Hosting Conversations about Questions that Matter
World Cafe and the Coffee Party Movement, part 2
Last night, I held my second Maestro Conference based WC on the Coffee Party Movement (CPM). As I noted to Amy Lenzo, who graciously helped me on the first call two weeks ago, the participation on the call of a few experienced practitioners from this and related communities made me feel a bit like a little league player coaching a team of professionals. At the same time, about half the nineteen people that started on the call had no WC experience at all. In general, I thought it was a great opportunity for both communities to get to know one another and to do some productive thinking about the CPM's direction.
The theme of the two hour café was the potential tension between the CPM’s twin goals of
issue-based advocacy and the fostering of broad-based “transpartisan” dialog. The discussion used three breakouts, exploring three successive questions (I would love some feedback on ways that more experienced hosts might have framed these):
issue-based advocacy and the fostering of broad-based “transpartisan” dialog. The discussion used three breakouts, exploring three successive questions (I would love some feedback on ways that more experienced hosts might have framed these):
11. 1. What experiences (or thoughts) do you have regarding combining broad based dialog and advocacy?
2.2. 2. Imagine that the CPM decides to tackle the issue of immigration. What processes might it use to facilitate dialog and to develop advocacy positions?
3. What principles might the CPM adopt to address the challenge of combining advocacy and broad-based dialog?
There were a couple of major technical glitches (figures that would happen when Amy isn't there and I'm flying solo!) that Maestro says were due to server errors on their end. One--a period of dead air just as I was setting up the first breakout-- probably resulted in five of the original nineteen callers dropping out. But we soldiered on and I would like to think that those who did were pleased on the whole with the experience and the output.
Meanwhile, with multiple advocates of dialog and deliberation lobbying the CPM's national leadership, it appears that they are finally willing to entertain the prospect of some expert assistance on group process facilitation and the hosting of vibrant conversations on questions that matter. My WC efforts to date have been solo affairs, not quite "under the radar," but not exactly embraced or supported by the national organizers either. Now, with NCDD director Sandy Heierbacher officially announced as part of a new CPM Board of Advisors, that dynamic might be changing.
The first project on which we may be officially invited to collaborate looks to be the creation of a Declaration of Principles for the movement. That was touched on a bit in last night's call, and I hope to address it more deeply on a call next week. Day and time are TBD--hopefully some of you can join us and also help craft the question(s) in ways that will really unlock the collective insight of the participants.
It's a short window--the national organizers want to hand the project off to a small team of writers for the creation of a draft within a week or so but have agreed to open up the process first with an initial request for broad-based input. Later, there will be an opportunity for commentary, feedback and discussion of the draft.
If you are interested in the details of the call last night, I have attached a report. Thanks again to Amy, Juanita, Jane Gignoux, Tom Atlee and others who have helped get me started on this journey. Stay tuned for Part 3!
Regards,
Ben Roberts
203 426-5088
- Attachments:
Replies to This Conversation
-
Permalink Reply by Peg Carlson-Bowen on -
Ben--great progress. On the Coffee Party USA site, they have the statements/text below--how would that relate to this statement of principles draft?
Coffee Party USA aims to reinvigorate the public sphere, drawing from diverse backgrounds and diverse perspectives, with the goal of expanding the influence of the People in America's political arena. We do not require nor adhere to any preexisting ideology. We encourage deliberation guided by reason amongst the many viewpoints held by our members. We see our diversity as a strength, not a weakness, because we believe that faithful deliberation from multiple vantage points is the best way to achieve the common good. It is in the responsible and reasonable practice of deliberation that we hope to contribute to society.
Coffee Party USA is made up of people acting independently of political parties, of corporations, and of political lobbying networks. To this point, all products created and hours logged for Coffee Party have been carried out in the spirit of volunteerism. In the coming months and years, we hope to transform our disappointment in our current political system into a force that will return our nation to a course of popular governance, of the People by the People for the People.
We are diverse — ethnically, geographically, politically, in age and in experience.
We are 100% grassroots. No lobbyists here. No pundits. And no hyper-partisan strategists calling the shots in this movement. We are a spontaneous and collective expression of our desire to forge a culture of civic engagement that is solution-oriented, not blame-oriented.
We demand a government that responds to the needs of the majority of its citizens as expressed by our votes and by our voices; NOT corporate interests as expressed by misleading advertisements and campaign contributions.
We want a society in which democracy is treated as sacrosanct and ordinary citizens participate out of a sense of civic duty, civic pride, and a desire to contribute to society.
Coffee Party USA is a call to action. Our Founding Fathers and Mothers gave us an enduring gift — democracy — and we must use it to meet the challenges that we face as a nation
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Roberts on -
It's a very good statement, isn't it? I have not yet received a statement from the National organizers as to just what they see as the purpose of the Declaration of Principles, so it's unclear how it might refine or expand upon what is already there. I think I'll psot something to our national strategy Google Gp and ask that very question!
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Roberts on
-
I updated my report a bit and also added a conclusion and recommendations, copied below. The technical notes regarding the use of Maestro might be of particular interest to this group.
Conclusions:
Overall, there was a positive assessment of the call, including this comment: “[m]et some great people and became aware of some new resources that I'm really excited about. I feel much more hopeful right now, that's a good thing.”
Not surprisingly, the value of broad-based dialog that includes diverse participants and opinions was strongly affirmed. At the same time, there was limited experience in the group with a single organization combining the promotion of such dialog with a core mission of political activism, suggesting that the CPM is embarking on relatively new and challenging terrain. The principles suggested by the group emphasized the need for creating a safe (“neutral?”) space for all ideas to be heard and for dissent to be acknowledged. Another key theme was the need for providing/developing credible sources of information.
The questions posed for the café led to some exploration of the “big tent” challenge (i.e. how diverse a membership does/should the CPM have and how do we achieve that?). But this inquiry may perhaps have been limited due to an assumption by the participants that, as a general rule, the CPM’s specific advocacy positions would emerge out of the dialogic processes in which the groups engaged, rather than as directives issued by the movement’s organizers. A future discussion might more directly explore this, perhaps with the question of whether or not the CPM (or its organizers) is being perceived as a “liberal advocacy group” and if so, why and what our response might be.
In terms of the process itself, Maestro Conference proved to be a good platform for conducting such discussions despite its glitches. The world café format was well received and successfully generated a positive and productive collaborative environment as well as an opportunity for participants to make potentially useful connections with one another.
On a more technical note regarding hosting strategies, holding three breakouts of thirty minute each within a two hour time frame proved workable even with the inevitable delays in getting fully under way, (not to mention the challenges posed by the tech breakdowns). An initial ten minute period of introductions and polling (plus an invitation to join the call up to ten minutes early for informal chat) allowed for an orderly start to the call. Having each of the final breakout groups conduct a harvest independently, rather than attempting this with the group as a whole, also allowed for an efficient use of time. The use of scribes whose email summaries could then form the basis for this report was also very helpful.
Recommendations:
As a general tool for the CPM, this call validated the world café format and Maestro Conference platform as a useful means of exploring core issues and of bringing together people from diverse backgrounds, locations and roles within the movement. As a next step, it is recommended that a series of calls be used to help develop insights and suggestions for the drafting of the new Declaration of Principles. It might also be interesting to explore the use of the Maestro Conference platform as a means of conducting virtual CPM group meetings, either as adjuncts to physical groups or as a means for those who are geographically isolated to gather regularly. - Attachments:
Photos
Contribute!
© 2017 Created by Amy Lenzo.
Powered by
