Developing+Collaborative+Norms

At the conclusion of our first meeting, Bob asked us to assess our decisions and actions across the Seven Norms of Collaboration. I thought that perhaps we should revisit these norms and their purpose. It has been a long time (for me at least) since a group at Todd County has paid attention to the skills necessary for productive group work.

=Four Group-Member Capabilities= A //capability// names what a person is able to do. It is different than capacity, which refers to how much one can hold. Capabilities are the metacognitive awarenesses with which people determine when to use, how to use, or not to use certain skills. Capabilities therefore organize and direct the use of skills; they influence the application and effectiveness of knowledge and skills.

The four group-member capabilities are as follows:

1. To know one's intentions and choose congruent behaviors. 2. To set aside unproductive patterns of listening, responding, and inquiring. 3. To know when to self-asert and when to integrate 4. To know and support the group's purposes, topics, processes, and development

To Know One's Intentions and Choose Congruent Behaviors
Clarity of intention in the moment and over time drives attention, which in turn drives the what and how of a group member's meeting participation This clarity precedes and influences the three other capabilities. It is the source of impulse control, patience, strategic listening, and strategic speaking.

This capability is the foundation for flexible and effective behavior. If, for example, a person's intention is to positively influence the thinking of others, various behaviors can be used congruently with that intention: Under some circumstances, a paraphrase will convey an attempt to understand and open the door for reciprocal understanding; in some situations, direct advocacy will be more persuasive; in other cases, an inquiry into the thinking of another speaker may be more effective.

To Set Aside Unproductive Patterns of Listening, Responding, and Inquiring
For each meeting participant, there are two audiences. One is external, made up of the other group members. The other is internal, made up of the feelings, pictures, and talk going on inside each individual. Group members need to continually decide which audience to serve. Three major set-aside areas focus this choice and allow fuller and more nonjudgmental participation. They are as follows:

1. To set aside autobiographical listening, responding, and inquiring. "ME TOO!"` 2. To set aside inquisitive listening, responding, and inquiring. "TELL ME MORE!" 3. To set aside solution listening, responding, and inquiring. "I KNOW WHAT TO DO!"

The autobiographical frame leads to several problems in group work. The first is the filtering process that goes on when individuals try to hear another's story through the lens of their own experiences. Although this can be a source of empathy, it can also lead to distortion and miscommunication.

This type of listening, responding, and inquiring is a major source of wasted time in meetings. It can lead to endless storytelling in which everyone around the table shares a related anecdote. This is dinner party conversation, not productive meeting talk. Each member of the eighth-grade team does not have to relate a discipline horror story. The team should explore a collective understanding of these students and their needs and develop appropriate response patterns that elicit desired behaviors.

The inquisitive frame is sometimes triggered by the autobiographical. People inquire to see how others' stories compare to their own. Pure curiosity also motivates inquisitive listening, responding, and inquiring. A critical question at the juncture is "How much detail to we need to move this item?" This is an example of what we call a "naive question." Such questions can be asked by any group member. The purpose is to focus attention on critical matters and avoid unnecessary specificity.

The solution frame is deeply embedded in the psyche of educators. Status, rewards, and identity are all tied up in being a good problem solver. The pressure of time in schools pushes people toward action and away from reflection. The down side of this pattern is that groups and group members get trapped in situations and action plans before they have time to fully understand the perspectives of others.

The solution frame also stifles the generation of new possibilities. It gets in the way of developing alternative ways of framing issues and problems, and it pushes groups toward action before creating clear outcomes.

To Know When to Self-Assert and When to Integrate
In productive groups, each member must decide when to self-assert and when to integrate with the group. In one group, a member confided to us that she was concerned about the autocratic disposition of the new chairman. While she valued the directness that he brought to the group's work, she was concerned that a collective ownership would gradually be lost if he were not sometimes challenged. Her issue, and the tension for each group member, is when to challenge and when to go with the flow. Self-assertion and integration are conscious choices only when group members have personal clarity about their own intentions and knowledge of and a willingness to support the group's outcomes and methods.

Self-assertion does not necessarily mean self-focus. It can mean asserting oneself into the flow of group interactions to refocus the group on a topic or on a process. It can mean reminding others of the purpose of the meeting when the conversation stray7s off course. It can also mean speaking up and advocating for topics and processes.

When individual group members integrate, they align their energy with the content and processes of the meeting. During dialogue they suspend judgments and counter arguments in an attempt to understand viewpoints different from their own. During discussions, they follow the flow of logic and reasoning as it emerges. In this way, solutions satisfying to the group as a whole are more likely to emerge.

Consensus decision making is the ultimate test of this capability. This procedure assumes that participants know when and how to self-assert and when and how to integrate, both during and after the decision-making process.

To Know and Support the Group's Purposes, Topics, Processes, and Development
All ongoing groups need to balance three simultaneous agendas. The first is //task focus//, which is the ultimate expression of the group's purpose. The second agenda is //process skills development.// Without continued attention to expanded repertoire and expanded skills, the group stagnates and does not expand its capacity for handling more complex wok in the future. The third agenda is //group development.// All groups exist on a continuum from novice to expert performance. Experience alone is an insufficient teacher. Many longstanding groups operate at novice levels of performance.

High-performing groups are adaptive groups. They learn from experience and improve the way they work. In supporting the group's purposes, topics, processes, and development, individual group members make a commitment to this shared learning and to personal learning.