Skip to main content

Consensual Effectivity

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Co-creative Meeting

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Business ((BRIEFSBUSINESS))

  • 771 Accesses

Abstract

Enough of talking! Let’s decide what to do and then do it.—When sitting in a coordinating meeting this is not only a common but also a very sensible thing to say. Once the options are clear it is indeed time to choose which road to travel. In Co-creative Meetings, however, things are not that straightforward. Sometimes the options are not clear at all. Sometimes every participant knows for sure the ‘right’ path but everyone has a different path in mind. Worse still, sometimes participants even lack a shared understanding of what it is they want to achieve together. Increasingly, however, there also seems to be a conflict between each individual’s interests and the interests of the community or the organization as a whole.

Commitment is the willingness to do whatever it takes to get what you want. A true commitment is a heartfelt promise to yourself from which you will not back down. Many people have dreams, and many have good intentions, but few are willing to make the commitment for their attainment.—David McNally

Unless commitment is made, there are only promises and hopes… but no plans.—Peter Drucker

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Chap. 2, On Dialogue in Ref. [1].

  2. 2.

    See also Ref. [2].

  3. 3.

    See Ref. [3].

  4. 4.

    Well documented disasters of groupthink behavior are the Challenger Accident and the Bay of Pigs Invasion, see R. P. Feynman's Appendix F to the Rogers Commission Report on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident, http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm as well as Ref. [4].

  5. 5.

    See Chap. 2, Ref. [5].

  6. 6.

    See Ref. [7] as well as Ref. [8].

  7. 7.

    See also Ref. [9].

  8. 8.

    This experience is described in Ref. [10]. Schein says: Dialogue emphasizes the natural flow of conversation. It actually (though somewhat implicitly in my experience) discourages feedback and direct interpersonal encounters. In dialogue, the whole group is the object of learning, and the members share the potential excitement of discovering, collectively, ideas that individually none of them might have ever thought of. Feedback may occur, especially in relation to individual behavior that undermines the natural flow of conversation, but it is not encouraged as a goal of the group process.

  9. 9.

    Documented examples are: UNDP—United Nations Development Programme which supports the project Democratic Dialogue, see http://www.democraticdialoguenetwork.org, and NCDD—National Coalition for Dialogue & Deliberation, see http://ncdd.org/. A case study of a co-creative meeting is found in the article by Mandl [11].

  10. 10.

    This report can be downloaded from http://ec.europa.eu/research/reports/2004/fya_en.html

  11. 11.

    See for example Ref. [12]

References

  1. Bohm D (1995) On Dialogue. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  2. Rittel Horst, Webber Melvin (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci 4:155–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Meadows D (1999) Chicken little, Cassandra, and the real wolf, whole earth. Spring

    Google Scholar 

  4. Giddens A, Duneier M, Appelbaum R (2006) Essentials of sociology. Norton, New York

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bohm D (1995) On dialogue. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  6. Rogers E (2003) Diffusion of innovations. Free Press, New York pp 281

    Google Scholar 

  7. Sarasvathy S (2001) Causation and effectuation: toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Acad Manag Rev 26(2):243–263

    Google Scholar 

  8. Blank S (2006) The four steps to the epiphany. Cafepress.com

    Google Scholar 

  9. Scharmer O (2009) Theory U: leading from the future as it emerges. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Fransisco

    Google Scholar 

  10. Schein EH (1993) On dialogue, culture, and organizational learning, organizational dynamics. Summer 22(2):40–51

    Google Scholar 

  11. Mandl C (2007) Evaluating evaluations or the case for action research. Newslett No. 30, pp 29–39 Plattform Forschungs- und Technologieevaluierung http://www.fteval.at/upload/Newsletter30.pdf

  12. Ostrom E (2009) Beyond markets and states: polycentric governance of complex economic systems, Prize Lecture. The Nobel Foundation

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christoph Mandl .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mandl, C., Hauser, M., Mandl, H. (2013). Consensual Effectivity . In: The Co-creative Meeting. SpringerBriefs in Business. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34231-8_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics