Beverly Wenger-Trayner’s old Eudaimonia blog post “What makes something a place?” is no longer online but in my archives of draft blog posts, this bit of text was saved. It seems to elegantly follow the words of Gardner Cambell in yesterday’s post, that I’m adding it into the slip stream. What do you think, Bev? Your description still resonates for me
Funny, I have been thinking about “place” related to another line of inquiry, and that is place as a recognizable border when I feel I am shifting between community and network. In my networks, I don’t feel the absence of place, but instead focus more on PULSE. In community, and even moreso in TEAM when I am intricately reliant on my partners, place becomes MUCH more central.
In communities of practices, I think I slip between place and pulse. Hm, I think I need to think about this concept some more and blog about it. After I do more housecleaning. (On a roll. Painting.)
Network. Resonance. Place. Pulse. There is something there….
I’ve promised myself to start blogging regularly this year. One way to get a jump on it is to finish drafts that I never got around to publishing. This is one of them!Is there something you’d like me to write about? Leave a note in the comments!
Skagit Bay – and colors change all the time…
What I Need From You (WINFY) is one of the Liberating Structures that I avoided for a long time. My own fears? Lack of clarity about how the structure would work, particularly in view of the presence or absences of trust in a power-dynamically lit situation? That said, once I actually started using it, it flowered open with many useful layers. I found some particularly great insights AND, when my fellow practitioners share their experiences, I see even more. This is the value of a community of practice, my friends!
For context for those of you new to Liberating Structures, I love the short and sweet description from The Liberators: “Liberating Structures are a collection of interaction patterns that allow you to unleash and involve everyone in a group — from extroverted to introverted and from leaders to followers.” The help us find the sweet spot between over controlled and under controlled group processes to access the intelligence and action of everyone in a group.
Our LS community of practice functions partially on a Slack instance, where we ask and answer questions for each other. At some point last year there was a great question and answer thread around WINFY that was SO VALUABLE I wanted to capture it before it aged off of our free Slack instance. (As so much does!) The players gave me permission to share so I’m going to share the actual thread, then close with a brief summary of my own. Italicized comments are mine to explain stuff that might not mean anything if you aren’t in the community!
OK, here is the transcript!
lolo A question re (WINFY –> we use the icon as shorthand in Slack!): I’m not fully understanding the reasoning behind the “No discussion! No elaboration” piece of the sharing. Why wouldn’t elaboration or discussion be helpful? Or do people often follow up this activity with something else to address if a ‘no’ came up? I appreciate that if there’s a ‘whatever’ that it means that there’s a need to clarify the request and so a second round could be done, but “I will try” or “No” with no discussion or no elaboration feels like the opposite of building trust.
fisher I tend to describe this rigidity as purposeful: there’s no need to justify why it’s a no. WINFY isn’t meant to be a negotiation. If you need me to get you a report by Friday at 12, and I say no. What more is there to discuss? Usually, people want part of the need met – “well we can get you half the report by Friday at 4”. That’s not the need. Do you mistrust the person’s initial request – do you think you know better than they do what they need? I find WINFY goes right at two types of trust. Do I trust that you how your own needs better than I think I can know your needs? Can I say no and deny you an essential need and believe we’ll still be ok relationally?
keithmccandless19 Saying no or whatever or huh in WINFY is an invitation to offer an honest and direct signal. So many of the explanations muddle the relationship and trust among people… particularly when you are working across functions that are very different. Also, getting very short answers out helps everyone see the interrelatedness of what is needed to move forward together. Each individual request is not sacred but rather part of a critically self-organizing set of entanglements. The next straw may break the camel’s back. Often one function or action must be sub-optimized to address the mix of needs expressed across the whole group. Last, it is a good idea to make space for more explanation and follow-on commitments after . Helpful? Confusing? Nonsense?
lolo haha18 @fisher & @keithmccandless Thanks so much for your explanations!I appreciate what you bring in here, @fisher, around not only emphasizing the non-negotiation but also intensive negotiation happening where there’s a real need to pose whether you can really know the other’s need better than them, and whether you can accept the relational impact of saying no to their need. How have you experienced people with perhaps more positional power handle the added heat of that need?@keithmccandless I love what you’re saying here, too! I appreciate the need for a brief and non-confusing signal. What have you followed up with to offer space for more explanation or commitment follow-up after ? I also welcome other feedback from those who haven’t commented yet!
fisher @annajackson has some hard stories about using with funders and grantees that were tricky given the power relationships. In my experiences, functional groups will often say “Yes” to a leadership team. If you are holding the structure, you often have to intervene a bit and gently nudge them to consider whether it is a request that is clear enough for a Yes or No – or whether it ought to be a huh. You can make it quite playful and eventually someone will say Huh or Whatever to the bosses and there’s usually a cathartic cheer. All of us tend to be underspecific in what our actual needs are and so you have be sometimes a little stiff in terms of supporting groups – especially those without positional power or authority to use No, Huh, and Whatever more frequently.As with most LS, frequent and consistent use of WINFY as a regular interactional or operational structure dampens the anxiety and increases the fluidity.
Ziryan @lolo haha, beautiful question. I have seen WINFY address two major assumptions within a company. People feeling comfortable enough to say Huh or No, and people feeling comfortable enough receiving Huh or No.I facilitated a workshop ones in which we wanted the sales team and development team to work together to sell more Agile contacts instead of fixed scope and deadline contracts. Almost at the end of the workshop, I asked the sales reps, including the sales director to state what they need from the development teams to be successful. The teams only had a few Yes while having lots of Huh and a few No. The sales director was not amused, and I had to intervene and address the trust issue. After the intervention, the sales director cooled down and was grateful for the honesty of the development teams that they did not understand what he exactly wanted from them. They decided to work together to formulate what the director needed and followed up by another WINFY to clarify if it is a Yes, huh or a No. Had I not intervened and allowed discussion, the development team would have been overwhelmed by the reasoning and negotiation power of the sales reps and director. They would end up frustrated and eventually giving in by saying Yes and still doing No. Or, making assumptions in what the director and sales reps needed. And most importantly, the issue of trust and lack of collaboration would not have been discussed and remain in the air like the elephant in the room.
lolo haha Awesome anecdote, @Ziryan !! Thanks for sharing, sounds like it’s one of those that may need a good deal of added facilitation depending on the trust and communication skills within the team!1
fisher I find to be the most exhausting and actively held structure. In my experience, there’s quite a bit more hanging on during that structure than in some of the others.1
keithmccandless Tempted to share more stories when the people with less power gave honest & risky answers and the people with more power responded with surprise/confusion/curiosity. (Working in healthcare is instructive because there are complex power dynamics). If there is a pattern, I would say the people with more power are unwitting and making unexamined assumptions about the relative importance of their role. Most often, the BIG WINFY insight revolves around interdependence. Eyes are suddenly open to what we need from one another to accomplish something important to everyone.
My Summary
As I read through the thread, the emergence of patterns of interaction – particularly those habituated through roles and power positions – help us see MANY things in a new light. If we can find simple ways, like WINFY and other LSs, to make patterns visible, then we can explore and act upon them. The SIMPLE part is essential, because it is so easy to get lost in a verbal analysis and miss the point.
Note: My threat/promise to blog weekly has suffered a bit. I’ll try harder! What do you want me to blog about? Tell me in the comments.
A few weeks ago I wrote a provocation on Peer Assistance and Mutual Support in preparation for a KM4Dev Knowledge Cafe. I really enjoyed thinking more deeply about the power dynamics of peer assistance. Thanks to the great KM4Dev team here are the artifacts from the event. ‘
What we don’t see beneath the patchwork on the surface…
This is 11th in a series of posts about the tidal wave of moving online in Pandemic-Covid-19. #1, #2, #3, #4 , #5 , #6, #7, #8, #9 and #10. This post explores peer assistance and mutual support practices, building on a blog post last Spring about virtual peer assists. This is also in preparation for a KM4Dev Knowledge Café on February 18th on this topic. (Please, join us! 7:00AM PST, 16:00 CET)
We Are Connected
My colleague and friend, Helen Gilman, pointed me to a tremendous book by Robert McFarlane, “Underland: A Deep Time Journey.” Among other fascinating topics, McFarlane writes about how trees “talk to” and support each other through underground fungal networks. (See Suzanne Simard’s Ted Talk.) This reminded me that we often operate as apparent autonomous workers in our jobs — single trees — yet in fact our networks sustain and support us. We are part of a bigger whole without which we could not exist. Like looking just above the forest floor and not below, we miss the practices that generatively connect us. Unseen, but present. With this blog post I want to “observe” some of those practices we call “peer assistance.”
Here is the baseline I offer. Our greatest knowledge resource is each other. The knowledge we each carry, the perspectives and experiences around our knowledge, and our diverse contexts, gives us an immense, and decentralized resource.
Assistance: With useful peer to peer (P2P) practices, knowledge can be more accessible, freed from centralized organizational boundaries and gatekeepers. P2P practices can subvert the power of large institutions that can dominate with or perpetuate one view of the world, one knowledge perspective. P2P approaches can step around those who wish to protect, prioritize, or hoard knowledge. They can help us be aware and address racism and colonialism that has been baked into so many of our “expert-centric” practices.
Support: At a human level, P2P practices can engage each of us. They can respect the fact that we all have useful knowledge. We might feel a bit more empowered and a bit less vulnerable working at the peer-to-peer level rather than trying to show up in front of a large organization. Feel a little more human. We, and our knowledge, might be unleashed in more generative ways.
I’m interested in these P2P knowledge liberation practices, and particularly these days, doing them online. This post explores a common form of P2P, peer assists, and how we might expand the repertoire beyond them, and to include support as well as assistance.
Peer Assistance (and support!)
A fungus growing in a rotten tree near my house…
Peer assistance is NOT new. In the knowledge management (KM) world, it has been popularized by the Peer Assist format. (Doing them online is also not new, but it matters now, more than ever, with the pandemic.) I like the definition from ODI building on Purcell and Collison’s work that describes a peer assist as a “learning before doing” activity.” Learning before doing, or the process of learning before undertaking a task, activity or project.” (Learning AFTERWARDS with peers could be exemplified by an After Action Review.)
A common format for peer assists is to have the assistee – the person who needs assistance — convene a gathering with people they invite who may have useful knowledge or expertise to address the assistee’s challenge or task. “You know more than I do, please help me!”
There is an explicit recognition in peer assists that knowledge is power. Knowing “the right thing” to do is a central component. And yet, our challenges are not always about not knowing what to do, but moving beyond feeling alone and vulnerable when risking doing what we perceive we should. Knowing WHAT to do is different than doing it. Knowing HOW do do something is different than doing it. Understanding the context for doing it. Having the mindset to do it. Confidence? Enough “safety” to take the risk? This is where mutual support comes in. Recognizing that we are humans working with this knowledge.
P2P may also help us with another huge challenge we face. Bias, or more accurately, biases! An “expert-driven” view of assistance may be implicitly propagating the bias of dominant actors or cultures. It could deprioritize or even bury local and indigenous knowledge. Could P2P approaches help us a) be aware and b) step out of these traps?
KM4Dev, one of my core communities of practice, has been engaged in ongoing conversations both about decolonisation of KM, and, as always, about specific KM practices. (See these posts from Bruce Boyes and Charles Dhewa.) For example (and forgive the broad generalization) when we look at the implicit prioritization of recognized expertise, we may be practicing racism and colonialism. When we look at centralized knowledge practices — same.
In the time of COVID-19, we have focused on ONLINE practices. Online theoretically gives us more access to a wider diversity of peers and allow easy self-organization, rather than relying on a centralized source. Peer to peer methods online provide scaffolding to connect with other peers to assist in a member’s or members’ challenges and opportunities, often in a “just in time” or very contextually embedded context. I sense that they also offer a specific assumption that we all have knowledge that may be useful to others, not just the validated and/or high status “experts!”
P2P Assistance and Support Online Practice Options
One approach to peer to peer assistance recognizes we each bring something of value, even if we aren’t identified (self- or by others) as an expert in a particular area. An example of a process that recognizes this distributed resource is Troika Consulting as defined in the Liberating Structures repertoire. Three people “sit” together, taking turns sharing their challenge, problem or idea, and get feedback from two peers. It is amazing that each time people report they received insights, even with perfect strangers.
As I think about Troika compared to traditional peer assists, Troika actively promotes the idea that everyone has something of value, not just the experts. It is easy to do with just three people (or 3x X). During the process, ALL THREE people can gain insights from their peers, not just one peer assistee. There is the distribution of engagement and value creation, regardless of role.
Another Liberating Structure is Discovery and Action Dialog. DAD, as we know it, builds on the idea of positive deviance – how can one person or group succeed at what the rest of us struggle with? Exploring where there are seeds of innovation and possibility through simple guided conversations through a series of prompts, and new possibilities emerge.
There are other Liberating Structures that do this sort of unleash/engage that we might not always define as peer assistance and support, as noted in my previous blog post. You can go there for specific examples. Longstanding group process traditions such as Open Space, World Cafe and the Art of Hosting also rest on this foundation of the value of our peers.
Connect the Micorriza!
Many years back when I was deeply involved in communities of practice (CoP) work, there was this persistent observation that people drew more confidence and a sense of support from their peers in their CoP than from their supervisors and direct team members. Freed from the constraints of organizational hierarchy and politics, peer support felt more genuine. To unleash ourselves, do we need our peers? I experience this as essential.
To decolonize or remove racism from our work, do we need our peers? I don’t know about you, but I can’t even imagine doing the work without my peers, both in figuring out HOW to do it (peer assistance) and the confidence to DO the work (mutual support.)
Moving Online in Pandemic is now #MOIP!This is 10th in a series of posts about the tidal wave of moving online in the time of Covid-19. #1, #2, #3, #4 , #5 , #6, #7, #8 and #9.
I’ve mentioned my work with the Floodplains by Design network over the past few years. We have been doing a lot of experimenting and practicing with online meetings and events over the last 11 months. We captured a few of our practices and now I’ve drafted an article on Virtual Field Trips. And yes, I’m looking for your review to help improve it. Right now it lives on a Google doc where you can comment. You are also welcome to comment generally here. Care to help? I’ll post the intro below. And THANKS!
1. Introduction
At the Floodplains by Design (FbD) Culture and Capacity Action Group (C&C)November 2020 meeting, we recently reviewed and reflected upon our experiences and value of field trips to FbD project sites. (See figure 1.) COVID-19 has curtailed our face to face field trips, demanding a new, virtual way of meeting these needs.
With the C&C’s focus on building and supporting a learning network, we are interested in the overall set of learning and network weaving practices that can help spread and deepen IFM. This document offers insights and useful practices for designing and implementing virtual field trips (VTS) to support Integrated Floodplain Management (IFM). It also helps us share in general the value of, and practices around field trips which are useful in our work together whether we are F2F or together online. It builds on our first document on Virtual Peer Assists.
We hope that through these occasional articles/resource documents we can make our learning more widely available across the FbD network and beyond.
The first section of this document reflects more generally on the purpose and value created through field trips. The second section addresses specific practices for planning and executing virtual field trips. A resources section follows for additional information.
Figure 1: Harvest from the November 2020 brainstorm on VTS
We created this first draft of useful virtual field trip practices using four guiding questions.
What general immediate and longer term value is created through field trips in our integrated floodplain management (IFM) work? This establishes a shared baseline understanding of field trips in IFM.
What specific purpose(s) and value creation do field virtual trips serve in our work right now? With whom? Clear purpose drives how we design our VFTs.
What useful field trip practices have we learned for VTFs?
How might we know when we are making progress on this purpose? Like any practice, we assume that as we learn, we can improve our practice.
I’m happy to post more here if that is useful… and know the doc got pretty LONG!
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
Cookie
Duration
Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
1
1
