Taking it all in...

Well, as my efforts at being humble go into overdrive, I've had the chance to think over a whole lot of things. All the same, I've had a whole bunch of 'not-so-humble' issues come to mind since the morning...

What is the change that I expect to see? Will I recognise it when it comes about? What if it doesn't look like what I expected? Is it already happening?

This is probably where I need the most grounding. I am a dreamer. I tend to get carried away with fantastic images of these flexible, light, dynamic and evolving organisations that are continuously shifting shape with highly porous boundaries but gradually organising themselves around a set of core values - such as equality, truth, mutual respect and tolerance, environmental sustainability, inclusiveness... and so on... I can further concretise this in specific contexts - and talk about groups of people who work creatively together, calling forth new realities through their interactions, nurturing linkages and relationships and bringing about an integral development process. But this is all too abstract.

I envision knowledge-holders from various fields, levels and backgrounds, sitting together and co-creating projects based on synergy and integration that help to refine, realise and replicate the values that they hold. Still too abstract? I hope to see units sitting together and talking about how they can work together to achieve common outcomes, involving the community in this process, helping them articulate their own values and visions, and then actually working together to help make these values and visions a reality.

I would not like to see separate units planning independently and expecting people on the next rung down to figure out how to coordinate things themselves.

Perhaps I will get a chance to see the extent to which this happens sooner than I imagine. Will these ideas form part of the discussions that follow the presentations of the 2nd and 3rd of June?

If there are underlying dynamics at work that need to be broken, how do I do it? What are my stealth tactics? Should I be measuring changes in relationships? At what speed do these relationships change? How do I measure this?

There is little doubt in my mind that there are underlying dynamics at work that need to be broken. The whole atmosphere gives off this feeling. There is a constant battle against negativity that has to be fought! This is not how it should be! But what are these dynamics?

To what extent do they emanate from people's own limitations and to what extent do they emerge from oppressive power structures within the organisation? And, perhaps more meaningfully, what is the equation between these two things? I am not completely sure that I can ever understand the totality of these dynamics - there are too many perspectives on this to end up with a really objective picture. And this is what leads me to think in categories like 'quality of relationships' or 'target versus social change'... 'Who talks?' is another big one...

And what are stealth tactics anyway? My understanding of stealth tactics is this: if i apply a model that exists within my mind without explaining to people what the model is (because I know that doing so would freak them out), then I am using stealth tactics. An example would be applying outcome mapping without actually ever using the words 'outcome mapping'. This can also back fire: trying to apply an open-space or spontaneous approach seems to terrify people who are more used to feeling in control of things. Knowing when to do what seems critical - all part of the learning process no doubt!

As for changing relationships... I feel pretty confident that this is the heart of what I am doing over here. A system can only truly be said to have changed when the nature of the relationships that define that system change. Is this too 'out there'? Is it too simplistic? Either way, I am quite convinced of it. What if one person changes their behaviour without being able to influence the behaviour of others in a way that could be said to amount to 'changing the behaviour of the system'? Well, it may seem nice but if it's not effective then it's really rather insignificant, which reminds of something I said somewhere: if a conversation doesn't translate into new action then it might as well not have happened! Rather extreme, but to the point! So obviously, I should be on the look out for these changes. Perhaps I need some categories for measuring them? Things like, did the zone worker argue their point in front of a senior? Did the zone worker question a strategy or activity? Did the zone worker challenge the way a decision was made? Did the zone worker get recognition (or were they considered to be just prattling nonsense?)... Something for me to work on, no doubt!

And so...

And so, all this leads me on to the topic of visions. Where are the visions? As I wrote a little earlier, I am a dreamer. I think - pretty much - in terms of visions. Without a vision, I wouldn't know why I am doing what I am doing. I wouldn't know how to even go about the task of thinking about how to go about the task of realising my vision if I didn't have a vision! I would be immobilised. But people don't seem to dream or imagine things on a very large scale. They don't seem to be hunting for that integral vision where all things are interlinked and working in synergy and people are open-minded and cooperative. There appears to be an inbuilt change negator at work! Why is this and how can it be broken?

Well, there is plenty for me to keep busy with. It's good to have gotten this off my chest for the day :)