When we gather, let’s be in conversation

When we are in the same place at the same time, let’s do the work we can’t do independently

A necessary distinction

Here is the distinction I need to make. If I am talking a lot, like in an interview, then the purpose of my speaking is idea-sharing. I am sharing content out into the world. If you listen to an interview or podcast, or watch a TED Talk (eventually), or when you read this blog post or pick up Nest City and read it, you and I have not gathered. My audience and I are not in the same space at the same time. Under these circumstances, it makes perfect sense for me to talk (or write) and broadcast.

However, if we are in the same location (again, in person or online), it no longer makes sense for me to talk and talk. When we are in the same place, we have an opportunity to be in conversation. When I joined that group to talk about my book, I missed this opportunity.

The “information sharing is conversation” trap

I’ve long criticized others for falling into the trap of thinking that information sharing is conversation. At a conference last fall, I found myself having an allergic reaction when the moderator described the five-minute question-and-answer period as conversation. The presenter was violent in his demeanour and not open to discussion and the purpose of the event, by design, was to share information.

Here’s the catch: we say we want conversation, but we structure our gatherings and meetings to rule out conversation. Or set webinars and conferences up for many of us to watch a few of us have a conversation. Sure, an interview is a conversation, but let’s not confuse the fact that a few people are in conversation, not all of us. It is not the same thing.

There are five parts to this “information is conversation trap” that we need to pay attention to:

1. Thinking we are in conversation when we are participating in information-sharing
2. Feeling good about the pseudo-conversation we tell ourselves we are having
3. Feeling superior and satisfied about being the information-sharer
4. Feeling inferior and incomplete, only to be made complete by filling ourselves with the information
5. Feeling secure in the familiarity of the information-sharing pattern

All of these aspects of the trap feed on each other, buttressed by our desire to feel secure. We have clear roles to play: expert and audience. This trap reinforces the idea that some of us are experts, and most of us are not. And since we have security in this idea, we do not see the conundrum, let alone question.

Ask: what is the purpose of this gathering?

Over the years, as I convene people to be in conversation — with each other, not listening to others — about small and huge topics, I have learned that everyone is yearning for conversation. That’s why we say we want conversation, all the time. We want better connections with each other, and we want better results.

Our design literacy is lacking when we organize meetings, gatherings, conferences, webinars, etc. A simple way to resolve this is to ask: What is the purpose of this meeting? Two primary purposes come to mind:

• Provide instructions: one-way information dissemination with an optional and brief question-and-answer period. This format is ideal when critical information needs to be shared, or the intention is to give people food for thought, for individual reflection.
• Discern wise action: multi-directional communication fosters and supports relationships among people. This format is ideal when you want people to meet and interact with each other, pool their intelligence to strengthen our resilience as a community.

It is not enough to say that being in the same room, in person or online, we are a community, in relationship with each other. If we are not in conversation with each other, we are not in relationship with each other.

The imperative: design for people to connect

We have endless opportunities to receive information: conferences, webinars, panel presentations, TEDTalks, etc. When we gather in the same place at the same time, there is an imperative to do something we can only do when we are together: be in conversation. We can design for this by design and organizing our gatherings in ways that allow people to connect.

When we meet in person, numerous processes are available to facilitate connection; World Cafe, Open Space Technology, The Circle Way are my go-to practices to support and develop participatory leadership (www.artofhosting.org).

In the excitement of being asked to speak about my book, I lost track of this principle. This experience has been a pivotal reminder about the work I do and why I do it. My work is not about speaking and talking about my work. My work is not speaking; it is convening:

Let’s convene ourselves. Let’s be a community of support for each other to offer our best selves to the communities and cities we serve.

This convening work feels more important than ever. When we do get a chance to meet face to face, we need to talk about and work on the stuff we can’t do independently.

The work calling to me:

• Convene conversations about who we are and who we want to be
• Convene conversations about our cities and how we serve them.

Does it call to you? Will you join me?

Reflection

• What is the next level of work for you to encourage connections between people when we gather at the same time?
• What support do you need?

This article first appeared at www.bethsanders.ca