Scenario: Visuals
Tags: Action Learning, ActionLearning Coach, Team Coach, WIAL, WIAL Action Learning, WIAL Talk
Trackback from your site.
Comments (6)
Leave a comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Tags: Action Learning, ActionLearning Coach, Team Coach, WIAL, WIAL Action Learning, WIAL Talk
Trackback from your site.
Andrea See
| #
Referring to the Action Learning #1) Ground Rules, where no direct mention of this is indicated, and #2 Outline/Script — “Let’s write it down – Ask each member to read what he’she has written.” — and it’s not “what he/she has drawn”, I would cotinue with this whole intervention portion by doing an SID:
“It seems that several participattns are enthusiastic about drawing a picture of the problem. Does it also seem that way to you?”
“I will be asking you all to read what you have written down. If you were to all a picture of what the problem is, what would the impact be?”
“How do we move forward?”
So several outcomes could emerge. My intent as the AL Coach is to enforce what in explicitly enforceable based on the AL outline, build on the enthusiasm of the group, encourage them to come up with a solution together, and keep to the spirit of team learning and taking action.
Reply
Jennie Verano
| #
What is your intention to draw? How can this be helpful to you? What outcome to come from this?
Then, I probably will allow them to do it. I’ll combine their visuals with AL goal in first intervention where we want each person to write their problem statement. So, I’ll probably say ” Yes, and… let’s combine visuals with written. How we see the problem and how to state the problem. There’s a saying “a picture paints a thousand words”. May I suggest – “a picture paints a sentence”? Everyone draws their picture of what they see the problem is. Below your picture, write down your 1-sentence problem statement. How does that sound, team?”
Reply
Neraida Polanco Lourens
| #
If this suggestion is made in the phase where the team members are asked to write down what they think is the real problem, I do not see this as an issue since everybody is enthusiastic about this and it is still an individual exercise after the exploration of the problem through the method of asking questions. This approach may even stimulate the creativity of team members and entice other type of questions. I would mention that it is important that after this exercise they will share what they think the real problem is, expressed in their drawings. However, there is a risk that the method, drawing, can cause distraction and take focus away from the AL process. As an ALC, I would mention this and be alert so that I can intervene timely in the case this happens. Once this phase is completed, I would invite the team to continue to the next phase and to ask questions to come to a definite problem statement.
Reply
KW LOK
| #
I would ask if there is anyone not comfortable to fully express their thoughts with a drawing in a two to three minutes? If everyone is comfortable and confident with their drawing ability, I’ll let them draw and share their problem statement. I will come back to revisit the impact of the drawing and if it helps the team to share their problem statement more clearly and the impact to time spent. The team may see they are taking time away from exploring the problem statement more fully through the questions & statements
Reply
Aline Costa Romão
| #
I would bring this enthusiasm to the attention of the group by asking “I noticed that you were enthusiastic about the idea of the drawing. Does everyone agree that this is the best solution for us to have an understanding of the problem?”. If everyone agrees, we move on with this solution. If there is disagreement, I ask the group “what would be the best solution, since not everyone agrees with this design option?”.
Reply
Angela Jaquith
| #
If everyone is enthusiastic about it, it doesn’t hurt to try. Sometimes we aren’t allowed to say certain things, but drawing them can address the problem indirectly. Referring to the idea of “We don’t talk about Bruno” from the movie Encanto, it’s interesting how this rule puts people in a double bind. Steve Whitla discusses this in an article I recently read. He writes, “the emergent problem isn’t actually that they can’t talk about Bruno; it’s that they can’t talk about not talking about Bruno. If they could talk about that, they could probably solve the problem, but they’re trapped in the logic of the double bind: to talk about not talking about something is still to talk about it, the same way telling someone to be spontaneous is telling them not to be spontaneous. It’s impossible. And yet …And yet here’s the crazy thing: they can sing a whole song about it. Not a whole song about Bruno, but a whole song about not talking about Bruno. This is subtle but profound: if the things you need to talk about are at the level of the language itself, then you need a meta-language to talk about the language.”
Drawing the problem could create a breakthrough by moving beyond language itself. Drawing can serve as a meta-language. If you can’t get consensus on the drawing, I think that interesting questions would emerge, leading toward consensus in subsequent discussions.
Source: https://meaning.guide/index.php/2022/07/19/helping-the-system-to-see-itself/
Reply