Monday, June 24, 2019

Could “Conversational Leadership” Avert Deeply Troubling Times Ahead?


We live in a world where some moments are simple, some moments are complicated, some moments are complex, and some moments are chaotic. If the world were always simple, then each of us could make decisions and easily predict the outcomes. If the world were always complicated, then each of us could research our options, make decisions, and likely predict the outcomes. If the world were always complex, then each of our individual decisions would impact each other and outcomes would likely be unpredictable. If the world were always chaotic, then it might appear as though we don’t even have decisions to make, almost as if decisions were being made for us as we react and respond to the environment around us.

Please pause a moment to slowly consider these three questions:

  1. What would it look like to have a “conversational approach” to your life?
  2. Do you spend more time in “conversation mode” (e.g. working with people) or in “action mode” (e.g. completing a task)?
  3. Are you intentional, choiceful and aware of how many jovial conversations you have, and how many intense conversations you have, and any other type of conversation that you have?


Our civilizations appear to have tremendous progress in handling simple and complicated moments. Simple and complicated moments are often directly related to cause-and-effect. We’ve become quite skilled at seeing cause and effect, especially when we’ve previously experienced the cause or the effect. However, in complex and chaotic environments, we seem to make more mistakes. Although mistakes can provide an opportunity for learning and improvement, there are many approaches for skillfully operating in complex and chaotic environments. One of the emerging approaches for living in a highly complex and connected world is being called Conversational Leadership.

In several of this books, Jungian psychotherapist Dr James Hollis talks about how the first half of life is about being happy, the second half of life is about making sense. This line of thinking often sparks thoughtful and intriguing conversation. Those conversations can offer different perspectives and provide each of us an opportunity to understand ourselves and each other better. It is through conversation that each of us can partner and understand each other in a deeper, more meaningful way. We can try to make sense of the complexity and chaos around us through conversation.

In simple and complicated moments, we’ve become quite skilled at taking action in order to make progress. In complex and chaotic moments, it may be helpful to remind ourselves of Ralph Waldo Emerson’s quote that “the ancestor of every action is a thought.” In conversation we have opportunities to share those thoughts, clarify those thoughts and even raise awareness of the thoughts themselves.

Conversational Leadership is an emerging broad field that includes leading, designing, cultivating, and convening conversations. Those conversations are intended to be purposeful, intentional, choiceful and as skilled as the group is ready to be. That said, Conversational Leadership intends to apply to all conversations, regardless of their type. It is also important to note that Conversational Leadership intends to be valuable to everyone, because the field views everyone as a Conversational Leader (not only positionally ranked “leaders”). Admittedly, the field is tending to be focused on conversations within organizations at this point. 

The field is so new that even the label itself is debated – it could be Conversational Management, Conversation Management, Conversational Communityship, Conversation Architecture, is it Conversation Design, or so many other options. Some people might say that many leaders are not conversational in their approach, they tend to demand or dictate and have little range outside of those options (and have even be quite skilled in how they present those demands so they don’t necessarily come across as demands). Some people might say that “most conversations are not designed, or poorly designed”. Some people might say that many of the recent advances in fields such as Project Management, Information Technology, Human Resources, Operations are due to improved conversations and collaboration, so Conversational Leadership is about “shining a direct light on conversation itself, as opposed to improving conversations for a specific outcome”. Similar to other broad fields, such as Knowledge Management or Organisation Development, it might be quite challenging to pinpoint an exact label or definition for the field. Each of those options could result in their own manifesto or definition, and maybe Conversational Leadership is the amalgamation of many fields related to conversation, even including the science of conversation which has existed for some time to study the rhythms within conversations.

For now, maybe we consider the model below as one way to look at Conversational Leadership.



This framework is probably too complicated and could be simplified. Let’s step through each area of the framework, and open the conversation for feedback and improvement.

General Purpose of Conversation
In the top bar we see “General Purpose of Conversation” and “Current Need”. The general purpose of conversation can be highly debated, but in the case of Conversational Leadership, we’re referring to making sense of a highly complex and connected world. The general purpose of conversation from this perspective would be to partner and understand each ourselves, each other, and our situation(s) through conversation. It is about enabling our best ability to act and improve.

The “Current Need” refers to your current needs in any active conversation that you’re having. It also refers to the needs of the other people in the conversation. Even more complex, it also refers to the needs of the entire group. Group needs are often different from individuals’ needs. As simple as it sounds, it can be quite difficult to be aware of your deepest needs in any given conversation. It can also be difficult to express your deepest needs in any conversation. For example, imagine you’re standing at a train station and the person next to you starts a conversation with you about the weather. Do you need to discuss the weather because that topic might begin to build trust and lead to the next topic. Or, do you need to have a personal conversation about a recent death in the family because that topic completely occupies your mind. As I learned in acting school, maybe its not only “needs” that are relevant, maybe it is “needs, wants and desires”. Then, its not only about the topic that’s being discussed, then it also becomes about “how” and “when” and “where” and many other facets of the conversation.

Imagine if we were all skilled at knowing the general purpose of conversation, and our current needs/wants/desires in this conversation, and how to express those needs/wants/desires. The two key questions in this area could be:
  1.  Are you having the conversation you need to be having right now?
  2.  Are we having it in the way we need to be having it?


Leadership and Communityship
Notice that there are 2 columns in this model. The left column is much wider than the right column. The left column focuses on “conversation”, while the right column focuses on “leadership”. The “Leadership and Communityship” is less fleshed out than the conversational column because many decades of work have been done in leadership. Henry Mintzberg coined the term “Communityship”, which if I understand it correctly, is attempting to say that maybe we need to augment individual leadership with group-level leadership which could be called “Communityship.”

Conversational Theories & Models
Underneath “General Purpose of Conversation” we see “Conversational Theories & Models.” There are dozens of well-received books/models that offer how to have certain kinds of conversations. For example, but not limited to, there are books on crucial conversations, healing conversations, deep conversations, non-violent communications, influencing, negotiating, etc. There are also quite helpful models such as polarity thinking/mapping that can serve to enable highly-aware conversations. Conversational Leadership, at this point, simply aims to be a pointer to the many existing models that support improved conversational skills. Stay tuned to this area though, there is hope that the field itself could result in new conversational theories and models.

Conversational “Sets”
Next to theories & models, we see “Conversational Sets”. At first, we listed mindset, skillset and toolset, we later added John Hagel’s spirit-set and heart-set. Each one of these boxes again offers a list of pointers.

Conversational Mindset could include conversational beliefs and principles such as “everyone has an equal voice” and “time for feedback and collective sense-making”, etc. The idea is to be aware of the mindset you’re brining into each conversation, and the patterns you have across all of your conversations.

Conversational Skillset includes your conversational behaviours and habits. For example, within your conversational skillset, what is your behaviour for making time to reflect? What are your listening habits? The list of conversational behaviours and habits is quite extensive, so in Conversational Leadership we are working to raise awareness of your conversational behaviours/habits and their impact on yourself, others and the situation.  

Conversational Toolset includes a long list of “tools” for designing conversations. For example, we could use a knowledge café design or an after action review design for conversation. Liberating Structures is a related field that offers at least 30 different conversational designs. Conversational Leadership could have a Conversational Toolkit to include conversational processes and even software that support conversation.

Above mindset, skillset, toolset, you'll notice spirit-set and heart-set. Credit (and further detail) goes to John Hagel for these concepts. If I understand them correctly, these concepts are to remind us that mindset, skillset and toolset tend to come from the brain, whereas heart-set and spirit probably come from somewhere else. Maybe it is the difference between mind and brain, maybe its the difference between thinking and feeling, maybe it is something else. From a Conversational Leadership perspective, spirit-set and heart-set are intended to be reminders that our conversational spirit and our conversational heart/emotions are well worth being aware of, and potentially even bringing into the conversation.

Current Conversation
At the bottom of the conversational left column, we see “Current Conversation” and “Applied Conversational Skills”. This area is intended to remind us that Conversational Leadership can be applied in every conversation by every person at any given time. It is meant to be the real-time application of all the other areas of the Conversational Leadership framework. In other words, during a conversation, am I able to “see” the conversational design, the conversational process, my own needs, the general purpose of the conversation? Can I embed light structure or facilitation if and when necessary? Am I aware, and listening for, individual and group needs? What is being said in the conversation, what might be covertly being said or not said in the conversation that is impactful?  This area of the framework is simply intended to be a reminder that Conversational Leadership is an applied discipline, it can be considered within every conversation.

Impact & Improvement Loops
You might notice the arrows on the far left and far right of the framework. These arrows are designed to remind us that every conversation has an impact on ourselves, on others and on our situation. If we approach conversations in a meaningful way, ready to learn and improve (not only the task and topic, but our conversational skills as well), then we can likely begin to live life in a conversational way. The hope and drive of Conversational Leadership is to connect with each other, make sense of our situations, and carry forward as best we can.

Your Feedback
Having read this, what do you now think of Conversational Leadership? What does the concept of Conversational Leadership evoke in you? Can you think of times where Conversational Leadership would directly improve your situation? Can you imagine where the field of Conversational Leadership could go?

No comments:

Post a Comment