Di.a.logic training report

Hello all!
As mentioned, last month I won a day's training on "The 4 D's of a Dialogue Culture" (run locally through Weisman Consulting) on the condition that I report back some learnings. The training was last Thursday, and I was grateful to have gone.

The Di.a.logic technique organizes information about how to improve effectiveness in individual and group conversations, primarily targeting a business setting.

Two parts of the day I liked especially well. We spent some time working through an exercise based on the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument, swapping cards until we had a hand which reflected our personalities. The cards were color-coded to show what traits often went together, and sure enough, I ended up completely "red-handed". It was a personal way to bring home how different people bring different skills and perspectives to the group, and how that provides creative potential as well as stress and difficulty.

When the training covered "surfacing undiscussables" participants started figuring out how this principle might apply to their own situations. This, of course, is when it gets juicy. Real life situations are complex, but we did a valiant job struggling with them, and had a very nice talk about how to handle cultures where trust had disintegrated. Some points in that particular discussion included:

• Trust is built on stepping out without getting killed. You connect on one little thing, take one little risk, and see what happens. If you don't get killed you can take a little step further.
• You can only affect yourself, not the other person you're (talking, working) with. If you want more trust, ask yourself - what can I do to be more trusting, more trustworthy?
• What is the lack of trust based on? How do we understand the assumptions we make about another person's actions?
• What is the role of forgiveness, what does this look like institutionally/in a business setting
• If you're waiting for the other person to do something that will restore trust, you're going to be waiting a long time. You have to take the first step.

I'm pretty fascinated by this and would be glad to hear other thoughts.

As a student of trainings, I was also paying attention to how the day flowed. The trainers broke up the reflection into individuals alone, discussion in pairs, table conversations (two pairs) and the full room. I thought this worked well - it felt predictable enough to be safe while introducing variety in the level and amount of perspective. Generally, I thought the activity level and type of exercises worked really well in sequence. Even standing up in a circle and holding a sign while talking felt like a meaningful switch in activity from discussing the concept sitting down.

Thanks for sending me!

Susan Loucks