WE make more sense than me - the art of Collective Sensemaking
•Descargar como PPTX, PDF•
0 recomendaciones•57 vistas
Talk delivered by Antoinette Coezee and Jason Knight at the Agile2019 conference. Abstract: Making sense is too important to do alone. We each see a part of the puzzle. It's only when we combine our collective sense of what's going on that we see more of the reality around us. Too often, it remains hidden. We need this collective wisdom to make sense of volatility, uncertainty, accelerated change, and ambiguity in order to respond. Did you know there is a framework for having a Collective Sensemaking conversation? And, if done properly, it develops the thinking of everyone involved? In this session, you will observe a live demo with a detailed breakdown of the demo to illustrate the power of this approach. You will then have an opportunity to practice yourself. Come to this interactive workshop and learn how you and your organization can apply this framework to better respond to the challenges you face. Learning Outcomes: * Describe the Sense-and-Respond pattern * Recognize the power of Collective Sensemaking in catalyzing deep individual growth and development * Understand and demonstrate Collective Sensemaking and its value in co-creating solutions * Explain the link between developing Collective Sensemaking and the impact on our leadership capabilities * Understand key nuances in the practice and application of Collective Sensemaking * Apply Collective Sensemaking to your own problem-solving * Demonstrate the kind of interactions and attitudes needed for Collective Sensemaking * Explain how the practice of Collective Sensemaking can significantly impact the quality of relationship within groups (e.g. in meetings) and teams Video embedded on slide 2: https://youtu.be/bmQRwyrvsqo
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
Similar a WE make more sense than me - the art of Collective Sensemaking
Similar a WE make more sense than me - the art of Collective Sensemaking (20)
Más de Antoinette Coetzee
Más de Antoinette Coetzee (13)
Último
Último (14)
WE make more sense than me - the art of Collective Sensemaking
- 3. TriadExercise 1 Find 2 people that you want to work with for the rest of the session. 2 Share with one another: o Where were you born? o How many siblings do you have? o What was your biggest challenge growing up?
- 4. Sensemaking
- 5. TheSensemakingCycle Source: Michael Hamman SENSING MAKING SENSE RESPONDING ACTION LOGIC
- 9. ActionLogics
- 10. DevelopmentofActionlogic ModernistTraditionalist Opportunist Diplomat Expert Achiever EARLY LATER StrategistIndividualist Post-modernist
- 13. COLLECTIVESENSEMAKING Source: Michael Hamman SENSING (individual) MAKING SENSE (collective) RESPONDING ACTION LOGIC
- 14. RelationalSystem
- 16. TriadDiscussion PICK ONE OF THE QUESTIONS BELOW AND HAVE A BRIEF DISCUSSION IN YOUR TRIAD: What are the relationship systems in your life like? OR How would your relationship systems support / or not these kinds of conversations? OR What are you learning about solving problems collectively?
- 19. TimeToPractice! WE WILL DO COLLECTIVE SENSEMAKING IN YOUR TRIADS NOW Step 2 Try and go through the 3 stages – Sensing, Sensemaking, Respond – very deliberately We have put example questions for each of the 3 stages on your table Step 1 Pick a topic that is: Disequilibrating | Salient | Emotionally Engaging | Interpersonal
- 20. SomeTipsandTricks 1 Stay in sensing; resist urge to make sense too quickly 2 Resist giving advice; focus on the thinking that is producing the thoughts 3 Watch for body cues e.g. nervous laughter, starts and stops, deep sighs, shifting in seat, hands moving to face 4 Try just blurting out what you’re thinking (you’re not wrong!!!) Trust your partners to use it and lead you to the next thing.
- 22. SENSING What information do we have? What might we be missing? MAKING SENSE What’s the most confusing / annoying / strange part of this? What beliefs do we hold about this situation? RESPONDING What’s the most confusing / annoying / strange part of this? What beliefs do we hold about this situation? ExploratoryQuestions
Notas del editor
- archived slides notes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1STZHraLj8Y7jHvFBvE3GzZNGHa9cZTPh-dJlujvVlb4/edit PURPOSE To let people experience a way of collaborating that allows for and demands the whole person, exploits the wisdom of the collective, and reveals how one’s internal operating system frees or limits. FLOW 10’ : OPEN Normal welcome, purpose, etc People form triads (triads will be used for discussion questions and to practice Collective Sensemaking later), and have a warm-up conversation that establishes a basic level of intimacy and connection. We are thinking of using Lencioni’s 3 trust questions maybe, but will refine. 10’ : ANATOMY OF SENSEMAKING CONVERSATION Explain the Sense/Sensemaking/Response cycle (slide) Mention topic qualities (Salient, Emotionally Engaging, Disequilibrating, Interpersonal) in order to prep them for choosing a good topic for their practice Bring in the qualities of a Deliberately Developmental Relationships a.k.a. DDR (including our own) so they grasp the link between Collective Sensemaking and Relationship. (Individuals and Interactions) End off with a discussion question in the triads e.g. what are you learning about solving problems collectively? 10’ : ACTION LOGIC Introduce action logic (William Torbert) and its role in Collective Sensemaking. This brings together the I with the WE aspect of Collective Sensemaking. Intro the different levels and what is possible and not possible at every level (We will use a handful of slides to do this) Demo the different levels of action logic applied to a problem or Collective Sensemaking and what an accompanying response would be End off with a discussion in the triads about observed or self-identified action logic states so they can apply the knowledge to themselves. 10’ : MODELING Demonstrate Collective Sensemaking between a group that regularly practices Collective Sensemaking together 5’ Demo Collective Sensemaking conversation along with the featured participants, potentially pausing to illustrate what’s happening 5’ Debrief by lifting out some of the following points: The focus spent on sensing rather than jumping to making sense too quickly Examining the thinking rather than the topic Blurting and seemingly nonsensical jumps The unimpeded, improvisational flow of the conversation The relationship and psychological safety present Where the conversation ended up i.t.o. clarity, response, learning 30’ : Collective Sensemaking practice 5’ Instructions and role introduction 7’ Have a go at it 5’ Tips and tricks 7’ Have another go at it 5’ Debrief - what was different this time? Overall learnings? Make the connection between action logic level and ease of Collective Sensemaking 5’ Closing Explore possible next steps for participants * Describe the Sense-and-Respond pattern * Recognize the power of Collective Sensemaking in catalyzing deep individual growth and development * Understand and demonstrate Collective Sensemaking and its value in co-creating solutions * Explain the link between developing Collective Sensemaking and the impact on our leadership capabilities * Understand key nuances in the practice and application of Collective Sensemaking * Apply Collective Sensemaking to your own problem-solving * Demonstrate the kind of interactions and attitudes needed for Collective Sensemaking * Explain how the practice of Collective Sensemaking can significantly impact the quality of relationship within groups (e.g. in meetings) and teams
- archived slides notes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1STZHraLj8Y7jHvFBvE3GzZNGHa9cZTPh-dJlujvVlb4/edit PURPOSE To let people experience a way of collaborating that allows for and demands the whole person, exploits the wisdom of the collective, and reveals how one’s internal operating system frees or limits. FLOW 10’ : OPEN Normal welcome, purpose, etc People form triads (triads will be used for discussion questions and to practice Collective Sensemaking later), and have a warm-up conversation that establishes a basic level of intimacy and connection. We are thinking of using Lencioni’s 3 trust questions maybe, but will refine. 10’ : ANATOMY OF SENSEMAKING CONVERSATION Explain the Sense/Sensemaking/Response cycle (slide) Mention topic qualities (Salient, Emotionally Engaging, Disequilibrating, Interpersonal) in order to prep them for choosing a good topic for their practice Bring in the qualities of a Deliberately Developmental Relationships a.k.a. DDR (including our own) so they grasp the link between Collective Sensemaking and Relationship. (Individuals and Interactions) End off with a discussion question in the triads e.g. what are you learning about solving problems collectively? 10’ : ACTION LOGIC Introduce action logic (William Torbert) and its role in Collective Sensemaking. This brings together the I with the WE aspect of Collective Sensemaking. Intro the different levels and what is possible and not possible at every level (We will use a handful of slides to do this) Demo the different levels of action logic applied to a problem or Collective Sensemaking and what an accompanying response would be End off with a discussion in the triads about observed or self-identified action logic states so they can apply the knowledge to themselves. 10’ : MODELING Demonstrate Collective Sensemaking between a group that regularly practices Collective Sensemaking together 5’ Demo Collective Sensemaking conversation along with the featured participants, potentially pausing to illustrate what’s happening 5’ Debrief by lifting out some of the following points: The focus spent on sensing rather than jumping to making sense too quickly Examining the thinking rather than the topic Blurting and seemingly nonsensical jumps The unimpeded, improvisational flow of the conversation The relationship and psychological safety present Where the conversation ended up i.t.o. clarity, response, learning 30’ : Collective Sensemaking practice 5’ Instructions and role introduction 7’ Have a go at it 5’ Tips and tricks 7’ Have another go at it 5’ Debrief - what was different this time? Overall learnings? Make the connection between action logic level and ease of Collective Sensemaking 5’ Closing Explore possible next steps for participants * Describe the Sense-and-Respond pattern * Recognize the power of Collective Sensemaking in catalyzing deep individual growth and development * Understand and demonstrate Collective Sensemaking and its value in co-creating solutions * Explain the link between developing Collective Sensemaking and the impact on our leadership capabilities * Understand key nuances in the practice and application of Collective Sensemaking * Apply Collective Sensemaking to your own problem-solving * Demonstrate the kind of interactions and attitudes needed for Collective Sensemaking * Explain how the practice of Collective Sensemaking can significantly impact the quality of relationship within groups (e.g. in meetings) and teams
- People form triads (triads will be used for discussion questions and to practice Collective Sensemaking later), and have a warm-up conversation that establishes a basic level of intimacy and connection. We are thinking of using Lencioni’s 3 trust questions.
- Land Alone, we go through this cycle naturally, instinctively, and with only our perspective and sense making operating systems. [AC] We would like to start off by introducing you to the mostly unconscious pattern we use thousands times a day when we react in response to a situation or problem: First we use our Senses to take in data. This includes observations, listening to conversations, etc - literally what we perceive with our senses. Next we interpret the sensory input to make sense of it - to determine the meaning of it. Based on the meaning we make out of it we then decide on a response - the action we take [AC] We are sensing, sensemaking, response planning machines with default access to only our own thoughts and perspectives. The cycle can happens in an instant, without any deliberation. This serves us well enough when we encounter a rattlesnake along a forest trail (sense rattle, make sense there is a danger nearby, responding with fight, flight, or freeze) but often does not often serve us well in VUCA conditions. In such conditions, our predetermined patterns of making sense or of best practice responses could well be inappropriate to respond beneficially an ambiguous or volatile environment for example. What is needed is “slow thinking” or a more deliberate way of examining what we are sensing, how we are making sense of the situation, and finally what types of responses would be most beneficial. Further, we seek to incorporate not just our inner sense-and-respond pattern with it’s single perspective but also the perspectives, meaning making, and response ideas from several others. Let’s take a slow walk through the different stages…. Let’s start with what you are sensing right now… Most of you, hopefully!, will be observing that Jason and Antoinette are standing in the front of the room. Who has noticed the patterns of the floor tiles? The smell of the room? The chair under you? Our sensory experience tends to focus on a fraction of what is available to us in the moment. We generally also take it for granted that everyone is sensing the same things we are, so we tend not to stop and examine the validity or completeness of our sensing, even though we base what comes next on it! It is an individual assessment of what is going on in the outside world. Let’s play with that a little more in a collective context….
- Land Our capacity to make sense is enhanced by having multiple perspectives and more sensing available to us. What would you call this? Think about the thoughts you’re having. Are you thinking…”I see 3 figures. The first has roughly a triangle shape. It’s got 1 rounded point and 2 sharper points. Those sharper points remind me of ears and the rounded one of the mouth of some animal. There’s something about it that makes me want to say baaaah! Whoa, that looks like a sheep. It’s a sheep!” or did you instantly decide, “Sheep, elephant, and giraffe?” Do you see how quickly and instinctively we can travel through a sensemaking cycle? do you notice that we often don’t distinguish between when we are sensing and when we are sense making? We often don’t interrogate the sensing. What if we added one more perspective to yours?
- Land Our capacity to make sense is enhanced by having multiple perspectives and more sensing available to us. Now what do you see? Someone with a different perspective might observe forms that remind them of a penguin, swan and seal. It’s possible that if only the previous perspective were present, these possibilities wouldn’t even be considered. This is like a situation with only one person is trying to make sense of what they are sensing and is limited by their perspective or the flexibility of their thinking.
- Land Our capacity to make sense is enhanced by having multiple perspectives and more sensing available to us. If a group of people can stay in a sensing mode long enough, their different sensations and perspectives generate a rich picture of a shared situation. The sense they can make can benefit from deliberate exploration of what they sense, the ways each of them make meaning of those sensations and the ways each can think to respond in beneficial ways. Can you now see each figure as both animals? You now have access to 3 realities. [AC] I think this bit from the Sensemaking slide now fits better here…. What is needed is “slow thinking” or a more deliberate way of examining what we are sensing, how we are making sense of the situation, and finally what types of responses would be most beneficial. Further, we seek to incorporate not just our inner sense-and-respond pattern with it’s single perspective but also the perspectives, meaning making, and response ideas from several others Where Sensing is all about the outer world, we cannot ignore what is going on for us on the inside. Right now, are you aware of your breathing? Whether it is slow and relaxed? What other somatic signals are you aware of? What emotions are you aware of? Your inner state presents you with even more input when confronted with a situation. Not only does it give you information, but it may well influence your Sensemaking : if we go to an extreme neuroscience tells us that we cannot think, cannot make sense iow if our amygdala has taken over - for instance when we go into fear. So unless we develop awareness of what is going on for us as an individual we may respond inappropriately. What else influences our Sensemaking and subsequent Response? We now would like to introduce you to the concept of Action Logics
- Point Antoinette Land Our capacity to respond to situations becomes larger as we develop ourselves. Let’s start by looking at how our development as human beings and leaders influence the extent to which we make sense of the world around us and respond to it. The model we would like to share with you comes from William Torbert and Suzanne Cook-Greuters and describes the centre of logic we utilise when we decide on an action. We do not have the time to go through each of the individual action logics but would like to look at the impact of the larger classification - i.e. Traditionalist, Modernist and Postmodernist - on our our capacity to make sense with others. Life through the Traditionalist lens is black or white, right or wrong. It varies from My Truth, to Our Truth, to The Truth, as proven by science. The Modernist lens is…… The Postmodernist lens is…. So let’s see how that would look
- Land Access to different action logics enhances what is available to us. Let’s look at an example of how different action logic may respond to a complex situation. In our organization, we perceive a problem with employee engagement. For the purpose of our explanation we are going to confine ourselves to the most common action logics present in the professional world - experts, achievers and individualists. Expert We must gather a large dataset from our people about their health, psychological state based on HR disciplines. With enough data, we can accurately discover the cause of increased sick leave, apathy, and other poor performance markers. Achiever - needing the opinions of others IN ORDER TO get things done I must go to those who are engaged, find out what’s working for them AND what they think the problem is. We can engage with them to form a plan, identify the values we want to encourage then tell folks you’re either on the bus or off it. Shape up or ship out Individualist - systemic view I must determine what sort of a system may be contributing to or detracting from engagement AND I must assume everyone possesses part of the answer. We will only know our reality when we get together and share how each of us sees it. I am open to engagement NOT being the root problem! Strategist Like the individualist, the strategist can hold all the individual views AND trusts that individuals can take care of themselves. Therefore, the strategist makes a decision that she thinks will catalyze those trusted colleagues to achieve a strategic goal.
- Knowing that it is difficult to assess our own action logic, especially at the point in time when we need to know whether it is actually exactly that action logic that stands in our way, let’s have a go at it anyway! 2 min discussion: which action logic seems most often present in your thinking? 1 min debrief: how might action logic enable or limit your sense-making?
- Land Obvious the benefit of multiple people sensing, perspectives, etc. Value of making sense collectively is that we have multiple action logics contributing. This makes it possible to A) come up with better sensemaking B) develop our action logics
- Point Jason Land The conditions of deliberately developmental relationships must be present for a collective sensemaking conversation to be possible. Stance Colleague A collective sensemaking conversation is a container that must be built with the right conditions. Participants must be mutually committed to growing themselves and each other. They must act with integrity. They must demonstrate respect for one another. We call a relationship exhibiting these conditions a deliberately developmental relationship. Participants must commit to these conditions for a collective sensemaking conversation to be possible. Imagine a volatile topic is raised in a much different container. This topic is sure to product strong reactions within a group wherein the members A) don’t respect or trust one another B) will act in any way to get ahead or C) aren’t interested in stretching to challenge their deeply held beliefs? How does that feel? How do you feel imagining that situation? I image reacting like a snail that senses danger and hides within its protective shell. My sensitive feelers are safe but give neither me nor anyone else any benefit. Now imagine a group where the people show due regard for the feelings, wishes, rights, or traditions of others. They are committed stretching themselves and others appropriately to develop in beneficial ways. Last, imagine they will act with truthfulness and honor and in a whole and undivided way. When participants in a relational system exhibit commitment to growing themselves and each other, integrity of action, and mutual respect that system becomes deliberately developmental AND collective sensemaking conversations become possible.
- Point Jason Land For a collective sensemaking conversation to have developmentally catalyzing power, its topic must be: salient, emotionally engaging, disequilibrating, and interpersonal. When choosing a topic for a collective sensemaking conversation, not just any subject will do.The topic must exhibit 4 qualities. Think of the first as edginess or something that causes people in a group to challenge their deeply held assumptions or beliefs. We call this ‘disequilibrating.’ Also, the topic should be something that truly affects the people involved in the discussion. It must affect their day-to-day lives. In other words, the topic must be ‘salient.’ Next, people must truly care about the topic. This may sound similar to salience, but there are many things that affect us daily for which we care very little. Thought gravity affects me daily, I can’t say I feel emotionally engaged by it. However, someone cutting me off during my daily commute is both salient and infuriating...I mean emotionally engaging :). Last, it must be interpersonal. The topic should not be one that a single person can see through or understand by themselves. Indeed, to see through or even resolve such a situation requires the coming together of collective. When these four qualities are present, there is rich potential to deepen shared understanding and grow developmentally.
- 5’ Instructions and role introduction 7’ Have a go at it 5’ Tips and tricks Stay in sensing; resist urge to make sense too quickly Resist giving advice; focus on the thinking that is producing the thoughts Watch for body cues e.g. nervous laughter, starts and stops, deep sighs, shifting in seat, hands moving to face Try just blurting out what you’re thinking (you’re not wrong!!!). Trust your partners to use it and lead you to the next thing. 7’ Have another go at it 5’ Debrief - what was different this time? Overall learnings? Make the connection between action logic level and ease of Collective Sensemaking
- triads disburse; form back at tables or in semi circle ask audience: * What was the most confusing / annoying / strange part of this? * What seems useful to try back at work / home? * Who might you practice this with?