|
CONNECTING - PETER BLOCK
It is my pleasure to introduce Nancy Miller who is the backbone person for the entire planning group for this event.
How was lunch? Remember to get a brownie in the back of the room.
We would like you to walk the pantheon of wonderful ideas that we have created in the past days with two other people. Take 15 minutes to do so. Walk all the way around, catch everything, have some good conversations. Then we will come back and be with Peter Block who will connect up all of these thoughts. So, with that, teams of three please, of your choice. [Participants walked around the room of wonderful contributions by participants and Joe Sterling's graphics to discuss what has been most significant to them.]
I'm into self introductions. My name is Marcello Mastriani. I have the dullest name of anyone I've ever known: Peter Block (laughter). I could have been someone if I had some vowels. I'm coming back with an unpronounceable name. Maybe then I'd have some character. I'm the dynamic after lunch speaker and I wish you all luck. At this point, this is the 4th quarter of these two days. My intention is to tie things together. I'll talk until I see you glaze over. Then we'll have a series of questions about acting on these things in groups of 10. We'll skip the synthesis. Then you'll come back for some small group activity and then we'll close. Here's the intention of what I want to say to you. Every community has several visions. There's some belief that if you have a vision, it will materialize. Then it gets laminated. It becomes permanent. It becomes a thing. It strikes me how little of community visions have been lived out. I want to talk about what's involved in acting on what we know. Why do I know so much? My last book was titled: "The Answer to How is Yes." Why would I write a book with that title? The how is everybody's question. Everybody says: "How do we" (as if I needed more tools.) I love tools. I have a workshop that has many, many tools. I've never created anything with that workshop. Nothing has gone out the door. I've only made things to hold my tools." [Laughter]
I'll use some audiovisual techniques (Peter drew a triangle and then a circle). This is the way we usually think of acting: it's a pyramid; it's wide at the bottom and narrow at the top. We expect strong leadership, we think the top has to be on board. We ask: "How do we get those people on board?" We think that someone above us has to change before we can change. It's a leadership-based culture. There's a name for this mindset and that is patriarchy. This is how things get done. This is our culture. We change things by implementing programs. We have a program for senior citizens, for youth, for this and that. You hear: "How do we get people on board?" As if they're in the water. We're in the boat and they're in the water. How do we know you're in the boat? (laughter). It's an engineering mindset. If you can't measure it, it doesn't exist. It's an expert-based model. Michael Freedman talked about "this is an award winning design and no one wants to live there, no one can get there." This could have been an award winning building. How does it happen that you can win an award and yet you have created something uninhabitable? It's designed for efficiency, cost, ergonomics, fuel economy (most of these new buildings the windows don't open - so much for nature). The programmatic mindset is one way to implement a vision. Let's assign some people. Let's hold them accountable. We have ideas that if you want accountability, you have to squeeze. You have a strange relationship in other places with elected officials. We want to hold them accountable. It's a way of thinking about change, about transformation as if you can enroll people into it. If you say why would we win an award for a building we don't want to inhabit, it's because we hired the "best experts" and said, give me an award winning building. This experience is an alternative to that. John calls this the systems way. The triangle creates a parent-child relationship between those who are responsible and those who aren't. For example, in business they have a performance appraisal. It's crazy. I'm the boss and you're the subordinate. Once a year I sit you down and give you a performance appraisal and then I coach you. Would you do that at home? Would you go home to your partner and tell them that it is their time for a performance appraisal? (laughter) I'm doing this for the good of the family unit. "I'd like you to tell me how you've let the family down for the last 12 months." No one is perfect. This isn't going to be held against you. I love you." We even train people for this. I've been trained. I know how to lean forward to indicate interest, to have eye contact, to ask open-ended questions" (laughter). If you take seriously the spirit of Peter, the methodology of John. (Peter started coughing and someone asked if he needed water.) I probably could use some water, holy water actually (laughter). All of this is a mindset. It has become a habit. We raise our children this way. The school systems are designed this way. We've got these young people. We ask how are we going to motivate them. They're not interested in learning. We need some kind of reward and punishment system to motivate them. We create the normal curve. We give A's to F's. We can only have so many A's. For every A we need the same number of F's. When I went to school I was a B student, A's were too much pressure. If I had had any integrity I should have gone to the students who got F's and said thank you (laughter). For me to get an A or a B, someone had to take the hit and it was you (laughter). There's another semester coming up so, if you wouldn't mind taking the hit again it would make me really happy. Being an underachiever it's not such a bad thing. There's this notion that we have to rank people, to motive them, to light a fire. We have all of these people crouched over kindling. You ask them what they are doing and they say they are waiting for someone to light their fire. (Peter bends down in a sitting position demonstrating bending over a fire.) This is in the architecture. This is in my bloodstream. So, what you are talking about is "Does this build community? Well, it's deeply individualistic, which this culture abounds in. There's the belief that great things are done by great individuals. A lot of us think that 80% of the work is done by 20% of the people."
Is there some other way we can find to live out a vision? Is there some community way, a more relationship based way? If you say we need strong leadership, the triangle model, no one will argue with you. We need to sell people on this. The top needs to role model. We have this kind of mindset. This is using the disease for the cure. People don't resist change, they resist coercion. It's not that I don't want to change, I'm dying for my transformation. I just don't want to be "converted", driven or enrolled. This is the search for the alternative. What are we here to focus on? This building is an occasion to re-imagine, or more deeply imagine, the larger questions of community. How do we build a strong local economy, keep the standard of living going up, keep business, public safety? All of these are symptoms. When these aren't working it indicates a breakdown in community. People say: "What we need is better professionalism in the schools." But maybe it is a symptom in the breakdown of community. It's not the quality of education professionals. It's the quality of the community. The question with healthcare is: Who's responsible for my health? Is it the doctor or is it me? The healthcare profession says it's the doctor and I like that. I want someone else to take responsibility for my health. I believe in better living through chemistry. I hate exercise. I love fat grams. Alcohol is the point (laughter). I want to go to the doctor and say, "Do something about this thing." Real health care reform requires a shift from parent-child to partnership as the model. Who keeps the community safe? The Police? Strong communities can make a community safe. How do we make traffic calmer, by using more enforcement, more stop signs, more speed bumps? They have started a citizen engagement committee. What you can do is drive slowly. You have a choice about how to think about it. Is there some kind of community building that would help? That's the framework. So we are addressing what you want this community to be, what you want this building to be. Is there something within this design that represents the destination you want for the larger community? The patriarchy model is part of our being so it won't ever be gone but is there some way to get balance (between the triangle and the circle)? Another language to use to talk about it, if the triangle is about installation, the circle is the language around engagement. At the end of every conference, we ask what are they going to do about this? Who are we talking about? Who are they? What am I going to do about it? Both are incomplete. Is there a way to make things happen through elements of engagement? Here are some elements of engagement. I like when he does that (Joe Sterling with his graphic scribed chart). It gives the illusion of substance. (from the audience: packaging is everything.) I feel like sometimes I am content-free. I give low calorie presentations. We asked the other night, how would I do this? This one (Peter pointing at the triangle) starts by assigning responsibilities, getting the top on board, having a clear direction, having milestones and plans. This one (the circle) begins with invitation. You came here out of invitation. Invitation demands something. It has power because there's a possibility of refusal. I give you the choice not to come. The other aspect of invitation is when it is personal. Most of the time it needs to be voiced (vs. a letter). What are the elements of reception? This conference has done a better job of hospitality than just about any other conference I've attended. To take this space and make it hospitable, is unbelievable. It's an expression of spirit, of warmth. These chairs aren't that comfortable but they are better than others. Most of the chairs were never sat in by their designers. (audience: award winning designers). I didn't know that winning an award was the kiss of death (laughter). (Drawing again on the circle) There's some kind of context. We invite you. Welcome. Here's the possibility that led to this invitation. We are going to partner with you to create the future. This was organized around powerful questions. The transformation comes from getting the question right. The answers always disappoint. People ask the mayor, "What are you going to do about it?" If he was smart he'd just say "I don't know". But you can't do that as a leader. The powerful questions are an element of engagement, they are open-ended which create a certain amount of anxiety and create meaningful conversation.
Engagement has to have the element of the possibility of refusal. You have to ask what doubts and considerations do you have about this. If I can't say no, my yes means nothing. People ask: "How did the meeting go?" It was great, no one raised any objections. Well that was a lousy meeting. That means there was no contact, there was no connection. Another element is commitment. Asking people what commitment they are willing to make. What's the commitment you are promising to make? For commitment to be real, "no" has to be a satisfactory answer. At the end of conferences, everyone leaves with a list 99% of which never get acted on. I've even written a list in a workshop I was taking and sent it to myself six months later. Dear Peter, when you receive this in 6 months you will have lost 10 pounds, surrendered to love, lived a lifestyle that is healthy, accepted your children for who they are (laughter). You sign it and they mail it to you. Six months later you get this thing and you say "who the hell is this from?" (laughter) You open it up and you have gained wait, your children bother you more than ever, you haven't surrendered to love. "No" sustains your membership in this circle. You have to support people in refusal. "No" is the beginning of a conversation when it comes to building community. You don't have the power to coerce. Even the statement, "No" means I want to sustain my membership, I just don't want to commit right now. You say fine, stay in the circle, keep coming to the meetings. The last one is about gifts. This culture likes working on weaknesses. I've been working on my weaknesses for 55 years. I've been working on being dynamic for 30 years. So this is it (laughter). I'm at my most dynamic right now. What you see is what you get so working on deficiencies makes them stronger. In some places we do 360-degree feedback. Now you get crap from every direction (laughter). It's bad enough they told me they didn't like me, now I've got to hear it from all around. Feedback doesn't help. I know how to defend against your comments about my weaknesses. I'm sophisticated in receiving feedback. I say, "Thank you very much. That was helpful." I know my deficiencies. Oh yeah, people have been telling me that for years. What a testimony for feedback. With gifts, I don't know how to defend against them. I'm not used to hearing that so there's enormous power not only in the notion that we want and value people for their capacities also in bldg community we need to put into words to each other "here's the gift, the value I have received from you in this meeting." I don't know what was useful. 80% of the stuff I say is habit, 20% may have value. I can't tell the difference. If I want to build community I need to focus on what gifts people brought and I need to let them know what those are. Why don't we come together to utilize and build upon our talents. The real test is to take the people on the margin and bring them into an experience like this. These are the design elements and this meeting has been structured in that form. Relationships, connection with each other is what brings vision to life, not programs. Programs are well meaning. But once you name it a program, somehow it loses its aliveness. How do we use relationship as a basis for accomplishment? Your connection to each other is what makes people show up at night and on weekends. If it doesn't have that dimension, it won't be successful.
The role of government and City Council in this is as initiator, catalyst and convener. With the design of these two days, they are trying to renegotiate the role between government and its citizens. It's a mistake to put the government into a customer-supplier model which a lot of people want to do. Why can't the government work more like a business, i.e. meet the needs of the customer. It lets citizens off the hook. When you hold public hearings, it's an interesting room. I bet the elected officials are raised up higher than the citizens, they have a table in front of them and each have a microphone. The citizens are each given a microphone, and they talk like wounded goats. They are given 2 or 3 minutes. The Council's job is to act interested. Council members say, "Thank you very much for your input, next". (Audience: "The red light just came on!" Laughter) What's the mindset that would lead to a design like this because both sides are imprisoned by it? It's the notion that we are citizens coming here with our little problems praying that government will do something about it. So this structure is trying to renegotiate that role into a partnership. Citizens say to government here's what I want from you and government says, well here's what I need from you in return. It's peers talking together as partners. Government says, I invite you. They enter as citizens who are deeply committed. How we chose to be together - we are creating our future together. Some day you will create rooms for a hearing where hearing is the point. Citizens need to reconcile themselves with each other. Most of the time the problems are when citizens can't come together. They want government to resolve for them what they can't do with themselves. The role of government then is to bring the citizens together in a different way. This design is an expression of this new model. Instead of the question being, "What are you going to do for me?", it's "What do we want to create together?" How can we move forward in a community-based way where the small circle/group is the driver of change vs. leadership being the driver of change? How do you create a community of accountability? People will be accountable for what they helped create. The idea I like to demonstrate that is the rental car. How you deal with rental cars? I've never even washed the car. I speed with the car. I love parallel parking. I pull the car up on the curb and then I shimmy it down until it slides down against the curb. I hope someone is watching because that's how you parallel park. (Laughter) When I leave I always throw the trash in the back seat. I prepaid for cleaning. So what I own I will care for, be accountable for, what I've been involved in creating. Accountability is caring for the well-being of the whole. Confronting people with their freedom is an accountable community. The deeper power of your being. You also come here for the sake of all who dwell in this community. What does it mean to be accountable? I have joined with others to create this. I'm not sold anything. Government has an initiating role. We need to create a space where every voice can be heard. There's a fourth quadrant on your handout with questions. Talk in your small group for 40 mins. There won't be a synthesis discussion. [Small groups discussed their questions.]
|
 |
Monday 3/17 Tuesday 3/18 Wednesday 3/19 Appendix [click on images to enlarge]
[click on images to enlarge]
|
This afternoon we are going to break the mold. We'd like you do something different than the breakout group format we've been using. Just when we were all getting that down, we're changing it on you.
I saw a nuance of a router the other day. Maybe that will get me over the hump and I'll make something. A common question is: "How do we get those people to do something, to change those people?" I got interested with how as the wrong question. Some other dimension is required, something that deals with courage, will, and commitment. The question is, "What does it take to act on that?"
Community is about peer-to-peer conversations. How do we carry forward this conversation so more citizens can be involved in further conversations? How do you design conversations for people. Most of my cynicism doesn't come from what life offered me but that my story about it stays the same forever. I keep hearing myself say the same stories over and over again. That's what makes me cynical. Need to have conversations that provide me a new story. How do we bring people together to have a conversation they have not had before? Open-ended powerful personal questions are a way to do that.
The committee got that the room we meet in matters. Michael talked about the construction of outside spaces and how buildings are organized to create civic spaces. Same thing inside a building. How do I create and meet in a room that supports the experience of community? This building was not designed for the quality of experience for people being in it. This room matters. The entry was designed to receive people. The walls matter. Walls don't like to be blank. William White said a blank wall is a testimony to the insignificance of the human spirit. Let us put color and life on walls. Chairs can move in here. The round tables matter. Most of our spaces we are unconscious about. Most schools are a variation between a prison and a hospital. Any thoughts you have?
