Purpose and Principles: (7)The group seemed to cohere around the principles of openness, sharing among peers and some form of outreach to the community locally and, later, globally with the purpose of creating strategic scenarios directed at solving key dilemmas emerging from the economic and environmental crises we are facing.
Tools and Technology:(2)
Although the meeting room was "decorated" with informative graphics in the form of wall-mounted posters and several large visual displays, the technology used for the meeting was low tech consisting of whiteboards and some handwritten artifacts from previous meetings of Doug's Continuing the Conversation salons.
The best use of the whiteboards was an expansive scribing by Jerry which, in my view summarized the conversations and his views succinctly and usefully. I recommend the sharing of any digital photos of the whiteboard, along with the group photo posed in front of it. If anyone has a desire to do so, it might be useful to render Jerry's free form sketch in a more pleasing way.
IMO it synthesized our conversation and the vectors out of it that we might follow. The whiteboard furnished was flimsy and difficult for Jerry to use- but his scribing was a key visual artifact of our discussion.
Questions that Matter:(2)
I may be alone in making this observation, but I did not feel that we had been sufficiently prepared to ask the questions that matter, or that there was a randomness to the questions that emerged from the group that did not seem to lead to ones of great moment.
Learning conversations:(5)
The initial introductions created a tapestry of diversity and togetherness which all of us felt was remarkable given the informal and personal way in which this introductory phase proceeded. Everyone seemed to be pleased with how well we seemed to connect with each other and the stories told by each provided a quick in-depth profile of each participant comfortably shared with the group.
Knowledge Capital:(1)
Knowledge capital is difficult to define, but in my eyes it is the group contribution to a dynamic knowledge repository that can be shared with others and form the basis for future conversations. Here again Jerry's sketches on the whiteboard would count as useful components of our collective intelligence if they are rendered in a clearer way that can join the archives of the material that was displayed on the walls from prior meetings or individual contributions.
Business Value:(1)
There was a sidebar of potential interest in leveraging the RGI space to be used for revenue-generating group workshops. No specifics were identified. TBD.
Process: In general, the self-introduction part of the event was the most exciting, diverse and informative part with everyone concluding concurrently about how many common threads emerged in the tapestry we were weaving openly in sequence as we told a brief story about ourselves.
The RGI facility tour opened our eyes to some of the possibilities of the infrastructure and the physical spaces might have for our mutual use and benefit.
The hospitality was very warm and welcoming and the upstairs space was nicely fitted out with illustrations of relevance to what had happened in the space before, in the form of timelines, and graphics extracted from the Silicon Valley index and printed as posters for wall hanging.
There was a minimal nod to context setting, but none done prior to the event, and thus not shared with the group beforehand. The wall-hung graphics were visually pleasing and worth a glance, but IMO they did not enter into the conversation in any recognizable way.
Looking at the Cafe Design principles( see image below) which I shared with group by blog post the day before the meeting, I would say that we didn't achieve the goal of " Integrating a set of design principles for hosting conversations that matter" unless the design was hidden, and dealt out by Doug in his meeting orchestration.
Two key ideas that came out of the group:
1. Think with a beginner's mind
2. Consider "dramatizing" the conversation with each member acting a role and taking responsibility for rehearsing and delivering it in a group "theatre-like" performance. IMO this requires preparation before the event - although many of the group could probably do a great job of "improv" we didn't "take the stage" as it were - so if we are to use this approach it will need more preparation by some or all of the participants.
Summary comment: It was a fun session, sparked by the remarkably diverse personalities of the participants, with an outcome that each person felt it worth continuing the conversation.
1 comment:
Thanks Dave for the reflections.
The meeting was meant to be a very preliminary conversation among peers, with no intent to prepare or technologize the conversation.
Post a Comment