive processes involving actors who come from very
different backgrounds and perspectives (different social worlds)

! Change
! Its about results – not talk

! Processes
! Involves articulation of multiple pieces or sub-processes occurring
both simultaneously and sequentially.


‣

‣

‣

‣

‣

‣


Some Fundamentals
! Action Matters…
! Achieving coordination is important for effectiveness
! Thinking Matters…
! Rigorous reflection on our assumptions and thinking …our “theories of change”
! Relationships Matter…
! Paying attention to the “quality of interactions”
! Process Matters…
! Use of appropriate social tools and approaches for effective process design and
facilitation

All of these (coordinated action, quality of thinking, relationships, and
process) are both INPUTS to achieving change and shifts in these are
important OUTCOMES for sustaining change.

!
!

!
!

!
!

!
!


Second-loop learning

A desired change

Mental Model
Action Strategy Results
Our assumptions & Rational

Examine our thinking (mental models, assumptions)
( )
Second-loop learning
Improve actions
first-loop learning

The importance and challenges of
becoming more inclusive and
participatory in change processes?

Café Conversation Exercise


As you think about your own
experiences, why is it important for
change processes to become more
inclusive and participatory?


As you try to make change processes
more inclusive and participatory what are
the challenges you face?


Why Dialogue?
From Separation to Interdependence

!Health
!Education
Intra-sectoral !Environment
dialogue !Peace
!Urban growth
CivilSociety
Civil Society
/ Migration
Organizations
Organizations

Government Private
Sector
Government Sector
Private
Sector Sector

Inter-sectoral
dialogue

!
!
!
Civil Society !
Organizations !
/

Government Private
Sector Sector


A sad horse story

! 600

! 700

! 800

! 900
At the end of these transactions, how did Jorie do economically? Did she
break even, make a proﬁt (how much), or lose money (how much)?

Jorie
( ) ( )?

11

How many times is does the white team pass the ball?


As we become increasingly more plural and diverse, our challenge is
not to have more communication, but better communication that
allows us to manage meanings and coordinate actions.

! Our stories, experiences, and our way of thinking
condition what we see and how we understand our
realities.
! Our individual vision and knowledge is partial.
Civil Society
! In dialogue we are challenged… Organizations
! To examine our own thinking.
! To become curious and inquire about other ways
Government Private
of seeing and thinking. Sector Sector

! To ask ourselves and others “What am I not
seeing?”
“What do we not yet know…and need to learn?
! To value collective wisdom and collaborative
action


‣

‣

‣ …

‣

‣

‣
? …..
?

‣


Dialogue = “Remaining in the tension”
! Truth only reveals itself when one gives up all preconceived
ideas. - Shoseki
! The paradox of “letting go” in order to “let come”
! recognizing and embracing what we Don’t know - the partialness of
our own visions.
! Move from the logic of strategic planning based on “Predict and
Control” to one based on “Learn and Adapt”.
! Dialogue asks that we navigate the narrow ridge between holding
to our own perspectives while at the same time remaining
profoundly open to the Other. - Martin Buber


=

! - Shoseki
!

!

!
.

! - Martin Buber


Inquiry

‣ A complementary skill to advocacy that:
‣ seeks to uncover information about why a particular view is held.
‣ asks questions about underlying assumptions, beliefs & reasoning.
‣ explores:
‣- why do you believe this ?
‣- what logic leads to this conclusion ?
‣- what facts and data do you have ?
‣- what examples or past experience exists ?

‣ Supported by an attitude of wanting to understand, explore, learn & expand.
‣ Not a technique to cross examine people or to ﬁnd fault.


‣
‣
‣
‣
‣ ?
‣ ?
‣ ?
‣ ?
‣
‣

Debate Dialogue
Assumption: the only solution that Assumption: others must have important
exists is the one that I can see. pieces to this puzzle.

Combative: Collaborative:
seek to prove the other is wrong. seek mutual understanding.
Its about winning Its about finding common ground

Listen to find errors or flaws Listen to understand
Defend assumptions Make explicit, revise and test assumptions

Criticize other’s perspective Examine all perspectives

Defend my perspective against those of Recognize that other perspectives can enrich
others my own perspective

Look for weaknesses or flaws in Look for strength and value in positions of
positions of others others

Seek results that coincide with my Seek to discover new opportunities and
position possibilities
17

: :

: :

17

DELIBERATION – Tough decisions with “Trade-offs”

! Metaphor: Coming home at end of a long and hard day
! Want to rest
! Children remind you of going to movie
! Spouse reminds you of important community meeting that you are
expected to attend
! Boss calls and wants you to come back to office to review last
minute details that are urgent
! Friend call and is in crisis

WHAT DO YOU DO?


!

!

!

!

!

!


Each person's view is a unique perspective on a larger reality.
If I can "look out" through your view and you through mine, we will
each see something we might not have seen all along.
!
The origin of the vision is much less important than the process
whereby it comes to be shared.
It is not truly a "shared vision" until it connects with the personal
visions of people throughout the organization.

Peter Senge


Distinct phases

Desired results:
1. Concrete Agreements
2. Strengthened governance
(strengthening a culture of democratic practices)


•
•
•
•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•


The Evolution of Dialogue

Reframing: Creating a common framework

Emerge
Dialogue- Exploration Framing alternatives (choices)
Deliberation
Diverge Converge

Can generate a sense of
Order emerges from chaos and
chaos that causes
things become more concrete
frustration in the group


Dialogue offers response to important
challenges?
‣ The challenge of dealing with complexity

‣ The challenge of coordinating meanings

‣ The challenge of producing innovation

‣ The challenge of enabling deliberation

‣ The challenge of achieving sustainable results


‣

‣

‣

‣

‣


Different purposes and results

Does not imply absence of
Relationships
conﬂict – but constructive
management of conﬂict that exists

Shared Understanding

Does not mean absence
of disagreement but shared
Specific Agreements
understanding of both
agreements and disagreements

Actions • Immediate actions within timeframe
Implemented of dialogue as well as longer-term
actions that occur after dialogue
• Importance of mechanisms for
following up and monitoring
implementation


—

—

•

•


Dialogue and Negotiation/Mediation: Some differences

! The hoped-for product of mediation or negotiation is a concrete agreement.
The aim of dialogue is a changed relationship.
! The currency of negotiation is defining and satisfying material interests through
specific jointly agreed arrangements.
The outcome of dialogue is to create new human & political capacities to solve
problems.
! Negotiations require parties who are ready to try to reach agreement. Dialogue can
be fruitful by involving parties who are not yet ready for negotiations but do not want
a destructive relationship to continue.
! Negotiation deals with goods or rights that can be divided, shared or defined in
tangible ways. Dialogue may change relationships in ways that create new grounds
for mutual respect and collaboration.
- Hal Saunders in A Public Peace Process


!

!

!

!

- Hal Saunders in A Public Peace Process


• Develop a shared vision and
understanding of current
situation
• Identify information needs Dialogue Deliberation Decision
• Explore possible paths forward


•

•
•


Where is change necessary?
Dimensions to consider in dialogue processes
Individual Relationships
• Leadership styles
•Mental maps – Unexamined • Dysfunctional Relationships
assumptions • Distrust
•Partial visions / truth • Poor communication
•Attitudes and values • Misunderstandings
•Competencies in communication, • Competition
conﬂict transformation, dialogue, • Power asymmetry

Culture Institutions / Structures
• Weak or missing structures or
• Patterns of exclusion,
institutions
polarization
• Political Accords, Policies, Laws
• Patterns of simplistic and
• Weak mechanisms, procedures
distorted discourse
• Weak systems (information,
• Weak culture of civic
decision-making, resource
participation
distribution, security, etc)
• Clash of different social worlds
• Structural violence


• •
• - •
• / •
• •
• •
•

/
•
•
• •
•
• •
•
•


Different Levels and Logics of Intervention

Top-Down Approach
Horizontal Capacity
• Political Negotiations
The capacity to move laterally
• High profile - Public
across sectors and groups High • Low profile – shuttle diplomacy
Level

Vertical Capacity Middle-Out or “Web” Approach
Those with capacity to exercise • Problem solving workshops
influence both at the community • Intersectoral dialogue
level and with top level decision Middle (high profile or low profile)
makers • Sustained dialogue (“critical yeast”)

Community
Citizen Engagement
Bottom-Up Approach
• Workshops to strengthen capacities (leadership and institutions)
• Spaces for public dialogue and deliberation (moving beyond “consultation”)
• Analysis and development of proposals
JP Lederach 27 Philip Thomas | November 2011

!"#$%"&'()*+(,(-$'.*
•
•
•

/0#'$-()*+(,(-$'. Middle-Out or “Web” Approach

•
•
•

•
•
•
JP Lederach 27 Philip Thomas | November 2011

Exercise

Concentric Circles

28

Transformative Power of Listening and Inquiry

Sharing more and
deeper

Building
Feeling listened
to Trust & Respect Talk

Listen without
opinion


Transformative Power of Trust

Trust

Collective
Mutual and more “We”
complex
Understanding Collaboration

Knowledge
Sharing & Learning


Transformative Power of Mistrust

Lack of
Trust

Fear
Mis-
understanding “Us / Them”
Social
/ Separation

Competition

Decreased
Communication


When we are distant from one another,
when we distrust or feel at risk, our
relationships and consequently our
awareness suffers.
Conversely, when we build trusting
relationships that allow us to be open,
honest and vulnerable with one another,
our ability to sense and respond to
complex and challenging environments
grows.

- Peter Senge


Day Two

! How do you know that a process has been successful?
?

! Important indicators of success


Triangle of Satisfaction
Three kinds of interests / Needs
! Psychological
How participants feel…
! Feel respected
! Feel heard, understood
l
! Legitimacy i ca

Sub
log
cho

stan
sy
S
! Substantive P

ti v e
What participants want
! Resources, etc.

! Process / procedural Process
How we proceed
! Feel included in decision-making
! Fair and clear process

34

‣

‣
‣
l
i ca

Sub
og
‣
l
cho

stan
sy
S
‣ P

ti v e
‣ …

‣ / Process

‣
‣

34

Process Design
General Principles / Core Challenges
! Inclusiveness
! Guaranteeing the inclusion and participation of all perspectives, including the voices
of those frequently excluded or on the periphery.
! Ensuring quality of participation
(information, competencies, clarity of purpose and mandate)

! Joint Ownership - Parties own the process
! Co-design of process

! Legitimacy
! Impartial process management (facilitation, managing information, documentation,
communication, logistics)
! Clear mechanisms for monitoring and follow-up

! Political will
! Not only to engage in dialogue, but also to reach agreements and follow through
with implementation


!
!

!
! -
!
!
!

!
!
!


Common Challenges in Design Stage
(Pre-dialogue)
! “Gaining entry”
! Who is best situated to initiate contact, conduct assessment, convene
! Managing expectation
! How to talk about the importance of a process without creating unrealistic
expectations
! How to talk concretely about goals and desired results AND at the same time
recognize the inherently open nature of these political processes
! Enlisting actors
! What to do if key actors are unwilling to participate
! Managing timeframes
! Representation
! Leadership crisis, elite vs broader inclusion and citizen/public engagement
! Valuing tangible and intangible outcomes
! The challenge of making visible intangible outcomes that often are the most
signiﬁcant


!
!

!
!
!

!
! ?

!

!
! vs /
!
!


Principle of Co-Design
! Beneﬁts:
! Creates stronger sense of ownership and responsibility for the process – psychological
dimension
! Creates a design that is informed by multiple perspectives and concerns – substantive
dimension
! Builds clarity among the actors about the process and its underlying logic –
process dimension

! Approaches:
! Technical team drafts a proposal based on comprehensive assessment and then
circulates for feedback
! Dialogue sponsors host working retreat with key actors with facilitation and technical
support
! A design emerges through ‘shuttle diplomacy’ in form a bilateral conversations

37

!

! —
! —
! ---

!

!

!

!


Essential Inputs for Effective Design

! Context Knowledge
! Political
! Historical
! Cultural
! Substantive Expertise
! Process Expertise
! Good Leadership / Facilitation
! A Comprehensive Assessment


/

!
!
!
!
! /
! /
! /
!


Assessment
! Understanding Assessment as Intervention – importance of
dialogic approach
! Assessment serves several purposes simultaneously:
Full Assessment includes:
! Serves the design process by • Mapping of Issues
! Eliciting stakeholder participation • Mapping of Actors
! Producing key information and insights for shaping • Interests/needs/concerns
process design • Perceptions
! Assesses ripeness of conditions for success • Connections to others / quality of
relationships
! Serves stakeholders and potential participants by • Willingness to engage
• Power/Means of inﬂuence
! Establishing shared body of knowledge and understanding
of situation • Potential role/contribution
• Context
! Fostering self-reﬂection in stakeholders
• Historical
! Helping to strengthen or re-frame relationships
• Political
• Social/Cultural
! Serves monitoring and evaluation by
! Establishing pattern of rigorous analysis of conditions and
context to support continual monitoring and adaptation
! Creating baseline of information and understanding for
eventual evaluation of outcomes


! —
!
•
! … •
!
• / /
•
! • /
!
•
• /
! … • /
! •
•
!
•
! • /

! …
!
!


Engaging Stakeholders

! Some challenges
! How to gain entry?
! Where to gain entry?
! How to proceed in a way that builds rather than burns
credibility?

! Who one talks to, and in what order,
can send signals about one’s intentions

40

!

! ?
! ?
! ?

!

40

Engaging Stakeholders

! Some tips
! Be as well informed as possible about the interviewee by reviewing
prior conversations and consulting available sources of information.

! Consider both the content to be covered and the quality of
conversation one hopes to achieve. For example, plan an opening
line of inquiry that will engage the other person in a positive way,
and anticipate difﬁculties or challenges that may arise.

! Reﬂect on whether one has a preconceived agenda, ideas, biases, or
fears that might get in the way of being open and empathetic in the
conversation.


!

!

!

!


Framework for Stakeholder Analysis

Actor Interests Perception of / Connections to Openness to / Power / Potential role /
Needs Position on key others / Support for a Means of Contribution
Goals issues Quality of dialogue inﬂuence
Concerns Relationships process


/ /


Assessment: Engaging the actors in
conversation
! Principle of Assessment as Intervention – importance of dialogic approach
! Sample of interview topics / questions

! Cost/Beneﬁt of engaging in a dialogue process
! What would you stand to gain by participating in such a process? What would you risk losing?
! What do you stand to gain by NOT participating in such a process? What do you risk losing?

! Identify the conditions necessary for engagement
! If you were to participate in a dialogue process to deal with this issue, what would you need to make it worth
your effort?

! Identify other stakeholders
! Who else do you think would need to be involved in this process in order for it to succeed?
! Who else should we talk to?

! Identify the scope of the issue(s)
! If a process were designed to deal with this issue, what other issues do you think must also be addressed in this
process?
! What are the issues that should not be addressed or that you would be unwilling to address in the process?

! Identify expectation
! If this process was ultimately successful by your standards, what would it look like to you?
! What is the most likely scenario if the situation continues as it is without signiﬁcant change in how people are
acting?


! —
!

! /
!
!

!
!

!
!
!

!
!
!

!
!
!


Deﬁnition of Roles
! Legitimization ! Process Assistance
! Convener ! Logistics coordinator
! Observer
! Facilitator
! Information
! Moderator
! Witness ! Process adviser
! Legal adviser
! Researcher ! !Preparation
! Process documenter ! Trainer
! Animator /motivator
! Psychological / Relationship
Assistance
! Conciliator ! Provision of resources
! Counselor ! Funder
! Spiritual guide
! Implementation
! Substantive Assistance ! Monitor
! Advisor
! Expert
! Guarantor
44

! !
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
! !
!
!
!
!
! /
! !
! !
!
!
! !
! !
!
44

Communication strategy

! Procedures for ofﬁcial documentation of the dialogue process
and its outcomes
! A plan for bringing constituents and/or public along with the
process.
! Guidelines on how representatives participating in the dialogue
will interact with their constituents.
! An approach to setting expectations for the ﬂow of information
about dialogue events.
! Guidelines on communication with public media.


!

! /
!

!

!


On Timeframes

! Planned times will differ from actual times

! There will be a tension between times pressures and achieving the
results desired
! To ensure that participants remain engaged throughout the process, it
can be useful to talk about time in terms of stages or phases

! In determining times, take into account the law of diminishing returns

! The dialogue process should have a clearly established end point


!

!

!

!

!


Exploratory Pre- Dialogue Monitoring &
Mission Dialogue Process Follow-up

Exploratory Mission
Full Assessment includes:
• Assessment of current situation – taking the • Mapping of Issues
pulse • Mapping of Actors
• Listen to the experiences and perspectives of • Interests/needs/concerns
the different actors-sectors • Perceptions
• Connections to others / quality
• Develop initial mapping of actors and issues of relationships
• Willingness to engage
• Explore ripeness of current conditions for • Power/Means of inﬂuence
dialogue • Potential role/contribution
• Detect opportunities for possible support • Context
• Historical
• Political
• Social/Cultural


Exploratory Mission

•
• — •
• • / /
•
• • /
•
•
• /
• /
• •
•
•
• /


Exploratory Pre- Monitoring &
Dialogue Process
Mission Dialogue Follow-up

Pre-dialogue (Co-Design)
Objectives Facilitated process of co- Preparation:
!Develop a design that is design requires deﬁning the • Establish technical secretariat
perceived as legitimate and following:
credible by all parties • Documents process and
• Purpose / Objectives
involved maintains constant
• Selection of participants communication with the
!Ensure all parties jointly own • Issues and Agenda participants
the process • Roles
• Prepares technical inputs
• Facilitation
• Technical support • Manages logistics
Depends on …
(Secretariat) • Administrative tasks
• Active participation in the
• The media • Advisor in process methodologies
construction of the
• Information & communication and techniques
process design
systems
• Ground rules • Logistics • Capacity building
• Who Convenes • Timeframes • Establish budget and mobilize
• Who facilitates • Resources resources


Objectives Facilitated process of co-
design requires deﬁning Preparation:
!
the following: •
•
!
• / •
• •
Depends on …
•
• •
•
• •
• • •
• • •
• •
•
•
•


Exploratory Monitoring &
Pre-Dialogue Dialogue Process
Mission Follow-up

Dialogue Process

49

• • •
• • •
• • •

!

49

Exploratory Monitoring &
Pre-Dialogue Dialogue Process
Mission Follow-up

Monitoring & Follow-up

!Agree to indicators to establish baseline and permit
ongoing monitoring
!Agree to mechanisms for accountability
!Guarantee technical, ﬁnancial and legal resources
!Agree to mechanisms to use if problems are encountered
along the way and agreements are not implemented

50

!
!
!
!


Matching strategy & methodology to purpose
Exploration / Relationship Deliberation / Collaborative
Awareness- Building – Working through action – multi-
Raising Working through tough decisions stakeholder,
conﬂict Whole System
change

•World Café •Sustained Dialogue •AmericaSpeaks – 21st • Appreciative Inquiry
•Citizen Café •Deep Democracy Century Town Meeting •Future Search
•Open Space •Public Conversations •Citizen Choicework •Change Lab
• Circle Processes Project • Citizen Deliberative •Prospective Thinking –
• Participatory Action Councils Scenario Construction
•Theatre of the
Oppressed Research – War-torn •Study Circles •Intersectoral Dialogue
Societies Project • Deliberative Polling
•Consensus Conference
•National Issues Forum


/ — / —

•World Café •Sustained Dialogue •AmericaSpeaks – 21st • Appreciative Inquiry
Century Town Meeting
•Citizen Café
•Open Space •Deep Democracy -21 •Future Search

• Circle Processes •Public Conversations Project •Citizen Choicework
• Change Lab
Participatory Action Research –
•Theatre of the Oppressed • • Citizen Deliberative Councils
War-torn Societies Project •Prospective Thinking –
- Scenario Construction
•Study Circles -

• Deliberative Polling •Intersectoral Dialogue

•Consensus Conference

•National Issues Forum


Dialogic Change Workshop Handbook (11/4/2011) - bilingual

More Related Content

Viewers also liked (16)

Similar to Dialogic Change Workshop Handbook (11/4/2011) - bilingual (20)

More from CP Yen Foundation 朝邦文教基金會 (15)

Recently uploaded (20)

Dialogic Change Workshop Handbook (11/4/2011) - bilingual