Designing Conversations to Improve Business Theory and Practice

and to Encourage a MoreParticipatory Culture in the Workplace

A presentation by Skip Rowland and Jim Wolford-Ulrich at the annual conference of the International Leadership Association, Nov. 5, 2004

Session Outline

Dialogue as design process and product Courageous Conversations

Definition and conceptual overview Lessons from the field:

Using courageous conversations in the Seattle Public Schools

Skill building in a dialogue ‘practice group’ Using structured dialogue in a business setting Using dialogue to form a learning community Implications for leaders

Q & A / Discussion

Communication Can Be Designed

Organizational members – guided by leaders – can establish norms and protocols for communication

Requires facilitated implementation: assessment / planning skill training / practice measurement / feedback

Intended to complement other forms of communication – not replace them

Purposes served: Divergent thinking Root cause analysis Joint application

development Scenario planning /

rehearse execution Create shared vision Resolve conflict Move beyond impasse Deepen trust Enhance safety and

openness Build community

Design as Process / Product

Design is what leaders do – they create with others preferred social realities

Design processes are guided by vision / purpose / design intention

Design is collaborative: we “co-design” Design – like conversation – has an emergent

quality – we don’t fully know at the outset the outcome we intend

Designs that ‘work’ become ‘design patterns’ that can be adapted and fitted to new situations

Presenter BioEducational Credentials Chapman Univ - B.S. Social

Science Gonzaga Univ - M.S. Management

Science Seattle Univ - Ed.Doc. Educational

Leadership

Professional Experience Entrepreneur – Business Owner Professor of Leadership Studies Global Learner Corporate Executive Government Administrator Race Relations, U.S.A.F. Child and Family Therapist

Courageous Conversations

Use of structured dialogue as an intervention to address racism within Seattle Public Schools.

Transformational Leadership – Leadership model for institutional change.

Culture – Groups with a socially shared meaningful structure.

Institutional Racism – Organizational behavior that systematically subordinates an individual or group.

The C.A.R.E. Package Learning System A model for structured dialogue and courageous conversations

The Human Brain

Left H

emisp

here

Right Hemisphere

MammalianBrain

ReptilianBrain

Preparation of the Imagination:Vision Building

Transformational Communications

Sender

1. Good Ideas

2. Appropriate Language

3. Respect the Receiver

4. Read and Listen

1. Open Mind

2. Read and Listen

3. Decode

4. Respectful Feedback

Bridge of Trust

Feed Forward

Reciprocal flow of influence

Receiver

Interpersonal Gap

Feed Back

Transformational Attitudes

INPUT SOURCES

FIVE SENSES

BEHAVIOR

Family

Friends

Managers

Peers

Media

Hearing

Touch

Taste

Smell

Sight

Self Talk = Inner voiceSelf Image = Self PortraitSelf Esteem = FeelingsSelf Expectation = Beliefs

Filter

Brain

Responsible and Transformational Goals

Goals are targets for the mind!

Reaction

MotivatingAction

Behavior

Able to Respond

MotivatingAction Behavior

Reframing

Judgment

Intention

Appropriateness

Freedom to Design

Reactive Model

Reflective Model

Strategic Effort

Collaborative & Reflective Performance Evaluation

Courageous ConversationPerformance Evaluation

Vision

Communications

Attitudes

Goals

Resources

Effort

Overall Score

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

100%

Additional “Lessons from the Field”

Field notes – Setting 1

Dialogue “practice group” 7+ Training and OD professionals met

monthly over a period of 4 years Format:

Check in Dialogue Check out Debrief

Outcomes

Lessons Learned – Setting 1

Having the ‘form’ (purpose and protocols) and the vocabulary facilitated skill acquisition The ‘debrief’ was an important element that

promoted group learning

After a “critical mass” of participants gained competence in the structured dialogue form, we felt more free to improvise and adapt the form When new members entered the group, it helped to

go back to using the form and protocols

Field notes – Setting 2

High tech, telecom R&D company Fast-paced, action-oriented culture As an outgrowth of a middle-manager

leadership development program, multiple work groups become intentional around ‘learning organization’ skills:

Shared vision Mental models Systems thinking

Personal mastery Team learning Dialogue

HR & learning and development staff formed a ‘community of practice’

Lessons Learned – Setting 2

Expect frustration and a perceived sense of failure / irrelevance at first

Readiness is key Embed the practice of dialogue in

solving real problems Example: two work teams discovering they

were ‘accidental adversaries’ Scatter the seeds widely and water

liberally

Field notes – Setting 3

Teaching masters-level students team learning concepts & skills: Left hand column Ladder of inference Balancing advocacy with inquiry

These became ‘building block’ core competencies for self-leadership and for productive group processes

Lessons Learned – Setting 3

Concepts are relatively easy to understand, but frustratingly difficult to practice, let alone master

Having a shared vocabulary enables peer coaching, feedback Over time, these skills can be instilled in the culture of

a learning community / cohort Modeling the skills (e.g., by faculty) is essential

These are core “self-leadership” competencies and form the basis for a transforming leadership practice as described by Quinn, Kegan, and others

Courageous ConversationsReflective Exercise

Pair off in twos. Write the words “Black” and “White” on your

pads. Write down under each word the emotions

you associate with that word. Summarize your findings. Report out to the large group.

Implications for Leaders

Important conversations can and should be designed “Producing intentional change is facilitated by

intentional communication” (Ford & Ford). Change happens in dialogue

Conversation is not merely planning for change that will occur later.

Dialogue and collaborative inquiry promote generative learning Dialogue enables followers to do the ‘adaptive work’

leadership requires (Heifetz).

Guidelines for Action*

Create space for dialogue and conversation

Generate awareness, cultivate skills Build in continuous feedback

For example, by using facilitators & mentors, providing open forums, and encouraging reflection

Create individual and collective scenarios for desired futures

Trust the process

*Adapted from Kurt April (1999) in Leadership & Organization Development Journal

Your thoughts and questions?

Thank You!

Presenter Contact Info

Skip Rowland, Ed.D.

Professor of Leadership & Management Sciences

Antioch University

2326 Sixth Ave.

Seattle, WA 98121

P: 253.839.6321

C: 206.227.7215

E: skip@bannercross.com

Jim Wolford-Ulrich, Ph.D.

Team Leader, Leadership Faculty

School of Leadership & Professional Advancement

Duquesne University

600 Forbes Avenue

Pittsburgh, PA 15282

P: 412.396.1640

F: 412.396.4711

E: ulrich@duq.edu

References

April, K. A. (1999). Leading through communication, conversation and dialogue. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 20(5), 231ff.

Ford, J. D., & Ford, L. W. (1995). The role of conversations in producing intentional change in organizations. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 541ff.

Whyte, D. (2004). Five conversations on the frontiers of leadership. Leader to Leader 33, 20-24.

Additional Slides

The Ladder of Inference

Adopt

Make

Reach

Add

Start With

Beliefs & Assumptions

Inferences

Conclusions

Personal/Cultural Meaning

Observable Data

Dialogue & Mental Models

“We are coming to believe that this ‘slip ‘twixt cup and lip’ stems, not from weak intentions, wavering will, or even non-systemic understanding, but from mental models. More specifically, new insights fail to get put into practice because they conflict with deeply held internal images of how the world works, images that limit us to familiar ways of thinking and acting.”

Peter Senge, The Fifth Discipline

Left Hand Column Exercise

What I’m Thinking

(or Feeling)

What Is Said

“Tacit Assumptions Which Govern our Conversation and Contribute to Blocking our Purpose in Real Life Situations”

The Left Hand Column (LHC)

What led me to think and feel this way? What was my intention? Did I achieve the results? How? How did my comments contribute to the difficulties? Why didn’t I share my left hand column? What assumptions am I making about others? What is the cost of operating this way? What was the other person’s LHC?

Note: Some LHC thoughts should stay hidden!

Advocacy / Inquiry Protocols Improve Advocacy

Make your thinking process visible Publicly test your conclusions and assumptions Walk up the ladder slowly

Improve Inquiry Ask others to make their thinking visible Use unaggressive language Compare your assumptions to theirs Gently walk others down your ladder

Intentional Dialogue Principle 1

Suspend Judgment Avoid categorizing people based on

their ideas. Avoid jumping to conclusions. Question your own assumptions.

Intentional Dialogue Principle 2

Speak from Awareness Be aware of others around you. Listen intently to what is said and what

is not said. Be aware of yourself and how you are

feeling. Speak from personal experience. Speak when moved -- not just to

break a silence.

Intentional Dialogue Principle 3

Hold the Space for Difference Be slow to respond to others' ideas. Entertain multiple views of reality. Accept that others don't see reality the

way you do.

Intentional Dialogue Principle 4

Speak to the Center Disassociate what is said from who

said it (and from what his or her position in the organization is).

Respond to ideas, not to people. Honor the collective mind.

Intentional Dialogue Principle 5Balance Advocacy and Inquiry

Share your left hand column. Make your thinking process visible.

Walk others up your ladder of inference slowly.

Publicly test your conclusions and assumptions.

Ask as well as tell. Invite others to slowly walk you down their ladder of inference.

It’s okay to wonder out loud.

The “Check In” Process

What is a “check-in”? How does it work? Everyone (in no special sequence) says something about “where

they’re at” -- then says “I’m in.” Members speak when they feel moved, not merely to fill the silence

between others’ talking. Comments are fairly brief and may be about their personal life, things

they are excited about, potential distractions, or just how they feel at the moment -- whether ‘good’ or ‘bad.’

The check-in is not intended to be a comprehensive summary of everything that has happened to the speaker since the group last met!

Others accept whatever is said -- without commenting, responding or taking responsibility for how others are feeling. Whatever is – just is.

Other members acknowledge each person’s presence with a “Welcome!” or “Thank you!”

Benefits of the “Check-In”

The “check-in” may appear to be an artificial group ritual. Here’s the substance behind it:

Encourages participation Symbolically gives everyone a voice Reinforces a climate of safety, since whatever is said is accepted Helps each participant become more aware of his or her own inner

states and feelings and how they may be affecting their participation in the group

Helps each person be present and focused on the here and now Encourages people to speak personally (e.g., by using “I statements”)

and thus to take responsibility for their own feelings and actions

The “Check Out” Process

What is a “check-out”? How does it work? A “Check-out” is often used to conclude a conversation, meeting or series

of meetings that was opened with a “check-in.” Everyone (in no special sequence) says something about “where they’re at”

after – and as a result of – the conversation(s) they’ve just experienced. The traditional closing words are “I’m out.”

Members speak when they feel moved, not merely to fill the silence between others’ talking.

Comments are fairly brief and reflect how they feel at the moment: Members share a key insight they gained, a fear they have about going

back to ‘reality,’ a word of appreciation, or any other thoughts or feelings -- whether ‘good’ or ‘bad.’

Others accept whatever is said -- without commenting, responding or taking responsibility for how others are feeling. Whatever is – just is.

Rationale for the “Check-Out”

The “check-out” is a useful conversational form for several reasons: Meets a psychological need people have for closure. Reinforces a safe communication climate, since whatever is said is accepted.

Members will be more likely to participate in the group in the future if they experience that their thoughts and ideas are accepted.

The discipline of a check-out maintains the integrity of the conversation(s) which precede it.

Like bookends which keep a row of books upright, the check-in and check-out encourage participants to keep their conversation focused, intentional and purposeful.

Note: a check-out may be followed by a ‘debrief,’ in which participants comment on how well they kept the form of the check-in, meeting or dialogue, and/or check-out.

Reflections about how well group members performed in any of these relative to their stated purpose belong in a debrief, not the check-out.

Five Courageous Conversations We Need to Have*

We need to have the conversation we’re not having . . .

1. with the unknown future - what lies over the horizon

2. with a present customer, a patient, a vendor, who all represent the future as it's lapping up against the side of our organization

3. between different divisions of the organization

4. in our work group, among our colleagues - people we see every day, or people we e-mail or talk to on our cell phone every day

5. with that tricky moveable frontier called ourself

Source: David Whyte in Leader to Leader (Summer 2004)

Types of Conversations

The ‘what happened?’ conversation

The ‘feelings’ conversation

The ‘identity’ conversation

Source: Stone, Patton, Heen & Fisher. (1999). Difficult Conversations: How to Discuss what Matters Most

Conversations for Initiating Understanding Performance Closure

Source: Ford & Ford. (1995, July). The Academy of Management Review.