We’ve completed our bibliography of the more recent CMM orientated books and publications, with a specific focus on the period from 2000 to the present. Where we’ve been able, we’ve included links to the actual article or to where you can purchase the book. We think the collection is inspiring and we hope it proves to be an invaluable reference source for you. If you’d like to add to our collection, please contact robynpenman1@gmail.com
In April, Chipps Taylor and Nicole Wells, a 2nd grade teacher, spent the day at the Capital building in Louisiana to showcase CosmoKidz as part of the Louisiana Children’s Trust Fund. The woman who made the last set of puppets also made the table cloth for us. Big smile!!!
Learn more about CosmoKidz here.
A monthly zoom meeting usually takes place on the first Wednesday of each month. However, we are cancelling the meeting scheduled in July. However, we are cancelling the meeting scheduled for July because of its proximity to the US Independence Day. Stay tuned for more on our August meeting.
Beth Fisher-Yoshida, Academic Director of the Negotiation and Conflict Resolution program at Columbia University, will be presenting at the following conferences in July and she invites anyone of our community who will be at either of them to meet up with her.
July 4: Women, narrative and healthcare, at Ono Business Academy, Israel
July 7-10: International Association for Conflict Management (IACM) annual conference, Dublin
Sergej van MIddendorp is presenting a paper and hosting a workshop at the Anticipation Conference. Along with colleagues Laurence Habib, Flávio Mesquita da Silva, and Fred Steier, the workshop will cover collaborative support networks as generative of new futures: using world café and other dialogic methods to further inclusion, awareness and sustainability. Everyone is invited to join Sergej and colleagues if they can. For more information http://anticipationconference.org/
The new Youth, Peace, and Security Leadership Program at Columbia University began this month. This program, led by Beth Fisher-Yoshida, focuses on developing leadership skills for youth leaders between ages of 18-30.
There will not be a Learning Exchange this year. Instead, the CMM Institute is jointly sponsoring the Global Social Witnessing Lab from March 30-April 3, 2020 to be held at Witten/Herdecke University in Germany.
Facilitating conversations that matter and groove : CMM as a Dialogic OD approach and method, illustrated by Jazz metaphors (with live played music examples) was the title of our (Eerika Hedman-Phillips and Rik Spann) creative jam session on the 9th of May in Amsterdam. At the Organizational Development Network Europe conference, we offered the audience a low-key but hi-sophistication (yeah !) introduction to this thing called CMM. Our goal : making the audience even more curious after our show than it was before the session. It worked.
The conference (logo above) was called Inspired by Difference. From many angles and perspectives we all explored what OD was, is, and could be in our future. The whole thing was very inspirational. Our contribution added its own specific flavour to the conference gumbo. Some twenty people (there were many parallel sessions) were invited to our story in a small cafe-like place, with couches to hang on, a bar in the back and even some jazz vinyl and an LP player in the other back of the room. An informal vibe in tune with the setting of our story.
The essence of CMM in less than one hour? We didn’t even try. To use an analogy with a music festival: it’s about the music, not about the full message. Some weeks before the conference I went to the fabulous Motelmozaique Festival in Rotterdam. The festival is renowned for the really creative and imaginative blend of experimental, independent acts (music, art, theatre, film) that present a taste of their work. The atmosphere is informal, very well organized and respectful. The audience at the concerts is listening deeply to all that emerges. From very soft and tender soundscapes to roaring walls of rumble & roll. Inspired by difference. Co-learning in action. The musicians interact with the audience while ‘jamming on the ambience’. Rewarding the depth of the listening with high quality impressions of whatever it is that their takes on a well-sounding universe might be like. Friendly earworms from another planet.
After the concerts, the audience leaves the room refreshed, inspired and, yes, renewed. Looking for more seeds for organic transformation of their perspectives and paradigms. Where can I buy an album of these great artists? Where can I find their stories, sounds, adventures? How can I be part of the jam?
In our session at the ODNE conference we used a loosely structured mix of words, slides (beautifully crafted graphics by Eerika) and sounds to invite the audience to our CMM-universe. After the show they came up to us (some rock stars stay very approachable…) , asking questions, being curious. Some books lying on the table (works from Barnett, Kim, Ilene, Beth and some jazz and music sources). They scanned, made notes, asked questions, while in the background Miles Davis still provided the soundtrack. Intriguing stuff, folks ! What is this thing called CMM? Where can I find more stories, sounds, adventures? How can I be part of the jam? What is life and work like on planet CMM ?
A jazz album normally lasts about forty minutes. We only had a few minutes more. It was enough to give a taste of our story. It surely was not enough to Spread the News in ways that do honour to the value of it. But well, every friend of the family or ambassador of our groove might be moving towards making that difference that makes the difference. Inspired by difference, the cool and funky way.
And, in line with the gratitude and ethics that are part of the jazz experience : Eerika, thanks for jamming ! Already looking forward to the next gig. Other players that want to jam along: the session is open.
Rik Spann, Amsterdam, June 2019
“This is about roots. This is where the development and the growth get their energy from. The roots grow into the ground. They grow through different layers of earth to get to the nutrition. They get their energy from the ground, the earth. They have to go through these layers, and by doing that, they reach the water and they feed the growth of the whole.”
Sterre van Middendorp, reflecting on her painting Sharing Structures.
In this post, Sergej van Middendorp discusses the article, “Making social worlds better: Grammars of action in traditions of practice,” that he retrieved from the W. B. Pearce Archives. It was a controversial article, and Sergej raises some provocative possibilities from it.
I have been thinking about a theme for this post for quite a while. Initially I searched the archives for articles on dialogue. I read Bohm’s On Dialogue and was having conversations with Kim Pearce and others about CMM’s take on dialogue (which I was learning was informed by Bohm’s thinking, but resonates more strongly with Buber’s relational take on dialogue). I was also trying to create stronger links between various theories, research, and practices to increase the force of the projects we are engaged in with the Institute and other like-minded organizations. I chose this particular article because it seems to integrate several of these perspectives and levels of context in one piece. I was also struck by Barnett’s note on the manuscript, which says:
Never published. I sent it to prominent practitioners of each of the practices included and got a surprisingly consistent response: “You’ve got all the others just right, but you’ve missed the subtlety and nuances of my practice”. (Pearce, 2002, p.1)
The piece starts with an outline of some of the great challenges facing human beings on earth as we enter the 21st century. Many of these challenges are still present today. In describing the challenges, Barnett set them in the context of practices that emerged in the second half of the 20th century, where professionals could be hired to methodically support “therapy, consultation, organizational development, small group leadership, and large group facilitation” to address such problems. Early on in the piece, Barnett identifies himself as “a person with one foot in each of the worlds of scholarship and practice”, wanting to understand what he is doing in these different contexts. Specifically, he wants to be able to compare and contrast different practices through the development of a common language, or a grammar. The idea is that such a grammar might help us better understand and compare these practices, which in turn might make them more effective for improving the social worlds in which they are enacted. The intent of the paper is to start the process of developing and applying such a comparative language. The paper is structured around four types of situations in which specific practices can be used to improve the situation. The table below outlines the situations and ways of working in which specific practices can be used.
| Situation | Way of working |
| Coordination problems | Working systemically, working appreciatively |
| Intractable/moral conflict | Working dialogically |
| Bargaining | Interest based negotiation; Problem-solving; mediation; Transformational mediation; Deliberation |
| Critical incident | Crisis management |
Table 1: reproduced from Pearce 2002, Figure 1: Situations and ways of working Barnett goes on to describe each combination of situation and ways of working by offering some examples and “keys to recognition”, before explaining the way of working itself with illustrative practices followed by a case study of each practice. The specific practices discussed in the piece are drawn from a) the Milan School of Family Therapy for working systemically, b) Appreciative Inquiry for working appreciatively, and c) the dialogic work based on Buber and Rogers as practiced with CMM in the Public Dialogue Consortium for working dialogically. Barnett’s subtle humor percolates through his descriptions and can be seen, for example, in the key to recognizing coordination problems:
In the second part of the paper, Barnett builds on Ludwig Wittgenstein’s notion of grammar as “a knowing how to act” in a situation as a way of understanding that situation. Barnett also draws on Kenneth Burke’s notion of a grammar of motives to sketch his approach to analyzing the grammar of action in the practices. He uses CMM as the underlying structure in making comparisons and contrasts, thereby shifting the language away from the analogy between grammar (rules/logics) and sentence structure (grammatical parts) to an analogy between grammar (rules/logics) and communicative actions (context/forces/actions). The minimal structure that emerges from this consists of:
Barnett then proceeds to apply this minimal structure in an analysis of the three example practices of family therapy, appreciative inquiry, and public dialogue. The similarities that come from the analysis between the practices are:
In the conclusion, Barnett revisits the question: is it worth trying to elicit this grammar of practice if leading edge practitioners will always be ‘further ahead’ than any description and/or analysis? He says he thinks it is worth it. Such a grammar and the practice of such a grammar can enhance our ability to act into specific situations with discernment, thus not only improving our specific practice but also improving our ability to act across practices.
Ironically, the attempt at creating and applying a first version of this grammar seems to have reflected back on Barnett through the reactions of the practitioners. Barnett himself reflects that he probably didn’t ‘get’ the case studies of the practices wrong, but that no newly developing language can capture from one single case what an expert practitioner knows from a wealth of experience. Being a grammar in a Wittgensteinian or Burkean sense means it is a “knowing how to act in it”1, applied by leading edge practitioners, mostly without an articulation of that grammar-in-action as a grammar. In other words, they know “how to go on” but it can be more intuitive than articulated.
In my reading of the piece, Barnett uses CMM to suggest the building blocks for a comparative analysis of structures across practices. Along similar lines, I have noted the pattern “CMM and […] “ emerging in our language in the CMM community over the past few years. (ie CMM and Global Social Witnessing, CMM and Family Therapy, CMM and Embodied Practice, etcetera). I now realize that until recently, I read these comparisons as “Practice” and “Practice”. In other words, CMM as a practice would be complimentary to the other practice mentioned. This piece has opened my eyes to another relationship that CMM can have to an “and”: that is, Grammar and Practice. In this sense, CMM offers a way of seeing and the minimal logic language to articulate it, while the “…and practice” is the enactment of a specific type of practice.
CMM applied in this way, compares to a form of musical notation for practices that can help their practitioners create (better) social worlds. Musical traditions of practice existed (well) before musical notation, but musical notation took the practice of music to a whole different level. Similarly, understanding the grammar of CMM as a grammar of context, forces, and actions can take ways of working, and practices in therapy, consultation, organizational development, small group leadership, and large group facilitation to a whole different level. Not only in the practice or way of working itself, but possibly also as a shared language across such practices and ways of working, helping us to improve our ways of working together globally and inter-professionally to address some of the deep and difficult problems facing human-beings and our earth.
But before we take this metaphor for a grammar of action further into our traditions of practice, I think it is important to revisit one possible meaning of the shift Barnett made earlier: from the metaphor of grammar as building blocks of sentence structure to the metaphor of grammar as forces/contexts/actions for coordinating the management of meaning. This, to me, is analogous to the shift from using musical notation to prescribe a classical music performance to using musical notation to create minimal structures for jazz improvisation.
Jazz songs are minimal structures that suggest chord progressions on a scale for a known melody and in a certain style. Jazz musicians share these structures so that when they start playing together, they are free to “listen to one another, anticipate and adjust to one another. This is what allows them to maximize independence and flexibility in their enactments.” (Barrett & Peplowski, 1998, p. 559). When we enacted that pattern of improvisation in our workshops with a jazz band in Jazzinbusiness2, we would ask the audience-participants to call out different styles in which we should play Summertime.
Whatever style the audience-participants threw at us, be it reggae, R&B, dance, or hard rock, it would only take a few seconds of coordination within the band to change the song to fit that style, and the band would get going again.
From this jazz improvisation perspective, it would seem that having such shared structures, or a grammar of action, as proposed by Barnett has some real merit. This shared structure would allow practitioners from different ways of working to better work together, and to switch practical mode when coordination problems shift into moral conflict, bargaining, or a critical incident.
Further development of this take on CMM might lead to a communication perspective ‘Real Book’, analogous to the book that holds the jazz standards3. Or to a communication perspective pattern language, similar to the pattern language that Christopher Alexander created to describe ways in which to make the physical environment come to life (Alexander, 1979). It could use CMM as a grammar of action to describe ways of working and practices in a visual language, annotated with hints at how to play with the forces and contexts that are part of the pattern that can be enacted using that page, allowing the players of the pattern to help a communicative groove come to life large enough to broaden, and deepen, their shared understanding of the situation that they are trying to make better together.
1 In an editorial comment on this piece, Robyn Penman shared that: “the one thing I[and Barnett] didn’t pursue was the concept of “knowing how to go on’. “ She wanted to consider changing this “knowing how to go on” to the idea of “knowing from”—part of the 3 fold distinction John Shotter used (knowing that, how and from) also one analogous to that of Aristotle’s, to Gadamer’s understanding of moral knowledge and, she believes, to Wittgenstein. But, as she said “I think that might have got the review onto another track altogether.” This is something we might pursue further in a follow-up review.
2 Jazzinbusiness was a (participatory) action research project and a workshop experience with a live jazzband that helped people in organizations to experience the inner workings of jazz improvisation and to apply those to problems in collaboration, knowledge sharing, and innovation. For an impression, see: https://vimeo.com/11625911
Alexander, C. (1979). The timeless way of building. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Barrett, F. J., & Peplowski, K. (1998). Minimal structures within a song: An analysis of “All of Me.” Organization Science, 9(5), 558–560.
Pearce, W. B. (2002). Making social worlds better: Grammars of action in traditions of practice. Unpublished paper retrieved from http://digitalarchives.fitchburgstate.edu/cdm/compoundobject/collection/p15892coll12/id/1096/rec/1
On the internet, I found a slightly different iteration of the same paper on: https://www.newconversations.net/pdf/makingworlds.pdf This appears on a site by Dennis Rivers, one of the friends Barnett quotes early on in the paper.
In her end of year letter to the CMM community, Kim Pearce reflects on the passing of events this year. From the loss of a dear member of our community, Philip Thomas, to the big dreamings we are nurturing for the coming years.
Dear friends,
It is the first day of the last month of the year. I’m overlooking my courtyard and gazing at a desert willow tree that has lost most of its leaves sitting next to a potted geranium plant still in full bloom. For some reason, seeing these plants side-by-side reminds me of seasonal cycles and, by extension, the cycles in our own lives.
I received the very painful news yesterday that a beloved friend and colleague, Philip Thomas, passed in Kenya. Philip was a very dear friend to Barnett and me and many others in the CMM community and beyond. For those of you who didn’t know Philip, he lived the life of dialogue in his personal and professional life, as he worked with international leaders in the “hottest of the hot spots” in the service of peace. He was also part of a small group of trusted friends that Barnett invited to help him determine whether it was beneficial to think of a “home” for CMM. The CMM Institute for Personal and Social Evolution was born out of those conversations and Philip was one of the first Board members of the CMM Institute. It is difficult for me to put into words the deep sadness, grief, and loss that I, and so many of us, feel…for so many reasons.
The passing of a loved one is also an opportunity to do some “perspective taking,” and since we are also at the end of another year, it seems fitting to do some looking back and looking ahead in our lives and in our work. In terms of the CMM Institute, there are myriad lived and told stories about the past and about the future depending on the perspective of the storyteller, so take this as an offering of my story and an invitation to think about the story you would like to tell.
Here is my story… The cultural anthropologist, author, and speaker Margaret Mead once said: “Never doubt that a small group of committed people can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has!” The CMM Institute was created because a small group of us believe this…and our belief in this continues to this day.
We are dreaming big and we invite each of you to dream with us and help make our collective dreams a reality.
We are dreaming about a world in which children grow up understanding the consequentiality of communication and have developed skills and abilities at an early age that serve them and those around them well. We are putting this dream into practice with CosmoKidz, and we are currently developing CosmoTweenz and CosmoTeenz.
We are dreaming of communities that take a communication-centric view on all aspects of community-life including city government, the educational system, housing, sustainable food production, justice, and faith communities. Cosmopolis 2045 is our way of showing what such a community might look like. This is an on-going, developing site. Visit it and add to it at www.cosmopolis2045.com
We are dreaming of providing support for and celebrating the work of scholars and practitioners who are currently using CMM or want to incorporate CMM in their research or their practice. We are in our eighth year of yearly Learning Exchanges along with the CMM and AC4 (Advanced Consortium on Cooperation, Conflict, and Complexity at Columbia U) Fellows program. And thanks to John Chetro-Szivos and Fitchburg University, the Barnett Pearce collection can be accessed from anywhere in the world. You will find it on our website under the W.B Pearce archives https://cmminstitute.org/w-b-pearce-archives/
We are dreaming of ways to better connect those of us who are interested in being part of a CMM community. Beginning in February, the first Wednesday of every month (8:00am Pacific Time zone and 5:00pm Central European Time zone) there will be an opportunity for the community to connect via zoom around topics you are interested in. For more information see https://cmminstitute.org/events/. We will also be exploring other ways of providing meaningful opportunities to connect, so stay tuned. But if you have ideas or requests please let us know.
As we all know, the planet continues to face enormous challenges and these challenges can seem overwhelming. The CMM Institute is an all-volunteer organization. We are not doing this work for money or prestige. We are doing it because we know the quality of communication changes the world for good and for ill. We know that CMM can change the world, and indeed it has… one conversation, one classroom, one family, one community, one research project, and one Learning Exchange at a time. The Board of Stewards and I look forward to what we, the collective community of the CMM Institute, will make together in 2019. Let us continue to dream big and live the lives we want to see in the world.
I will end here and again invite you to tell your own story or add to mine. We are opening up our Facebook page for you to make your own offerings on where and how our dreams can unfold. Become one of the small group of committed people that want to change the world with us!
With gratitude,
Kim
Adrian Wagner is part of the Institute for Global Integral Competence, has studied Public Policy at the Humboldt-Viadrina School of Governance in Berlin and has trained as a mediator at the Humboldt Law faculty. Adrian was one of our two CMMI Fellows who presented at the recent Learning Exchange. He reflects on his experience at the Learning Exchange, interweaving his reflections with the topic of his talk on “Collective Trauma Integration in the Light of the current US Crisis: Establishing Global Action Networks of Meaning-Making”.
The topic of the CMMI Fellows’ session at the Learning Exchange in 2018 could not have been better chosen—“Overcoming Polarization in Communities and Societies”—especially given what else was happening at the same time. It was my first visit to the USA and while I was there I had the chance to witness the unfolding of the run-up to the midterm elections. It was fascinating and scary at the same time to see the mismanagement of meaning and the coordination of polarization taking place on multiple levels. At the same time, other sobering highlights included the attempted postal bombings, the Synagogue shooting and the open nationalist language of the President.
Having explored mass and group traumatization in the light of the current US crises as part of my doctoral research and for my CMMI fellowship, it seemed present everywhere. The CMMI Learning Exchange was a very welcome contrast and I was very happy that it highlighted that even in times of crises there is hope and the possibility to co-create.
During my time as a scholar, I focused on Dr. Regine Scholz’s collective trauma research and found a very similar theoretical foundation to CMM. Scholz states in her work on culture and collective trauma that individuals, groups, and societies are units of a “continuous communicative creation process” (Scholz, 2011). Similarly, Pearce states that social worlds are “extending through time in unfinished processes, as multi-layered, fully reflexive, and having the ultimate shape of a self-referential paradox” (Pearce, 2002).
Understanding how we are shaped by language in a fundamental way and how we are co-creating realities is crucial in times where the dialogue is missing and polarized points of views are on the rise. It was a pleasant surprise that the Learning Exchange was built on this commitment to co-create realities together from the very start. Because there was an equal number of experienced and inexperienced scholars of CMM a dynamic field of learning was established. The facilitation was heart-full and professional throughout the days. The composition of exploration, exchange, dialogue, and presentations was well crafted and helped not only to learn CMM on the go but to draw participants into a generative field based on trust and mutual respect. One learned about the Cosmokidz initiative where new approaches to learning and empowering of kids are exercised and developed as well as what the future city—Cosmopolis —could look like. What struck me was the diverse and high-quality academic background of many participants and the many inspiring conversations and discussions next to the official program.
Reflecting more on my own lecture and the insights I gained during the fellowship I realized how important human relations are beyond our narrow identities. It seems important in times of polarization that the root cause is examined, understood and analyzed. Too often we deal with the symptoms rather with the cause of the problems. Following this understanding and the insights CMM provides, I realized how much communication matters.
When it comes to trauma, we are often unable to find words and so become silent. Our energy and understanding is blocked by this silence and dissociation from the pain that we are not able to feel. This in turn often leads to miscommunication, mismanagement and a lack of coordination of meaning. While this has been researched in trauma theory and in psychology, it’s only in recent years that more scholarly work has emerged around collective trauma. Dan Bar-On, for example, has researched intergenerational traumas discovering the painful and disturbing relationships of Holocaust survivors and the following generations of victims and perpetrators. Vamik Volkan’s research has focused more on “the mental representations of an event that has caused a large group to face drastic losses, feel helpless and victimized by another group, and share a humiliating injury.” (Volkan 1998). Volkan defines such events as chosen trauma. In his understanding, those events are usually in the past and kept alive in societies and cultures through memory and rituals. Chosen traumas are therefore mental representations and meaning-making plays an important role in shaping them. What he observed was that if new conflicts arise old, almost forgotten, chosen trauma can reemerge and a time collapse occur. People associated with the chosen trauma feel as if it could happen right now. This can, of course, lead to dangerous polarization.
Brunner has criticized Volkan for this term “chosen trauma”. For him, only individuals can be traumatized and usually they don’t choose to be so. In his view, there can be a “collective processing of mass individual traumatization” when war or natural catastrophes influence large amounts of people. On the other hand, he also refers to the term trauma narration or trauma discourse as something that either can be “just invented or correspond to the real trauma of several group members. In the last case, we could talk about a discursive collectivization of individual traumas.” In addition, he suggests the term “trauma-induced collectives” if large groups are formed after their persecution (Brunner 2012).
In the light of these different definitions it seems important to get a better overview and understanding of the overall topic of collective, or group, trauma; especially how mass traumatization that occurs, for example, through events like Hurricane Katrina or 9/11 can develop into group traumas. Depending on the level of leadership and the ability to coordinate and manage meaning group traumas can generate ethnocentric identities leading to exclusion and polarization—as has happened in the US. While we might not be able to stop mass traumatization in times of climate change, how we deal with and work in the aftermath of such events will decide if we are able to prevent group traumas. This could be crucial to stopping the polarization in communities and society. Only if we find deeper meaning in the painful events of the past and are able to activate resilience, hope and a global perspective will we be able to truly establish cosmopolitan communication—a form of communication that is much needed to face the challenges of the 21st century.
Margret Mead is attributed with saying: “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.” The Learning Exchange was, to me, a beacon of hope that change is possible. Supported by the findings of Lukas Herrmann’s research on generative fields theory I felt a lot of potential to deepen and explore those generative dimensions, so much needed for lasting and sustainable change. I’m grateful to have had the opportunity provided by the CMM Institute and look forward to continuing to co-create the world through communication.
Bibliography
Alexander, J., Eyerman, R., Giesen, B., Smelser, N. j., & Sztompka, P. (2004). Cultural trauma and collective memory. Cultural trauma. Slavery and the formation of African American identity. University of California Press.
Bar-On, D. (2001). Die „Anderen” in uns. Dialog als Modell der interkulturellen Konfliktbewältigung. Hamburg: edition Körber Stiftung.
Reimann, C., & König, U. (2017). Collective Trauma and Resilience 1 Introduction 2 Key insights on trauma from the Dialogue & underlying assumptions, (11).
Volkan, V. D. (2014). Psychoanalysis, international relations, and diplomacy: A sourcebook on large-group psychology. London: Karnac Books Ltd.
Scholz, R. (2017): The Fluid and the Solid – or the Dynamic and the Static: some further thoughts about the conceptualisation of foundation matrices, processes of the social unconscious, and/or large group identities. In: Hopper, E & Weinberg, H. (eds.): The Social Unconscious in Persons, Groups, and Societies, Vol. 3: The Foundation Matrix Extended and Re-configured, 27-46, Karnac Books, London
Scholz, R. (2014): (Foundation-) Matrix Reloaded – Some Remarks on a Useful Concept and Its Pitfalls. In: Group Analysis 47/3, Sep. 14: 201-212.
Scholz, R. (2014): When Time becomes an Illusion – Collective Trauma and Memory. In: Agrafa – Journal of philosophy of psychoanalysis. Vol. II., 3/2014: 29-38.
Scholz, R. (2012): The Matrix of the Values. Group Analysis 45/4, Dec. 2012: 450-458.
Scholz, R. (2011): Kollektive Traumata in der kulturellen Matrix. In Roth, W.M., Shaked, J.und Felsberger, H. (eds.): Das “soziale Unbewusste” – Gesellschaftskritische Perspektiven der Gruppenanalyse: 115-135. Facultas Verlags- und Buchhandels AG, Wien.
Scholz, R. (2011): The Foundation Matrix and the Social Uncounscious. In: Hopper, E. and Weinberg, H. (eds.): Social Unconscious in Persons, Groups and Societies, Vol 1: Mainly Theory, 265 – 285. Karnac Books, London.
Scholz, R. (2011): Kultur und kollektive Traumata. In: Arbeitshefte Gruppenanalyse (Hg): Kollektive Traumatisierung und kollektive Erinnerung. psychosozial 123: 41-62.
CMM
Pearce, W.B. (1989). Communication and the human condition. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Pearce, K. (2012). Compassionate Communicating Poetry, Prose & Practices. Lulu Enterprises.
Juarrero, A. (2010). Complex Dynamical Systems Theory. Cognitive Edge.
Pearce, W. (2007). Making Social Worlds: A Communication Perspective. Wiley-Blackwell.
Pearce, W. (2011). An Alternative Version of President Bush’s Speech to the Nation, September 11, 2001, Incorporating Insights from a Communication Analysis of Moral Conflicts. Fielding Graduate University, Public Dialogue Consortium, Pearce Associates.
Matoba, K. (2014). Global Integral Competence for Cosmopolitan Communication, Integral Leadership Review.
Global Action Networks
Krznaric, R. (2007). How change happens: interdisciplinary perspectives for humandevelopment. Oxfam Research Report.
Perlas, N. (1999). Shaping Globalization, Civil Society, Cultural Power and Threefolding. CADI, GlobeNet3, Pasig City.
Sztompka, P. (1993). The Sociology of Social Change. Wiley-ˇBlackwell.
Tarrow, S. (1994). Power in Movement: Social Movements, Collective Action and Politics. Cambridge University Press.
Waddell, S., Waddock, S., Dentoni, D., & Meszoely, G. (2015). Large Systems Change -ˇ An Emerging Field of Transformation and Transitions. Journal of Corporate Citizenship Issue 58, Greenleaf Publishing.
Waddell, S. (2012). Global finance as an action research domain: Testing the boundaries. Action Research, 10(1).
Waddell, S. (2011). Gobal Action Networks – Creating our Future together. Bocconi on Management Series, England.
Waddock, S. (2015). Intellectual Shaman, Management Academics Making a Difference. Cambridge University Press.
Wagner, A (2015). Large System Change and Global Action Networks – A Case Study of Transparency International. M.A. Thesis Humboldt University.
Others
Eyerman, R. (2015). Is This America? Katrina as Cultural Trauma. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Der Umzug der Menschheit: Die transformative Kraft der Städte. Berlin: WBGU.
Rittel, Horst W. J. (1973) Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning , Policy Sciences, 4:2.
Waddell, S., Waddock, S., Dentoni, D., & Meszoely, G. (2015). Large Systems Change – An Emerging Field of Transformation and Transitions. Journal of Corporate Citizenship Issue 58, Greenleaf Publishing.
Our Learning Exchange this year had the dual theme of Creating Magical Moments and Building Community. We have captured some particularly poignant reflections from participants about the magical moments and the sense of community they experienced.
Vin Jensen is our highly valued web and social media maestro. This is his second time at one of our Learning Exchanges and when asked about his experience this year he said:
“Did a moment stand out for me? I think, with a straight face, that magic was available in every moment. Let me say, first, that the word “gregarious” has readily come to mind for no one, ever, who has offered to describe me. Yet as I looked around at some thirty-five people (probably half of whom had been names, at best, or complete strangers to me two days earlier) I counted not a single person with whom I had not shared at least one meaningful, and memorable, conversation during the Learning Exchange. That’s a rare kind of magic.”
At the end of the Learning Exchange we were favored with the gift of music, from Bart Buechner and Sonny Seabrook, and an impromptu poem from Tamara Smiley Hamilton.
Bart tells us how Sunny found himself at the Learning Exchange this year:
“Sunny Seabrook is an Army veteran and musician I first met a the Veterans Home of California at Yountville, where he still lives today in a community of some 800 other veterans. He was involved in the EST movement in the early 1970’s, and continues to work on personal improvement and development at 84 years of age. We have had numerous conversations about CMM over the years, and he finally got curious enough about it to accept my invitation to the LE. As we were leaving, he told me that he finally understood the difference between the EST/Landmark Forums and CMM. In years of attending the Landmark Forums, he achieved good personal insights from each of them, but not the level of interpersonal connection that he experienced at the LE. This understanding of the profound relational capacity of CMM was a profound learning for him.”
And Sonny tells us what it meant for him:
“The CMM Generosity of spirit is running through my veins … thank you for sharing and creating those precious musical miracle moments with me …
And for introducing me to such a high quality group of human beings! each of them contributed in their own way many unforgettable miracle moments for me.
There’s not one person on the list that did not reach me deeply in one way or another I feel forever bonded with these extraordinary people and that realization is a miracle moment! Those five beautiful days in Oracle Arizona and the whole transformational experience was up to this point the highlight of my year!
I am so grateful for your unforgettable gift of including me”
Fielding Graduate University was well represented this year. Apart from these six alumni, Linda Blong, Bart Buechner, Erin Kreeger, Sergej van MIddendorp, Beth Fisher-Yoshida and Jan Elliott (L to R), there was also a 10-member Fielding University contingent. Elena Nicklasson, Director of Development at Fielding Graduate University, was one of the participants. She prepared a brief news item on her experience from a Fielding Perspective:
“During the last weekend of October, a group of Fielding alumni, faculty member Miguel Guilarte, PhD, and Teresa Southam, the inaugural recipient of Fielding’s CMM scholarship and a doctoral student in the School of Leadership Studies came to Oracle, AZ for the CMM Learning Exchange 2018.
Kim Pearce, president of the CMM Institute and widow of beloved faculty member W. Barnett Pearce, PhD, inventor of the coordinated management of meaning (CMM) theory, hosted the three-day workshop. This year’s theme was “Creating Magical Moments across Space and Time: Building CMM Learning Communities.
Themes that were presented and worked on by the participants ranged from Cosmokidz to Global Social Witnessing. The event stood out for its many ways to engage all participants in working together to experience the magic of CMM while learning and talking about it at the same time.”
You can read more of her story on the Fielding Alumni Network site.
Last year we were excited to tell you about our first ever CosmoKidz Camp. This year we have more good news to report. The Camp has continued and it has become bigger and better with the generous support of the Louisiana Governor’s Office.
This year’s Camp CosmoKidz was held at the end of July. It was a free, week-long camp with over 60 kindergarten and first-grade students at Woodland Park School in Hammond, Louisiana. We were able to run such a long camp for so many young students because of the generous support of the Governor’s Office in Louisiana—in the form of a $25,000 grant to the CMM Institute.
The CosmoKidz Director in Louisiana, Chipps Taylor, had told staff in the Governor’s Office about the CosmoKidz program being run in Hammond over the past year. This program and the positive impact it is having on the young children is described in the 2017-2018 research report that you can read on the CosmoKidz page.
As part of the CosmoKidz program, young children are given opportunities to engage in unscripted deliberations about communication issues. Chipps invited staff from the Governor’s Office to observe an unscripted deliberation by first graders on how to respond to hurtful comments. Both of the representatives said they were “blown away” by what they observed. They had never seen a group of young children having the type and quality conversation that was occurring and they were convinced that the skills these children are learning will make a significant contribution to reducing violence in their communities. Within a matter of months the grant had been organized to continue the good work of CosmoKidz in a summer camp.
Nine teachers from Woodland Park, who had been using CosmoKidz for the past year, developed the curriculum for the week-long camp. Ten college students assisted the teachers. The camp included a healthy breakfast and lunch each day and focused on SOARing behavior (Sense what’s around you; Open your hands to help others; Act with kindness; Respect other people).
On Monday, the children focused on what it means to sense what’s around you. The children talked about body awareness using the CosmoKidz card on this topic. They made faces from felt to exemplify different emotional facial expressions.
On Tuesday, children in one class wrote one thing they would do that day to open their hands to help another and they made a chain comprising their responses. Kindergarten children in another class made clay angels that they painted and later gave to seniors living in a residential home in the community.
Children in yet a third class made a sign to post on the wall of their school to remind all kindergarten through 8th grade students to “act with kindness” through their words and actions. The sign will remain on the wall throughout the school year.
The social world that was made during camp week was truly uplifting for all involved and it was made possible through the good will and support of so many committed people. We give thanks to the teachers, college students, food services personnel, bus drivers, janitors, the administrator on duty, the Director of CosmoKidz in Louisiana, Chipps Taylor, and the over 60 children who attended. And we give a special thank you to the Louisiana Children’s Trust Fund for making this week possible. The official school year will begin in another week and these CosmoKidz campers are prepared to SOAR when they arrive in their new classroom.
Inviting others into non-polarizing conversations
Inviting others into non-polarizing conversations
The May 1st CMM Community Call featured the question “How to invite others into non-polarizing conversations about politics, religion, race and other contentious issues?” Eleven members of the CMM community participated in the call, with Arthur Jensen hosting.
Arthur said his motivation for asking the question stemmed from his experience of having difficulty engaging in conversation with friends and relatives who hold very different political views than his own. “The people I know are mostly either fervently pro-Trump or equally fervent in their opposition to Trump. Most conversations about politics these days are over before they start or just end up with people yelling at each other before ending up in uncomfortable silence.”
There was a strong consensus on the call that Arthur was not alone in his experience. Most participants acknowledged having similar kinds of conversations and finding them difficult to navigate, even given our collective commitment to trying to “coordinate across differences” with others. Among the strategies that were offered during the session was the idea of describing one’s feelings of frustration to the other, which often leads to at least some common ground (both parties being frustrated at their inability to talk about these kinds of issues). Connecting with others on an emotional level can help reframe the conversation, focusing on maintaining the relationship even as they disagree about issues.
Another CMM-based strategy was to champion curiosity, especially during difficult conversations. This involves showing interest in understanding the other’s perspective or specific views while remaining firm bit not confrontational about one’s own views. After listening to the other offer reasons or motivations for their views, one can simply say “that hasn’t been my experience” rather than initiating a direct rebuttal of the other’s perspective. Instead one can thank the other for being willing to share with someone who disagrees.
The call did not result in any breakthrough strategies, but left the host feeling that there was strong support for continuing to think about more effective ways to have very important conversations about the issues of our day.
Commentary and news
What does the CMM Institute do?
Want to learn more about the Coordinated Management of Meaning?
What's happening in the CMM community?
Want to support us?
Contact
General Data Protection
Categories
Join the conversation!
Support the work of the CMM Institute!