A REFLECTION ON NOVEMBER’S PARTIAL REFLECTION, AND A ROADMAP FOR NRN DIALOGUE PROCESSES



On Thursday, December 1st, the Needham Resilience Network met in Powers Hall at the Needham Town Hall. 


December is a month to both reflect on the past year and look ahead. In that vein, the Network Co-Directors opened the meeting with a review of November’s “reflection on a current event.” The reflection had been set up to provide NRN members an opportunity to share their reactions to a recent event. The Co-Directors acknowledged the challenges of trying to address current events in real time while the Network is still in the process of developing protocols that will respectfully and effectively support the community. 

To ensure that we as a Network are able to engage in such dialogues in the future, we will complete our communications training and hold the full structured dialogue (that we began in November) within the next few months. In the meantime, all NRN members have been invited to reach out to the Co-Directors to share their questions, feelings or thoughts about the process.



STRUCTURED REFLECTION ON CURRENT EVENTS


What does a structured dialogue process look like? 

Drawing on the framework developed by Essential Partners, structured dialogue processes aim to: 

  • promote understanding between participants (not influence or persuasion), and 

  • generate a shared, albeit more complex, narrative of a situation. While the structure of the process itself is designed to promote equity, voice and understanding, it ultimately relies on participants’ contributions, particularly on their ability to communicate in accordance with the NRN Communications Agreement.

The process consists of 3 parts:

Structured Reflection 

Everyone in the circle speaks for a predetermined number of minutes about their reactions to an event, and/or the impact they think it might have had (based on their own views, or informed by their sub-network). Themes are collected. The goal of this exercise is simply awareness.

Through it, we give voice to everyone who desires to feel heard; elicit a range of perspectives; and start the process of perspective-taking so that we can begin to understand multiple types of experience rather than just our own. 

Assumptions, Questions, Answers

Before jumping from reflection to dialogue, the group generates a list of assumptions that may elicit various reactions. We also record questions; either to clarify an aspect of another person’s experience, and/or enable us to check-out the assumptions we have listed. Some of these questions are answered by individuals within the circle; the facilitators will typically bring information from outside the room as well. This is a time to consider new knowledge and different frames—to more fully understand each other’s experiences.  

Take-Aways

Everyone will again have a predetermined number of minutes to answer each of two questions:

  • What is it like to talk about the issues in this manner?

  • Is there an idea, or set of promising questions that you are taking with you?

As a circle, we will generate answers to a final question:

  • Are there useful learnings, lessons, or next steps (for the NRN) that come out of this discussion?

This process is meant to equip members of the NRN with the skills necessary to have difficult conversations on issues that drive us apart. With each dialogue, a shared understanding of Needham’s and each other’s situational context grows and soon we are able to carry it with us as we consider future decisions and behaviors. Ultimately, these skills allow us to stand in solidarity with one another and to support our community as it confronts rapid and unpredictable change.



SKILL - BUILDING: RECOVENANTING (previously, “Calling In”)


Two major tenants behind the NRN Communications Agreement are to: 

1) Speak in ways that promote connection and learning; and 

2) Refrain from judgments (which often requires being aware of our assumptions). If any principle in the Communications Agreement is breached, it prevents our ability to do these two things. In a case where we ourselves have breached the Agreement or someone else has, we can “recovenant” by noting the principle that was broken and inviting the speaker to make a contribution in a way that fits the agreement.

Following a large group practice, Network members formed groups of three to practice this. They first identified which elements of a written statement were not aligned with the NRN Communications Agreement, and then practiced rewording or reframing the comment in a more respectful, curious or open way. For instance:

Someone interrupts a speaker and says, "Actually that’s not true. Let me explain what the data says about this.” 

This comment breaches the principles of: respecting time limits (for self and others), speaking only for oneself (versus for your group, or on behalf of data), and responding in ways that promote connection. The person who interrupted could instead wait their turn, and reframe their comment as: “My personal experience with this has been XYZ.” They might add, “I have been influenced by studies that show ABC” (though be prepared that the data source may be disputed).

Someone says something like: "You’re also a scholarship student, right? You get what it’s like."  

This comment breaches the principles of: speaking only for oneself (versus for a group, which assumes all others share the same views), making judgments, and responding in ways that promote connection. This person could reframe their comment as a question: “What has your experience as a scholarship student been like?”

“The administration at this college doesn’t care about students’ voices. They just care about keeping their jobs.”  

This comment breaches the principles of: speaking for oneself, making judgments, and promoting connection. This person could reframe their comment as: “When X and Y happened, it sometimes felt to me like the administration was not listening to student voices. I’m curious to learn more, from their perspective. Why did they react the way they did in each of these cases? How do they view these situations? What opportunities do they see for more successfully incorporating student voices into their planning?”

Back in a large group debrief, members considered what it might feel like to prompt another Network member or facilitator to reframe their statement. Some noted discomfort, and most articulated interest in ongoing practice. 



CLOSING PULSE


NRN members shared poignant statements of commitment to this process of working together for shared visions of community well-being. Reflections included: 

  • Appreciation of the co-Directors reflection on the process

  • Appreciation of being a part of this group and the opportunity to get to know others

  • Appreciation of the communication practice to apply to settings outside of NRN, including the personal sphere

  • The great draw in hearing about people’s lives and in what they find interesting

  • The challenge of missing meetings and trying to catch up 

  • Hopes to continue working on these issues and relationships 

  • The importance and impact of words and tone

  •  The feeling that we’re getting closer to building trust and the realization that it takes a long time to build safe, brave space

  • Appreciation for working on the “calling in’ practice

  • The value of small group work in building relationships and making progress

  • Seeking clarity about the direction of our work   

  • Appreciation of the need to ‘assume good intent'

  • A wish to continue to question where to draw lines, especially when intent and impact are not the same

  • As we consider harm, we can keep in mind that the meaning of the word ATONE can be divided into “at one”. Every human being craves love, freedom and unity and our work here strives for that.

The purpose of the NRN’s work is relationship and trust-building, which can then scaffold into prevention and rapid response. It is also unity around shared goals (of community well-being; of feeling able to share one’s opinions and be valued for them, even if they differ from others, etc.). As one of our clergy reminded us, and as the Network practiced throughout the December session, this work embodies a process of “re-covenanting”; in this case, of relational rupture and repair, where “repair'' entails returning to a covenant, e.g., the Communications Agreement. 



GROUP BIOS 


Needham YMCA - Paula Jacobson, the Director of Charles River YMCA, presented the wide array of activities found at our two Y sites in town. The Y’s programming and partner relationships reflect the deep commitment to community wellness, including the building of a strong mind, spirit and body, and the values of diversity and accessibility to all. The Y heralds a special commitment to teach swimming to all, and works hard to grow funding for this and many other opportunities so that no one is turned away due to financial hardship. The Y believes in the empowerment of all, regardless of abilities or disabilities. Paula discussed several of the many Y programs that exemplify these values, including “Healthy Habits”, addressing diabetes prevention, "Livestrong", geared towards cancer survivors, and Scamper Camp. The Y aims to eliminate economic inequality and discrimination, and collaborates with a host of programming and funding partners. 


                             
RESOURCES


What We Are Reading/Watching/Listening to:


  • Here’s a vision for spending $100 million on pluralism over the next decade. The Healing Starts Here blog authored by Uma Viswanathan and Alison Grubbs of the New Pluralist Collaborative.


  • What Too Little Forgiveness Does to Us by Timothy Keller in the Opinion Section of the New York Times. Dr. Keller describes the way that a culture of forgiveness serves the same goals as justice-seeking.




  • Joe Bubman of Urban Rural Action describe the experience of folks in Maryland coming together from different ideological perspectives to tackle issues of immigration, economic development, and inclusion with practical, local solutions for their state. 


  • Faith and Polarization. Vice President for Programs at One America Movement, Chandra DeNap Whetstine gave an inspiring talk at Stand Together’s Catalyst Summit describing their approach to combating toxic polarization, working with faith communities across the U.S.


Onward!
Nichole & Beth (NRN Co-Directors)