Wow. The ideas have been flowing like mad, and it is time to properly write (some of) them down!
One idea that emerged out of the CBI practice session last Friday is the need to write a book about "Collaborative Problem Solving in the 21st Century." As Innes and Booher (2010) write in their "Planning with Complexity Book" and as many of us well recognize, the trends of the 21st century present some interesting, complex problems for collaborative/collective problem solving. With mass communications and the internet, we have more information at our finger tips than ever before, and while this can be good and can help support informed decisions, it often leads to misinformation and polarization instead. Similarly, while technology can be used to educate, engage, and connect people, it is often instead a source of isolation, misinformation, or disconnect. There are more people in the world and we are more connected than ever, but the forces of globalization have often led to ongoing disparity and divides. Trust in government is at a considerable low, at least in the U.S., and people are over involved and under committed. Social capital is arguably declining with increased connectivity. Etc. What does all of this mean for collaborative problem solving in the 21st century? I want to write this book with my colleagues in the field, since I think we seriously need to think about this. We need to be "foxes," ready to adapt to the changes that are happening in the world, rather than being hedgehogs that stick to our same old approaches. That is one idea.
Another related idea that came to mind during the practice session is the need to do some serious research and writing about the role of technology in collaborative problem solving and participatory planning. For example, we have key pad polling and poll everywhere, GIS-based systems that allow people to input data into planning processes, tracking systems, geodesign programs, mediated modeling approaches, etc that can all--at least in theory--lead to better planning and greater participation in planning. However, I argue that these technologies cannot replace dialogue. Nor do they inherently enhance it. I think these technologies, at least some of them, can be powerful tools, but we have to be very careful to use them as part of well thought out processes, we can't overly rely on them, and we have to be wary of them taking away from the overall intent of our approaches. Lots of research to be done, along the lines of mini-NECAPs (PAR like experimental research looking at uses of different tools for different purposes). This could be a huge line of inquiry for the future. I am trying to get my CBI colleagues to work with me on an article about this general idea of technology as a tool for collaborative problem solving, what we know, and what we need to know.
Finally, and related in some ways as well, I have been thinking about how we need to teach the skills of collaborative problem solving and adaptability (along the lines of what Caroline and Allegra are trying to teach through improv) to all young people. What if we all grew up knowing how to actively listen? What if thinking about different interests and how to reconcile them--and to create value!--was part of our every moment consciousness? With this in mind, I want to spend some time in the future integrating role-plays and other experiential exercises into primary and secondary schools as a way to teach kids about the core concepts that underpin collaborative problem solving, adaptability, and mutual gains. When I/we start our Institute in Montana, this might be one of the threads. We can work with adults to solve the world's problems and work with kids to prevent future problems and to build a society of natural collaborative problem solvers!
Nothing here is immediately actionable, but that is what I am thinking about right now.
Braindump done...for now.
One idea that emerged out of the CBI practice session last Friday is the need to write a book about "Collaborative Problem Solving in the 21st Century." As Innes and Booher (2010) write in their "Planning with Complexity Book" and as many of us well recognize, the trends of the 21st century present some interesting, complex problems for collaborative/collective problem solving. With mass communications and the internet, we have more information at our finger tips than ever before, and while this can be good and can help support informed decisions, it often leads to misinformation and polarization instead. Similarly, while technology can be used to educate, engage, and connect people, it is often instead a source of isolation, misinformation, or disconnect. There are more people in the world and we are more connected than ever, but the forces of globalization have often led to ongoing disparity and divides. Trust in government is at a considerable low, at least in the U.S., and people are over involved and under committed. Social capital is arguably declining with increased connectivity. Etc. What does all of this mean for collaborative problem solving in the 21st century? I want to write this book with my colleagues in the field, since I think we seriously need to think about this. We need to be "foxes," ready to adapt to the changes that are happening in the world, rather than being hedgehogs that stick to our same old approaches. That is one idea.
Another related idea that came to mind during the practice session is the need to do some serious research and writing about the role of technology in collaborative problem solving and participatory planning. For example, we have key pad polling and poll everywhere, GIS-based systems that allow people to input data into planning processes, tracking systems, geodesign programs, mediated modeling approaches, etc that can all--at least in theory--lead to better planning and greater participation in planning. However, I argue that these technologies cannot replace dialogue. Nor do they inherently enhance it. I think these technologies, at least some of them, can be powerful tools, but we have to be very careful to use them as part of well thought out processes, we can't overly rely on them, and we have to be wary of them taking away from the overall intent of our approaches. Lots of research to be done, along the lines of mini-NECAPs (PAR like experimental research looking at uses of different tools for different purposes). This could be a huge line of inquiry for the future. I am trying to get my CBI colleagues to work with me on an article about this general idea of technology as a tool for collaborative problem solving, what we know, and what we need to know.
Finally, and related in some ways as well, I have been thinking about how we need to teach the skills of collaborative problem solving and adaptability (along the lines of what Caroline and Allegra are trying to teach through improv) to all young people. What if we all grew up knowing how to actively listen? What if thinking about different interests and how to reconcile them--and to create value!--was part of our every moment consciousness? With this in mind, I want to spend some time in the future integrating role-plays and other experiential exercises into primary and secondary schools as a way to teach kids about the core concepts that underpin collaborative problem solving, adaptability, and mutual gains. When I/we start our Institute in Montana, this might be one of the threads. We can work with adults to solve the world's problems and work with kids to prevent future problems and to build a society of natural collaborative problem solvers!
Nothing here is immediately actionable, but that is what I am thinking about right now.
Braindump done...for now.
hi!
ReplyDeletethis week I went out to dinner with Kathy, from Larry's conflict resolution course (she's a sloan student). we got to chatting about spirituality and its connection to 'coping with uncertainty' and all those not-so-tangential issues about vulnerability, resilience, fragility, and need to 'control'. we were talking about how, to some degree, all four of the approaches we proposed discussing at the APA conference are variation on a theme that occupies one side of a coin, and there is arguably another side of the coin altogether - what she labels 'spiritual', or what I might call 'reactive' (but still really working on this). we discussed how there is a lack of real progress in developing an approach that puts the two sides of the coin together - which may be a more genuine form of 'improv' or 'foxiness'. I just re-read your blog and i saw a lot of connections there. so..my proposal is to have dinner together (this time with you!) and talk this out. right now its just some thinking, but I love to see where this takes us - maybe a publication, but more interesting to me would be a short course that really explores these ideas! I have one more friend Brandy who I think would be really fun to invite - she's an organizational studies phd student at BU.
I'm in! I have been thinking about related ideas off and on all summer..you know, while hiking in the mountains and having pensive thoughts about the world. One thing that I keep circling around is how our society (in the U.S., at least) is not well cultured to address and productively resolve "conflict," defined broadly as tensions between different interests and aspirations. Take for example my grandma, who is a lovely, smart, and kind person, but who thinks the first step to addressing a property conflict between her and her neighbors is to hire a lawyer, rather than go next door and talk this through with the neighbors (really interesting story about human nature, we should discuss and use this as an example in our writing/course teaching!) Rather than our cultural default being to look for mutual gains ways of dealing with conflict, and thus positioning the tension as a "gift" in the improv sense, we go straight to the courts/legal system, elevating a potentially productive tension into a destructive dispute. There are so many examples of this in society--from the individual level (like my grandma's case) to the public policy level (think conflicts over endangered species habitat). While this might be somewhat different from what you and Kathy talked about, I am truly fascinated by this whole broad area of thinking and look forward to chatting about it over dinner and continuing to develop these ideas, here on this blog (which I will begin using again as of the first week of September) and through other formats (such as our APA presentation!!)
ReplyDeleteWhen's dinner?!