Michael Soulé

New Meeting Forms: LeadTogether Highlight #3 9-1-2014

Dear Colleagues,

In our latest newsletter we explore ways to plan and prepare for meetings. But are there different ways to meet that facilitate maximum involvement and exchange of ideas? World Café and Open Space are two relatively new ways of meeting that can do this . Here is a description of both of the meeting formats and some tips on how to make them a successful part of your organization meeting life. These and other ideas about successful meetings found in our resource library are from a new booklet, Building Regenerative Communities, compiled by Mary Christenson and Marianne Fieber. This helpful new booklet is available free in our resource section, thanks to the authors and the Mid States Shared Gifting Group. (click here for the article)

Keep in touch.

Michael Soule

LeadTogether

Michael Soulé

New Meeting Forms: Open Space and World Cafe

Excerpt from Building Regenerative Communities: Open Space and World Café. (download the whole booklet here)

Open Space This is an open form of meeting where passion and responsibility are combined to empower participants by allowing agenda topics to arise from the group. A facilitator is only visible when the meeting needs re-opening. There are a series of laws or principles to consider with an “open space” meeting. Two of these are:  The law of two feet: If you find yourself in a situation where you are neither learning nor contributing, move somewhere where you can. This is a law like the law of gravity. You can choose to notice it or not, but it's safer just to notice it.  The four principles: Whoever comes are the right people; whatever happens is the only thing that could have happened; when it starts is the right time; and when it’s over, it's over. These aren't prescriptive—they are the results of thousands of little experiments. The link below will take you to further explanations about Open Space. http://www.openspaceworld.org/cgi/wiki.cgi?OpenSpaceExplanations ~Marianne Fieber

The World Café Using seven design principles and a simple method, the World Café is a powerful social technology for engaging people in conversations that matter, offering an effective antidote to the fast-paced fragmentation and lack of connection in today's world. This approach to conversation creates several smaller, intimate groups within a larger group to discuss one question, thereby giving more people an opportunity to dialogue. Based on the understanding that conversation is the core process that drives personal, business, and organizational life, the World Café is more than a method, process or technique. It's a way of thinking and being together sourced in a philosophy of conversational leadership. http://www.theworldcafe.com/tools.html

Michael Soulé

Building Regenerative Communities: Strength in Collaboration

From the Introduction

Our intention in creating the guide is to facilitate conversations which promote deeper understanding, trust and community within and between organizations. We feel that such interaction may lead people to discover ways to collaborate that foster associative endeavors, perhaps discovering ways to share resources to support each others work.

The Guide provides a starting point for calling a circle and highlights a variety of tools from which to choose for setting up conversations. It contains several case studies which provide the content to initiate conversation. There are additional web, print and video resources to inspire and urge participants into deep discussion around themes of regenerative communities, associative economics and cultural renewal.

It is given freely and may be shared broadly. It may be posted on websites to encourage its availability.  ~ Mary Christenson and Marianne Fieber, June 2014

Download the guide here:   Building Regenerative Communities_Conversation and Resource Guide.final

Michael Soulé

How Spiritual Organizations Develop – LeadTogether Highlight #4 9-8-14

Dear Colleagues

What are the natural developmental phases of spiritually based communities and organizations? Bernard Lievegoed, one of the early leaders of organizational development work and long-time Director of the Anthroposophical Training Organization, NPI, in Holland, wrote “ The Developing Organization" in 1973 in which he outlined the phases of development of organizations. In 1988 he offered a new booklet to clarify his thoughts about the difference between the phases that economic businesses and educational institutions go through. Lievegoed offers that spiritually focused organizations involved in human development don’t follow the typical phases of pioneer, administration and integration, but develop in a much more organic fashion, from their early development through growth and into maturity. This booklet, “Institutions of the Spiritual Life” provides insights to better understand how the growth and development of our institutions unfold over time. We have added the booklet into our resource collection for you. (We've put it into a format so you can print it out as a booklet.)   Find it here.

Keep in touch.

Michael Soule

 Keep in touch, Michael Soule LeadTogether

Michael Soulé

Core Principles of Waldorf Education from the PSC, 2014

1 Comment

Core Principles of Waldorf Education

By Pedagogical Section Council of N. America (Amended August '14)

 

Waldorf education can be characterized as having seven core principles. Each one of them can be the subject of a life-long study. Nevertheless, they can be summarized in the following manner:

 

  1. Image of the Human Being: The human being in its essence is a being of Spirit, soul, and body. Childhood and adolescence, from birth to twenty-one, are the periods during which the Spirit/soul gradually takes hold of the physical instrument that is our body. The Self is the irreducible spiritual individuality within each one of us, which continues its human journey through successive incarnations.

 

  1. Phases of Child Development: This process of embodiment has an archetypal sequence of approximately seven-year phases, and each child’s development is an individual expression of the archetype. Each phase has unique and characteristic physical, emotional and cognitive dimensions.

 

  1. Developmental Curriculum: The curriculum is created to meet and support the phase of development of the individual and the class. From birth to age 7 the guiding principle is that of imitation; from 7 to 14 the guiding principle is that of following the teacher’s guidance; during the high school years the guiding principle is idealism and the development of independent judgment.

 

  1. Freedom in Teaching: Rudolf Steiner gave indications for the development of a new pedagogical art, with the expectation that “the teacher must invent this art at every moment.”Out of the understanding of child development and Waldorf pedagogy, the Waldorf teacher is expected to meet the needs of the children in the class out of his/her insights and the circumstances of the school. Interferences with the freedom of the teacher by the school, parents, standardized testing regimen, or the government, while they may be necessary in a specific circumstance (for safety or legal reasons, for example), are nonetheless compromises.[i]

 

  1. Methodology of Teaching: there are a few key methodological guidelines for the grade school and high school teachers. Early Childhood teachers work with these principles appropriate to the way in which the child before the age of seven learns, out of imitation rather than direct instruction:

~Artistic metamorphosis: the teacher should understand, internalize, and then present the topic in an artistic form.[ii]

~From experience to concept: the direction of the learning process should proceed from the students’ soul activities of willing, through feeling to thinking. In the high school the context of the experience is provided at the outset. [iii]

~Holistic process: proceeding from the whole to the parts and back again, and addressing the whole human being.

~Use of rhythm and repetition.[iv]

 

  1. Relationships: Enduring human relationships between students and their teachers are essential and irreplaceable.  The task of all teachers is to work with the developing individuality of each student and with each class as a whole. Truly human pedagogical relationships gain in depth and stability when they are cultivated over many years. They cannot be replaced by instructions utilizing computers or other electronic means. Healthy working relationships with parents and colleagues are also essential to the wellbeing of the class community and the school.

 

  1. Spiritual Orientation: In order to cultivate the imaginations, inspirations, and intuitions needed for their work, Rudolf Steiner gave the teachers an abundance of guidance for developing an inner, meditative life. This guidance includes individual professional meditations and an imagination of the circle of teachers forming an organ of spiritual perception. Faculty and individual study, artistic activity, and research form additional facets of ongoing professional development.

 

[i] A note about school governance: while not directly a pedagogical matter, school governance can be an essential aspect of freedom in teaching. Just as a developmental curriculum should support the phases of child development, school governance should support the teachers’pedagogical freedom (while maintaining the school's responsibilities towards society). 

[ii]  The term “artistic”does not necessarily mean the traditional arts (singing, drawing, sculpting, etc.), but rather that, like those arts, the perceptually manifest reveals something invisible through utilizing perceptible media. Thus a math problem or science project can be just as artistic as storytelling or painting.

[iii] This mirrors the development of human cognition, which is at first active in the limbs and only later in the head.

[iv] There are four basic rhythms with which the Waldorf teacher works. The most basic of those is the day-night (or two-day) rhythm. Material that is presented on a given day is allowed to “go to sleep”before it is reviewed and brought to conceptual clarity on the following day. A second rhythm is that of the week. It is “the interest rhythm”and teachers strive to complete an engagement with a topic within a week of working on it. A paper that is returned to the student after more than a week will no longer be interesting to the student. The only interesting thing will be the teacher’s comments, but the topic itself is already past the “interest window.”A third rhythm is that of four weeks. A block, or unit of instruction, is usually best covered in four-week periods. This life-rhythm can be understood in contemplation of feminine reproductive cycles, for example, and can be said to bring a topic to a temporary level of maturity. The last of the pedagogical rhythms is that of a year. This is the time it can take for a new concept to be mastered to the degree that it can be used as a capacity. Thus a mathematical concept introduced early in third grade should be mastered sufficiently to be assumed as a capacity for work at the beginning of fourth grade.

 

[1] A note about school governance: while not directly a pedagogical matter, school governance can be an essential aspect of freedom in teaching. Just as a developmental curriculum should support the phases of child development, school governance should support the teachers’pedagogical freedom (while maintaining the school's responsibilities towards society). 

[1]  The term “artistic”does not necessarily mean the traditional arts (singing, drawing, sculpting, etc.), but rather that, like those arts, the perceptually manifest reveals something invisible through utilizing perceptible media. Thus a math problem or science project can be just as artistic as storytelling or painting.

[1] This mirrors the development of human cognition, which is at first active in the limbs and only later in the head.

[1] There are four basic rhythms with which the Waldorf teacher works. The most basic of those is the day-night (or two-day) rhythm. Material that is presented on a given day is allowed to “go to sleep”before it is reviewed and brought to conceptual clarity on the following day. A second rhythm is that of the week. It is “the interest rhythm”and teachers strive to complete an engagement with a topic within a week of working on it. A paper that is returned to the student after more than a week will no longer be interesting to the student. The only interesting thing will be the teacher’s comments, but the topic itself is already past the “interest window.”A third rhythm is that of four weeks. A block, or unit of instruction, is usually best covered in four-week periods. This life-rhythm can be understood in contemplation of feminine reproductive cycles, for example, and can be said to bring a topic to a temporary level of maturity. The last of the pedagogical rhythms is that of a year. This is the time it can take for a new concept to be mastered to the degree that it can be used as a capacity. Thus a mathematical concept introduced early in third grade should be mastered sufficiently to be assumed as a capacity for work at the beginning of fourth grade.

Michael Soulé

Highlights: an Introduction Aug 18, 2014

Dear Colleagues,

We are celebrating our fifth month of LeadTogether and appreciate the positive responses we have had so far. We will be introducing a new feature this month called, Highlights, a short update of new postings, resources, training opportunities and news from organizations and schools around the world related to collaboration, leadership and organizational development. Highlights will be sent to your email address and will provide links to the LeadTogether site as well as be posted on the website.

And whether the name reminds you of the streaks in your friend’s hairdo, the many things you have marked that you thought important in books you have read, or the children’s magazine we used to read when we were young, it is really much the same – small illuminated aspects of the human experience.

We hope you find it a useful tool.

In service,

Michael Soule

LeadTogether

Michael Soulé

Sustainability: Associative Economics

1. Associative Economics

 The idea behind associative economics arose from the work and insights of Rudolf Steiner in 1922 through his work with the first Waldorf School, and in a series of lectures on economics. Steiner’s visionary capacity brought to light a new imagination about economic life and money; that consciousness applied to the nature of transactions in the conduct of financial life would allow us to transform our relationships with each other and with money and provide a new basis for transforming the entire economic system. Understanding this is essential in the development of a school. In the attached articles by Warren Ashe, Siegfried Finser and Werner Glas, authors share important insights on the effect on school finances of seeing tuition in a new light.  Going further, John Bloom in an interview segment from the film The Challenge of Rudolf Steiner, and in his book The Genius of Money, offers insights into the realm of social finance and Steiner’s ideas. Christopher Houghton Budd has numerous publications and research on Associative Economics on his website that goes even deeper into the realm of Associative Economics. And lastly, Gary Lamb offers in his book on Associative Economics, an excellent treatment of the background, history, details and practical applications of Associative Economic thinking for schools. To be familiar with this book and these ideas will help every school leader work with financial matters in a new way.

Resources

EconomicExplorations-Ch 2- Three Kinds of Money - W Ashe

EconomicExplorations-CH 1- Underlying Themes - W Glas

Associative Economics Gary Lamb, AWSNA

Center for Associative Economics Website

The Genius of Money, John Bloom

 Interview with John Bloom and Martin Large in The Challenge of Rudolf Steiner

From Co-Creation to Association by John Bloom

This is a continuation from the article Seven Keys to Sustainability in the April 2014 LeadTogether Newsletter.

Michael Soulé

The Basics of Consensus Decision-Making by Tim Hartnett, PhD

The Basics of Consensus Decision-Making
by Tim Hartnett, PhD
http://www.GroupFacilitation.net

The Principles of Consensus Decision Making
Consensus decision making is a process used by groups seeking to generate widespread levels of participation and agreement. There are variations among different groups regarding the degree of agreement necessary to finalize a group decision. The process of group deliberation, however, has many common elements that are definitive of consensus decision making. These include:

  • Inclusive: As many stakeholders as possible are involved in group discussions.

 

  • Participatory: All participants are allowed a chance to contribute to the discussion.

 

  • Collaborative: The group constructs proposals with input from all interested group members. Any individual authorship of a proposal is subsumed as the group modifies it to include the concerns of all group members.

 

  • Agreement Seeking: The goal is to generate as much agreement as possible. Regardless of how much agreement is required to finalize a decision, a group using a consensus process makes a concerted attempt to reach full agreement.

 

  • Cooperative: Participants are encouraged to keep the good of the whole group in mind. Each individual’s preferences should be voiced so that the group can incorporate all concerns into an emerging proposal. Individual preferences should not, however, obstructively impede the progress of the group.

An Alternative to Common Decision Making Practices
Consensus decision making is an alternative to commonly practiced non-collaborative decision making processes. Robert’s Rule of Order, for instance, is a process used by many organizations. The goal of Robert’s Rules is to structure the debate and passage of proposals that win approval through majority vote. This process does not emphasize the goal of full agreement. Nor does it foster whole group collaboration and the inclusion of minority concerns in resulting proposals. Critics of Robert’s Rules believe that the process can involve adversarial debate and the formation of competing factions. These dynamics may harm group member relationships and undermine the ability of a group to cooperatively implement a contentious decision.

Consensus decision making is also an alternative to “top-down” decision making, commonly practiced in hierarchical groups. Top-down decision making occurs when leaders of a group make decisions in a way does not include the participation of all interested stakeholders. The leaders may (or may not) gather input, but they do not open the deliberation process to the whole group. Proposals are not collaboratively developed, and full agreement is not a primary objective. Critics of top-down decision making believe the process fosters incidence of either complacency or rebellion among disempowered group members. Additionally, the resulting decisions may overlook important concerns of those directly affected. Poor group relationship dynamics and decision implementation problems may result.

Consensus decision making addresses the problems of both Robert’s Rules of Order and top-down models. The goals of the consensus process include:

  • Better Decisions: Through including the input of all stakeholders the resulting proposals can best address all potential concerns.

 

  • Better Implementation: A process that includes and respects all parties, and generates as much agreement as possible sets the stage for greater cooperation in implementing the resulting decisions.

 

  • Better Group Relationships: A cooperative, collaborative group atmosphere fosters greater group cohesion and interpersonal connection.

The Process of Consensus Decision Making 
There are multiple stepwise models of how to make decisions by consensus. They vary in the amount of detail the steps describe. They also vary depending on how decisions are finalized. The basic model involves collaboratively generating a proposal, identifying unsatisfied concerns, and then modifying the proposal to generate as much agreement as possible.

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6
Discussion Identify Emerging Proposal Identify Any Unsatisfied Conserns Collaboratively Modify the Proposal Assess the Degree of Support Finalize the DecisionORCircle Back to Step 1 or 3

Finalizing a Decision
The level of agreement necessary to finalize a decision is known as a decision rule. The range of possible decision rules varies within the following range:

  • Unanimous agreement
  • Unanimity minus one vote
  • Unanimity minus two votes
  • Super majority thresholds (90%, 80%, 75%, two-thirds, and 60% are common).
  • Simple majority
  • Executive committee decides
  • Person-in-charge decides

Some groups require unanimous consent (unanimity) to approve group decisions. If any participant objects, he can block consensus according to the guidelines described below. These groups use the term consensus to denote both the discussion process and the decision rule. Other groups use a consensus process to generate as much agreement as possible, but allow decisions to be finalized with a decision rule that does not require unanimity.

Consensus Blocking
Groups that require unanimity allow individual participants the option of blocking a group decision. This provision motivates a group to make sure that all group members consent to any new proposal before it is adopted. Proper guidelines for the use of this option, however, are important. The ethics of consensus decision making encourage participants to place the good of the whole group above their own individual preferences. When there is potential for a group decision to be blocked, both the group and any dissenters in the group are encouraged to collaborate until agreement can be reached. Simply vetoing a decision is not considered a responsible use of consensus blocking. Some common guidelines for the use of consensus blocking include:

  • Limiting the option to block consensus to issues that are fundamental to the group’s mission or potentially disastrous to the group.
  • Providing an option for those who do not support a proposal to “stand aside” rather than block.
  • Requiring two or more people to block for a proposal to be put aside.
  • Require the blocking party to supply an alternative proposal or a process for generating one.
  • Limiting each person’s option to block consensus to a handful of times in one’s life.

A basic outline of consensus decision making that allows consensus blocking is outlined in this flow chart from wikipedia: Consensus Decision-making.

Agreement vs. Consent
Unanimity is achieved when the full group consents to a decision. Giving consent does not necessarily mean that the proposal being considered is one’s first choice. Group members can vote their consent to a proposal because they choose to cooperate with the direction of the group, rather than insist on their personal preference. Sometimes the vote on a proposal is framed, “Is this proposal something you can live with?” This relaxed threshold for a yes vote can help make unanimity more easily achievable. Alternatively, a group member can choose to stand aside. Standing aside communicates that while a participant does not necessarily support a group decision, he does not wish to block it.

Debate Over Decision Rules
Critics of consensus blocking object to empowering individuals to block otherwise popular proposals. They believe this can result in a group experience of widespread disagreement, the opposite of a consensus process’s primary goal. Further, they believe group decision making may become stagnated by the high threshold of unanimity. Important decisions may take too long to make, or the status quo may become virtually impossible to change. The resulting tension may undermine group functionality and harm relationships between group members.

Defenders of consensus blocking believe that decision rules short of unanimity do not ensure a rigorous search for full agreement before finalizing decisions. They value the commitment to reaching unanimity and the full collaborative effort this goal requires. They believe that under the right conditions unanimous consent is achievable and the process of getting there strengthens group relationships.

Conditions that Favor Unanimity
The goals of requiring unanimity are only fully realized when a group is successful in reaching it. Thus, it is important to consider what conditions make full agreement more likely. Here are some of the most important factors that improve the chances of successfully reaching unanimity:

  • Small group size
  • Clear common purpose
  • High levels of trust
  • Participants well trained in consensus process
  • Participants willing to put the best interest of the group before their own
  • Participants willing to spend sufficient time in meetings
  • Skillful facilitation and agenda preparation

Using Other Decisions Rules with a Consensus Process
Many groups use a consensus decision making process with non-unanimous decision rules. The consensus process can help prevent problems associated with Robert’s Rules of Order or top-down decision making. This allows majority rule or hierarchical organizations to benefit from the collaborative efforts of the whole group and the resulting joint ownership of final proposals. For instance, a small business owner may convene a consensus decision making discussion among her staff to generate a proposal for changes to the business. After the proposal is developed, however, the business owner may retain the authority to accept or reject it.

The benefits of consensus decision making are lost, however, if the final decision is made without regard to the efforts of the whole group. When group leaders or majority factions reject proposals that have been developed with widespread agreement of a group, the goals of consensus decision making will not be realized.

More Elaborate Models of Consensus Decision Making
As the field of group facilitation has evolved, more detailed models of consensus decision making have been developed. One example is the CODM model (consensus-oriented decision making). Newer models focus on the process of group collaboration, increasing understanding within the field of how collaboration can be best fostered and what facilitation techniques can promote it.

 

Michael Soulé

Creating Effective Board Agendas by Judith Lindenau, JWL Associates

1 Comment

TIPS FOR CREATING EFFECTIVE AGENDAS

1. At least a week before the meeting, list the topics which must to be on the agenda.
Those items may include old and new business, recommendations for action,
adoption of new policies. Staff and the President should set the agenda, making sure that all items are appropriate Board of Directors concerns.
a. Refer items appropriate to a committee before it comes to the Directors

b. Avoid placing administrative and management items on the agenda as
business. The Directors should act on policy matters and matters of strategy.
(Staff should be empowered to make operational decisions guided by the budget, business plans, and adopted policies.)

c. Let board members know how and when they can add items to the agenda.

d. Add “Acceptance of the Agenda” as the first motion of a Board meeting. This will be the last call for new items.

e. Adopt a polity that in most cases, newly added topics may be discussed but not acted on without further study.

2. Together with the staff, assemble the agenda.

a. Research items and include supporting data, committee findings, options and recommendations for actions.

b. When appropriate, include wording for a proposed motion or resolution.

3. Don’t include agenda items which are not ready to be acted on. If a committee has not completed it’s recommendation on an item, don’t include it as business. A staff person may want to update the Board on progress, but to discuss it would be counter- productive.
4. Consider using a consent agenda and vote on routine matters and committee reports without explanation or discussion. Group these items together at the beginning of the meeting. Any director may request removal an item from the consent calendar
for separate discussion later in the agenda. There will then be one motion to approve all items on the consent agenda.

a. Note: If the Board is empowered by its bylaws to take votes when not in meetings, those votes should be included in the consent calendar for ratification and inclusion in the written minutes of the Board.

5. In dealing with agenda items requiring action, allow sufficient time for discussion to encourage opposing points of view, clarification of ideas and expression of personal viewpoints. It is good practice to have a specific motion in front of everyone before discussion begins.
6. If an item needs energy and creativity, put it near the beginning of the agenda.
7. Use a timed agenda. The chairman will then have a pattern for controlling debate. A timed agenda gives participants in the meeting a concept of the relative weight of various items of business, and helps avoid prolonged discussion on trivial matters.

8. Minimize oral reports. Require written reports from committees and staff. These reports are informational and do not require discussion or action. The should be included in the meeting packet.
9. If you avoid the micromanagement issues by careful agenda construction, you will
have time to do the work of a Board, which is to be strategic. A part of each agenda might be a few minutes of guided discussion on, say, the association’s community image.
10. Place ‘hot’ is sues on the agenda carefully, following them with less controversial issues so that the group ends a meeting on a note of teamwork. Also, consider establishing a directors’ list serve to hold prolonged examination of issues prior to the meeting itself. And if an issue is really controversial and needs prolonged examination, schedule a study session either in person or by teleconference. Do not vote on the issue during the study session, but let the intended action ‘season’ before a final vote in accordance with the bylaws.

11. Urgent items precede more trivial ones. The agenda should reflect this value.

12. On the agenda, list the name of the person responsible for presenting each item, and indicate the action required.

13. Present the agenda to the Directors in a packet, complete with supporting items, several days before the meeting…Five days is a good number. Organize the packet so that it is easy to follow, perhaps with tabs or numbered appendices

14. It’s a good idea to place your organizational mission statement at the top of each agenda.

15. Avoid anti-trust issues. It is up to the Chairman to immediately stop such
discussions and, if necessary, adjourn the meeting if the y continue. It may be wise to
keep an antitrust avoidance statement easily visible to the participants.

16. It is the Chairman’s job to lead the meeting plan as set by the motion at the beginning of the meeting to accept the agenda, and to adjourn the meeting in a timely
manner.

Prepared by Judith Lindenau, CAE, RCE JWL Associates

Michael Soulé

Meeting

Meeting

...there is what happens to the speaker when he is fortunate to be listened to perceptively.  Another kind of miracle takes place in him, perhaps best described as a springtime burgeoning.  Before his idea was expressed to a listener, it lived in his soul as potential only; it resembles a seed force lying fallow in the winter earth.  To be listened to with real interest acts upon this seed like sun and warmth and rain and other cosmic elements that provide growth-impetus; the soul ground in which the idea is embedded comes magically alive.   - Marjorie Spock