|
By Alexander Christakis |
|
with Kenneth Bausch
 |
Co-Laboratories of Democracy |
|
Unshakeable Burdens of Dialogue |
|
The SDP Process |
|
A Simple Example |
|
Download a Brochure |
|
Download "New Agora" |
|
Faculty Expectation Message Welcome to Harnessing Collective Wisdom and Power. If all goes well in this course, we will engage in dialogue that enhances our potential collective power. In these discussions we are all teachers and learners from each other. You are expected to bring your own experiences and insights into our discussions and go beyond standard textbook chatter. You should speak frankly, but courteously, voicing honest disagreement when you feel it is called for. Such disagreements often generate new insight and are win-win situations for all involved. To do well in this course, you should:
From me, you can expect:
POSTINGS: I plan to visit the course room about every other day throughout the quarter. I will read everyone’s contributions. The flow of the class depends upon your participation in the unit discussions. All online postings are completed within the seven-day period conforming to a Monday through Sunday time period. I will post the next unit questions by each Sunday. As you plan your weekly schedule, please note that all postings are completed by Saturday and follow-up/responding to other learners through Sunday. Please avoid last minute posting. Prompt postings facilitate the discussion process. I expect that you respond to any questions by other learners or by me. Please sign your name at the end of your posting. Also, cut and paste your postings in the comment area. You will notice in each unit there are 2 – 3 questions. Please label your answers accordingly – U1/D1, U1/D2, U2/D1, U2/D2 … Use APA format when you post your response to discussion questions. Any reference made to an author, study, theory, etc. used in the body of your main posting must be accompanied by a full citation, in APA format. At the conclusion of your posting, you will need to indicate the reference. Also routinely use the HTML spell/grammar-check option. For your comments to other learners or me, change the heading (e.g., to Ken). A brief description of APA guidelines for your papers can be found in the course resources reference section. Discussions and question responses will be graded on the basis of the quality and quantity of your participation for a maximum of one hundred (100) points. COURSE GRADES will be assigned as follows: 90 -100 points =A; 80 -89 points = B; 70- 79 points = C; 69 points and under = D/F Introduction We have all experienced the benefits of dialogue when we openly and thoughtfully confront issues. We have also experienced the frustration of interminable discussion that does not lead to progress.
Co-Laboratories achieve these results by respecting the autonomy of all participants, and utilizing an array of consensus tools – including discipline, technology and graphics – that allow the stakeholders to control the discussion. These are explained in depth in a book authored by Alexander N. Christakis with Kenneth C. Bausch: Co-Laboratories of Democracy: How People Harness Their Collective Wisdom to Create the Future (Information Age, 2006). * * 8 This course will introduce you to Co-Laboratories using the above named book as a principal text. It will involve you in an online version called the WebScope that will give you hands-on experience with the process and let you experience its power. It will also situate this methodology in the history of dialogue and democracy. SYLLABUS How People Harness their Collective Wisdom and Power Outline Unit One: Dialogue and Democrac Unit Two: Difficulties with Democracy Unit Three: The Global Picture Unit Four: Relieving the Burdens of Dialogue Unit Five: SDP in Action – WebScope - Responding to Triggering Question Unit Six: A Science of Dialogic Design – Clarifying Responses Unit Seven: Six Dialogue Laws – Voting on Importance Unit Eight: Online Synchronous Voting on Influence Unit Nine: Transformational Leadership – Design and Decision I Unit Ten: Web World – Design and Decision II Unit One Dialogue and Democracy Dialogue and democracy grew up together in the agoras of ancient Greece. Dialogue is the essence of participative democracy. Such person-to-person democracy was effective only in local politics having a limited scope as was evident already in the time of Plato. Over the centuries, less dialogic forms of democracy have developed until we have a situation today where many of “our” representatives are more beholden to the donors and fund-raisers than they are to us. In our society, dialogue is reserved for family or small group interaction. Co-Laboratories of Democracy are designed to increase the breadth of dialogue to groups of up to 200 people. They respect the autonomy of all participants and honor their power to construct their own futures in a timely and transparent manner.
U1d1 (Unit One, Discussion One): Based on your experience, common sense, and readings, how would you characterize the relationship of dialogue to democracy in the United States today? U1d2: In your opinion, how much of our lives is ruled by agreements that we as a people have worked out among ourselves, and how much is ruled by impersonal systemic forces? Give 3 reasons for your answer and support it with real-life examples. Readings Habermas – Luhmann Debate Unit Two Difficulties with Democracy “Without a framework of disciplined inquiry that permits organizational learning in an explicit way, the theories-in-use by individuals engaged in dialogue are undisciplined and muddling. …This muddling should not be attributed to the bad will of individuals or groups. It is caused by the unshakeable human burdens of dialogue” (Introduction to chapter 3). This unit deals with burdens and skepticism about the possibility of social change. It discusses different efforts to simplify decision-making and how they differ from Co-Laboratories of Democracy.
U2d1: What has been the history of associations in the United States since the time of de Toqueville? What in your opinion are the causes behind that history? U2d2: Google 3 out of the following list of methods that facilitate decision-making and democracy and indicate their strategies for overcoming the difficulties of democracy.
Chapter Three
Unit Three The Global Picture
What are the strengths of the Limits to Growth? What are its weaknesses? What has been the history of implementation of the 5 major prescriptions of the Club of Rome? How accurate are its projections? Based on your experience, common sense, and readings, how would you characterize the democracy that the United States urges on the world today? What is the relationship between democracy and capitalism? Christakis in CWC 2 Unit Four: Relieving the Burdens of Dialogue
U4d1: Describe your experiences in decision-making meetings. Do you prefer leader/expert driven meetings or meetings in which the participants are responsible for the decisions. Explain your preference. U4d2: Which components of the SDP architecture can be carried out without computer assistance? Which of them are substantially enabled by software assistance? What are the positive and negative aspects of using computers in group decision-making meetings?
Chapters 4 – 10 Unit Five: SDP in Action – Webscope – Responding to Triggering Question
In this unit we will view applications of the SDP (Co-Laboratory) methodology. One application is face-to-face; the other is online and is called the WebScope. You are asked to participate as stakeholders in the following scenario. Blueford is a fictional small city 150 miles north of Atlanta, whose principal industry, Big Hawk Carpets, has just announced intentions to close its plant and move in six months to Mexico. Approximately 600 workers will be laid off and the city’s unemployment rate will initially be 35%, but because of rollover effects could reach 60% in several years. 30% of Blueford’s young people do not graduate from high school. Only 25% of them pursue education after high school. You are parents and professionals in Blueford. You are asked to participate in a YMCA-sponsored revitalization design process. The city council, the school board, and the local community college have promised to support your decisions to the best of their ability. Your assignment is to design the Blueford of the future using the SDP methodology. Preparatory to your first session a White Paper describing Blueford’s situation has been prepared after interviewing a dozen people with varying viewpoints on the situation: Blueford is caught in a trend of cultural changes that affect its present and future. Some of them are:
Caught in these trends:
Blueford faces several obstacles and challenges in facing its future:
Among Blueford’s assets are:
The first triggering question that you are asked to address is What factors (obstacles, challenges, assets) do we face in constructing the future of Blueford? This week you are each asked to contribute exactly three answers to this question. Try not to duplicate each others answers. Please try to make your contributions as succinct as possible. We anticipate that some of your statements will be very general and some very specific. Keep them to one sentence maximum. The words below are offered to help you formulate proposed factor statements:
Others… (the above are just suggestions). Then in the clarifications box, explain in one paragraph the meaning and importance of your factors. In the next unit, your fellow students will ask for further clarification of your statement, while refraining from criticizing or disputing its wording. They and you will have the opportunity at that time to add statements to this week’s triggering question. In addition, this week you are also asked to respond to the following discussion: U5d1: Do you believe this WebScope application will yield results similar to those achieved in the applications described in the text? Why or Why not? U5d2: What do you perceive are the relative strengths and weaknesses of the WebScope methodology in comparison with face-to-face Co-Laboratories with regard to honoring autonomy, involvement, impact, etc. Speak from your common sense. You will be asked a similar question at the end of the course.
Chapters 11 – 18
Unit Six A Science of Dialogic Design – Clarifying Responses
Dialogic design is set up as a tight axiomatic science; that is, given its axioms and definitions, its laws and practices logically follow. This week in the WebScope you are asked to probe the meanings of the statements proposed by your co-designers. You are also asked to respond to their questions about yours. The sole purpose of your dialogues is to understand each other. Should you disagree with a co-learner, do not assume that they are wrong. Instead, make a statement and clarification (ala last week) and be prepared to clarify it further in dialogue. By the end of this process, we will have constructed a consensual linguistic domain and be prepared to move on. U6d1: Explain the differences between instrumental, strategic, and communicative action. Give examples.
Chapters 19-22 and 24 Unit Seven Six Dialogue Laws – Voting on Importance
SDP is a science that honors the life experience, observations, and wisdom of people as they try to navigate their way is a complex world. Its axioms, definitions, and laws are designed to enable constructive dialogue in everyday language that can be managed logically and transparently. [To expedite matters, the knowledge development team has clustered the statements on their perceived similarity. It has also ascribed descriptive titles to the clusters.] Your job this week is to vote on the statements that you have come to understand on the basis of which ones you think are most important. You are each given five votes to pick five different statements that you feel are most important. Your votes will determine the 12 or so statements for the second voting next week on the basis of influence.
U7d1: Do you agree with the text’s tree of meaning involving the six laws? Would you like to propose a different order to spark discussion with your co-learners?
Chapter 23
Unit Eight Online Synchronous Voting on Influence Unit Nine Transformational Leadership – Design and Decision I
In the past, leadership was seen as the attribute of a “great man,” who got that title by reason of his birth, his appointment by more important men, or his election to office. This model of leadership is well-suited to the hierarchical structures of feudal and industrial civilizations. In the fast-changing and complex world of today, however, hierarchies are more and more dysfunctional. At the cutting edge of transformational change, a new type of leadership is emerging. In the WebScope this week, we build upon the foundational design work and influence tree that we have already completed. We will use a simplified version to generate actions and select those that are most essential to our evolving action plan to create the future of Blueford. In this step of the process, you will generate and clarify actions that answer the following triggering question. Given the factors revealed in the tree of meaning, what action options, if adopted and implemented by us, will help in the revitalization of Blueford? Toward the end of the week the knowledge management team will cluster the options into an options field. Then, as in the definition stage, you will vote for the five options that you feel are most important. The results of your votes will be made available to you at the beginning of next week.
U9d1: Explain the book’s distinctions between transactional, transforming, and transformational leadership. Provide examples for each type.
Chapter 26
Unit Ten WebWorld – Design and Decision II
For this final unit you will break up into small groups of 4 or 5 each, whose members will share e-mail addresses (and telephone numbers if desired) with each other. Each member on the first day will think up a scenario in which Bluefield prospers and indicate 3 action options that would enable that scenario (and share it with the group via email). On the second day, you will start comparing your scenarios and action options. On the third and following days you will settle upon a likely story of how Bluefield comes to prosper, and you will select as a group 5-10 action items that will make that story possible. Each group will submit its scenario and action option votes in the discussion area. On the last day of class, we will again go synchronous to finalize our action option selections and generate an options profile. We will begin to superimpose the action items onto the tree of meaning as it is described on pages 239-230. If we do not have time to finish the superposition, we will seek volunteers to complete the process. Then the knowledge management team will put it into good form and send it to all of you. Everyone will have an opportunity to address the group at this time.
U10d1: From your experience and readings, give an example of a self-organizing web and its history of development.
Chapter 27 |
 Download the Syllabus |
||||||
Harnessing Collective Wisdom and Power
 |