3. Experimenting with art as a tool for different looking

I have designed and implemented two experiments and one effect measurement. I have done this in

inspiring co creation with Menna Kruiswijk, of Yellow Fellow. The art of Yellow fellow was part of the

experiments. The purpose of these two experiments, with almost identical frameworks, was to see if a

dialogue with art could lead to a different view on a day-to-day (coaching) question. And if possible to

some sort of transformation. Both experiments were focused on expanding the time and intensity of

looking at a work of art, related to a personal question. As stated previously: the ability to see and

experience the aesthetic quality of an artefact or process is the basic for aesthetic intelligence.

The second experiment differs from the first experiment, in a way that it was designed and performed

in a more ‘standard’ or (semi) ‘scientific’ approach. We have differentiated the target group into four

groups, given them different assignments. Also the way of interviewing afterwards was more standard

compared to the first experiment. Finally I conducted certain effect measurements 2 weeks after the

experiment. A total of 42 persons took part in the first experiment, 48 in the second experiment 48. I

selected 13 persons for the effect measurement.

Frame work of the experiments

Purpose: to let people experience another, different way of looking, seeing, thinking, feeling by having a dialogue, a coaching session with a piece of art. “Does it really talk then?” someone asked.

Context 7 pieces of art (5 of Yellow Fellow, one beautiful old tree and ‘Mali’, one of my own sculptures) were located in 7 white tents (3 x 3 metre), outside on the learning lane of the Baak, location Driebergen (in the forest); each tent contained one piece of art and one chair. After a short introduction people could sit in any tent, as long as they liked, to have a dialogue with art. Afterwards they were asked about their experiences by an interviewer of the Baak, Menna or myself. This experiment was part of a bigger event at de Baak: the Special Event ‘Art and leadership’, and the Learning Lane Event.

Target Group the first experiment: managers, artists, professionals; the second experiment: mostly professionals in HR, MD, having their own company; also some (interim) managers.

Assignment think about a coaching question, a day to day question about a relevant issue in your life or work. Then choose at random (or specifically one) a piece of art that you would like to talk with. You are allowed to close the tent and you can stay as long as you like. Afterwards we are going to ask you about your experiences.

Process 1) people were invited to join an experiment (creating curiosity)2) they think about a coaching question upfront, before entering a tent (pacesetting)3) they choose a tent intuitively (serendipity)4) they take their time, as long as they like (dialogue)5) we ask them some questions (reflecting and sharing)

6) afterwards I wrote down all the taped conversations and analysed these. I also asked some colleagues to read the outcomes and tell me “what triggers you?’ (analysing, constructing meaning)7) I drew some conclusions and formulated options to improve a next experiment (concluding, improving).

Assumptions with respect to the experiment

While starting the design process of the experiment we came up with the following seven

assumptions:

1. People like joining an experiment, it arouses the natural curiosity.

2. The upfront coaching question renders focus to the dialogue and forces the person to look for

answers.

3. The context of space, silence, white or light atmosphere, being alone, nature, unicity, art invites a

person to reflect.

4. The art speaks with her own, expressive language in images, forms and realities; so it is indeed

able to ‘talk to you’, participants take over the artistic language of the piece of art on their reflection

of their questions, e.g. words like space, colour, form, proportions, time, emotions, intuition.

5. The other languages invite the participant also to look differently to one’s issues and get different

insights; it may stimulate people to transform slightly or more.

6. The longer the time one takes (conscious or unconscious) the more impact this will have; the

experience of time will be confused or different from the actual time.

7. The conversation with the interviewer afterwards adds to the experience, to in-depth reflection and

finding language to talk about your experience and to enlarge the chance of transformation.

In this way three basic competences of aesthetic intelligence have been the focus of the experiments:

1) the ability to look, see and possibly feel and think differently, 2) to find language and to

communicate in an intuitive and rational way about your aesthetic experience and share such with

others 3) have an open attitude towards something new and unexpected. The preposition is that in this

way these experiments have a chance to develop or improve someone’s aesthetic intelligence.

Methodological justifications

To put a question forward upfront, before the dialogue starts, changes on a conscious level the

attitude with which the participant is looking at art. In this way the experiment provokes a dialogue that

would not have been there if the questions were not asked upfront. It changes the basic attitude of the

person. The same accounts for visiting a concert: it sharpens your senses when you start with a focus

or when you have more information upfront: you are able to ‘get more out of the concert’ (er meer

uithalen). Thus, because of this coaching question upfront, a person sees and experiences the art

better. Without such question being put people look but may not see. It might be a nice experiment but

it does not lead to some kind of justification.

Maxine Greene describes this as follows: “Like most people, I think, I go through the World, even the

variegated, resonant, dramatic multi-shaded World of New York City, without seeing or hearing it.

Caught in reverie, perhaps, or in the lazy unseeing of everydayness, I almost forget that I have eyes

and ears. I plunge ahead with….just to get there, and I am perceptually dead.” (Jansen, M, 2002,

quoting Green in Blue Gitar, p 71). She speaks about looking without seeing. To be able to really see,

she uses the concept of ‘uncoupling’ as “…a process in which people take the time to cultivate their

own informed awareness, allow their minds to be activated, their feelings to be aroused, their

imaginations to be released. …open enough to notice what there is to be noticed…to see the quality of

things and the work of art in its integrity and its autonomy. It is a relearning to see the world, seeing

new details, catalogues and patterns… To cultivate and stimulate the sensory and perceptual life and

not to psychologize or over intellectualize. To avoid reading in meanings and expressions that is

irrelevant. The sense must be reached before the mind.” (Jansen, M, thesis about Maxine Green,

quoting Green, p 15).

According to the philosopher Van der Schoot (Chapter 3) it is also possible that the question leads to

examination fright: “With a question the effect could be that someone urgently has to look, in order not

to fail for the exam. So the assignment, to come up with a question and the insinuation to come up

with an answer too, creates this fear in it self, this has nothing to do with the art as such. The question

is more effective than the art.”

Still, would it be the same when a person literally walks into ‘the forest’ with a coaching question

(coaching by nature) in order to create the same effect. It is well known that a walk through the forest,

with its natural beauty and fresh air, creates many opportunities for reflection. What could be the

added value of art, instead of nature, as a tool for this experiment? One of the works of art in the

experiment was actually a tree. In fact, it was just a part of a tree, mainly the tree trunk, limited or

framed by the white tent. In this way it was a kind of abstract work of art. The difference is that nature

is a ‘given factor’, some like to say a present of God, whereas art has been created by human beings.

Maxine Green talks about the added value of art: “Works of art exist apart from the mundane and the

routinized and the every day. They can be achieved and made meaningful only when those who

attend are willing to leap out of the ordinary and be present.” (Jansen, M, 2002).

Using art as a tool or language to get unstuck. Gianpiero Petriglieri speaks about ‘stuck in a moment’

as a developmental perspective in impasse. (Petriglieri, G.; 2007). He argues that being stuck in a

moment might sometimes be good. “It might mean that we are in the space between stories, faced

with the opportunity to shape new ways of being wit ourselves and with others. Developmental

stuckness may occur more frequently then we previously used to.” Petriglieri has outlined: “…a

template for working with developmental stuckness and shifting defiant loneliness and hopeless

confusion into creative experimentation.” He speaks about reframing and understanding. Reframing

would suggest that stuckness may be not a block or a prison to escape, but more a message that it is

time to change directions and find new meaning. Reading his article, my assumption is that art may be

able to help with the reframing process. Many questions of the ‘coaching with art experiments’ were

about: stuck in work, trapped in dilemmas, difficulty with choices. And some new insights were about

either accepting it or reframing the issues. But this is just a hunge, that art might be a good facilitator

to get unstuck (good topic for follow up research).

A work of art can be a concentrated form or explosion of an intuitive and rational creative and artistic

process of an artist. A concentration of a theme or a question the artist wants to criticize, explore,

which he loves or hates and which he has to express and lay down in a piece of art. Therefore, art is

the message of the artist, which contains a concentration of human themes, meanings and

fascinations. And hopefully the receiver is able to receive and understand, intuitively and rationally the

message.

During the experiment the coaching consists of two phases or two conversations: one with the piece of

art, in the language of art and images, and the second afterwards, in regular language. The second

conversation is based on three questions: 1) what did you experience? 2) Have you reached new

insights? 3) In what way might this meeting have effect on you? Weggeman states: “The more

fundamental the research the smaller the chance to work with closed questions. Of which we do not

know, we have to look for in an open way’. To analyze the conversations I made use of my own

intuition, ratio and amazement: what triggered me when I was listening to and reading the interviews.

My own astonishment, and of three others, has been my measurement for research. Weggeman

refers to Straus and Corbin, the founders of the so-called grounded theory. By means of ‘interjury’ one

is able to research the basics of observations, and creating senticising concepts, the building blocks of

theory in wording. This concerns an observation free from theoretical foundation. This method is used

to find words for things we have never seen before. Pure and without association.

5. Results 1e experiment Special Event: Art and Leadership

I have the records of 42 conversations: all beautiful! I was very touched by the depth of the

conversations in such a short period of time. Also by the sharing of very personal questions and

precious insights, of the quality of the artistic language that was used, sometimes in a stuttering way.

In short: it was a joyful experience for me, as well as I believe also for most of the participants. One

example:

A manager, male, mid fifties, taking his time to find some words to express his feelings, the sound of birds around us to fill silence. “…what comes in my mind is beauty. The … (birdsong) …beauty in the story has something to do with…..so it is about rediscovering the beauty in myself….so in that sense it truly is an encounter (ontmoeting)….yes it is an encounter….something different compared to meeting a tree….yeah….it is as if a fellow human being tells me something…ehm….that the world of feelings that manifests through art differentiates art from the tree…..(birdsong)….it is artworks, something constructed by a human being….with thoughts, feelings, intentions, desires, ambitions….they all resonate in me….it is a kind of viewing what I do now….a variety of different feelings came along that I now have to catch in words…..feelings of loneliness, joy, amazement, curiosity….contentness (tevredenheid),… moments of coming home and not, moment of embarrasment, that someone drops by, while I was near the tree and the man asked me if I were the work of art…hahaha…that is something of embarrassment …so I have experienced a whole palet of feelings…in the beginning diffuse, but along the way more explicit…and I thought…why should I share my experiences with someone? That is a bit impertinent…why should anyone…but along the way, via my feelings of loneliness, the theme came up what do I need to feel at home in a situation…and this whole experience has added to my insight…that just by doing (sharing) this is already an answer and that to feel at home can be independent. An old idea of mine that has been re-entered my thoughts, as an answer on the question…’

What triggered me?

Curiosity: Almost all people reacted spontaneously in a positive way when I asked them to join me in

an experiment. Furthermore, the setting with the 7 white closed tents in one row in a forest landscape,

with people going in and out, aroused curiosity:

“But I find the decorum, that I was working with the image, I do not think I would come to that without the image that was kind being there to correspond with.”

“I already work with art but never in this way; to use art so directly to come up with ideas, or words or themes, piece of arts that do not have a title or something. When you enter the place, it is just me and the work of art, very beautiful.”

Freedom and simpleness: the whole concept of the experiment, from introduction to evaluation is

simple. Every participant is allowed freedom within a simple framework: choose their question, choose

their tent, take their time, and choose what they would like to share and the way they want to share it.

Most of the participants very soon started to talke about very intimate issues. This must mean that

they felt safe, or were inspired to feel safe:

“The next step in my work will be to make space and create a framework for space” “The first Mondrian look a like, with the dynamic patches (vlekken), gave me the feeling of too

much, too busy. The other one on the contrary, had more white in it, emptiness, playing field. Space where something can grow, and where the big things are set aside, but still used as a base, in order for me not to get lost. So it gave me a framework of a playing field where I can take the next step.”

Inspiration: we had a varied collection of high quality pieces of art, from geometric abstract art to

expressionistic abstract art, from paintings to nature, from video to sculpture. Mostly everyone liked his

chosen work of art and found connection with their initial question. Probably, when serendipity has

brought them to another work of art, they would have been happy too. I believe that the quality of the

art also invited people to take more time. And more time spent on looking might result in more insights.

A Poem of Lucy:Ik wil dichten zonder of juist mijn hemd op te lichtenAssociëren met of juist zonder al die berendie ik op de snelweg hoor, doorgaan met wat ik doegrazen als een koereflecteren, animeren, associërenasso-cieerenassociëren, leren, begeren,heren, keren, wegscheren, afleren, bekeren, omkeren, heenkeren, erenbeleren, afleren, gaan en keren, terug naar cu te-rug naar uch,

kuch, ug, zuch(t), mug, terug, zug, dug….

Personal, worldly and complete: most conversation, were very intimate or personal and at the same

time the personal experiences were often put in a broader context; the combination of the personal

question, tent, and conversations; especially the last conversation, with the interviewer completed the

circle and helped the coachee to make connections between his intuition and ratio, and possible next

steps. The last conversation also gave an added feeling of joy, confidence, and happiness (of putting

things together and find language to share this).

“You need a different language to live in an universal world, there is a need around us for a universal language.”

“Not only with art but also in general: it is strange that we do not stand still and reflect upon what happens here and now, what we see in the here and now…that is strange…it is a valuable suggestion. Not only with respect to art, but speaking in general.”

Time and space: most heard words are: time, space, reflection, peacefulness, and proportions. Most

of all: at rest, quiet, silence, peacefulness. Hearing all the interviews I really was struck by the image of

so many people having the need for a time out to rest, just sit, not having to do something: let it flow.

This might say something about the context: the rest of the event, or in a broader context. Most

questions were about fixing dilemmas, handling chaos, accepting differences, mending parts to

become a whole. Some insights were on the level of accepting the situation as it is. Some on the level

of seeing several layers of reality (or several realities).

“It has helped me in the way that I have to take more rest, time to reflect, beside the usual daily life that keeps me so busy; I just have to find time and place to reflect on things…”

“I chose the painting with the collage, to me a very difficult painting, not easy to graps. I wanted to look for the eenheid/unity. But the pieces stayed what they were: separate pieces. That’s the way it is, that’s clear now.”

Languages: people started to use the language of the work of art. also the word beautiful was often

used. Words such as: form, colour, wholeness, ugliness, taste, light, darkness, proportions were often

used, in relation to their question and situations. Also emotional language: fear, worries, anxiety,

insecurities. Also there was a lot of stuttering, broken or unfinished sentences, silences. Definitely

looking for words.

“What a sad person, very, very sad. I even become sad myself. It’s like of sadness is sculpted in it…this sad, exhausted person is even split in two…this arouses enormous emotions in me....”

“This painting is about me. When you are born, you start with light. And when you grow up, greyish nuances make their entrance. Personally, I need more colours. Colours stand for choices I have to make…”

Intuition-ratio-balance: there has been a lot of looking and perceiving, with intuition ánd with ratio.

Whenever the words ‘they’ or ‘must....’ were being used, the ratio took over. Mostly, people enjoyed

finding a connection between intuitive associations in relation to the art linked to rational, emotional

questions and situations. A need to bridge domains.

“The ultimate question is how to organize reflection and set things in movement in a different way, to create new forms and ways of being together and of doing in our organization….the statue has a kind of introvert cautious look, and cautious is connected to reflection, thinking about things. But reflection is also about taking an outside position”

“Then the image is not a home image. It has strangeness about it. A real cultural context to it, if I actually read the image, to meet. I feel a need to meet. So the image was saying: no it is no time to come home. It is even time to go further into the world…”

Conclusions first experiment

I my opinion it has been a very successful, pleasant, relaxed and poetic experiment. The set up, the

conditions, the art (not the weather however, it rained a lot) proved to be very effective, at least to give

the participants a well spent experience. I also believe we have proven that art (works of art) can be

used as a tool to stimulate the more intuitive, imaginary and artistic language and create space for

new insights, at least for that moment. Most dialogues with the work of art lasted about maybe 2 or 3

minutes, with a maximum of 15 minutes. Most subsequent conversations lasted between 2 and 10

minutes. But we did not record the time. At least there was much more time spent on looking at

artworks than the average of the 9 seconds, mentioned by Fuchs. But of course, my experiments were

in a total different context then a museum context. All in all, being participant in this kind of

experiments seems to be a very relaxing, reflecting, inspiring and accepting (letting go of) process.

The effect of the intervention as a lasting effect was not measured. However, I dare to assume that

experiments like these could be effective for the development of aesthetic intelligence.

6. Design and results 2nd experiment (Learning Lane Event)

I decided to conduct a second experiment, inspired by Weggeman’s model and questions: How long

does it last? What is the effect of such an intervention? What would happen it they were not asked a

question upfront? Does it make any difference a male or female participant? The second experiment

had the same design principles as the first one, though it was a more planned and structured

experiment. Also within 2 weeks after the experiment I performed an effect measurement with 25% of

the participants. The target group differed from the first experiment: there were more professionals and

less managers; almost no artists. The context differed: the experiment had to be done during breaks in

between workshops: this had an effect on the time awareness (and pressure) of the experiment:

sometimes there was too much pressure on time available from the part of the participants. The main

six differences were:

1. We have used a ‘Kijkwijzer’: a small questionnaire “with 7 questions, inspirited by other kijkwijzers

used in museums, helping people to understand art better:

What is your first impression (thoughts, associations), hold to it for a while What part of the work of art did you notice first? What part do you like best, is the most exciting part? What part is the most disturbing? Look at the art, all the sides (up-down, left-right): what kind of layers do you see, what kind of

ingredients or parts is the work of art composed of? How do the ingredients relate to the whole? What do you believe are the intentions of this

work of art? What could be the philosophical, social or psychological statement of it? What kind of beauty does this work of art contain do you find? In what way is the aesthetic

experience aroused, by the form, the thought or the poetic aspects?

2. The target group was differentiated in four categories: the red group was with a coaching question

and with a kijkwijzer; the green group was with a question; the blue group was with only a

kijkwijzer and the yellow group was without a question or kijkwijzer.

3. We asked them to choose consciously or intuitively.

4. We asked about their experience of time.

5. I had developed a questionnaire for the interviewers with some open as well as some closed

questions, to be used by the interviewers:

How did you choose the tent: conscious or intuitively? How long did your dialogue with the piece of art last? How did you experience it? What did the piece of art say to you? And the other way around: what did you say to it? Did you develop new insights? What kind? Did it appeal more to your ratio or intuition? Was the piece of art of any help to you? Have you ever looked in this way to art? Do you think these kinds of experiments would work in your company? In what way? We are conducting some research on the development of aesthetic intelligence: do you have

any associations? Are you prepared to participate in the effect measurement?

6. I developed an effect measurement in order to evaluate the impact of the intervention and the

change for transformation in relation to the way a person is able to relate to objects. (see next

paragraph).

Additional Assumptions (compared to 1st experiment):

The longer one is able to look and concentrate the higher the chance of transformation.

The person with a question upfront has a higher chance of transformation.

The person with a ‘kijkwijzer’ has a higher chance of transformation.

The person with a question and a kijkwijzer has the best chance for transformation.

The person who chooses intuitively is more open to the dialogue.

Persons who have any experience with art, have more chance to change

Inexperienced (in relation to art) people, who are willing to try, have more chance to change.

Results of the 2nd experiment

It was difficult to check all the assumptions because not all the questionnaires were completed. Also

not everyone was acting in the way they had been invited to. Also it is possible that the participants

had read the invitational flyer with the invitation to come up with a coaching question. And some did,

although they were not asked to do so (maybe, because they had heard from others). Also some

people did not use the kijkwijzer, or was not asked to do so by the interviewer. Hence: there were

more green participants (with question and no kijkwijzer).In total 48 persons: 13 marked as yellow, 9

marked as red, 8 marked as blue, 18 marked as green; and 6 no marks (not asked) which I did not

include. During the effect-conversations it turned out that not everyone had acted according to its

colours. Therefore I had to change some codes. Because of this I can only make more general

statements. The differentiating statements (about the 4 coloured groups) are not very trustworthy.

Results 2nd experiment quantitative

Population: 25 % male, 75% female; average age 43; most of them consultant, trainers, interim managers, some managers

Time: average time in the tent: 3.8 minute, with a minimum of 5 seconds and a maximum of 10 minutes; the people who started off with a question stayed just a fraction longer than the ones without a question

Choice more than 45% chose intuitively, the ones with a question chose more often intuitivelyRatio-intuition more than 2/3 said that the experiment mostly appealed to their intuition; in case of the

persons with a question red: 100%; green: 80%; the persons without a question yellow: 50%, blue: 60%

New insights 35% no; 30% yes; 10% mixed; 10% new insight in yellow group (no question, no kijkwijzer)

Work of art of any help? 20% no, 50% yes. No real difference in the 4 colours (although the green group, with question, was most positive); 25 % said no new insights but the art was still of help, 15% said no new insight, no help of art

Earlier looked at art this way: 33% no, 50% yesExperienced with art: 35% no, 27% yesAssociations with aesthetic intelligence: 25% no, 60% yesExperiment adds to development of AI: 5% no, 45% yesWill it work in your organization, an experiment like this: 10% no, 50% yes.

Results per colour (though not accurate)

Green (question, no kijkwijzer)

50% mentioned rest, relaxed as effect on them; 40% was more analyzing the situation

45% new insights, like: verzilveren van vergrijzing, relationships are splitted (zitten gespleten in elkaar) constant asking if things could be seen from the other side

Most people (25%) associated aesthetic intelligence with looking, seeing, beholding, be open to see new things (look honest); some did not like the words aesthetic intelligence (horrible word).

Red (question, kijkwijzer)

Again 33% speaks about rest; 33% is emotional about it, 20% talks about form, 45% is more or less analysing.

20% new insights (only) The kijkwijzer has helped 55% one way

or the other : the interpretation came up trough the kijkwijzer, it helped me to stand still more consciously; it was nice to have it, I looked at it and used just a few things; something was added to my way of looking; the questions helped me to fin my answer; yes it helped, because you do not get the answer on your question that easily

Two third had some associations with the concept of aesthetic intelligence (more ore less superficial) that is has got to do with creating a context that stimulates creativity, beauty of things, to sides of a coin, beauty may help you to come with new insights, give space; it is all about proportions and flows of energy

Yellow: (no questions, no kijkwijzer):

66% experienced emotions (sadness, negative, chaotic, empty); 55% talk about form, 23% had a kind of poetic reply; 55% a more analytical response; there might be a link between using form language and analytical responses.

40% had new insights: a painting can have –unasked- a lot of impact; nature helps us to ground; art or maybe any object will help with associating.

55% had no associations with ai; some new insights: 2 connected it more with exterior beauty (design, materials, buildings) and 3 connected I more with interior beauty (symbol, experiencing, beauty within people, sustainability, consciousness).

Blue: (no question, but handed a kijkwijzer)

60% experienced emotions (rush, nice, run away from, on restless, sombre); 25% talked about form, 40% about rust, 25% a bit poetic language, 25% more analytical response;

Most people did not use the kijkwijzer, only one said it helped him to look better and see more; one liked it that the kijkwijzer helped him to see the whole picture and not only the details

50% new insights: e.g. to be able to have a dialogue with art, to be able to see the different layers in the work of art, that is a metaphor for adding layers in an organization, until everybody is happy.

Some associations with aesthetic intelligence: more remarks about exterior aspects, like the context is important, art in the room, identity through work of art.

Lessons learned from the experiments

The question asked upfront (to think about a coaching question) certainly helped to look for answers.

An average of 50% of all the participants more or less gained a new insight (level 2 or 3). Strangely

enough the participants of the red group seem to have the least impact, judged by the interviews.

The kijkwijzer, when used, seems to have a positive effect on the participants: to be able to

understand the work of art better. Many people have experienced the experiment as ‘peaceful’; it is

possible that the side effect of the context and conditions is more important compared to the art and

exercise itself; also it is possible that this working method leads a person to a more reflective mood

and reflection leads to rest. There are not many associations with the concept aesthetic intelligence;

some associations are about exterior aspects (creative context, works of art, interiors); I liked the

remark about the flows of energy, the two sides of a coin

7. Effect measurement second experiment

My purpose was to find out if the intervention had impact on the 4 levels of Bollas: 1) an object merely

fills the emptiness (empty wall, reading a nice book); 2) something triggers, gives the observer rich

fantasies; 3) the object gives a person an intense experience in such a way that the person changes

or transforms; 4) a person can get completely lost in the object. I hope and expect that the experiment

at least has some results on level 2 and 3. My questions during the open effect measurement

interview were:

How often did you think back to your dialogue with the piece of art? (feelings, insights)?

How often did you talk about it with others, and what did you speak of (at work, back home)?

In what kind of way did this intervention have an impact, if any, on you (ratio, intuition, acting,

language)?

Would it be possible to say that there is some kind of change (as a person, professional)

How about the concept of aesthetic intelligence, have you thought about it some more?

Results effect measurements

I called 13 participants of the 2nd experiment within 2 weeks of the experiment. I started off with an

equal share of the four groups, but I noticed that at least 3 had changed colour. Still, I made some

observations. The assumptions are mentioned before, but basically: starting with a personal question

must have more effect, just as having the help of a kijkwijzer should have impact.

Two Yellow participants (no question, no kijkwijzer) gave very short responses: no impact, no more

thoughts. Maybe once or twice spoken of to others. One person said he had missed a focused

assignment. One said that doing this ‘senseless experiment’ was a nice ‘in between’. One admitted

that he had taken time in the tent to make some phone calls. I would say that this assignment just filled

in some emptiness, so level 1 of Bollas.

The Blue participant (no question, kijkwijzer): she had been thinking back to her dialogue often. She

likes to use this kind of method in her work, in Indonesia, using art by local artists. She was amazed

about the effect on herself, surprised about the impact of the work of art. She is very inspired and

really committed to working with it. The kijkwijzer had helped her and had effect on her: helping her

with looking in a different way, feeling peaceful. “I have used it all the way. It helps to ask different kind

of questions. Without it, I would be without focus and that would have troubled me. And I am

experienced with working with art. At least I have been looking for 20 minutes’ (we have checked: 8,5

minutes). In this particular case I would like to say this case scored the 3rd level of Bollas.

The Green participants (question, no kijkwijzer) have been thinking back several times to the dialogue.

Also they have spoken about it with others, mostly at work. Most participants say that the experiences

have had some or more impact on them, on ratio, intuition and acting. But no significant change.

Jan: “I am surprised that this is working for me. And so quickly. That is really nice. To me it is really

new that I can get new insights through a piece of art. I immediately went to work with it.” He had not

thought about the art itself any more, but only about his own astonishments. The art was a tool for him,

to get a quick response. He believes that this kind of methods could be effective in his working

environment (police). Claire: “I had a good feeling about it. The experience had impact on me: keep it

simple. Follow my intuition and make it easy.” She realized that she had to be more decisive and

started to do so in her work. Berta: “I have a positive feeling thinking back and it happens now again. I

have often looked back at the picture of the piece of art. I realised then and now: art is a way to create

space, to do nothing. Inner silence is needed for change, my company is changing at the moment and

what we need is more inner silence. Art might help me out”. In these cases I recognize levels 2 and 3.

The Red participants (question, kijkwijzer): have been thinking back a few times, and talking about it

with others. It did have some impact, more intuitive. But not more than compared to the green

participants. Evelien: “I have the feeling that I have refound myself, and my own company. The

painting has given me the answer. First I did not like it at all, ugly. But because of the kijkwijzer I

started to look and see differently. And recognized beautiful aspects of it. Without it, it would have

been a different dialogue, she was sure about it.” She says she has changed a little bit. Every time she

thinks back she gets a happy feeling. Nicole: “The kijkwijzer has helped me to sit down and keep

looking for longer than normal, especially because I did not like the painting and wanted to leave. It

helped me to stay focused, to see all the aspects of the piece of art. Maybe the answer to my question

was hidden in the corners of the painting?” But she did not find it. To me, these are cases of level 2 or

3.

Conclusion 2nd experiment

Based on these reactions, if only a few, I believe one may conclude that the experiment had the most

impact on the green and red participants:

Participants are able to transform to level 2 or 3, and are still there after 2 weeks.

The question upfront helps to look for answers and new insights with the help of art.

The kijkwijzer, when used, is helpful to achieve looking in a different way.

The interview, and also my phone calls, helped too, for more impact.

It must be possible to develop an even better, more solid way, to structure the experiment and

measure the effects ánd at the same time still be able to play, also as the facilitating organization.

I personally preferred the first experiment, there seemed to be more flow (but no effect

measurements). This may be the effect of less time pressure, an important aspect of the

experiment.

8. Conclusions about experimenting and learning

What are the lessons learned from experimenting and learning in my quest for development of

aesthetic intelligence? I would conclude:

Keep it simple and playful; just call it an experiment, to arouse curiosity

Create play-space: empty, spacious, and of high quality.

Have the best facilitators

Find a way to facilitate personal or collective flow, also in the organizational team

Beware of time: do not spend too much time (the experiment showed that it can be done in a short

period of time).

From chapters 3-5 I drew some more suggestions for developing aesthetic intelligence. I differentiate 5

categories of possible ways.

The first, most natural way of developing some kind of aesthetic intelligence are all kinds of

(un)conscious, indirect playful interventions, that are related to art and that somehow helps you to

develop some aspects of aesthetic sensitivity, like stimulating creativity, craftsmanship, skilled ears,

intuition, etc. Like going to concerts, visiting museums, reading books, taking sculpting or drama

lessons, cultural holidays, joining art classes art in a museum, start collecting artworks etc.

The second way is to do this from a more social and organizing perspective, like organizing art

symposia for the community, art projects at school, opening a gallery, and other art related activities in

the community. Join think tanks or become a member of the board of a museum, be active in crossing

over activities, develop activities crossing borders, help out other people etc. In order to develop into a

more holistic person, with a broad interest and activity beside work and private life. To become a

socially engaged citizen.

The third way is: museum, crossing over initiatives, and business schools are able to join in and help

each other by building bridges between art and leadership, art and community etc. Co create

programmes and activities together, reflect on learning, join effect measurements, develop and share

new insights, by exchanging kijkwijzers etc. Experiments like we have done, coaching trough art, with

music, paintings etc, and with more facilitating of coaches who can help participants with

transformation. Develop specific methods based on sources of inspiration, deepening of the content,

supervision and homework (reading, reflecting, and experimenting).

The fourth way is to include in standard curriculum of MBA classes and/or leadership programmes at

business schools topics as aesthetics and ethics in an integrated way. Let ‘double-minded’ programme

directors, with experience in the art as well as business, design programmes where aesthetic

elements are blended into the programme in a natural and exciting way. Programmes that develop the

ability to create vision, constructing meaning, experimenting, researching, need to be different,

choosing, going in depth; and make use of an artistic approach, an artistic play (like Antichone) with

actors and a contract of a master class. Topics like storytelling, imaging, drama, opera, and creativity,

writing autobiography, writing about and doing useless things. Let artists be part of the programme, as

participant and as trainer or facilitator, to introduce another way of thinking and acting. Again I like to

quote Frieling (chapter 4): ‘Artists are able to close the circle, by putting all the ingredients in the right

place and connecting them to each other. First untangle them, and ten connect. Constantly making

choices, until there is a unit”.

And finally: coaching focused on intrinsic motives of creating art (sublimation, repair, transformation).

Coaching leaders to help them to become a more authentic, richer and whole person, able to see with

all his senses. With their need to create, to build, to construct transitional space. By helping them to

learn from their own ambiguity and experiences of pain and insecurity. Learning the language of

images, the heart and art. The use of art could be a very effective tool to stimulate this.

It must be clear by now, that aesthetic intelligence can’t be learned in a fortnight, with a 3 day training,

or joining one experiment. It is a way of living, an attitude that is felt in the whole body, mind and soul.

And people with talent, like always, have more chance in succeeding. On the other hand: I strongly

believe we have to go back to the originals of learning, to for instance Plato’s school system, the

museion etc. Where artistic schooling was as natural as learning mathematics or science.