FW: [Ailist] thoughts on working in pairs in small groups

[Jody Jacobson]

I think the value of working in pairs, whole groups, or even allowing for silent internal dialog depends on the situation.  What's best for the client?  How can I be of greatest service?
   
  The thread of this conversation reminds me of the time I met with a group of medical science graduate students to design a new alumni association. Like others, I worked in a way that was based in appreciative principles, while taking a significant degree of poetic license with the process.  At the time, I managed the graduate program, so knew the participants (a few current master's students, several PhD students, and a few PhD alums who were visiting).
   
  From previous attempts to engage these students, as well as some of the faculty, in appreciative conversations and interviews, I knew they'd be self conscious about offering ideas openly or creatively for fear of having wrong "answers" or, worse, humiliated by their peers.  As "faculty in training," the doctoral students, in particular, were inclined to tear apart (deconstruct) not only other's ideas, but their own as well.
   
  So, I read the appreciative questions aloud to the group as a whole and then gave them quiet time to ponder and write their thoughts and feelings on sheets of colored paper.  Then, I asked them to go around the table and share their ideas with the group.  The groundrule was no critiquing of other's or one's own ideas...each idea has value, and each will be written on the list of ideas.  That allowed them to do what they do so well:  see patterns, empirically recognizing that they share many of the same hopes and wishes, and get energized by the common threads and an unfolding mystery.  Then, I had them work silently again considering all that had been listed and selecting those five ideas they had the most energy around.  Again, all done in internal dialog.  Each person's votes counted and again no critiquing.
   
  We went through this sort of process enough times that they eventually were able to work together toward a shared sense of purpose.  Working with this group in an appreciative way was like working with war veterans who suffer Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).  They needed time to build trust in the process and each other.  The icing on the cake was that the University's Alumni Association had just completed a major research project exploring what structural and relational factors appear to be present in successful alumni organizations nationally.  What the students had designed in two 1 1/2 hour sessions exactly mirrored the findings of the lengthy study.
   
  Cheers,
  Jody
   
  Jody Jacobson, Principal
  Aerial View Consulting, LLC
  www.aerialviewconsulting.com
  P/ 608.347.9961
  F/ 608.204.0039
  
Bryan Kidd <bryan at thoughtfulleadership.com> wrote: 
  Hi Lynne



I agree with the statements regarding the benefits of using pairs. I think
Kathryn puts it well "it does create a field of receptivity within the
larger group that I don't think would [be] there without the prior work in
dyads." This phenomena is of significant interest to me, as I believe it
helps generate a position of learning rather than reception of information.
I have spent the last decade constantly working with groups of various
sizes. Some of this has been in innovative 'classroom as organization'
programs in universities. Working in pairs (or triads) helps individuals
find their voice, and also helps them internalize information, turning it
from something that happens in the external world, to something that is
relevant to 'me'; Individuals become involved, rather than passive
observers, are better able to make sense of what is happening, and better
able to commit to the process at hand.



Such contact and involvement can also be threatening in some contexts. For
example, getting 'hard-nosed' managers to tell 'stories' to each other may
be difficult as they defend against the possibility of exposure when they
may have built a career on impression management and masking anything that
may be seen as a weakness.



Do you think that such 'defence mechanisms' were operating in your earlier
experience of resistance?



Cheers.



Bryan.



Bryan Kidd, CEO

Thoughtful Leadership. Activate your power to influence!

www.thoughtfulleadership.com 



_______________________________________________
The Appreciative Inquiry Discussion List is hosted by the David Eccles School of Business at the University of Utah. Jack Brittain is the list administrator. For subscription information, go to:
http://mailman.business.utah.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/ailist