Pattern #92
Pattern Card
Click to enlarge or download Pattern Card.
Buy or Download
To buy or download the complete Wise Democracy Card Deck use the Buy & Download button.
Comments
We invite your participation in evolving this pattern language with us. Use the comment section at the bottom of this page to comment on its contents or to share related ideas and resources.
Whole System in the Conversation
The child takes part in discussing her situation. The more people in the room who are part of her system the better. Credit: Monkey Business Images – Shutterstock
Pattern Heart
Conditions — both desirable and undesirable — are co-created by all the players involved, directly and contextually. To the extent these diverse people, interests and perspectives are brought into creative interaction, wise outcomes can be co-created. So think seriously about who or what else should be part of any given conversation.
Some related patterns: 17 Constraints on Concentrated Power 29 Expanding Situational Curiosity 39 Generative Interactions 43 Healthy Competition/Cooperation Dynamics 60 Out of Many, One 71 Realizing Essential Aspirations 79 Spaces for Dialogue and Collaboration
Whole System in the Conversation – going deeper …
This is an edited version of the video on this page.
The key question here is “Do we have the people we need in order to bring into the conversation all the relevant systemic perspectives and factors we need to consider in order to work through this issue?”
An issue is by definition a conflict of some sort, some topic that involves some people wanting this and others wanting that, and they are arguing over it. The scene or problem exists because everybody is co-creating some piece of it and those pieces don’t fit together.
The whole purpose of conversation in this case is to figure out what to create together, that will actually fit together. We are going from undesirable conditions to desirable conditions, and we are trying to move from a competitive mode to a collaborative mode. (But notice that even competition is co-created! There’s a funny way in which competition is very cooperative: people are creating the competition together!)
We’re trying to create something that we all agree is a good idea. So we need to find out who’s involved in creating the actual conflict and who is around the conflict creating the context for how it unfolds. There are some players and powers that can shape which way the conflict goes, who have to be dealt with by the players who are more directly involved.
Things like the weather and the economy can also be contexts and there may be players involved in such larger factors whom we want to engage. So we want to be thinking in terms of all the different forces that are involved and who is involved with those forces.
Diverse people have diverse interests and some people want this, some people want that. There may be universal needs that everyone shares, but people manifest them in different ways and in different relation to each other. People can say “For me in this situation this need is more important than that need, etc.“ How that plays out is different for everybody and they are all looking at the conflict and possible outcomes from different angles.
So how can we bring all this into creative interaction? If we can do that, then we’ll start covering more of the factors that are involved and will be rearranging the energies in the issue into configurations that will be wiser, that will actually have outcomes that serve everybody.
As you do a conversation, it is important to keep this question in mind: “Who else should be part of it?” You may perceive partway through the process – from what people are saying – that somebody else should be present. So who exactly would that be? And how can you appropriately involve them?
There are various approaches useful for including the right mix of people. But that’s the general idea, that we are getting into co-creativity and we want the whole system involved co-creating something positive here by different parts of the system talking to each other in ways that can take into account what needs to be taken into account to generate positive outcomes.
Video Introduction (5 min)
Examples and Resources
- Future Search
Link-Future Search - Wisdom Council (Civic Council)
Link-Wise Democracy - Consensus Councils
Link-Agree - Deliberative Polling
Link-Paricipedia - Open Space
Link-CII - World Café
Link - Citizen Juries
Link-Wikipedia - Principled Negotiation Link-Wikipedia
- Council of All Beings
Link-Joanna Macy - Circle Forward’s Governance Networks vision – Link
- Open Dialogue (participatory therapy) – site Link, video Link
- Constellations work – Link Link (video)
- Social Presence Theater – Link (videos)
- Warm Data Lab – Link
Future Search brings together dozens of very consciously selected stakeholders to review their shared past and present and to envision a future they can all buy into, and then they split up into working groups to work for that vision. This whole-system conversation lends itself to stakeholders thinking about the future.
Consensus Councils are specifically designed to identify stakeholders who then work through their issues to an agreement on a policy approach to their conflict that can be adopted by legislators. Consensus Councils both identify and provide the context for the stakeholders to work together on their issue.
Open Space and World Café can be used for whole-system work if we consciously bring the full spectrum of stakeholders into the conversation. These are really successful way to engage them in creating new approaches and activities.
Wisdom Councils, Deliberative Polling and Citizen Juries are ways to engage the the whole system of citizens. Deliberative Polling and Citizen Juries also include stakeholder as witnesses, as experts and advocates about various approaches.
Joanna Macy’s Council of All Beings is an interesting one because it’s trying to get all the organisms and the Earth included in the conversation. They are definitely part of most systems and issues, but are seldom included.
I’m happy to, though it could use some cleaning up and I have yet to add a section on obstacles to recovery. It struck me that I could use this Perfect Storm framework to identify the causes, drivers of dysfunction and obstacles that each community partner has in co-creating wellness. For example, for food supply, what are the challenges of growing and getting food to market? What current systems exist that make it challenging to connect community members with good quality food at affordable costs, and what is standing in the way of resolving these issues? Collecting and collating this input from all stakeholders could provide the common ground that unites everyone around the common vision and goal of improving the health and wellbeing of our communities.
I’m really interested in what you do with this approach, Sue. I can imagine it also being useful in the network weaving that’s part of Inclusive Stakeholder Governance and Connecting Nodes of Life Energy – and it might even be an expression of (and resource for) Realizing Essential Aspirations…
Who is involved in creating the conflict is such a large question with respect to wellness or lack thereof and as always, there are multiple layers. The conflicts and needs of individuals are so inextricably linked to the wellness of the community and environment we live in, the quality of the food we eat, the air we breathe and the water we drink as well as the dominating atmosphere. So to restore wellness, all these aspects must be addressed and creating a space where that can happen has been my life’s work for the last four years.
The current approach to wellness is to identify THE thing that is making a person sick so that the corresponding treatment can be prescribed. This condition or symptom equals this drug or treatment. The problem is, there is no one answer and the things that drive dysfunction and obstacles that stand in the way of recovery are never identified or acknowledged. To do so would be to expand the conversation to all the entities involved in co-creating wellness, from doctors and wellness providers, to communities and the food systems we rely on. I created a “Perfect Storm Assessment” that seeks to identify all the components that are contributing to an individual’s health challenges and think focusing a conversation about what is revealed will help answer the question of who else needs to be part of the conversation. I’m also looking forward to hearing more about Barb’s Framework of Involvement tool!
Sue: Can you provide a link to your Perfect Storm Assessment that I/we could check out for inclusion as a resource in both this and the Whole Healing patterns (and possibly others)?
This pattern seems so fundamental! I have a reaction that says “can that be done?” It would be valuable to highlight more specific examples of when/where this has been done well, when a representative mini-public has been well organized. In Ireland, for example, my understanding is that participants were not given any stipends or childcare, limiting those who could participate meaningfully.
Thanks for the suggestion, Rahmin. The current examples listed on this page are mainly offered to demonstrate some of the many varieties of “whole system” and “whole system engagement” that are available to us, not always through a mini-public deliberative microcosm, so hopefully you’ll scan them over to get a sense of that. But any effort to approximate the “whole” can and should involve the questions “Who else should be part of this conversation?” and “What would they need or need to be true in order to participate adequately?” These become increasingly complex as the diversity of participants increases, including disabilities, other languages and cultures, class differences, racial differences, cognitive and learning style differences, etc. – it is basically infinite. In the end, since we want to evolve beyond events to ongoing processes, the key question could be “Who did we miss? Who do we now know we need to try to include?” This is another application of the wisdom principle of doing our educated, discerning best (to include the whole) and then being alert to what Reality tells us about who we missed…
Thanks Tom — I agree with the suggestion to frame this as a north star — not a destination but an aim. That said, examples of that aim well expressed, in various use cases, would still be invaluable.
I believe it can Rahmin. Though a small scale example, I instigated a project called the Eastern Sierra Service Club Alliance in Bishop California which bought the service clubs together around the common goal of being in service to our community. Each club or association had identified community needs and each had solutions, but by coming together, we were able to pool our resources and talents and take on bigger projects. These projects included a schedule of drivers to transport veterans out of the remote area for medical treatments, creating a mentoring program for the high school students and transporting people discharged from the hospital to their homes in the community. Each of these were too big for one group, but together, they were possible.
We started with a handful of groups and a shared goal of tackling the larger issues in the community, organized a social mixer so each group could talk about their specific goals and needs, collated and shared the results and began the projects. Though I left the area three years ago, the alliance is still meeting and to my knowledge, the projects ongoing.
I have facilitated group discussions ranging from one day to one year in which the people who needed to be in the room were not present. The participants could not identify the “whole system” and therefore, their discussions and decisions lacked the information, analysis and synthesis that was needed. I use a Framework of Involvement tool with groups to help them identify and involve those who need to contribute to the conversation.
Barb – thanks! Please give us a link for the Framework of Involvement tool so we can consider it for inclusion in the resources for this pattern.