Friday, June 15, 2012

solving your institutional crises w/presence, "don't know", and "real" networks

Peter Senge, MIT
There is a strong sense for many folk, perhaps most, that our institutions are failing, that no one really knows what to do, and that there is little hope that we can "fix" things "soon enough".   There is also, however, the sense among some folk i bump into, that there are so many "synchonicities" unfolding rapidly now that we appear to be approaching a "tipping point", and that a solution(s) is beginning to manifest from many directions.  


As the Universe would have it, i found "myself" in an  unimaginably unlikely situation two days this week, meeting w/Peter Senge of MIT, the author of the seminal, ground-breaking, "The Fifth Discipline; the Art and Practice of the Learning Organization".  


The Journal of Business Strategy named Peter as one of the 24 people who had the greatest influence on business strategy over the last 100 years.  Peter has lectured extensively throughout the world, translating systems theory into tools for better understanding of economic and organizational change and has worked with leaders in business, education, health care and government. He is is the Founding Chair of the Society for Organizational Learning, a global community of corporations, researchers and consultants committed to "increase our capacity to collectively realize our highest aspirations and productively resolve our differences".  

Peter serendipitously saw "my" interview video from the Towards A Science of Consciousness conference sent by our mutual friend, Jeff Walker.  Peter's takes on that video were very perceptive and he insisted we meet. 


 The Fifth Discipline focuses on group problem solving using systems thinking to convert companies into learning organizations.  The five disciplines represent approaches for developing three core learning capabilities; fostering aspiration, developing reflective conversation and understanding complexity.  


Systems thinking is a broader approach to problem solving, viewing "problems" as parts of an overall system, rather than as just specific events or outcomes (the trees) and ignoring the larger view (the forest).  The systems approach avoids many of the unintended consequences of overlooking the forest.  Generously, a .pdf of The Fifth Discipline is available. 
Systems Thinking


Peter's newer book is "Presence: Human Purpose and the Field of the Future" which focuses on "How would the world change if we learned to access, individually and collectively, our deepest capacity to sense and shape the future?  "Presence" lays out a new approach to change and learning based on the experiences of Peter, C. Otto Scharmer, Joseph Jaworski and Betty Sue Flowers with 150 scientists and social and business entrepreneurs.


"Presence" articulates a way of seeing the world which integrates leading-edge thinking, personal experiences and ancient wisdom to connect us to life more broadly and to open to what is "seeking to emerge".  Developing these capacities accesses a "deeper level of learning" key to creating change that serves the whole; ourselves, our organizations and our world.
Otto Scharmer, MIT


Strongly recommend "Presence"; my copy is highlighted, underlined and dog-eared.  (i like "real" books).  The core approach outlined in "Presence" is C. Otto Scharmer's "U" theory.  Otto is also at MIT and is the founding chair of the Presencing Institute


OK, you say, so what does that have to do w/meditation?


Well, these really smart guys recognized that we normally solve problems in institutions, big and small, by a repetitive, well-worn process, called "reactive learning".  we use old mental models, lay out a plan, and proceed by (re)enacting our old habits.  Thinking and doing are not creative; no real, "big" solutions result.


So they developed a model that engaged a more creative process, one that broke the "reactive learning" model.  They found in working with many groups that there was a different way.  An example was a big issue at a medical center in Germany.  they gathered the key "real network" folk together; "key" meaning not the CEO and his assistants, "real network" folk meaning the emergency room nurses, the EMTs, the emergency room docs, the ambulance drivers, etc.  These folk had, knew and were the network of how things really happened.  


They discovered that when they got into a really difficult problem with the "real network" folk, sometimes they would reach the point of "don't know".  When someone frankly, honestly, and from their heart, admitted in front of their network peers, "i really don't know how to solve this", everyone realized that they, too, "didn't really know" and something happened, and everyone and everything changed.    


A deep silence followed.  After some time, a discussion emerged from a different level, with a different feeling, creativity and synergy.   This energy seemed to be "more" than the group had experienced before; it felt like this was an idea that was "seeking to emerge" and just needed the stillness and "don't know" to allow it to manifest.


The process was one of three steps: 


a) "sensing" - information relating to the problem was gathered, discussed, and observed with the broadest possible perspective


b)  "presencing" - deep reflection following a "don't know" which allowed a deep, collective, inner stillness to emerge


c)  "realizing" - the creative solution was acted upon, naturally and swiftly in a "flow"


The depth of the process, and the creativity and innovation of the subsequent solution were defined by how complete presencing could be, how deeply meditative and open the group could be, and how still and present they were.


This is where meditative practices come in.  If folk are trained in contemplative practices/meditation, they are able to move more easily into, and are accustomed to, the "don't know" state.  They are able to be present as a group to allow the creative solution that was "seeking to manifest" to occur.    


This process has been used in many different institutions; stages have been developed for specific ways to facilitate the process.  Peter Senge is focused on sustainability, particularly of food, and on education.  Peter has his own deep meditation/contemplative practice.    


Otto Scharmer's book "Theory U: Leading From the Future As It Emerges" gives extensive details; Otto gives an introduction, and a discussion of how we shift to our "source" from which we operate, on youTube - there is a PowerPoint of aspects of this "U" process.


So there is an emerging, well-researched and developed process for fundamental change in institutions of all sizes that relies upon meditation to facilitate its most critical element, presencing.  you might try it when your next organizational crisis manifests.


BTW, Peter Senge has asked me to attend some of his sessions - i will be at the Creative Learning Exchange's Biennial Systems Thinking and Dynamic Modeling Conference in Wellesley, MA from June 30 to July 2 meeting and exploring ideas w/Peter and some of the "master mentors".  Will keep you posted.

2 comments:

  1. Thanks for posting this, Gary. An important issue, and I'll share your post on FB and other media. It's a great development to have one of the world's greatest management gurus looking at more mindful approaches to human communication and problem solving. I have been toying with similar ideas myself for some time, and looking at developing alternative ways to process knowledge and information to avoid the standard pitfalls of confirmation bias and the mind/ego's tendency to take a for/against stance - classic 'debate' - which is what western science and philosophy has been founded on since the days of Socrates.

    One of the problems with intuitive knowledge and insight - besides the obvious issue of reliability - is that the very ways of knowing employed to discuss the issue typically preclude intuitive processes. In other words many academics and scientists - and lay people - can't access the cognitive processes which would allow them to appreciate the problem experientially (as opposed to 'in the head'). Perhaps Peter Senge's method helps circumvent that problem.

    By the way, in Futures Studies, Sohail Inayatullah has developed a layered process for dealing with issues - he calls it Causal Layered Analysis (CLA) - .http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_layered_analysis - It is well worth checking out (see also his www.metafuture.org). He works with many governments and organisations around the world. CLA also creates space for intuitive insight at the fourth level. I have used CLA in many of my own papers. Sohail was my doctoral thesis supervisor, BTW!

    Marcus

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tks for the comment, Marcus. i did c/o CLA - there are similarities w/Senge's process, esp. in the recognition of where the current process fails, i.e. not getting input from the key folk directly involved, not accessing "non traditional" sources/resources (meditation, cultivating what arises from stillness and "don't know", etc.), and not valuing everyone's viewpoint. The worst failure documented in "Presence" was when they had just CEOs in the group; there was no way to get everyone to "don't know". Congrats on having Sohail as your doctoral thesis advisor. stillness.

      Delete