In a discussion underway on the Transforming Transformation Discussion Forum entitled “Copenhagen Summit Generates Hot Air?” this framework was posted December 8.
Making Sense of Copenhagen Summit
(and other large group work events)
After numerous years of attending many conferences and other large group work sessions (physical and digital realms) we created the following framework that we use to make sense of what typically goes on and to help us think about what might be done to positively impact future sessions, what remains to be created, etc. One positive aspect of the change making business is that it allows one to encounter, engage and look across many disciplines, many industries, many geographies and many events. In this viewing we see a lot of repeating patterns and issues impacting transformation.
INNOVATION DYNAMICS TOP FORTY
Humantific’s top forty reasons why most large group meetings, work sessions, working conferences produce little other than feel good vibes.
1. Vastly different, unarticulated, unaligned expectations among participants.
2. Lack of awareness that many types of dialogue exist.
3. Lack of acknowledgement regarding what the default dialogue mode is.
4. Disconnect between (serious significant) expected outcomes and (tea party-like) processes.
5. Lack of acknowledgement that the scale of challenges facing us has changed.
6. Lack of acknowledgement that few adults in the mix presently have been educated at high levels in cross-disciplinary work skills.
7. Lack of awareness that content knowledge is not process knowledge.
8. Deeply engrained academic value system based on argument dialogue dynamics.
9. Lack of appropriate content knowledge among participants.
10. Lack of adaptable process knowledge among participants.
11. Lack of adaptable process mastery among session organizers and leaders.
12. Lack of common change making language.
13. Acting out of bad behaviors learned in previous eras.
14. Dialogue filled with tribal acronyms.
15. Habitual reliance and overemphasis on judgment/convergent thinking.
16. Lack of ownership of challenges among participants.
17. Lack of trust among participants.
18. Competitive marketplace forces (includes schools).
19. Assumptions that participants are all using the same cognitive processes.
20. Over-reliance on words, no visual sensemaking present.
21. Fear of looking dumb among participant colleagues.
22. Over emphasis on portfolio presentation of preconceived solutions.
23. Little upstream navigation awareness present.
24. Lack of awareness that sustainability is a type of challenge (content) not an innovation (problem solving) process.
25. Lack of awareness regarding the messiness of human cognition.
26. Inattention to the cognitive aspects of the psychical work-space.
27. Blank slate phenomenon, no acceleration research materials present.
28. Assumption that technology equals innovation.
29. Assumption that with technology present no process or process skills are needed.
30. Importation of conflict oriented online interaction dynamics.
31. Assumption that observing (lurking) is constructive participation.
32. Over reliance on feel-good ego-based (emergent) chat dialogue rather than on outcomes.
33. Resistance to learning by adult participants.
34. Lack of acknowledgement that new learning is needed.
35. Lets wait until they fail and then return to the default mode approach.
36. Lack of appropriately scaled and designed integrative thinking tools.
37. Challenge overload and fatigue among participants.
38. Constant churn, session activity overload.
39. Assumption that simply putting diverse minds in proximity to each other creates innovation.
40. Assumption that broadcast mode equals cocreation mode.
Humans are amazingly adaptable creatures. Never-the-less we try to imagine a time and place when skills and tools are better synced to the challenges facing us.
You can read more about the Transforming Transformation Discussion Forum on Facebook.
Time is up – the deadline is Copenhagen
Copenhagen summit: How climate change will shape these lives