An Experience with the Center for Creative Leadership

Opportunity does knock from time to time. This blog, set up in December 2006, was found in February by the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) in Greensboro, NC. They were planning a day and a half event wherein leaders who had experienced Hurricane Katrina would share their experiences in the interest of uncovering lessons for leading in times of crisis. Among the ways that CCL wanted to capture the event was through the use of a graphic recorder, and we subsequently agreed to work together.

Funding was provided by a private donor who asked that CCL consider something “edgy,” so the event design was a lesson unto itself. Ten leaders who had dealt with the storm and its aftermath were joined by a “discussant” team of about twenty made up of CCL faculty and representatives of various agencies. The work day began with David Horth leading a Fish Bowl, wherein participants took turns observing and participating in dialogue. That was followed by a Visual Explorer exercise, wherein participants selected an image that conveyed meaning about their experience in the storm, and then conveyed those feelings comprehensibly to others. This first day ended with an abbreviated form of Open Space Conversation, and then the next day began with a Mind Map created by the entire leadership group.

The event concluded with a summary of the lessons learned, using a method of dialogue in which everyone could “talk and listen” at the same time. When the event began, the discussants were on networked laptops connected to each other by groupware. They could do things like keep personal journals and text message others in the room about what they were seeing and hearing. Eventually the leaders were able to join in, and this final morning concluded with everyone live and online. Specific questions were framed by a second facilitator, Jerry Abrams, and as individuals typed their thoughts into the system at the bottom of the screen, they could see what everyone else was saying at the top. Literally, about thirty people were all talking and listening at the same time.

At back of the room, things were a little simpler: markers, chalk and wide roll of paper. Usually I have to either lead the facilitation or at least co-facilitate while also producing the images; it is rare that I get a day and a half to just draw, so I made the most of it, filling about 70 square feet of paper, including the sketch pad used during the Open Conversation. In the presence of all the sophistication and technology “just drawing” felt pretty crude – at first. I was absolutely unprepared for the reactions that were to come.

As the day wore on, there was constantly someone watching what I was doing, and there were small crowds at breaks. There would be comments like “That’s how it was!” Near the end of the day, David Horth asked if I wanted to talk about the work. I suggested instead that he invite the participants to take a “gallery walk” by it all, and that he might even invite them to sign it. That’s what they did, over the course of several heart-felt minutes. One of them observed “The technology certainly captured the facts, but the drawings captured the emotions.”

What Can Planning Learn From Design?

If you ask for volunteers to participate in the design of a new building you’re likely to have plenty of takers, especially if your audience has a stake in it. Now, imagine asking that same group to help with a strategic plan – odds are the response will be much less enthusiastic. Why is that?

In my still-limited experience, it’s because architecture is generally approached with high expectations of creative endeavors, whereas when planning involves the non-physical the images that come to our minds include boring meetings, wasted time and nice books that end up on the shelf. For purposes of this discussion let’s narrow our field of reference: the setting is a university campus, the design involves a prominent new building and the planning involves the institution’s strategic plan.

What could the planning learn from the best of design?

• There’s an evident commitment up front: someone believes in what’s about to take place, money has been put on the table and there WILL be results. Can we say that about most strategic plans?
• Processes are in place to facilitate creative activity. The selection of designers is based on talent, for example. And what’s the favored mode of communication? Visual images! What do the best teams do? They “draw” our thoughts and dreams out of us right before our very eyes. How was your last strategic planning conducted?
• The act of construction requires a thorough assessment of context, as it is recognized that the building interacts with and depends upon its immediate environment. Think of what’s considered: soils, materials availability, weather patterns, local trades, traffic and sight lines. What was in the last environmental scan that your campus did? You did do one, right?
• In recent years the entire idea of context has taken an additional form that merits a bullet on its own, and that’s Sustainability, where higher levels of thought are given to the life of a structure and the demands that it – as well as its uses – will make on systems, resources and future generations. How would most university planning look different if we believed – especially in the public sector – that we had to sustain ourselves rather than assume someone else would carry the freight?

Let’s not be totally one-sided, however; what could design learn from the best planning practices?

• When planning is committed to discovery, generative processes are often used that forestall “problem-solving” in the interest of problem design. The result is a level of authenticity that creates shared visions and a belief in the possible outcomes.
• The resulting shared visions are maintained as a frame of reference throughout the work. Many design teams begin this way, but few can keep it alive for the duration. Architects become overwhelmed by tradespeople, the campus leadership that began the work gives way to bureaucrats, and contracts become inflexible barriers rather than the enabling tools intended. Before you know it, participation and collaboration are equated to herding cats, and the most important goals are to be “On Time and On Budget!”
• Planning can be an iterative process, continuously involving large groups. Agreed: the expense of design and construction dictate that iteration is eventually ended well before completion, but there is room for improvement. In an article entitled “ChangeIsNow,” AIArchitect describes how a disproportionate number of decisions are made late in design, when possibilities are constrained and mostly the “experts” are involved. The author suggests it is time to “shift the curve to the left.”
  
• Planning can actually use prototypes that can facilitate the early wins suggested by John Kotter. There is an opportunity to try something out, see if it works and either make adjustments or proceed with confidence. In most design projects, the building IS the prototype. What design practices are out there that will let us take an idea out for a spin?