Tolerance is Insufficient

February 3, 2017Kathy Jourdain 1 Comment

It is not enough to tolerate something or someone. We cannot tolerate each other into connection, understanding or belonging. We will not tolerate our issues, concerns and challenges into progress or tolerate our way into finding paths forward on issues that matter to us all.

Say or think the word. Feel into it. Roll it around in your mind or on your tongue. Feel the energy of it. Tolerance is not generous or expansive. It is elitist. It suggests, I’ll put up with you or with your opinion even if I think it is wrong or misguided — because — I’m tolerant?

Medical definitions of tolerance are about the capacity to endure pain or hardship; it is about endurance, fortitude, stamina. How long can I hold out? How much do I have to put up with?

Eventually the veneer of tolerance cracks. We give in or give up. Whatever causes us to be dismissive of other views or another person’s experience as if it was not valid, also causes us to go from tolerance to annoyance to frustration to anxiety to fear and even to hate. It causes us to justify our own sense of superiority, experience, knowledge – the reasons my beliefs, my values, my faith are true. I am right. You are something less than right all the way to completely wrong.

Candle Light Vigil and Halifax Grand Parade post the Quebec City Mosque Killings – connecting to share sorrow and grief with others

So, if tolerance is insufficient to find ways forward, what do we need? The capacity to suspend judgment. To be genuinely curious about another person, their experiences and how they have come to see the world the way they have. To bring humility and generosity to truly engage in a conversation of discovery. To honour not just the other person’s perspective but also our own and any number of other ones that might exist.

From a point of connection, we can explore differences and discover the vibrancy that exists in another person’s experiences. From understanding we can empathize with each other and discover the humanity that exists in each of us. From these we can create places and spaces of belonging. This causes us to move past the fear that holds us in the place of tolerance that often becomes intolerance.

Participants from the United Tribes Technical College and the North Dakota State University meeting each other in worldview explorations in support of hosting community conversations about Standing Rock, the pipeline and racism. Jan 2017

This is essentially the work and result of Worldview Intelligence and the explorations invited – whether personal, cultural, organizational or about a social system. Everywhere we go we hear, we really need this right now. It is why we care deeply about this work, why it is our life passion. Building connection in an increasingly fragmented and polarized world. Generating understanding in a time when the impulse is to cocoon away from the world and protect ourselves from “the other”. Because tolerance is not enough. Because true compassion and understanding requires meeting someone else in their experience.

The shortest distance between two people is a story. Can you be available to hear someone else’s story and share your own?

It Is the Multiplicity of Stories That Shape Who We Are – Individually and Collectively – And It Is Time To Invite Them All Now

December 28, 2016December 28, 2016Kathy Jourdain 1 Comment

Stories matter. Many stories matter. Stories are how we make sense of our experiences. For each of us individually we have a multitude of stories. We know this and yet, it is easy to default to a single story when we think of another culture, another region, another country or even another political party – as is the current danger in many countries including the US. This leads us to more fragmentation and polarization and makes it harder to be open to the complexities that are true of any individual, culture, region or country.

Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie

In her July 2009 TED talk, The Danger of a Single Story, Nigerian author and story teller Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, offers that stories have been used to dispossess and to malign. They can be used to empower and to humanize. They have been used to break a people and they can be used to restore dignity.

A single story robs people of their dignity, it makes recognition of equal humanity difficult and it emphasizes how we are different rather than how we are similar. Some of our greatest learning comes from people the least like us.

For each of us, an impression will arrive in a nano-second at the consideration of any of these words (or others): America, Canada, France, Europe, Africa, man, woman, child, immigrant, refugee, Brexit. The lines that enter our heads are often of a single story, easily and quickly told. And this single story does not capture the whole of the story. Ngozi Adichie speaks of how she bristles when people describe Africa as a country. It is not a country. It is a continent full of countries. There is not one singular African experience, just like there is not one singular American or Canadian or European experience.

She also shares how we significantly change the story depending on what we identify as the starting point. When we start the story at “secondly”, as in, when we start the story with the arrows of the Native Americans not with the arrival of the Europeans, we have an entirely different story. When the story starts with the failures of the African States and not with the colonialization of the African States, we have an entirely different story. Starting point matters.

Focusing on negative stories flattens the experience of individuals, cultures and countries. It ignores the totality of the things that have shaped them. A single story is not untrue, but it is not complete.

Power lies with the people who tell the story about another. Showing a people as a single story creates a power imbalance that can only be brought back into balance by sharing and examining the multiplicity of stories that are also true – the “ands” rather than the either/or’s. And, different versions of the same story is not a multitude of stories.

Worldview Intelligence asks that we invite a multiplicity of stories to exist in the same space. One story does not negate another story – individually, culturally, region wise, in a country. The many stories make visible the interweave of all that is true, of all that influences how someone, or a culture, has come to see and experience the world the way they do.

It is only in opening up our willingness to see this multitude of stories that we will learn from each other, connect with each other and find ways forward that do not currently seem to exist.

In the words of a very good friend and colleague, Lemoine Lapointe, “we have forgotten how to visit with each other.” It is time to visit again with our neighbours with curiosity, compassion and an open mind, open heart and open spirit – not to negate our own worldview or even to change it, but to allow for an expansion that leads to the possibilities of the very different experiences that have shaped we are – individually and collectively – today.

Not On My Watch, Although I Am Still Deep In Shock

December 26, 2016Kathy Jourdain 7 Comments

It’s been seven weeks since the American election and I, like so many people I know, am still in shock. I find myself going through the motions of my life, living into the moments as they appear while at the same time there is a niggling little curiosity that tugs at the corners of my mind. Is this what it was like in pre-war (pick any time period) Germany, France, Austria and so many other countries? Were there people who wondered at the inanity of it all, who feared for the future, who could see disaster lurking around the corner and felt powerless to stop it? Did they think the things my mind turns to as I wonder what the future will hold? As on a daily basis there are choices made that seem incredulous? Like all the cabinet picks who couldn’t be more opposite than the intent of the portfolios they’ve been assigned to or the focus of the President elect’s tweets as he seems intent on not actually running the country he is not qualified to run in the first place. Glibly uncaring about the impact of his actions, behaviours and words.

On the one hand it seems laughable. Until I pause and think about the possible ramifications of it all. Which then has me, in the back of my mind, wondering with each normal activity, with each dinner, with each celebration I am part of, how close to the brink of disaster, or even planet wide annihilation, are we? And do I even want to know? The whole idea is not that far-fetched. Not as far-fetched as it may have seemed six months ago.

‘I wish it need not have happened in my time’, said Frodo.

‘So do I’, said Gandalf, ‘and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us. And already, Frodo, our time is beginning to look bleak. The Enemy is fast becoming very strong. His plans are far from ripe, I think, but they are ripening. We shall be hard put to it. We should be very hard put to it, even if it were not for this dreadful chance…”

This is how I feel. Like I am about to witness an age I did not imagine possible in my lifetime. And I wonder what my role in this time will be, what the role of my children will be, what the role of all brave hobbits will be, as events unfold.

I struggle to know what well-informed means these days given the propensity of fake news, my knowledge of how our worldviews influence the information we pay attention to and how social media creates bubbles of like minded, like values people. I am drawn to read articles in my desire to understand and to look for any rays of hope. Some days I just want to shut it all off – like two decades ago when I stopped watching the news with any regularity and stopped subscribing to the newspaper. Those days you could watch a news story or read an article and maybe you chatted to the people you lived with or were next to and that was mostly the end of the story.

With social media, our “news” and our social connection are entwined. A news story gets shared with all our social media friends, it doesn’t stop at the breakfast table. Turning off the news now also means, for many of us, disconnecting from social networks that are also life affirming for me and for many of us. And we have the opportunity to connect dots thanks to social media – an opportunity not available in the same way in previous eras. I am haunted by the thought, will we just notice what is happening or will we find ways to stand up to our own values, our own personal integrity? Will we keep finding the moments to be courageous and keep shining the light – we need this now as much or more as in any previous moment.

So much of what I read only fuels the uncertainty and anxiety I feel about the future. Looking for those stories that give me hope can almost seem like such a small drop in the bucket, to be almost futile. Almost. And yet, since I do not have influence in the political systems of power, what can I do and what can I influence? What can you do? What can you influence?

Look close to home. Hold loved ones close. Keep doing the work you are here to do. Look for opportunities to take a stand. Do not hide. Be a person who champions, supports and advocates for those who are more at risk. Learn about how other people see the world, especially those with very different worldviews than your own. Otherwise the danger of increasing fragmentation and polarization grows and it becomes increasingly difficult to find our way. Look for inspiration in all the places you can find it and surround yourself with people who encourage you. Look for and create new systems of influence.

I wish it need not have happened in my time, in this time. But, since it is happening in my time, in our time, we still have choice. Let’s exercise it as often as we can. Let’s keep our eyes open. Let’s stay woke. So in the times to come, we can say, “not on my watch. I did everything in my power to do the right thing, even when it was hard, even when I was challenged, even when I felt powerless, even when I did not know what to do.”

Chaos on the Other Side of Worldview Collisions

November 12, 2016November 17, 2016Kathy Jourdain 3 Comments

On November 9, 2016 we woke up to an upside down world where the impossible was realized and many people, communities and organizations were thrust into chaos. One thing that was increasingly clear throughout the very long US election process is that people became very attached to their worldviews – me and my friends included – and this set the stage for the collision of worldviews in the most visible fervent political and personal exchanges many of us have witnessed.

This showed up in deep attachment to candidates and hostility to anyone who wasn’t that candidate or supporting that candidate. People with varying worldviews were incredulous that others could actually support their candidate of choice. That was expressed in arguments and, increasingly, in attacks on people who supported a different candidate. There was a vehemence in the attacks. It happened amongst friends, calling into question friendships both new and longstanding. It fuelled more vigorous debates and sometimes divides within families. And people found themselves being attacked for their views by others they did not even know. There was more unfriending and blocking in social media than on any previous collision of worldviews (that I am aware of).

If there is anything we know now more than ever, we need spaces where we can be kind, generous, compassionate, generative and creative with each other to find ways forward when issues are challenging and worldviews collide. The work of Worldview Intelligence is advancing and we have created one such space with a new listserve – the WVI Global Forum. This is intended to be a space where we can support each other, ask questions, share resources and collectively imagine a future we all want to live into in. You can search it out and join it in Google Groups.

world-in-heart

While it is still in its infancy, a discussion has already begun there, sparked by a question, “Is it a new worldview we need? Or the original?”

Which sparks another question about what is an original worldview? The answer is, that it is different for everyone. And it could be that we remember a past that is more romanticized than real. Some want the future to be an idealized remembrance of a better past, some want the future to be radically different and many just don’t know and we cannot see the way forward.

Where we get trapped is in believing there is one worldview, one story, one narrative that we either all have lived or we can all agree to. In advocating for that one worldview – which of course would be the one I’m advocating not any of the various others that exist out there – divides deepen. In a Duke Chronicle article Tears and Cheers, Julian Keeley, says these divides are accompanied by growing political animosity to the degree that in some families it is unacceptable to be in relationship with someone from the other party, even in families with a growing acceptance of being in relationship with someone of a different ethnicity. She advocates for familiarity which can lead to empathy and even love.

The work of Worldview Intelligence is to look for the new narratives that will help us all make sense of our experiences individually and collectively. This is not one story but an interweaving of a multiple of narratives until we begin to see the tapestry of these different experiences come alive in the same space. We will not be able to get to that place until we invite ourselves to step back, to take a breath, stop name calling and proliferating information that may or may not be facts. It is not to let go of our worldview or our preferred candidate but to reach out to truly understand why someone who supports another candidate or has a different worldview has come to see the situation or the world the way they do.

So many people are not feeling heard. Shutting them down does not change the way they feel, it only exacerbates it. It doesn’t go away as we have witnessed in this US campaign season. Finding the courage and compassion within ourselves to embark on the quest is part of what is needed to heal the rifts, to step out of our own rhetoric long enough to invite someone else out of theirs, to reach the human being who is acting out of fear, passion, determination and desire for a better life.

We each have our own notions of what that means and how to get there. Even as I write this I feel my own worldview and attachment rise to the surface wanting to be expressed. But I will not come to understand why someone has come to see the issue the way they do if I cannot open the space to listen. After all, it is not about a candidate and all the data we can find to support our point of view. It is about something that is fundamentally important to each of us as individuals, about our sense of identity and the drive to survive in a world that does not make sense to us anymore.

Van Jones has done a brilliant job of reaching out to people, in a video series called #TheMessyTruth which you can find on his Facebook Page, who have very different views than his to try to understand what people are thinking and to create openings along the way for humanity to show up. He does not let go of his worldview. He asks compelling questions and he does not judge the people he talks to.

This is the challenge now for each of us. To reach out to someone whose views we do not understand, not to convince them that the way we see the world is the right way or that our candidate is the right one, but to dig into motivations, fears, desires and find the human beings under the easily spouted rhetoric and “facts” that are not always facts.

I know this is easy for me to say. I am not in danger. There are others who are. Many of my US based friends could well be in danger and I want them to be safe. And some people are more reachable and some less. But we have to start somewhere to change the conversation because the circumstances are already dire and urgent and lives truly are at stake.

As Otto Scharmer said in his Huffington Post article On the Making of Trump and the Blind Spot that Created Him, “We have entered a watershed moment not only here in America, but also globally. It’s a moment that could help us wake up to a deeper level of collective awareness and renewal—or a moment when we could spiral down into chaos, violence, and fascism-like conditions. Whether it’s one or the other depends on our capacity to become aware of our collective blind spot.” He advocates the need to lean in to what wants to emerge—and build architectures of collaboration rather than architectures of separation.

As another person on the WVI Global Forum said, “It is time for a new worldview that will begin with each of us as we journey inward to uncover our stories about who we are and how we are in the world. I am choosing to reach for the spark that is calling me to show up in the world differently. To have compassion, to love, to listen to understand and to be peace.”

If the US election has taught us anything it should surely have taught us that the impossible is possible. So, let’s begin now.

world-thumbprint

Perfectly Broken and Ready to Heal – Robin Youngson

October 15, 2016October 15, 2016Kathy Jourdain 2 Comments

“Every time I demonized those I wanted to influence, I met resistance.” This is the first point Robin Youngson shares in his TEDxTauranga talk: Perfectly Broken and Ready to Heal. “More people started to listen when I dropped judgment.”

Youngson is a physician and senior medical leader, whose journey to transform the patient experience of health care was sparked by a horrific accident his daughter was in that caused her to be in the hospital, immobilized, looking only at the ceiling, for three months. So little stimulation. So little compassion. So little humanizing of a patient.

Meredith and Robin Youngson

It began a quest for him. A radical commitment. To humanize caring in the hospital system. He and his wife, Meredith created a company called Hearts in Health Care and they struggled to create change. His worldview of his work, of patient care or human care, has shifted and expanded in his journey. His work and quest is resonant with the foundational philosophies of our work with Worldview Intelligence.

He and Meredith learned that logic and evidence does not help. The facts will not likely change someone’s mind because people are vested in their own worldviews. Non persuasion was more effective. “I discovered my greatest power was vulnerability,” he says. “It was through vulnerability that we began to open hearts and minds.”

They also discovered that casting themselves as experts on compassion did not work. They were confronted by a group of nurses who said, “I imagine you are here to teach us about what we have only been doing for about 3o years.” That reminded them, “Every doctor and nurse already has a depth of compassion. Our job was to draw it out; to draw out the wisdom and compassion that already existed in the room.”

They moved from a business model to a generosity model, bringing greater alignment between their views and how they are showing up in the world, and have been humbled by the generosity of the world. As an example, his book Time to Care is being translated into many different languages by volunteers.

Hearts in Health Care Lessons Along the Way – Powerful and resonant with much of the Worldview Intelligence work, philosophies and foundational premises

Finally he says, “We discovered that approaching the issues like a pathology only focused people on the problems where they blamed each other. So now we ask better questions, to help people share the very best stories of healing and connection.”

“All the strategies that didn’t work involve separation. All the ones that did work involve connection. The new world we were trying to build was already in the room.”

Youngson offers, “When we fight against what’s wrong we draw up the battle lines.Our protests, fights and campaigns are counterproductive because they serve only to separate us even more.”

Drawing the analogy between patient care and connection to health care, he says, “If I make a compassionate human connection to my patients it boosts their immune system, reduces their stress and pain. It is as powerful as medical treatment. As a doctor I am sometimes confronted by patients who are broken and have no hope. Compassion calls me to sit with them in their darkest hour. When I dare to hold the sacred space I see them crack open and begin to heal.”

“If we can take this gift of brokenness into our hearts we hear the call of compassion and suffer outselves to become more vulnerable, humble and generous. Everything we need is right here, within us.”

He ends with, “Will you receive this gift? It is perfectly broken.” Well, will you?

When We See It, It’s Obvious; Until Then, It’s a Hidden Dynamic

October 1, 2016Kathy Jourdain Leave a comment

When we see it, it’s obvious. Until then, it’s a hidden dynamic. Worldview Intelligence provides many different opportunities to reveal the obvious, making it possible to strategize relationships and communications in ways that move issues of common interest forward, often in new and previously un-thought-of ways.

Each of the Worldview Intelligence explorations – personal, professional, team, organizational, cultural, social systems – provides a window into seeing more of what exists, illuminating patterns, assumptions, belief and value systems in reflective, curious and generative ways. The best way to understand this is through stories. Here we share an example from a health care client we are working with in the United States. It operates in three States with 30,000 employees and is bringing innovation to many areas of its work. One such area is in bringing a team based approach to patient care in their clinics.

In the last year, there have been six clinics in a pilot project led by a team within the organization that is providing the clinics with resources, including evidence based research, leadership development and team cohesion assessments. We were invited to bring Worldview Intelligence to build connections within and across the teams as they were brought altogether for the first time. The impact was revealing and fascinating for all involved.

Shifting the Trust/Risk Dynamics

The co-ordinating team was curious to see if and how we could build enough trust within two days for the teams to become vulnerable enough to share with each other openly and honestly. At the end of Day 1, they weren’t sure they had the answer to that question but by break time the next morning it was clear that the teams were openly sharing successes and challenges and making requests of the co-ordinating team. There was also a demonstrable shift in how members of teams sought each other out to explore new questions at the break and during lunch.

Personal Exploration

How did this happen? The first day focused on the personal worldview exploration including strategies for hosting yourself when your worldview is challenged. While on the surface it didn’t look like much had shifted at the end of the day, it laid a solid foundation for the next day’s exploration related to the social systems of each of the six clinic teams and the co-ordinating team. The personal experience provides an opportunity for people to embody the Worldview Intelligence framework as they gain insight into why they see and experience the world the way they do. The reflection and curiosity that was brought to the personal exploration carried through to subsequent explorations, opening the space for expanded observations, understanding and insights.

Social Systems Mapping

The teams were asked to map their social system and then come back and share what they discovered with the whole group. Social systems mapping is not new, but looking at the mapped systems through the Worldview Intelligence framework is. It has mappers asking different questions to reveal the hidden dynamics and to strategize how to work within and across the system.

Example of a Social System Map

Examples of Social Systems Maps

As the team shared their discoveries, not only were they honest and open, there were surprising collective revelations as the entire group began to see the worldview experiences of each clinic and of the whole. By the time all the presentations were complete, the atmosphere in the room had shifted from a collection of teams to a sense of belonging to something bigger and the conversations and relationships had shifted as people sought each other out to learn more.

Worldview Revelations

What were some of the revelations? In short: the impact of the community as a social system on each clinic, unintended consequences and a question about the role of the co-ordinating team.

Impact of Community on Each Clinic

First of all, each clinic is located in a different community or social system. That social system impacts who comes to the clinic, the unique challenges each clinic must address and it influences how the clinic interacts with its community. Different clinics held assumptions about their environment and how it differed from the other clinics and not all those assumptions held true. A clinic located in a larger center assumed they experienced more diversity than clinics in smaller centers. When they said this in their presentation, the members of another clinic team all smiled or chuckled so we knew something was up. When that team did their presentation they talked about the large newcomer population in their area and how that brought 56 different languages into their work, presenting different challenges depending on access to translation services, understanding of cultural traditions and more. Other influences of the communities on the various clinics included availability of staff to fill positions and outreach.

Unintended Consequences

One of the clinics, located in a larger center, had an ongoing relationship with two other clinics in that area. They had spent over seven years working on building consistency across the three clinics so patients would have a similar experience no matter where they went. Only one clinic is in the pilot project and they shared that this was putting their relationships with the other two clinics at risk because they were now changing their approach to patient care and the other clinics did not have the same context.

Role and Relevance of the Co-ordinating Team

Another revelation of note is that for each of the clinics, as they mapped their system, the co-ordinating team was either not on the map or only there in a peripheral way, whereas for the co-ordinating team the clinics were a significant part of their map. This awareness has the members of the co-ordinating team questioning why this is so and becoming curious about their relevance and role and what they might need to shift to support the clinic teams differently.

Consistent and Responsive Systems and Processes

The exploration pointed to the need for an approach, systems and processes that provide consistency across the clinics while allowing for responsiveness to each of the communities and social systems the clinics are located within. It provided key learnings for the current pilot and for what needs to be taken into account when the next round of clinics is brought on for Phase 2.

It all seems completely obvious as it is revealed but it stays hidden until a process, framework and structure is offered to illuminate the patterns and dynamics in a healthy, constructive way that builds relationships and connections for stronger outcomes. Worldview Intelligence is that approach.

Why Asking Someone to Change How They Work May Not Be as Simple as You Think

September 30, 2016September 30, 2016Kathy Jourdain 3 Comments

It happens all the time in work environments. The organization wants or needs to change – the way it works, delivers service, makes its products, is organized. Often this point is missed: change is not just about the mechanics of what is to be changed, it is about the people. People make up and deliver our systems and processes. Most people say they don’t mind change, but they don’t like being changed. Even when it “makes sense”. Because “makes sense” depends on your perspective.

Anais Nin - We don't see things as they are

When we are looking for efficiencies at work, we are often asking someone – or several someones – to change the way they work. To take on new responsibilities or to give up part of your role. It seems to make sense in the grand scheme of things. It is integral to the change working. If we are leading the change or innovation, when we meet resistance we often don’t understand why. What we are asking often seems like a simple request.

conversation-one-on-one The challenge we meet is that many of us identify with our role. It forms part of our identity. We think we are simply asking people to change the way they work when we might actually be challenging the way they see themselves. We might be challenging their very sense of identity. And when we feel our identity is being challenged or threatened, psychological research tells us that we respond as if our very life is being threatened. Instead of being open to change, we dig in our heels and overtly or covertly resist being changed. We become more attached to our role or our identity.

Worldview Intelligence offers personal explorations that help us understand our own worldview, where it comes from, what influences it, what values and beliefs are fundamental to who we are. It illuminates typical responses, ingrained human patterns, of how we respond to challenges, how we filter information in and out, how our sense of identity shapes our responses, how we become entrenched in our point of view when we feel compelled to defend it. When we can bring curiosity to the exploration we become aware of what is important and why and then we can become conscious of the choices we are making. The very exploration opens up the possibility for each of us to expand our own worldview and be more open to possibility.

For those of us who are responsible for leading change or asking our people to change, understanding that simple requests might have deeper implications allows us to think about how we approach another person or whole department, their role, their work and what is needed to bring about the changes that we need or want rather than becoming frustrated or combative which only serves to make us less effective in our leadership.

Worldview Intelligence Offers an Elegant Structure to Support Powerful Dialogue

September 25, 2016Kathy Jourdain 1 Comment

“Those who say they are ‘dialogued out’ are actually tired of no real discourse.” Daniel Yankelovich

How do we have the conversations needed now in a way that honours differences while transforming them into progress on issues that are of fundamental importance in today’s world?

“I’m Right and You’re An Idiot: The Toxic State of Public Discourse” is the riveting title of a book written by James Hoggan with many contributors. As I have been reading it, the contribution our work with Worldview Intelligence is making is becoming increasingly evident. Worldview Intelligence changes the nature of conversations and public discourse, even – or especially – when the stakes are high and views on issues have become polarized, and we are ready to do more of this work.

In Chapter 1: Like Ships in the Night, contributor Daniel Yankelovich talks about the differences between debate, dialogue and advocacy. He says advocacy is a dominant mode of communication in public discourse right now. It is about trying to sell something or persuade someone that your point of view, position or solution is the correct one, maybe even the only one. This can become an imposition of worldviews where the only one that really “counts” is the advocate’s.

An imposition of a worldview is an act of violence. At a minimum it dismisses or overrides another’s experiences and ideas and shuts down the space and opportunity for many contributions. In the worst case it forces another to live under the rules or worldview of the imposer.

The differences between debate and dialogue are illustrated in the following table. I particularly appreciate the statement that those who say they are ‘dialogued out’ are actually tired of no real discourse. Everyone is talking or even yelling and screaming at each other, but nobody is listening. In particular, it is often people who are part of a dominant worldview who are unable or unwilling to imagine there could exist a very different perspective or that someone else’s experience could be fundamentally different than their own. AND that the differing worldview has value and contributions to offer.

Debate	Dialogue
Assumes we have the right answer	Assumes we all have a piece of the puzzle and can craft a solution together
Is combative	Collaborative
Defends assumptions	Reveals assumptions
Criticizes the views of others	Re-examines all positions, including our own
About seeing weakness in other’s positions or views	About searching for strength and value in others’ concerns
Advocates own views, dismisses views and experiences of others	Willingness to listen, pay attention and suspend judgment
Wants others to come to their way of seeing things	Looks for common ground, meets in that place

**Adapted from “Like Ships in the Night”, Chapter 1 with Daniel Yankelovich in I’m Right and You’re An Idiot

On the world stage, we are experiencing a time when differences are being stoked and amplified. It is becoming harder to find the points of connection to learn and imagine something fresh, new and constructive. Especially for deeply entrenched issues like climate change, racism, sexism, sexual orientation discrimination and deeply divided politics. Good dialogue is not only hard to find, it is becoming increasingly an imperative.

International Exchange Students from over 15 countries at IGR University in Rennes in deep Worldview Explorations making fascinating discoveries

Debate is combative. It assumes we have the right answer and in arguing for it we become required to defend our position and our assumptions – even assumptions we may not have been aware we were holding. It is about seeing the weaknesses in other people’s perspectives and criticizing their views, which often becomes criticizing the person.

We come to dialogue from a very different internal posture than how we come to debate. We assume we all have a piece of the puzzle. It becomes important to bring curiosity, set aside judgment and really listen to what another person is trying to express, even beyond the words, to listen from a place of open heart and open spirit. It allows that all experiences and perspectives have validity – our own and others. It searches for the strength and value in all the perspectives, looking for the common ground or points of connection that create the opportunity to advance issues of collective concern. Inviting all the voices creates the possibility for generative space and new solutions.

Yankelovich says dialogue is not an arcane, esoteric or intellectual exercise but is practical and accessible and it is needed when values and frameworks are not shared. The challenge is that there are very few frameworks out there that can offer this exploration of differing perspectives that do not assume a position that one idea or one approach is better or more valid than another.

Worldview Intelligence changes all of that and we have seen it happen time and time again. The framework for exploration is value neutral. It makes no assumptions about the other person or group but takes them as they are. It provides a language and structure to understand where someone else is coming from. It is not built on a fancy, complicated system but rather is an elegantly simple way of entering the exploration. It is not a system that helps people do what they already do but better. It changes the way we enter the conversation, which changes the conversation.

It invites each individual or group to reflect on their own worldview, how it was shaped, how they have come to see and experience the world or a particular issue the way they do. Then it offers the opportunity to share what people are discovering or articulating, sometimes for the first time, in a way that honours each reflection and expands the collective worldview experience in the discussion.

The Worldview Intelligence framework is a structured approach to exploring individual and collective assumptions, beliefs and value systems and it is effective in many different kinds of explorations. The explorations generate new insights, innovative thinking, different conversations and new connections. A deeper understanding of worldview and how worldviews are developed leads to understanding them. Individuals and groups then have a language and a way of growing skill to work with different and multiple worldviews. this is essential to creating a fundamentally different environment for some of our most needed and challenging conversations. It is a 21^st Century leadership skill and it could disarm the toxic state of public discourse.

Worldview Intelligence Expands Your Ability to Deal With the World – Alan Gaudet

September 21, 2016Kathy Jourdain Leave a comment

Alan Gaudet describes his experience with Worldview Intelligence. He notes that it is a resilient, rich framework that offers a depth of analysis that takes you places you wouldn’t get to on your own. It really makes you want to pull out the meaning and it is a validating experience. The framework offers better methods to understand difference. Something meaningful happens between you and someone else when you make connections not otherwise possible.

Silos, Communication Breakdown and “I Don’t Know What You Do”

August 27, 2016August 27, 2016Kathy Jourdain Leave a comment

It seems no matter what the size of the organization we work with, we typically hear these three complaints: “We work in silos.” “We don’t communicate well.” “I don’t know what you do.” This seems equally true of an organization that has 30 employees relatively co-located or 30,000 employees spread across many sites across a large geography.

It can be a frustrating experience for leadership teams intent on breaking down those silos, improving communication across the organization and wondering why people just don’t talk to each other to discover what they do to hear the same challenges emerge time and time again. Because these issues are not one off. They can’t be solved with that being the end of the story. They need constant attentiveness.

There is no magic bullet. Ever. So, what is a leadership team to do? Keep these challenges in their sights and invest in the time and opportunities it takes to bring people together to talk to each other, to strategize together how to work across silos and be in conversations about what people do and how they contribute to the overall work of the organization.

We have been using Worldview Intelligence in a variety of settings with our clients. The program surfaces these age old complaints with a framework that provides a new lens of discovery, different language to enter into the conversations, a way to illuminate the hidden dynamics or patterns of behaviour within the silos and the organization overall and ways to think about a shared future that honours the individual workings of departments while making sure all are moving forward in alignment.

It is an iterative process. The same framework offers the opportunity for many different often interrelated explorations, including personal, professional, departmental or team, organizational and social systems.

Worldview Intelligence Explorations – An Iterative Process

The personal exploration is a leadership practice as individuals become aware of the lenses through which they see the world, work or community and learn how to invite other people to share their perspectives and influences on how they see the world. It is a heart centered exploration as people first turn curiosity and compassion inwards toward their own journey and then outward toward another. It invites genuine listening and learning to really understand how life experiences, including day-to-day reality, are different. This is particularly true when people from different cultures are learning from and about each other and it is also true for what might be considered more minor differences like coming from a different community in the same city or region.

The professional exploration offers people the opportunity to understand how the views of their profession influence their own professional views. This includes everything from educational influences to the patterns and practices of the profession overall. It provides insights into communication challenges and points of tension with other professions or even within a profession. Within health care, for example, the different medical professions often experience points of conflict around scopes of practice and delivery of health care. Examining the worldviews of each of the professions offers insights and reminds people of the points of connection between them, offering new ideas, thoughts and strategies about how to communicate with the well being of the patient at the center.

The departmental and team explorations invite members of a team to reflect on the history of the department and team, even prior to the current composition of the team, how they think about and live into the future and the practices they use with each other and external to the team to get work done. It can illuminate how they treat each other and others outside the department, offering the opportunity to be intentional about their relationships.

When departments and teams share their worldviews with each other the resulting insights are often surprisingly dramatic and simple at the same time. The exploration surfaces things that can be blindingly obvious once illuminated but hidden until that time. Within an organization this could be the result of different leadership styles or perspectives on the future, it could be the lingering influence of conflictual relationships or any number of other scenarios. Across an organization, particularly one geographically dispersed, the location of a department or unit can have a significant impact on how they function and it is often unacknowledged until the system is mapped and explored.

Once departments or units across an organization share their worldviews with each other, the elements of a shared worldview can be elicited. The organization does not need a singular worldview, but worldviews across the organization should have elements that are common. An organization benefits from a diversity of views and learning how to draw out the greatest potential in addressing the issues and challenges the organization faces. The alignment across worldviews can be strategic and intentional as the organization moves forward on issues that are pertinent to its work and its future well-being.

Understanding what comprises the social systems of departments, units or the organization overall provides an opportunity to explore how to create consistent policies and practices across the organization that are also flexible enough to be responsive to local circumstances and influences.

When an organization takes the opportunity to collectively enter a worldview exploration, it also enters the conversation about how to work across silos, communicate more effectively because people are learning from and about each other and what they do. It is an iterative process. In one way it is simple. In another way it is difficult because it takes time, focus and strategic thinking to ensure ongoing attention to the age old issues. And it is important because these age old issues get in the way of getting work done.