Gordon Wells
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 1998 04:21:29 +1100 (EST)
From: Charlie Hendricksen <veritas who-is-at u.washington.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <arlist-l who-is-at scu.edu.au>
Subject: [ARLIST-L:3448] Re: Reflective Practitioner
Friends,
Perhaps it is time once more to point out that there are other modes of
communication that may be more supportive of reflection. Asynchronous
communication, such as practiced by the readers of this list, gives us the time
we need to reflect on both the stimulus and our response. The same is likely
true in brainstorming sessions. The group dynamics of face-to-face meetings
reduces the reflective opportunities, especially of those who are inclined to
think before speaking.
Brainstorming as originally conceived and practiced has not consistently
delivered (Mullein, Johnson and Salas 1991). Reduction of the power
relationships in synchronous brainstorming by using electronic brainstorming
has been shown to increase the production of ideas over verbally interacting
groups (Gallupe et.al. 1994). I believe that further decoupling to pure
asynchronous systems will create an environment even more conducive to idea
production.
The face-to-face meeting as a panacea or ideal type is simply a myth.
Meetings do, of course, serve us well in several ways. Building group
coherence and coming to consensus are outstanding uses of face-to-face
meetings. If the group seldom sees each other, then unstructured meetings that
provide free-form interaction are very important and often productive.
However, structured and well supported asynchronous forums should be considered
likely superior to the face-to-face meeting for many information intensive
purposes.
Asynchronous "meetings" can be joined on your schedule, when you are in
the mood, without traveling, and with a perfect persistent record of the
transactions. You can carefully reflect and prepare responses.
Gallupe, Bastianutti and Cooper. 1991. "Unblocking Brainstorms." J. Applied
psychology. 76 137-142.
Mullen, Johnson and Salas. 1991. "Productivity Loss in Brainstorming Groups: A
Meta-analytic Integration." Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 12 3-23.
Cathy H. Hamilton wrote:
> >The 'contemplative practitioner' rings bells for me as well. For me, it =
> >also hints at a preparatory state prior to reflection. EG, being calm, =
> >open to experience or difference, and entering a relaxed concentration =
> >in readiness for reflection. =20
>
> David, You've hit on something that is, perhaps, taken for granted as
> necessary (calm, preparatory state) but I think about typical "group
> contemplation" where we are talking about needing relaxed concentration and
> "energy was up, ideas were bouncing." How do you make the two work?!
> Journaling could be one response to bridging the two seemingly paradoxical
> dynamics. If articulating insights and applications of ideas for both
> oneself and group is not practical between these gatherings, how about 10
> minutes of silence within the "high energy" in which everyone needs to jot
> down thoughts, insights, group and personal relevance which can then be
> shared before folks shoot out the door. This would give the less verbal
> folk time to gather thoughts and those mouthy ones (me) a chance to THINK
> before riding that high energy crest of idea rush.
>
> Just a thought.
> >
> >On another level, how much can people engage in "group contemplation" =
> >without heavy trade-offs for individual contemplation? In our recent =
> >learning set, energy was up, ideas were bouncing, and people were =
> >conscious of mindful sharing and turntaking. Many individuals were =
> >experiencing insights quickly, often with more personal relevance than =
> >group relevance (at that point in the dialogue). As a consequence, some =
> >people had trouble capturing and exploring their insights. In this =
> >situation, the question for me is, how to maximise the opportunity for =
> >individuals to explore their personal insights (to remember, explore =
> >and/or share them) without jeopardising the process and dialogue within =
> >the group which had led (I assume) to such insights? Any thoughts?
> >
> >David Holzworth
> >Organisational Psychologist
> >dwh who-is-at powerup.com.au
>
> Cathy H. Hamilton
> 819 South Olive Street
> Hammond, LA 70403
> Phone:504-542-6861
> FAX: 504-345-2197
--
Charlie Hendricksen veritas who-is-at u.washington.edu