CALP deep democracy webinar

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

An Introduction to Deep Democracy

Mia Eisenstadt | Reos Partners | Aug 1, 2012

Campaigns and Advocacy Leadership Program, Oxfam GB


1. When is Deep Democracy useful?

2. What is Deep Democracy?

3. The Principles of Deep Democracy

4. The Iceberg: Working with the Conscious and Unconscious in Groups

5. The Decision Making Steps (A recap)

6. When Decision-Making breaks down

7. The Terrorist Line

8. Role Theory

9. Capacities required for Deep Democracy

10. Exercises

11. References

12. Visual Summary

Material to be Covered


Deep Democracy Can Be Useful in Situations With Four Characteristics

1. They are working with a group that is committed to working together in the long-term (there is a commitment to the relationship).

2. Decision-making in the group has led to a situation where there is a majority or minority position and the group cannot reach consensus or a decision that brings the minority along.

3. There is a commitment to facilitating a conversation where all stakeholders have an equal opportunity to contribute.

4. There is a need for a decision that will last.


Deep Democracy is…

The pragmatic, practical decision-making methodology and tool kit designed by Myrna and Greg Lewis. Deep democracy takes a democratic approach that is different from conventional democracy in that it aims to incorporate the “losing” side in the outcome of a democratic process.

Based in Process Orientated Psychology, a framework by Arnold Mindell that can be applied to psychotherapy, relationships, small and large groups and social issues.

Myrna Lewis argues that conventional democracy is unsustainable. Following a vote in conventional democracy, the idea that the losing minority will disappear, but this is a myth. Instead she argues that the minority will consolidate and gain strength and try to undermine the majority position, it will go underground. Thus the value of listening and including the agenda of the minority is to contribute to wider ownership of the outcome and more sustainable decision.


The Principles of Deep Democracy

1. The articulated views of participants in a group are influenced by the subconscious hopes, fears

and preferences of group members.

2. Every group has a unique atmosphere that is influenced by the conscious and unconscious agendas

of the participants.

3. The minority views in a group have wisdom that is relevant for the whole group.

4. There is value to conflict and overcoming conflict.

5. Relationship is the most important aspect of group work and maintaining relationship.


Working with the Conscious and the Unconscious

Unlike conventional democracy, Deep Democracy focuses on both the conscious and

unconscious in individuals and groups. Deep Democracy works with the Freudian idea that there

are both conscious levels and unconscious levels within individuals and at the group level.

Both Freud and Jung formulated ideas on human psychology that have been likened to an ice-

berg where the majority of consciousness sits under the water, the unconscious (and the pre-

conscious), and only 10% of consciousness is above the water line.

The consciousness above the water is the rational and cognitive aspects that are easier to talk

about in work settings. The issues that sit beneath the water line are described as fish in Deep

Democracy. These are the issues that if unaddressed can block a team from aligning or moving

forwards.


The Iceberg


Pre-requisites for Applying Deep Democracy

The principles of Deep Democracy can be used informally in the sense of trying to hear all views and incorporating the minority voice into a final decision. A family might use Deep Democracy when deciding where to go on holiday, for instance. When using Deep Democracy in a professional context it is important that you have the necessary buy-in from the people attending the meeting. This process of obtaining buy-in is called contracting and it is important to have the permission of participants before you begin a Deep Democracy process. There are a number of pre-requisites:

-A firm commitment that the group wants to work with each other.

-A willingness by the group to reach a decision that the whole group can go along with.

-Sufficient time to complete the process.


Decision-Making Steps

When working with groups there is a Deep Democracy decision making process that can be applied as a facilitator to support the groups to make decisions: Steps to Decisions that Last

Step 1: Everyone has a say

Ask for proposals (list these proposals on a white board accurately)

Step 2: Create Safety and find the No

Make sure you’ve got all the proposals, even the most outlandish ideas. Take a vote to get a sense of

majority-minority.

Step 3: Spread the Role

“Who else disagrees or has an alternative proposal?”

Step 4: Include the wisdom of the minority

Ask the minority, what would it take to come along with the majority?


When Decision-making Breaks Down

When you get to step 4 and you have not reached a decision, it may be that there are some deeper issues in the group that the group does not want to confront (below the waterline)

The broken record conversation

There are some ways of detecting an unresolved issue. The first is to listen out for cycling. When the group has a similar conversation again and again without seeming to reach an agreement or get into the deeper issues you can notice that the group is “cycling.” Cycling is repetitive, inconclusive debate and where a particular word or phrase initiates discomfort.

The second way is to look at the behavior of the group. Are people relaxed and smiling or frowning? Is the atmosphere tense or relaxed? Are people fidgeting or nervously tapping tables. Are some people silent for the entire meeting? Are a few individuals dominating the conversation? Is the conversation slow or very fast paced?

DD tool: going fishing

As a facilitator you can use this tool by mentioning an undiscussable topic to the group. For example, “is it possible we are skirting around the issue of Sub Team A not completing his work for the recent deadline?”


When decision-making breaks down continued:

When you observe that the group is not progressing on making a decision its likely that the group actually has some unresolved conflict. At this point you have a range of options:

1.Diagnose- what do you think the underlying issue is. “Get on the balcony”.

2.Look at multiple channels: cognitive/verbal, physical, emotional

3.Encourage fluidity of roles

4.Listen for public/ private narrative

5.Slow the conversation down.


Moving Towards a Conflict: The Terrorist Line

There are number of signs that as facilitators we can observe that a group is moving towards conflict,

in Deep Democracy terms this is called ‘the terrorist line’.

When are we on The Terrorist Line?

- Jokes and sarcastic jokes (hidden conflict), Excuses (hidden conflict) ,Gossip (hidden conflict)

- Communication breakdown (open conflict) Go slow (open conflict), Strike (open conflict)

-War (open conflict)

The space is dominated by power relations.

How to keep the Terrorist line from getting closer to open conflict? Listening to the perspective of

the “terrorist” and making a decision that includes the needs of all the strong views in the room.

Tool: the weather report, feedback to participants all the major issues that have arisen so far.

Slow the conversation down and stop participants so that each person can be heard.


Role Theory

In facilitating groups it is useful to consider both what role you are playing and the roles you see

participants playing in a group. Are you playing the role of facilitator or participant?

The facilitator is different from the rest of the group as she is interested in the well being of the

group and is non-partisan.

Role theory is a theory from social psychology that has been adapted by Arnold Mindell (1992).


Role Theory

The idea is that in a group individuals will be unconsciously drawn to playing specific roles

(behaviours or archetypes): the devil’s advocate, the pragmatist, the joker, the quiet one, the

observer and so on. The idea is that in a group where certain roles are unrepresented, others will

then play the missing roles, even if they are not the normal roles they play. Deciding to play

roles is often unconscious and groups are often unaware they have slipped into roles.

Roles in groups can be:

� An idea, view/perspective, concept, or opinion

� A feeling or affect

� A symptom (headache, fatigue, stomach ache)

� An archetype. An archetype is a collection of behaviours such as mother, or artist.


Role fluidity avoids scapegoating


Stuck in a role

In some groups certain individuals will be stuck in a particular role. The classic example is a

classroom where a child is singled out as the naughty child.

In a work context example, Javier, a group member might be stuck in the oppositional role. The

group will think that Javier is always disrupting and disagreeing. The role is bigger than Javier

though. So if Javier were to be absent from the group for a few weeks, some one else would take

on the role of opposing or resisting ideas from the rest of the group. In an unhealthy group the

group will scapegoat Javier. In a healthy group, individuals will identify with Javier’s position,

and try and understand the motivations that come from his concerns. As a facilitator you might

act to see if anyone else agrees with Javier to “spread the role” and support him to play other

roles in the group.

A group where there is role fluidity tends to be healthier than other groups or teams.


Capacities: Neutrality and Suspending Judgment

Neutrality. Maintaining neutrality as a facilitator. This is considered one of the most important

skills of both facilitation and facilitating Deep Democracy. We are all drawn to like and identify

some positions and perspectives above others. However, to maintain neutrality we will need to

practice suspending judgment.

How? Try not to judge the different positions of different stakeholders as right or wrong. Stay in

understanding and inquiry mode. If you find yourself disagreeing, ask a question. Otto Scharmer

from MIT suggests we all have an internal voice of judgment, the idea when facilitating is not to

act from that voice, but to engage with it later.

Notice when a group member triggers you or “presses your buttons” but follow it up later.


Capacities: The Metaskills

Metaskills that are useful to develop when running a Deep Democracy decision-making process

and facilitation in general:

1. Neutrality- Not having a position and valuing all positions.

2. Light touch

3. Beginners Mind- Asking questions and inquiring (not assuming unknowns are known)

4. Humour

5. Patience

6. Awareness that being a facilitator is a position of power.

7. Compassion (empathsising with members of the group, particularly minority roles)


Capacities for DD: Getting on the Balcony

Capacities: Moving from participation to observation

This is the idea of getting on the balcony comes from Adaptive Leadership by Ronald Heifetz at

the Kennedy School at Harvard. Heifetz distinguishes participation in a group situation between

being on the dance floor in a dance and being up on the balcony watching down on the dancers.

The idea is that when you are in the dance, it is difficult to observe patterns across a whole

group. But when you are on the balcony, observing the group, you become more detached, and

from this place its easier to make interventions as a facilitator.


Capacities: Channels of Intervention

In a facilitation situation there are many different channels you can intervene in as a facilitator. For many people the linguistic cognitive channel is the one we feel most comfortable with. For example, if a conversation gets difficult we can suggest working on a different agenda item or talking through a particular topic in more detail. However, there are many other ways to intervene and it may be that another channel is what’s needed.

•Physical. In this channel you may ask the group to sit down, you might stand up as a facilitator, you might suggest a game or an ice-breaker, or a stretch.

•Emotional. This might entail making the meeting environment comfortable for people to speak freely about how they feel. This may involve being open about how you are feeling.

•Cognitive Linguistic. This is at the rational level of following the discussion and reaching a solution or outcome from the discussion. It might entail break out groups to think through different strategic options for example.


Learning Edges and the Blind Spot

Learning edges are issues that a group finds difficult to deal with, or issues that are outside

conscious awareness. A facilitator can help a group to become aware of topics that are on

the groups edges. Groups often help facilitators, unwittingly, to become aware of her/his

edges and this is worth reflecting on and exploring further.

One way to spot your own edge as a facilitator is to think of a

personality/profession/nationality/accent that makes you feel uncomfortable.

Being aware of your edges is valuable as a facilitator. When you choose to ignore your

own edges it might come and bite you when facilitating. A person might voice a

perspective that you violently disagree with and you might lose your neutrality by reacting

in a way that is not in the interest of the group.

You can spot a groups edge’s by edge behaviour: cycling, nervousness, excuses,

avoidance, fidgeting etc. You may need to “go fishing” to verify that you have got the

nature of the edge right.


Exercises to Practice

1. Sitting on the balcony: next time you find yourself in a debate try literally sitting on your hands and just observing the debate. Take the on the balcony view and see the roles others play.

2. The next time you hear an opinion you strongly disagree with try listening and asking a question, explore ways that you can “share the role”, even if you find the perspective extremely difficult.

3. The next time you are in a group or facilitating look for signs of conflict and try going fishing, in the sense of seeing what unprocessed issues a group is trying to deal with.

4. Notice what topics in a group get cycled around but never get resolved.

5. Investigate your own edges.


References and Further Reading

The Practice of Adaptive Leadership: Tools and Tactics for Changing Your Organization and the World” by Ronald Heifetz, Alexander Grashow, and Marty Linsky

The Facilitators Guide by John Heron

Impro by Keith Johnstone

Inside the No: Steps to Decisions that Last by Myrna Lewis

Leader as Martial Artist by Arnold Mindell

A Theory of Social Change by Doug Reeler

Domination and the Arts of Resistance: Hidden Transcripts by James C. Scott

Understanding ‘Roles’ and The Impact on a Culture of Safety by Georgina Veldhorst


A Visual Summary of Deep Democracy

News & Politics

CALP deep democracy webinar