Emotional sustainability - weaving a picture of potential

Starting with an emotional thread 

If we are to weave a new picture of human potential, what threads will we select and how will we weave them together? If emotional sustainability is one of those human threads, what does it look like? This is what I recently explored in conversation with eco-social innovator Rijul Narwal.

If you prefer to watch or listen, you can find our conversation here.

Rijul and I met through our shared work and interest in emotional sustainability. We began our conversation by sharing how we both came to be interested in emotional sustainability, and immediately found some common threads. We have both experienced periods of particular emotional challenge, involving moving countries. We both completed Masters courses at University of the Arts London. We both wanted to talk to other people during our research about seemingly complex, or less frequently spoken about topics. During my research I was finding it hard to talk to people about their values, whilst Rijul experienced challenges talking to people about their emotions.Overcoming these challenges required us to design creative interventions that helped people create and share their own meaning, through creative processes and conversations.

 
 

Creativity is an essential thread in our picture of human potential. By working with creative facilitation and communication, and a design-thinking approach, Rijul and I were both able to create spaces and processes that allowed people to begin to connect with and understand their emotions, values and actions in new ways. If we are seeking a new picture of human potential, it is of course vital that we create new ways of thinking about and doing things for the picture to emerge.  

The thread of emotion also requires us to examine how we currently talk about emotions, or what we have understood them to be from our culture or society? As Rijul shared during our conversation, she comes from a culture in India where emotions are often seen as weakness. A perspective that feels familiar within most of UK culture as well. Whilst understanding how that perspective has been formed over time in human history was too complex to explore within our conversation, we did discuss the important distinction between emotions and feelings as presented in the work of neurologist of emotions, Antonio Damasio. He defines emotions as a conscious or unconscious physiological response in the body. These responses are fleeting; they do not last for a long time. This physiological sensation could be anything -  a racing heartbeat, a sick feeling in the stomach, an excited tingling sensation, tensing of muscles. These emotional, physiological reactions can be seen as important information signals. Signals from a source of bodily intelligence.  

 
 

The important distinction comes when we look at the difference between emotions, these physiological reactions in our bodies, and feelings. Our feelings are the conscious or unconscious experience of emotional reactions. They last longer, come after emotions, and are more connected to our thoughts. Feelings are much harder to understand because they become so intertwined in our internal systems; in our ability to understand how our past experiences, education, culture, families, etc shape our understanding and perception of ourselves in relation to others and the world around us. 

The first thread of emotional sustainability is the ability to become aware of and understand our own emotions better, consciously recognise how our emotions affect our feelings and in turn help to form the values, beliefs and motivations that help give us strength and security in ourselves. 

Our tip for starting with an emotional check-in

As well as asking someone or a group of people, “how are you feeling?”, try also extending this question to ask them, “if that feeling was a living or non-living entity, what would it be?” This allows people to connect with and express their feelings in different ways that provide more meaning and understanding to themselves and the people they are communicating with. 

Energy in motion - connecting to what is important 

My work with emotional sustainability began with an inquiry into values.  Values are a very strong thread in the new picture of human potential, and something that I continue to weave into my work as a facilitator. I shared with Rijul that I bring values into workshops because I recognise that in spaces where we need to bring people together, values and emotions allow us to understand each other on the level of common humanity. When we are invited to share how we are feeling, and what values are important to us and why, we can start connecting and building trusted relationships because we recognise those things in others in ourselves.

It is clear that Rijul feels similarly; that connecting with emotions can also help us understand and communicate what is important to us. She shared that her emotions give her the passion, energy and enthusiasm to explore her work. Rijul explained how working with emotional sustainability helped her acknowledge her biases and why they are there, and then use them to inform her design approach. I was particularly struck by Rijul’s insight into how emotional sustainability can reduce conflict in groups as this is something I have also witnessed in my own facilitation practice; “If we could practise emotional first aid people wouldn't have as much friction between differences of opinions, often people have aligned values but differences of opinions.” 

Understanding is clearly an important thread in our new picture of human potential. This thread is about how we understand ourselves and others, which is often made possible by sharing our emotions and values, as indicators of what is important to us and why. 

Rijul and I both share a love of etymology, and during our conversation we reflected on the root meaning of the word emotion - a stirring, moving, agitation, energy in motion. It became clear during our conversation that by working with our emotions, we can create motivation, movement and action. Whilst we may have been taught to suppress or turn away from the more difficult emotions, it is only by facing them that we can create the energy to move with them and through them. As Marshall Rosenberg, creator of nonviolent communication said, “all feelings are an expression of life.” We invite all emotions and feelings to be present as threads in our new picture of human potential, as that potential requires all humans to feel fully alive. 

 
 

The second thread of emotional sustainability is to discover our passions and our purpose in order to fulfil our unique potential and contribute it to an interrelated and interdependent global society and natural world. To become active, not passive.

Our tip for reflecting on emotions 

You might be familiar with the phrase “sit with your emotions.” Whilst it is important to acknowledge, examine and make space for emotions and feelings, it is not always necessary to come to stillness in your body. Next time you feel a challenging emotion try going for a walk or dancing at home to let your body help you process that emotion…the mind can’t do it alone! 

Experiential learning and creative reflection

To close our conversation exploring emotional sustainability I asked Rijul to share one thing that might be of value to listeners. She shared that the ability to be able to reflect goes a very long way. For me the ability to reflect requires being able to see all the threads individually - my thoughts, feelings, values, actions - know that they are all connected, and to be able to understand those connections in a way that creates meaning and actionable learning or change. 

 
 

Reflecting allows us to integrate new information and perspectives into our understanding. Reflecting on my conversation with Rijul, I am feeling a renewed sense of focus on why we need to continue to reframe our emotions as sources of intelligence and catalysts for positive and collective action. We are living in increasingly challenging times. As challenging as the world currently is, we can’t turn off our emotions. Emotions are part of what makes us human and alive. And right now we need to be fully alive, to be able to work together and face our shared challenges.

The threads of emotions, feelings, creativity, values, understanding, and reflection are just some of the many threads we need to weave back together for people. We would love to know what threads you would weave into a beautiful new picture of human potential.

The third thread of emotional sustainability is to embrace our creativity and engage in dialogue with others to create shared meaning and positive relationships, that will unite us with equality and give us the optimism, drive and shared innovation needed for us to bring about peace amongst humans and secure the preservation of our precious planet. 

We have collated a selection of resources related to the themes we discussed in this conversation. For any further information or questions related to emotional sustainability please get in touch at jessica@creatingmeaning.club. 

Jessica’s work on emotional sustainability 

Rijul’s work on emotional sustainability

Practical philosophy course

To find out more about values and why they matter

To learn more about how infinite growth and measuring progress by GDP doesn't work

To connect with your feelings and needs and learn more about Nonviolent communication  

and language of feelings and needs

To use an empathy map as a tool for insights 

For a creative idea for understanding systems thinking

To explore the inner development goals framework

To learn more about creative education Masters programmes at UAL

Deep Democracy, Surfacing What Is Not Being Said

Expressions of power-over - The Censor

Have you ever been in a personal or work situation where the conversation left you feeling bored, numb or dull? Or perhaps there was a time when you felt blamed, shamed or isolated, even made to feel like the scapegoat. These feelings often arise in situations and exchanges when we are unable to say what we really think and feel: when we are being censored by others, or censoring ourselves. In contrast, bring to mind a conversation that felt meaningful and open. How did you feel after? Energised, inspired, moved? When we can use our voice, and connect with others to share meaning, it can spark new ideas and fresh thinking, and help build trusted relationships.

 

The Censor is one of Starhawk’s ‘five ‘entities of control’ expressed in a power-over paradigm

 

Return for a moment, to those dull feelings, perhaps in a meeting, or social occasion. Reflect on what isn’t being said, on what lies in the undercurrents of the group dynamic. There are many reasons why we might feel we cannot speak freely in a situation: dominance of other voices; fear of judgement, conflict or repercussions; feeling that what we have to say will be perceived as unimportant, or inarticulate; concern for the feelings of others; lack of accommodation for our needs or styles of communicating; or physical embarrassment and nervousness. Of course, not all these reasons, or others not mentioned, are related to a feeling of censorship. In other instances the differences in use of language, personal  experience, cultural context etc may feel too vast a divide to bridge. In these instances we have to ask ourselves what is the desired or necessary connection and understanding, and what value will that bring to those involved. 

We can also ask the question, what is the intended outcome of censorship? It is important to become aware of the times when we are censoring ourselves or being directly or indirectly censored by others, as censorship is one expression of a power-over paradigm. Power dynamics are always at play, and frequently govern how we communicate and relate to each other, and in turn what is perceived to be of importance and priority by individuals or groups. We see daily the consequences of power and decision making that serves only a few, already privileged people. In situations that still uphold a hierarchical structure of leadership, it may be difficult to affect positive change that is equitable and fair. Hope lies with leaders that want to build more inclusive and collaborative teams, organisations and societies; and in raising awareness of tools and approaches that can support this shift in how we communicate and relate to each other.

Deep Democracy - lowering the waterline 

Deep Democracy is one such communication approach that can support this shift in how we communicate. Deep Democracy is a facilitation, decision making, conflict resolution and inclusive leadership methodology, developed by psychologists Myrna & Greg Lewis and inspired by Arnold Mindell's Process Orientated Psychology.

 
 

At the heart of Deep Democracy is the metaphor of the iceberg. The process works to lower the water line: to surface more of what is in the unconscious of the group, and make it conscious and known to everyone. This lowering of the water line is the aim of any facilitated communication method. 

Common threads in facilitated communication methods are

  • Be inclusive of all voices

  • Acknowledge and welcome thoughts and feelings 

  • Redistribute power 

  • Harness the collective intelligence of the group 

We can see these threads in the 4 steps of the Deep Democracy approach: 

  1. Gain all the views

  2. Make it safe to say ‘no’ or the alternative view

  3. Spread the no

  4. Vote, and incorporate the wisdom of the minority by asking them what they need to come along with the vote.

What we might call the USP of Deep Democracy is a safe yet courageous process for first uncovering, and then exploring any polarities that surface, if the minority refuses to come along with the vote. Moving to a ‘debate’ invites participants to express statements from the perspective of both polarities, without directing these at any particular person in the group. Expressing statements from both sides allows the group to explore both perspectives, and in the reflection after, to surface any insights that may inform or transform decision making. 

The uncovering of group insights in the Deep Democracy process is also a primary feature of the Bohm Dialogue process. David Bohm described insights as having, “some universal sort of significance.” and stated that in the primary act of insight, “we see…a whole range of differences, similarities, connections, disconnections, totalities of universal and particular ratio or proportion..” 

 
 

Communication challenges - behaviours to look out for  

Uncovering insights may be at the more elusive end of these communication practices and processes. As a starting place, Deep Democracy also offers powerful diagnostic tools to assess the current communication challenges within groups. 

Firstly, the resistance line. Having personally experienced and lived the behaviours of the resistance line in a previous organisation, this concept immediately resonated. We have all felt, to varying degrees, a resistance to change. Any change management professional will tell you that change cannot be done to people, it needs to be done with people. If an individual, team, or group of people are going through a period of imposed or unavoidable change, here is some behaviour to look out for:

  • Jokes / sarcasm

  • Excuses

  • Gossip

  • Disruption 

  • Communication breakdown 

  • Strike

  • War / separation 

 
 

Once we become aware of these behaviours we have the choice to intervene, understand and manage them, and of course integrate the wisdom that comes from understanding the resistance.

Similarly to the the resistance line, we can look out for the six communication vices outlined in Deep Democracy:

  1. Not being present - we are all guilty of this, particularly in virtual meetings. Whilst the ability to be present can be impacted by factors such as stress, tiredness, physical environment etc, it is important to have the intention to be fully present as this demonstrates respect for others, and a willingness to be open and engage in the process at hand. 

  2. Interrupting - whilst interruption can sometimes be associated with excitement of being involved in the conversation and wanting to get your point across, it is indicative of an environment that does not provide adequate time or processes to explore the topics or issues in the depth required. It can of course have more malicious intent, when one person wants to demonstrate power by actively shutting down someone else and disregarding their contribution. 

  3. Radio broadcasting - we’ve all got that relative who blurts out a random comment or tries to start a new story in the middle of a completely different topic of conversation. This one requires someone to keep the conversation on track until it is time to move on. Staying with the flow of the conversation can help maintain connection in the group. 

  4. Indirect speaking - we can recognise this when someone is not speaking from their own personal experience and point of view; uses vague and general language; or speaks on behalf of someone else. Depending on the power dynamics in the room, this person may be too afraid to say how they really feel or think, or they may be actively creating confusion and avoiding any sense of accountability. 

  5. Sliding not deciding - similar to radio broadcasting, this is when a group changes or moves on to a new topic without resolving the current one. 

  6. Questioning - being able to ask questions is an important part of group processes, whether it is for clarification or inquiry purposes. However, there are times when people hide their views in the form of a question.

Reclaiming power from the censor - finding your voice

The question of safety was asked by a member of our group on day one of the Deep Democracy training. Agreeing on safety, acknowledging individual experience and being aware of power within the group were threads we explored throughout our time together. In the final day of the three day training we explored both perspectives of the question, “Deep Democracy is about shifting power and allowing for each voice to be heard.”

It was a rich sharing, with many nuanced perspectives. A reminder that whilst the group shares an experience, within that, individual experiences can vary greatly. Whilst facilitation processes actively centre inclusion and participation, at some point the responsibility of the facilitator ends, and the responsibility of the individual within the group, to find and use their voice, begins. Finding our voice is not an immediate process. It takes time; requires us to get out of our comfort zones; be curious about ourselves and courageous with others. All this cannot happen when we are alone. Being in a group that brings compassion, vulnerability and patience to a process of communication, is a powerful way to connect with and find our authentic voice. And Deep Democracy is one tool to support us getting there.

 

Finding a voice is the antidote to the Censor, as described in Starhawk’s book, Truth or Dare

 

A huge thank you to Payam Yuce Isik of Tribe for leading this training with grace and wisdom. In particular your masterclass in listening and reflecting the feelings and thoughts of the group. And thank you to the other participants for sharing openly and courageously throughout our three days together.

Can you handle the (compassionate) truth?

“You can’t handle the truth”

You may not have heard of Deep Adaptation. Not many of us scour the internet looking for academic papers to read, and the truth of our current environmental and social situation is a lot harder to digest than a cute cat video. If you were to read the freely available paper, you might be interested to know what sets the Deep Adaptation paper apart from other academic texts. Authored by Professor Jem Bendell in 2018, it was rejected for academic publication during the peer review process. As is standard academic process, the writer must reference other academic research in the form of a literature review, with which to validate and strengthen their hypothesis. In other words, without giving a shout out to your peers, you can’t be in the club.

The German physicist Max Planck said that science advances one funeral at a time. That makes advances pretty slow, just when it appears we don’t have time to lose. The purpose of the Deep Adaptation paper is exactly this: to face the truth. We are already experiencing social and environmental collapse. This collapse will continue to increase global impacts. Impacts such as increased food scarcity, conflict, extreme weather, forced migration and biodiversity loss. As Bendell states in the preamble to the paper, ‘a reviewer’s request not to dishearten readers with the claim of “inevitable near-term social collapse” reflects a form of censure found amongst people working on sustainable business.’ In non-academic speak this means you, the general public, can’t handle the truth. 

Can any of us actually handle the ‘truth?’ Because of course, you don’t want to feel ‘disheartened,’ right? Or maybe not...Has there ever been a time in your life when someone withheld the truth from you because they thought they were ‘sparing your feelings,’ and you wish they hadn’t? Deep adaptation wants to be the friend that tells you the truth. A friend who is also there to offer you a shoulder to cry on and ears to listen with.  Bendell gives acknowledgement to his own ‘friends’; the people that helped him to “prioritise my truth.” 

In writing this paper he perhaps gives us all permission to step forward with the courage to tell our own truths, and cultivate the compassion with which to listen to each other’s. Could there be such a thing as compassionate truth, a truth that we know will hurt in the beginning, but will save us from much longer lasting and deeper pain in the long run?

“I can’t collaborate with someone until I fully listen with love.” - Skeena Rathor

No pain, no gain

It was with the knowledge that I was going to have to face the truth and my own pain that I applied to the Radical Resilience programme. Run by St. Ethelburga’s, a peace and reconciliation centre based in London, the programme will take 16 people on a deep adaptation learning journey from January - May 2020. 

The purpose of the first Radical Resilience event was to ask the question - what does it mean to hold spaces for holding uncomfortable truth? Clare Martin of St Ethelburga’s was joined by a panel of three speakers: Toni Spencer, artist, facilitator and lecturer; Skeena Rathor, Vision Coordinator of Extinction Rebellion Movement, Labour Councillor and mental health champion at Stroud Council; and Justine Huxley, Director of St.Ethelburga’s. 

Our starting point is the deep adaptation paper, which sets out to shatter what might be seen as a taboo - that there isn’t time to stop climate change. Science tells us that the world is far further down the line in climate breakdown than many people, globally,  are willing to admit. Given the catastrophic start to 2020, with the wildfires in Australia and rapidly accelerating ice melt in Greenland, it might not be much longer until we are all on the same page with this thinking.  

For Bendell, it is not a case of stopping the climate crisis, but adapting to the new world that it is going to inevitably create. This is indeed a very painful truth to face. Panellist Toni Spencer described deep adaptation as a ‘permission slip to talk about things that are heartbreaking.’ To enable conversations to explore this painful truth, its aftermath and potential futures, Bendell outlines in his paper a framework  based on 4 Rs. The first 3, Resilience, Relinquishment and Restoration, are outlined in the original paper. The 4th, Reconciliation, has been added by Bendell as a response to feedback and exploration since the paper has been made public. This new addition aims to provide ‘hope and vision in the face of collapse.’ After all, we cannot act well, and think long-term, from a place of pain and despair.

Toni went on to provide an outline of the purpose of the 4 Rs in her own words, and contained within her words are some quite difficult questions you may wish to ask yourself.

Resilience - this asks what is it that you love, want to keep, take care of and is of value to you?

Relinquishment - what are you ready to let go of? As Toni says, maybe one of the most important and challenging questions, it includes those things that not only give you pleasure and comfort such as, money, nice homes, holidays etc, but also things intrinsically linked to your identity, like status. So you may need to explore the question of relinquishment in terms of your own identity, how you make meaning and how you make sense of the world.

Restoration - what is it that you want to bring back, not because you necessarily value it right now, but because your very future depends on it? Good relationships, healthy soils, ways of exchange, Indigenous wisdom. What makes sense for the world of your future?

Reconciliation - to move to a place of active and radical hope you need to reconcile with the facts of the ecological devastation happening, which include the social justice issues and history that have got us to where we are now. In Bendell’s words ‘this is a time for reconciliation with mortality, nature and each other.’

Toni views the deep adaptation framework as an invitation to have a conversation. Panellist, Skeena Rathor had a much more visceral reaction when she first heard Bendell present his paper, one of physical shock and anger.  She admitted that more than a year later she is still stuck in shock, horror and heartbreak. However, Skeena has since become friends with Bendell and moved at least parts of her thinking onto a more contemplative place. As part of the Rising Up! Movement and Extinction Rebellion, Skeena has been able to channel her experiences and pain into substantial action and community. 

“Being of use frees up a lot of energy and space.” - Justine Huxley

The final speaker on the panel was Justine Huxley, and for her, it was a transformative moment when she first read the paper. For Justine, what was different about the presentation of science and ideas was the articulation and a freedom from denial. On reading the paper, Justine took herself away to the forest for a few days, to question what no longer makes sense. She explored what it means to let this thinking in, in such a way that we can know it with our whole body, mind and heart. For Justine, these questions, free from denial, are liberating. For her they mean that it is no longer about us as individuals, but about serving something beyond that. If your compassionate truth friend were talking, they might ask you how you would feel if you stopped running away from the truth or fighting your pain and faced the problem head-on. 

Brave spaces are an evolution of safe spaces

Central to much of Toni’s work is the issue of climate justice. Developed by the formidable Mary Robinson, climate justice reframes the issues of climate change to include human rights. Climate justice acknowledges that those doing the least environmental harm are suffering some of the worst consequences of climate change impacts. This is the moment when your compassionate truth friend points out that your actions are harming other people, and in your rage/self-pity, you say you don’t care about other people. Your friend will probably say something like, you don’t really mean that, you’re just saying it because you're scared and you can only think about yourself right now.

As hard as it is to think about others in times of personal crisis, social justice issues have to be central to the conversations of the climate crisis and deep adaptation. Skeena reflected on her recent time at the Climate Change Conference, (COP) Madrid, in December 2019, and the picture of separation it presented to her. ‘The first thing we need to do is recognise and name the division tactics that are being used, (mainly class and race.) The first responsibility we have in our privileged echo chamber is to speak to the people who are being targeted that way and say I won’t be divided from you, I’m withdrawing my consent from this division.’

For Skeena this division and separation  is caused by the scarcity and competition stories created by patriarchy, and modern capitalist systems.  What is needed now is collaboration. It is competition and greed that got us into this mess in the first place. We need to collaborate is easy to say, but much harder in practice. First we need to ask what is needed to undo the narratives and embedded cultures of competition that infiltrate our business, education and political systems. If we are constantly forced into echo chambers where people agree with us, we might be lulled into a false feeling that we are collaborating. For real change to happen we need to be able to collaborate with people that we might initially or permanently disagree with. So what does it mean to practice radical truth telling in these contexts?

Getting comfortable with being uncomfortable

So you’ve told your friend all your woes, and in the process uncovered some challenging truths. You might be hoping for your friend to give you an answer or be complicit with you in the denial story you have created for yourself. But your compassionate truth friend tells you that they don’t know what you should do, and perhaps it is going to take more than one conversation/cry/gym session/bottle of wine to come up with the answer or take away the pain. They say you should continue to seek your truth anyway, painful and lengthy as it may be.  As Toni rightly said, ‘we need enough space to digest and have conversations, so we don’t leap quickly to fix it. We don’t know how to get out of this mess. The thing that really matters to me is that we let it be messy, and sit in the fire of not knowing what to do.’ 

That doesn’t mean that you have to do nothing. There are other things you can do, besides ‘fixing the problem.’ For Skeena it comes back to the R of Reconciliation: to enter into vulnerability, mourning, and our grief from the feelings of separation. From here we can start to reconnect in the most meaningful ways we can - with our truth, our power, ourselves, each other, the earth.  Or you could explore the R of Resilience. Belonging to the Sufi tradition, Justine shared that she gets a huge amount of resilience from faith, belief and community. An R that isn’t yet part of the deep adaptation framework is Reciprocity. For Toni, Reciprocity includes an understanding of an interrelated world. ‘We are only one species in an ecosystem, we need a decentralising of ourselves as the one species that counts. There are many human beings still alive that know how to be part of a healthy ecosystem.’ By this Toni is referring to the communities of Indigenous people around the world, who comprising less than 5% of the world’s population, protect 80% of global biodiversity. Indigenous knowledge and wisdom has much to teach us about living with the sacredness of all life.  

“I have a profound and deep relationship with the sense of mystery.” - Toni Spencer

Sacredness, spirituality, mystery. These words might not hold much meaning for you. In fact, this whole article might have filled you with an overwhelming sense of denial, confusion, despair, anxiety or apathy. You might be asking yourself what we achieve by accepting our current reality. Whatever it is you are feeling right now, I ask you to take a moment of silence to allow yourself to fully feel it. Close your eyes, bring your attention to the centre of your chest, your stomach, or wherever it is you feel any sensation in your body, as you think about social and ecological collapse. Stay with your feelings. Then go and find your most compassionate friend and talk to them about it. We might not have the answers yet, but together we can find the courage to face our truths.


Dialogue & Diversity

“Dialogue helps us to bridge the increasing diversity found within modern organisations today.  It is through the exploration of meaning that we learn who each person is and how we can work together appropriately.”
- Glenna Gerard & Linda Elinor

1.jpg
4.jpg

The topic of diversity today is mostly seen as the "inclusion and visibility of persons of previously under-represented minority identities.” However, previous to this recent focus on the meaning of diversity, introduced in the 1990s, diversity was simply a difference in character or quality. 

Difference is sometimes seen as potential for conflict or fragmentation. But if we see difference and diversity as an opportunity for knowledge and innovation, we can recognise that each person within an organisation or society possesses unique talents and experiences that can be contributed in a positive way. We are not limited to viewing diversity policies as a box-ticking exercise, and can reach across gender, age, ethnicity and experience to unlock and nurture potential in everyone. Studies have shown that diverse teams are smarter and create better results. So the question is, how can you support diversity in a way that makes all people feel included, valued and is also good for business?

It is our assumptions and unconscious biases that often create barriers to reframing difference and diversity as a positive strength. Challenging these assumptions in a critical and confrontational way will most likely result in increased conflict and fragmentation. It is only within an environment that fosters deep listening and non-judgement  that people are able to become aware of their assumptions and biases and potentially change their thinking and behaviour as a result. 

“Dialogue is the collective way of opening up judgements and assumptions.” - David Bohm

The practice of dialogue, supported by other creative facilitation techniques focusing on communication skills and relationship building provides a space of psychological safety for participants to come together, to voice, listen and learn from and with each other.