The best place to start thinking about facilitation is from a very simple place. What makes a great conversation, one to one, or in a small group? In the course of this conversation, something shifts for everyone involved. New meaning is created, new realities emerge, future directions become clear, needs are met, and commitments are made.

The best conversations go beyond discussion or debate. Someone with a sense of humour noted the etymological link between ‘discussion’ and ‘percussion’ - discussion as the clash of ideas.  Good conversations pass through this collision and enter the realm of dialogue.  Dialogue is not just about information, data, and facts. We can google for that. It is more than a simple exchange of ideas, encompassing at least two more features: empathy and intention.

Lets consider feelings first. Do we have a sense that we are open to another’s emotional universe? Do we recognize and appreciate, not just their ideas, but their feelings? When someone is angry, moved, delighted by an insight, do we step into their shoes and sense the full implication of that emotion? By contrast, do we acknowledge the danger of getting railroaded by someone else’s passion? How do we feel ourselves? What are we experiencing?

Then intention.  There is almost always some forward movement in someone else’s words. We are creatures of the future. We are heading somewhere (however vague or short term).  For each of us, gathering in a group, there are multiple intentions available, intentions that have, potentially, coalesced for the brief moment of this meeting. Norbert Elias uses the beautiful phrase ‘The interweaving of countless individual interests and intentions’[1]. Is there something that might emerge between us that creates a collective insight that has some mutual forward movement?  And potentially, granting us all the opportunity to learn or change.

 Good conversations enter unknown territory.  When you start, you don’t actually know how it will turn out. You may have a purpose, or an end in mind. But this purpose must allow for other voices and other expectations. If you are just pushing for a specific result or change in the other person, it’s a lecture, or a scolding. It will be resisted.

The hope implicit in dialogue is that some new meaning emerges between the parties in the conversation.

So.  Dialogue implies an openness of mind, heart and intention that, from careful sharing and listening, allows new meaning to be created. New meaning is created between people in conversation. Imagine if every conversation was seen as an opportunity for this kind of dialogue? Dialogue with depth and delight. What would be different?

The etymology of ‘conversation’:  to ‘turn together’