What you think changes how you act.
A while back, I was leading a group of teens in an exercise - each person gets five minutes to talk, without interruption, while the other two in the group listen. At first, the kids were horrified "I just listen? What's that? What am I supposed to talk about for five whole minutes . . . . What . . . what . . . what." We did a brief introduction to active listening (maintain eye contact, nod, if you need clarification or more details ask for it, but basically your job is to receive what's being shared) then let the discussion begin. As the conversation began, the kids found it really difficult to both listen and share; a few gave up and didn't try. But, those who engaged, who moved past the discomfort, quickly learned how to listen actively and the shared deeply; they found that being listened to opened them up - they had more to say than they thought possible. As the activity continued, the kids moved deeply into conversation - sharing more deeply than many had done so before. At the end, several participants commented publicly and privately that they'd never had such deep conversations before. This group of kids are exceptionally skilled in online communication and sharing, gifted users of social media, yet unpracticed at face to face sharing. Actual person to person discussion, with all the subtle social cues and messages, is extremely powerful. As leaders, the adults in the room simply created and held social space for the conversation to happen; what people brought determined the quality of the discussion.
As someone who plans and leads meetings all the time, the role I inhabit determines how I plan and lead the meeting. If I think of myself as the "presider" I act differently than if I am the convener, the facilitator or the host.
The Art of Hosting is, simply stated, a way of reconceiving the role of meeting leader. I'm not a presider or facilitator, I'm the host - I create and hold the social space in which the meeting occurs. Like a good host, I prepare the space in which we gather, I plan the menu, I think about the events of the gathering but I leave it open enough that my guests can shape the evening.
I've discussed the four core methods of Art of Hosting - Circle Practice, Open Space, World Cafe and Appreciative Inquiry. Each of these methods has its strengths and weaknesses, each works in its own ways and places and none is right for every setting. These methods all place a high value on face to face conversation. There's a tendency to think we can use online gatherings and discussions or conference calls in place of face to face hosting. These means of meeting have their place and value but cannot replace the person to person. In my experience with the teens, actually seeing some, hearing their voice, watching their expression and body language deepens the meaning of the actual words. Using online fora to explore ideas, check facts, even share personal stories has value, but cannot replace the in person experience. For all our technological wonders, we are at the end of the day just very clever monkeys who need each other.
Most practitioners mix and match specific methods - a gathering might open with Circle, move to Appreciative interviews then end with Open Space or might begin with World Cafe, then move to Open Space and then close in Circle. There's neither orthodoxy nor orthopraxis. The primary rules are what will work for your group and what you can comfortably host.
The history is surprising. Early efforts were all about process - how do we do faster and more efficiently and more effectively. Ideas evolved as people began to realize the limitations of production oriented approaches. People began to recognize relationships mattered and that whole systems were crucial. Earlier practitioners innovated by broadening the conversation from "OD" (organizational development) to engaging the whole system. Today's practitioners are moving forward by deepening the processes, by seeing connections between the processes and by refining various models. Conversation Cafe's, for instance, strike me as a variation on World Cafe - starting in circle, it works in conversation, dialogic rounds. World Cafe dates from the mid-90s while Conversation Cafe arose in 2001. Study Circles - a.k.a. Everyday Democracy - is a another take on Circle practice. Interestingly, though these various methods are part and parcel of social change, some of the strongest resistance comes from the not for profit world where these methods are distrusted because they began in the business world.
The result is that many social organizations that could benefit from Art of Hosting aren't using it - political parties, local advocacy groups, churches, nonprofits, government agencies could all benefit from changing their perspectives and methods. Yet, they cling to older models of organizing their meetings.
The traditional model of meetings is governed by Robert's Rules - a procedural manual hundreds of pages long. My goal is not diminish the importance of Robert's Rules, nor to dismiss the reasons for them, but rather to argue that they do not serve us well today. Even at their best in the hands of skilled and knowledgeable user, the rules provide little leeway for brainstorming, for the creative process of engaging one another in conversation, for meeting complex challenges in creative ways. To be painfully blunt, Robert's Rules work well in a more stable setting than we currently inhabit; no doubt their time will come again, but for now we need to put them aside.
In a stable setting where the challenges aren't complex -where cause and effect are obvious, where the future is relatively predictable, where people generally agree, Robert's Rules work. Yet, when those qualities are absent, Robert's Rules (and other procedural rules like them) become deeply dysfunctional. The minority is able to thwart the majority, actual problem solving becomes bogged down in obscure, transactional disagreements and agreements, solutions even when adopted are wholly unsatisfying to everyone. Simply reaching any sort of compromise is almost impossible. The process itself thwarts rather than aids in solving problems. The system becomes incapable of responding to people's everyday concerns.
The Art of Hosting invites us to think differently about how we come together, how we solve problems, how we engage one another in the social space, and ultimately, invites a different kind of institutional behavior. Art of Hosting - the participatory model and assumptions - moves us into systems level thinking and behavior which better suits solving the systemic, complex problems that are facing us.
Critics of participatory democracy point out that in many cases participatory methods cannot or will not work because people lack basic information necessary to make informed decisions and that such methods can fail because the don't get the right people to the table. In many cases, there are actual experts who have dedicated a lifetime to studying and mastering public policy issues - such individuals should be trusted to use their expertise and knowledge to propose workable solutions. To take a cogent example, someone whose entire career is about studying and understanding the federal budget is in a better position to make recommendations about fixing it than some yahoo off the street who thinks we spend 20% of the federal budget on foreign aid and 15% on PBS and who thinks Medicare isn't a government program. These are valid critiques and I do not dismiss them. Rather, as we prepare participative gatherings, we need to find ways to use experts to educate participants, we need to work harder to get the appropriate people to the table, we need make sure that the necessary information is being communicated. Our job as hosts is to create and hold the social space in which what needs to happen, happens.
The Art of Hosting is the umbrella beneath which we do a better job of meeting one another in the public square.
Cross posted at OneUtah.org