Let go of the Shore and enter the mainstream #1

25/6/2014

This is the first post in a two part blog on "going mainstream". This one is an overview of some of thoughts and the next blog has some specific learnings that have turned up so far. Part two will be published July 2nd, Wednesday next week.

Back in the day

Back in the day, when I looked like this (that's me on the left with the magnificent side burns), Art of Hosting and Participatory Leadership was a fringe effort. In 1999 Toke, Monica and Jan had done their first Hosting training in the USA with Pioneers of Change and then I met them at Castle Borl in Slovenia in 2000, where this picture is taken. It was a massive period of awakening for me. I discovered a whole suite of theory and methodology that aligned with my innate understanding of how humans could organize together to achieve their potential. The World Cafe, Open Space Technology, Appreciative Inquiry, Future Search, Chaordic design and so much more poured into my life and invigorated me into all kinds of action, including the founding of Engage! InterAct in the Netherlands.

It felt radical, counter cultural, edgy and most of all, needed. In the last 15 years Art of Hosting has grown into a world wide community of practitioners and along with many other trail blazing folks has helped build a broad culture across many sectors of reaching solutions though conversation - figuring it out, rather than fighting it out.

Now days you can't swing a cat without someone talking about meaningful conversations, participatory democracy, employee engagement, collaborative leadership, communities of practice, relationships being essential to our capacity to achieve results etc. It's out there. People are making big bucks touring the speaking circuit talking about it. The Harvard Business Review writes about it, there's books galore! You get my point.

My direct experience is that my work is more and more invited into mainstream society - public consultation, organizational change management, community lead responses to economic downturn, government responses to the incredible stress of delivering public service in rapidly changing circumstance, to name a few …

The work is going mainstream. It is just a question of whether we are ready to go with it, whether I am ready to go with it.

Getting beyond right and wrong

This isn't just a trend that is inexorably taking me along, though. I want to be part of something that influences society, that has an impact on the mainstream way of working and living. I don't think we can do that as a fringe experiment in making participatory change happen. It is not enough for me to stand on the sidelines and pass judgement on society, political leaders and corporate giants. It is not enough for me to just take the exciting pieces of work that build the new. I want to roll up my sleeves and get into some of the toughest, darkest, most confusing places and apply participatory methodologies and world view there.

It is in those places that I find I learn the most about who I am and what I do. In my own personal journey it has been entering the parts of me that I am most afraid and ashamed of - the dark, long avoided parts of myself - that has helped me discover the crystal clear kernel of clarity at my centre. It is the same in my work. So many of the people, organisations, ways of working that I villified as a young man have now become my most interesting and powerful practice grounds. I am shedding all my ideas and concepts of right and wrong and working with the reality of people who are trying to figure out how to live a meaningful and productive life.

“Beyond our ideas of right-doing and wrong-doing, there is a field. I’ll meet you there. When the soul lies down in that grass, the world is too full to talk about. Ideas, language, even the phrase ‘each other’ doesn’t make sense any more.” - Rumi

I want to engage the dominant system because it is inviting it. That means I have to change some things about myself though. If I want to work with CEOs, I have to find the CEO in me, to meet them where they are at. If I want to engage power, I have to find the power inside myself and trust I will not be corrupted by it. I have re-branded, bought some nice ties (I now love ties - see the pic!), taken some jobs with corporations I would not have taken 5 years ago, listened to advice about my business from corporate clients and friends … I am in training about how to lead change in the mainstream. This is my work now and I am loving it because I am learning so much.

I am letting go of the high expectations of my earlier ideology and meeting reality where it is at. It feels great.

The magic in the mainstream

So here's my rant …

I think it is time to get out of the fringes of community, organisations and society at large and bring the work of participatory leadership and art of hosting to the mainstream. We are not going to make change by using language that the majority of the world thinks is hokey. (Someone recently asked me why people talk about 'the work' like it is god!) All we end up doing is going round and round in re-enforcing circles of increasing irrelevance as the world moves on and co- opts something that so many of us have been a part of launching. If we want to steward and protect this work and its DNA we must find ways to follow it on its inevitable course into the heart of the very thing we are seeking to change. That means branding, sharpening language, having solid business models and making choices about what we stand for. It's not for everyone, I get that - but for me I no longer want to be embedded in something that is so diverse it is diluted and is articulated so vaguely is gains no traction in the systems it is seeking to transform.

So maybe it is now time to let go of the shore - the safe place of being the radicals leading change - and swim in the mainstream as leaders of transformation. It puts the 2001 Hopi message in a different light for me:

There is a river flowing now very fast. It is so great and swift that there are those who will be afraid. They will try to hold on to the shore.They will feel they are being torn apart and will suffer greatly. Know that the river has its destination.

The elders say we must let go of the shore, push off into the middle of the river, keep your eyes open and our heads above water. And I say: see who is there with you and celebrate. At this time in history we are to take nothing personally, let alone ourselves. For the moment that we do, our spiritual growth and journey come to a halt. The time of the lone wolf is over.

Gather yourselves. Banish the word "struggle" from your attitude and vocabulary. All that we do now must be done in a sacred manner and in celebration.

Going mainstream.
Let's do it!

I hope this has inspired, provoked or validated you in some way. Keep an eye out for part two coming next week with some specific learnings.

I would love to hear your thoughts and comments so we can continue to talk and evolve our work some more,

Change Ahead.
TM

23 Comments

Ursel link

25/6/2014 11:29:59

Hi Tim,
I was struck mostly by your mentioning of language, which you called "hokey", and I agree that it is not mainstream language, that which is often used in Art of Hosting trainings. This makes me wonder: when you develop something new, and I think what you co-developed in the Art of Hosting field and beyond is (or has been) pretty new stuff, is it natural that in the beginning you just don´t find words for it? Maybe development of new social behaviours happens outside of the realm of language! Language only follows later, tries to capture that thing that is developing, and since the thing is new, language has difficulties capturing it adequately and then draws upon "hokey" expressions. But, and here is the connection to the topic of mainstream: as soon as "this thing" is not so new any more, language has a much easier time expressing it. It does not have to rely on hokey words any more, but can find different expressions, which come out of the mainstream. It can do that, because by then the existence of "that new thing" is more stable, more solid, so the words don´t have to be so careful any more.
In that sense: I think it is a matter of personal preference, weather you choose to move, along with that thing you developed into the mainstream, which is where it apparently wants to go, of if you choose to stay on the edge of the new, and look out for the next new thing that comes up on the horizon. I think both, the "moving into the mainstream" and the "looking out for the new" need people to be brought into existence. Which one you choose to do might have something to do with your personal preference, or the general conditions your life is in.
It is definitely an interesting topic!

Tim Merry

25/6/2014 13:17:50

Hey Ursel - thanks for posting. Yes, I think ambiguous would have been a better word than 'hokey' . Love this idea that new social behaviours develop outside the realm of language and the more they are practiced the clearer the language becomes. Makes sense to me. Absolutely a personal preference where to put one's energy and focus … and I think there is call now for me to become adept at navigating the mainstream with our work and I wonder if that is broader than just me, whether there is bigger timing as well as personal preference?

Helen Titchen Beeth link

25/6/2014 21:50:34

Your post made me quite happy, Tim! On Monday I received a call out from a dear friend, mate, and force of nature bringing participatory leadership into the heart of the European Commission. Her very own team (it's often our most intimate professional circles that are the greatest challenge), in a crisis, is calling for 'her' magic methods to help them out of their impasse, as the only solution they can think of. That for timing. It is time indeed, and things are morphing 'all by themselves', because of the good work we have all being doing around the world, that mean that enough people have experienced participation 'on the fringes' to know that it can also help 'in the mainstream'.

About language, the hosting language we have been using all these years - carefully, not carelessly, chosen to reflect the essence of what it is describing - is catching on in EU circles, at least (Commissioner Barnier referred to 'harvest' in both English and French at a big social business event earlier this year, and if a Commissioner can say it without damaging his reputation, then others can too). In my experience it is worth holding one's ground and using one's 'sacred language' consciously and intentionally. There is an insidious tendency to be worried about how other people will experience strangeness, and to try to manage their experience. I tend to reframe that these days as allowing people to take responsibility for their own responses as an act of respect. It's surprising how well that works.

26/6/2014 09:11:32

Thanks Helen. I was chatting to a friend and colleague Lalith yesterday and we were asking: what is clarity of language that creates the conditions for people to surrender to ambiguity? I am happy to hear it is settling in the EC. After being here over 10 years now, I have made the decision to let go of the language and focus on the practice. Whatever the language/ model / concept that fits the need, I want to l work with that … that way we develop and articulation that is true to the place. I think we can do that without compromising the DNA of participatory work. The language is not sacred to me, nor the models … it is only the practice that has my unconditional loyalty and even that, I find, is constantly changing and evolving.

Jan Hut link

26/6/2014 00:51:33

Hi Tim,

great blog, Going mainstream. Here in the North of the Netherlands we try to start up a community and practising with very different groups. Most community oriented with people dealing with regional development. But slowly entering the professional world. Hosting a meeting with customers form a very small shop in a small village, how to prepare the shop for the future, A meeting with 30 employees from a party centre how to enhance their services. The owner most of the times listening and sitting on his hands. The next challenge is a Harbor where big investments are made for data centers, Electricity plants and windturbines. So more or less we are going mainstream too. But the biggest challenge is how to host the disabled customer of the small shop and also host the meeting with the management of the habor (more or less disabled but in antoher way :-).

Tim

26/6/2014 09:15:37

Yes! It is interesting how the more mainstream we go the greater the diversity that can turn up in the room (if we run good invitation). My experience has been that it leads to better conversations and deeper transformation - the more difference people are confronted with and able to be in together the more opportunity there is for something truly new to come out. Good luck bringing them all together. It would be great to hear the story!

Cheryl Lyon

29/6/2014 03:56:26

Tim et al,
"Diversity!" I'm trying to get AOH into the mainstream of municipal government; specifically the Big Social Service System whose funding, legislation & policies affect so many marginalized people. Trying to get both sides into equal, respectful, trusting conversation. Not only is it a "hard sell" but a wicked challenge is how to meaningfully include mentally, physically and economically marginalized people. People whose lives are so dependent, so ruled. Who mistrust, hate and resist the other half of the room but who want a voice and who are being asked to speak (but thru surveys and emails!) I believe we must somehow build with them the very capacity to participate. So, as an AOH practitioner, I am faced with the dual responsibility to conduct The Work well while attending to that part of the dialogue - either by work before the conversation, project whatever, and/or during.

Aerin Dunford

26/6/2014 03:27:26

This reminds me so much of a recent conversation Tenn and I had about the Art of Hosting when I was in Utah last month. Particularly this line: "I no longer want to be embedded in something that is so diverse it is diluted and is articulated so vaguely is gains no traction in the systems it is seeking to transform." At the same time we shared this sentiment, we also noticed that there seems to be a tendency towards rigidity - e.g. "An AoH training has to look exactly like X, Y & Z." Maybe that's a certain kind of dogma emerging. I wonder if these are patterns people are noticing more broadly across this rapidly growing AoH "system" -- particularly for those of us that have been part of it for 10 - 15 years now.

26/6/2014 09:19:54

Thanks Aerin - lovely to hear you on here. I would love to hear more about what you are experiencing as the dogma … I feel there is a line between delivering something we know works well and getting stuck in a rut ...

Kelly link

26/6/2014 04:03:06

Thanks once again for offering your journey Tim. I love the way that you reflect that courageous moment when those of us who come from 'the fringe' make the conscious decision to work intimately with people in the mainstream systems that were once 'the problem' or metaphors for what is wrong with this world.

I would love to hear more from you about the risk in this decision and what it takes to remain a steward of life in these settings. More about having eyes wide open to the danger of entering large systems that are elegantly designed to colonized life.

What does it really take to hold space for life, living systems, meaningful connection and (could it be an aspiration?) transformation in these spaces?

How do we discern the moments when our practices are about to be adapted by the machine rather than engage it?

Some might say that these questions don't matter and that creating moments of visceral understanding in a few hearts and minds that there is a more life affirming way is enough... but I don't think you are solidly in that camp.

26/6/2014 09:33:01

This is a great question … thank you. The only way I have found to hold my integrity in my work is to build experience through my own journey inside myself. What is equipping me to go places I have avoided all my life in my work is spending some time going to the places inside myself I have avoided all my life. I feel like if I can navigate those places inside myself I am well prepared to navigate those places in the world. It was actually by going into my inner work that I found the courage, conviction and desire to do the work I am now doing in organisations and communities.

I have also found that I can use theories, models, roadmaps to help me navigate but my ultimate tool is my intuition. A project or situation may be ticking all the boxes of awesomeness but it doesn't quite feel right. Every time I have ignored that feeling it has come back to get me! When I get the uneasy feeling I stop and investigate to find out if it is a block in me or something in the context that needs to shift.

Lastly working with people like Tuesday Ryan Hart has helped me develop an analysis that aligns with my own intuitive knowing. That has been helpful too - an articulation of why power in a situation needs to shift for example. All of that comes out of conversations "something doesn't feel right here …" then off we go into a conversation that turns something up that shifts us and our work. It not feeling right is not enough - a clear and unambiguous analysis and articulation of what and where we could go from here is mostly what is needed.

Bit of a ramble …. What is working for you?

28/6/2014 02:13:31

Yes, the play between the intuition that you describe and analysis and frameworks is what works for me in real time or in a beginning-middle-end project. I also get very clear with myself and clients about what it is we are really trying to do here... it's usually less about an invitation to ‘change our system of operating' than it is about getting unstuck or moving to the next level.

Even in the grand transformation invitations, the pattern continues where the institution adapts participatory practices and frameworks in ways that reinforce or alleviate resistance to business as usual. This is when 'something doesn't feel right' is more about sensing the whole than the immediate (which can still feel really awesome) and feels like a reaction to collaborating with that old enemy ~ the institutions of death that are perfectly designed to extract potency from people, animals, plants and minerals and discard the rest (dramatic effect intended).

I guess the question is about adaptation. Human beings are exceedingly good at it; it makes complete sense that the dominant organizational framework of our times is wildly adaptive. Mainstream institutions integrate new influences at a fairly rapid pace and grow stronger from the disturbance (think greenwashing or bank profits following the most recent crash and Occupy).

How can we discern the difference between adapting to and engaging with?

What does it really take to maintain our potency when swimming in the mainstream?

What if our collective focus on maintaining our zen (hosting ourselves), rather than our potency, is less about thriving and more about adapting to the toxicity in the mainstream?

François

2/7/2014 00:00:51

Hi Tim.
Just a quick note to say how glad I am to hear I'm not the only one to go by "gut feeling" :-)
We just cancelled an event, Herman & me precisely because we had a very bad feeling about it.
We had a serious talk with the sponsor and he agreed that we needed more clarity to go further.
So yes to intuition.
That's why it is called the art of hosting - otherwise I guess it would be called the science of meetings or something :-)

Cheers from sunny Luxembourg.

Violetta

27/6/2014 10:58:31

So great to read your evolution Tim. I love the fluidity you embark on in your innerwork, learning to pick up your power, to find the CEO in you, etc. This is resonant with my own journey as I map my next path and its really heartening and encouraging to read your sharing.

John Mortimer

30/6/2014 08:04:44

Well, its an interesting question that I have been seeing as two different areas for some years - the alternative, and the conventional.
Having started working with transformation in the corporate world ten years ago, I have realised that we are all people that can be transformed. Maybe there is more scope in the conventional organisations for personal and organisational improvement; the impact maybe more profound.
I believe that I benefit from working with the conventional organisations, if they are willing to extend their curiosity to go in a expansive and learning path. The challenge is how to do that carefully, and by taking that journey in the way that corresponds to the path that leads to greater understanding.
It is a very interesting question...

3/7/2014 04:16:35

I love this questions. Thank you Kelly!!

What if our collective focus on maintaining our zen (hosting ourselves), rather than our potency, is less about thriving and more about adapting to the toxicity in the mainstream?

More to come in the next post coming out today or tomorrow.

Sandy Heierbacher link

3/7/2014 14:53:30

Wow - what a smart, provocative post you've written, Tim! And these comments are fantastic as well.

The thread here about language reminds me of something we focused on at the 2008 National Conference on Dialogue and Deliberation. We referred to it as "the framing challenge" in our field. Basically, the question we engaged people in at (and before) the conference was "How can we talk about and present D&D work in more accessible ways?"

We focused specifically on how the language we use to describe and present this kind of work might unintentionally be turning away conservatives. I wrote an article on our findings that's up at http://ncdd.org/rc/item/3387 if you're interested.

One of the things we explored is how we might develop a common language for our practice with more universal appeal (impossible! dialogue & deliberation is even more broad than AoH practices) -- though we certainly can rethink our terms and shift in new directions). We also explored how different framings affect different groups. Some terms we use in this field turn people away because they are too “new-agey” sounding (maybe what you meant by 'hokey'); others because they are too academic or jargony to be welcoming (like "deliberative democracy"), or because they have negative connotations or implications for certain audiences (like anything that uses the term "democracy," which puts conservatives on alert). The report goes into a little detail about how D&D practitioners are acquiring and cultivating greater sensitivity to the ways that distinct language ‘plays out’ for different groups.

Anyway, thought you might be interested in taking a look. These are important questions to be asking, and ones that don't go away. This is one of our field's own "wicked problems," and you've articulated it very powerfully.

Rik Verschueren link

3/7/2014 22:34:48

Hi Tim. I worked hard to get in authentic touch with 'mainstream power' and offer occasions and methods to look more-dimensional to the possibilities. But sub-streams made me to leave this ambition for a while. Now I have time to look at the WorldFootball at my mainstream neighbours place. And the morning that I was wondering how I could bridge the gap to his sometimes racist language and my own sympathy for some immigrant-players, I found a little card in my mailbox, where they invited me for dinner the evening of the next Red Devil-match.

What I want to say: it is not only about entering mainstream at the powerfull top.

Your text appealed to me on my question:
"How to awaken hidden local solutions for nowadays and future problems in my neighbourhood' and "How can the AoH-culture and methods contribute to a local, every-days, vital level.!"

Allen Kwabena Frimpong

4/7/2014 06:43:41

I totally understand where you are coming from Tim (part 1 and 2 of this blog is AMAZING! as I say), and I am just reading the comments here too, so I would like to offer my perspective on the points your are making in the blog because I think the conversation that its generating is really DOPE and important to this creative work of art we are putting on display.

My question that I want to offer to this conversation, which is also inspired by Grace Lee Boggs as well as Jelani Cobb ( Folks google both of them- they are also amazing people that just living truths of this dialogue we are having)

What are the opportunities and challenges in radically co-evolving within the mainstream?

For me, what I am currently learning is that I am very invested in transformative justice. I am practicing my 'stealth organizing' skill set through Art of Hosting to achieve my personal vision for what transformative justice looks like in my life, and I want to share that with other people. Perhaps that is the co-evolving piece-sharing our intentions for why we want to or should grow together.

I actually don't leave my radical nature when I enter into the mainstream (which right now is working with Foundations who want large scale change with a large social and financial return on their investments- talk about muddy waters huh?). It is part and parcel of my vision for transformative justice. My radical nature perhaps shapeshifts, and I package and deliver it (the shapeshifting) in a way that it is seen and embraced as a gift, rather than a curse which is what people in the mainstream tend associate radical with or anything else that appears to even look out of the ordinary. This actually allows them to shapeshift too as well. I engaging in shapeshifting because it creates space for me to co-evolve with others in the mainstream. This is why I love how your blog entry has also generated this question from Kelly: How can we discern the difference between adapting to and engaging with?

I want to co-exist in my difference and not always get rejected as a curse, and/or adapt myself out of my gifts. Which is what I have experienced in my own journey as have been in the mainstream. I just feel like it is a repeated pattern that definitely has underpinnings of oppression (white supremacy culture/colonization-specifically) under and behind it. It takes a certain amount of risk and courage to do what all our ancestors and many of us are doing today, which is to practice navigating the waters of power (which I think Tuesday was able to lay out so beautifully from the Art of Hosting Beyond the Basic experience), but I think this tension should be explored more. Thank You Tim so much for this!!

8/7/2014 06:38:15

Yes! Love this. It is not that we have to lose our radical nature - just that it can turn up as a gift. Moving from fighting it out to figuring it out. Perhaps more that a gift it can turn up a strategic necessity to get the results we would all like to achieve. How can I bring what I have to offer in a way it be seen, used and spread?

Here's to navigating the waters of power in the world and inside ourselves. Thanks Allen.

Stephani Roy McCallum

4/7/2014 09:02:16

Hi Tim - I loved this blog and thank you for sharing your thoughts. I referenced it in my recent blog about insights from the Spartan Race - reflecting on courage, resilience and connection in community engagement. You can find it here: https://medium.com/@RedheadSteph/surprising-insights-from-the-spartan-race-1ed6fb9472c1
Cheers!
Steph

Michael Kline link

19/9/2014 09:04:48

I loved reading all the opinions here. My team and I have been struggling with the language as well, as we attempt to leave the shore and dive into the deep waters of corporate or industrial clients. I was recently referred to a machine shop to do some team-building work. Without using any particular language, I sat 30 very "unlikely customers" in a circle, used a talking piece, built a center, and got them sharing - sure, some complained, some whined, some were downright nasty, and in the end, the process stayed together and we were invited back to continue the progress.
My thought is that if we choose to venture into the factory floor and work with conservatives who cannot remember their last meaningful conversation, and have been taught for 0 years to not express any feelings for any reason, we may have to translate our language into something even the far side of mainstream - the practice seems to work the same, whatever the name.

Howard Stanten

20/9/2014 18:36:12

Mike, your idea of translating the language into something even the far side of mainstream adds a new dimension to the depth of this discussion. Where 3 day AoH trainings among relatively like minded folk occur at one side of the main stream, the work on the factory floor may very well occur at the other. In that space, even "mainstream" language, whatever that really means, may be less than effective. On the factory floor, working to build an atmosphere of trust based on a willingness to be vulnerable will require facilitators to be able to listen to the unspoken stories first while at the same time modeling their own vulnerability in such a way that the walls of fear built by years of marginalization start to break apart. Tim's notion of clarifying the ambiguous language makes a lot of sense. Categorizing this clarity as "mainstream" however may not reflect the depth of the challenge. To me, the work needs to move into the trenches and become more accessible. This means we, as change leaders, need to above all else be able to listen nimbly and reflect the language that is presented to us, be it AoH- esque, mainstream, or "something on the far side of mainstream" all to use to being swept up on the factory floor.

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.