Difference between revisions of "Integrating statement leaps forward"
(Zeroth version.) |
m (Typo.) |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Oyster | {{Oyster | ||
|goal=move on after a near complete spectrum of views on the table | |goal=move on after a near complete spectrum of views is on the table | ||
|stage=Sparkle | |stage=Sparkle | ||
|theme=Don’t just do something | |theme=Don’t just do something | ||
|context=during {{p|allies experience differences}} people start recycling earlier statements which usually indicates that a spectrum of views is now on the table. No one has more to add. To move one, all the group needs is an integrating statement. | |context=during {{p|allies experience differences}} people start recycling earlier statements which usually indicates that a spectrum of views is now on the table. No one has more to add. To move one, all the group needs is an integrating statement. | ||
|wish=Progress when the time is right and calls out for the next step. | |||
|wish full=You want to progress when the time is right and calls out for the next step. | |||
|background=Forces: | |background=Forces: | ||
*Polarized groups often get stuck in tense “either/or” conversations. An integrating statement takes the form of a “both/and” comment, recognizing that each side of a polarity has validity. | *Polarized groups often get stuck in tense “either/or” conversations. An integrating statement takes the form of a “both/and” comment, recognizing that each side of a polarity has validity. | ||
*When you wait long enough for a dialogue to run its course, | *When you wait long enough for a dialogue to run its course, some group member will nearly always volunteer an integrating statement. | ||
|therefore full=Discipline to just stand there when you notice that the flock is circling around earlier statements to create space for anyone to speak up and utter a integrative both-and statement. | |||
|new=Fortunately, you will find many natural integrators in groups. | |||
This will shift the energy in the room towards closure and action-orientation. | |||
Suppose no one comes forward? Well, in a pinch, you can always state the obvious. “We hear two points of view, A and B. What would you like to do with these?” | |||
When all else fails, consult group members on what they want to do. | |||
}} | }} | ||
==Sources== | ==Sources== | ||
*{{djdsst}} | *{{djdsst}} | ||
Latest revision as of 16:45, 22 March 2014
…during allies experience differences people start recycling earlier statements which usually indicates that a spectrum of views is now on the table. No one has more to add. To move one, all the group needs is an integrating statement.
✣ ✣ ✣
You want to progress when the time is right and calls out for the next step.
Forces:
- Polarized groups often get stuck in tense “either/or” conversations. An integrating statement takes the form of a “both/and” comment, recognizing that each side of a polarity has validity.
- When you wait long enough for a dialogue to run its course, some group member will nearly always volunteer an integrating statement.
Therefore:
Discipline to just stand there when you notice that the flock is circling around earlier statements to create space for anyone to speak up and utter a integrative both-and statement.
✣ ✣ ✣
Fortunately, you will find many natural integrators in groups. This will shift the energy in the room towards closure and action-orientation.
Suppose no one comes forward? Well, in a pinch, you can always state the obvious. “We hear two points of view, A and B. What would you like to do with these?”
When all else fails, consult group members on what they want to do.
✣ ✣ ✣
Sources
- Don’t just do something, stand there!—Ten Principles for Leading Meetings That Matter by Marvin Weisbord, Sandra Janoff