Une journée avec Otto Scharmer | Christine Koehler A l’occasion de la sortie en France du livre d’Otto Scharmer, La Théorie U, Diriger à partir du futur émergent, Génération Présence et SOL France avaient organisé la semaine dernière une journée avec Otto Scharmer à Paris. J’y étais. Qui est- Otto Scharmer ? Que veut-il ? Maître de conférence au MIT, fondateur du Presencing Institute, Otto Scharmer cherche à comprendre ce qui met en mouvement les systèmes complexes et les conduit à réussir ou pas leurs processus de changement. Il a introduit le concept de “presencing”, qui, mélange de présence et de ressenti, est un état d’attention particulier permettant aux personnes et aux groupes d’agir sur leur qualité de présence et de s’ouvrir au futur émergent. Le déroulement de la journée Les concepts A partir de là, Otto Scharmer nous a posé quelques questions fondamentales : • Comment les parties (par exemple les bribes de connaissances individuelles) se connectent-elles au tout ? Pour en savoir plus sur la Théorie U (VO anglais) : video MIT.
M A R G A R E T J. W H E A T L E Y Welcome · HubHostGuide Dear Hub Host, This guide intends to support your efforts in organizing hubs during the edX course u.lab: Leading From the Emerging Future - An introduction to leading profound social, environmental and personal transformation. The course will bring together thousands of participants from around the world for an eight-week experiential learning journey. The u.lab is a learning experience that gives people the opportunity to co-sense and co-create the emerging future within a challenge or context that matters to them. ! Co-created Guide After the last u.lab, we organized calls with u.lab hub hosts and listened to their stories and feedback. There are many different layers to the u.lab hub hosting experience. This guide was co-created by many people and the entire guide draws from the collective experience of hub hosts around the world. With gratitude for your support and energy in making the u.lab a truly global and local experience! The u.lab Hub Host Team
U-procedure and Theory U U-procedure and Theory U is a change management method to change unproductive patterns of behavior. It was developed by Dr Friedrich (Fritz) Glasl and Dirk Lemson of the NPI (Netherlands Pedagogical Institute) in 1968 and presented systematically from the 1980s. It has been used in organisation development and social development since that time. Following Dr Glasl's special interest in conflict issues, the method has also been explicitly developed to handle to the consciousness and process issues associated with relational dynamics and conflict resolution. Since the early 2000s it has been elaborated as Theory U (also called "U" methodology) by C. Otto Scharmer, incorporating also his theories of presencing and capitalism 3.0. This work itself draws on collaboration between Scharmer and his colleagues Peter Senge, Joseph Jaworski and Betty Sue Flowers. U-procedure or U-process The seven stages consist of: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Theory U Presencing
Action research Action research is either research initiated to solve an immediate problem or a reflective process of progressive problem solving led by individuals working with others in teams or as part of a "community of practice" to improve the way they address issues and solve problems. There are two types of action research: participatory action research and practical action research. Denscombe (2010, p. 6) writes that an action research strategy's purpose is to solve a particular problem and to produce guidelines for best practice. Action research involves actively participating in a change situation, often via an existing organization, whilst simultaneously conducting research. Kurt Lewin, then a professor at MIT, first coined the term “action research” in 1944. Overview Major theories Chris Argyris' Action Science Main article: Action Science Chris Argyris' Action Science begins with the study of how human beings design their actions in difficult situations. Dr. Wendell L.
Theory U: Leading from the Future as It Emerges - An Awareness Based Leaders today are torn between worlds: on the one hand they are confronted with a new set of emerging leadership challenges in a 21st-century world of complexity, chaos, and disruptive change; and on the other they find themselves equipped with a 20th-century management toolkit that is inadequate to fix the problems they face. Between these two worlds there yawns a wide chasm that today’s leaders must find a way to bridge. Theory U addresses this situation by supplying two forms of help: a lens or framework that shines a new light on the current condition of leadership, and a social technology that gives leaders tools to deal with their challenges more effectively, more creatively, and more collectively. Illuminating the Blind Spot The premise of Theory U is that the current condition of leadership – that is, operating in the chasm that separates the two worlds – cannot be addressed without illuminating the blind spot of leadership. Figure 1: The Blind Spot of Leadership Levels of Change
How to Design Culture: 16 Patterns to Build Adaptive Learning Organizations How do we form learning cultures in times of accelerating change? What tools and practices can self-organizing structures implement to become more agile and adaptive? I just received a copy of a new book by Dan Mezick called The Culture Game, which is all about answering the above inquiry. It touts itself as “the reference manual and toolbox for management “culture hackers,” those innovators and change-makers who are focused on creating a culture of learning inside their team…and the wider organization.” I’ve known Dan now for the better part of this year, and he’s been feeding me these tips, which are totally changing the ways I approach my own personal growth and development, as well as how I’m interacting with others. For me, the culture hacking movement really gets to the essence of how to build/become a learning organization and transform the future of work. Below are the 16 learning practices outlined in the book, and a brief description of each. 1. Ain’t that the truth. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Jaywalk » Structural Manifestation of Theory U Otto Scharmer’s book Theory U: Learning from the Future as It Emerges describes “the social technology of presencing”, the theory and practice of the U process that calls for “presence” and “sensing”. Scharmer maintains that through this “presencing” — being in touch with the inner place from which attention and intention originate — individuals, teams, organizations and global systems alike are able to raise to a higher level of operation, at which they are able to seize the highest future possibilities that “want to emerge”. Theory U is about profound transformation: personal, social and global. Scharmer describes to great extent how to bring about such a change individually, in organizations and in society, but does not give a proper account of what the change means in structural terms. Figure 1 depicts my idea of how Scharmer’s four levels of responding to change would be manifested structurally in a system, e.g. an organization. Figure 1.
The Co-Inteligence Institute Dialogue Conversation is thinking in its natural state. Thinking is the conversation within us.... Words began in human beings in the process of transforming gregariousness into co-operation. -- Malvina Reynolds Not all communication is dialogue. (Note: Some of our colleagues believe that what we call dialogue should be called conversation. Dialogue can at times be truly magical, dissolving the boundaries between us and the world and opening up wellsprings of realization and resonant power. These are moments of grace, whose frequency increases as we practice listening more deeply and exploring more openly with each other. Here are some guidelines for dialogue in its most basic form We talk about what's really important to us. Bohmian Dialogue The late quantum physicist David Bohm observed that both quantum mechanics and mystical traditions suggest that our beliefs shape the realities we evoke. Other ways of understanding dialogue Open Dialogue Guidelines for Open Dialogue Chime and stone Books
Theory U -> Leading from the Emerging Future | Foreign State Dr. C. Otto Scharmer is a Senior Lecturer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and founding chair of the Presencing Institute. Scharmer chairs the MIT IDEAS program and helps groups of diverse stakeholders from business, government, and civil society to innovate at the level of the whole system. He co-founded the Global Wellbeing and Gross National Happiness (GNH) Lab, which links innovators from Bhutan, Brazil, Europe, and the United States in order to innovate beyond GDP. He has worked with governments in Africa, Asia, and Europe and has delivered award-winning leadership and innovation programs for companies, including Daimler, Eileen Fisher, PriceWaterhouse, Fujitsu, Google, and Natura. Scharmer introduced the concept of “presencing” – learning from the emerging future in his bestselling books Theory U and Presence (the latter co-authored with P. He holds a Ph.D. in economics and management from Witten-Herdecke University in Germany.
Bohm Dialogue Bohm Dialogue (also known as Bohmian Dialogue or "Dialogue in the Spirit of David Bohm") is a freely-flowing group conversation in which participants attempt to reach a common understanding, experiencing everyone's point of view fully, equally and nonjudgementally. This can lead to new and deeper understanding. The purpose is to solve the communication crises that face society, and indeed the whole of human nature and consciousness. It utilizes a theoretical understanding of the way thoughts relate to universal reality. Bohm's Original Dialogue The Theory of Dialogue Bohm has introduced the concept of a dialogue stating that dialogue can be considered as a free flow of meaning between people in communication, in the sense of a stream that flows between banks. These “banks” are understood as representing the various points of view of the participants. David Bohm: It seems then that the main trouble is that the other person is the one who is prejudiced and not listening.
From ego-system to eco-system economies Credit: Shutterstock. All rights reserved. We live in an age of profound disruptions. Global crises in finance, food, fuel, water, resource scarcity and poverty challenge every aspect of our societies. Here’s a clue to the answers to these questions: the root causes of today’s global crises originate between our ears, in our outdated paradigms of economic thought. The symptoms of these crises can be summarized in three divides that disconnect us from each primary source of life: ecological, social, and spiritual. These structural disconnects indicate a broken system. Like most things on earth, economic frameworks have their own life-cycle of birth, development and growth, before they finally outlive their usefulness. How has this lifecycle continued? Unfortunately, not much: economic debates are still shaped by the same frameworks, faces, and false dichotomies that ushered in the crisis. - “co-inspiring,” or creating channels for connecting to the sources of creativity;
A Scientific and Philosophical Assessment: The singularity as a phase transition (extended abstract) Béla Nagy, Santa Fe InstituteJ.Doyne Farmer, Santa Fe Institute John Paul Gonzales, Santa Fe Institute The Finite Time Singularity Scenario In his seminal article about “The Coming Technological Singularity” Vinge (1993) quotes how Ulam (1958) paraphrased John von Neumann as saying: “One conversation centered on the ever accelerating progress of technology and changes in the mode of human life, which gives the appearance of approaching some essential singularity in the history of the race beyond which human affairs, as we know them, could not continue.” Of course, we can only guess exactly what kind of singularity the great Hungarian-born American mathematician had in mind, but one such guess is a finite time singularity, i.e. a mathematical singularity that can occur by trying to divide with zero. Our arguments are based on our analysis (Nagy, Farmer, Trancik and Gonzales 2010) of the information technology data in Koh and Magee (2006). References BETTENCOURT, L. JURVETSON, S. (2004).