Replying to LO24783 --
Dear Anonymous:
"Rules of engagement" (ROE) have a particularly military meaning however
the phrase has been adopted by many groups or organizations to convey the
notion of boundaries of behavior or interaction. You have indirectly
presented your idea of dialogue based on four ROE.
1. Dialogue is an inquiry.
2. "Cross talk and advice giving" are not permitted.
3. Fruitful silence will be engaged regularly.
4. Participants will not think on their feet, or on their machines but
rather present well articulated thoughts.
Now you have me thinking (hopefully on an acceptable level) and wanting to
inquire about a few things. How do you define "an inquiry"? What is this
"thing?" Does it have characteristics of a "process?" What is "fruitful
silence?" How do you know you have it? Isn't it "normal" for a group to
seek advice and share practical ideas or solutions to problems when they
become more "familiar" with each other? Is there an intangible benefit to
not strictly adhering to "rules of engagement" in an open forum? If an
epiphany exists in an environment when I am "on my feet" or "at my
machine" does that make it of less value to others?
I have my own set of ROE when it comes to facilitated dialogue. Been using
them for years and don't mid if anyone uses the same words.
R - Responsible for self. Don't rely on others to speak your position.
O - Open and honest communication. Direct, without hidden agendas.
P - Participate. Don't just "be there."
E - Evaluate others, NOT. Understanding does not mean changing your view or
tearing others apart.
S - Stay on track. Keep to the dialogue at hand.
These are the "ropes" of facilitation from a participant's view. If you
were to apply these ROE to your current mental model of an inquiry, would
you accept the level of dialogue being server here? Or would these ROE
further support your position that this dialogue is of little if any
value?
>This list does not appear to be an inquiry at all, and certainly not in
>the fashion of dialogue as being created by Bohm, Senge, Isaacs, and
>other leaders. For one thing, "cross talk" and advice giving seem to be
>a regular part of this dialogue. And second, as you certainly have
>noticed yourself, there is no fruitful silence. Third, participants are
>thinking on their feet, or on their machines and not presenting a
>thought.
--"Swan, Steve R. SETA CONTR" <SwanSR@ftknox5-emh3.army.mil>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.