Feedback needed on NCDD's Vision Statement

[Sandy]

NCDD?’s Mission/Vision group is also considering the following Vision Statement for NCDD. Please do let us know what you think by replying to this post.

- Tom Atlee, Nancy Glock-Grueneich, Sandy Heierbacher, Ambassador John McDonald, and Evan Thomas Paul

Draft Vision for NCDD
NCDD envisions a future in which all people?—regardless of income, position, background or education?—are able to engage regularly in lively, heartfelt, thoughtful conversations about what really matters to them, in ways that have a positive impact on their lives and their world.
_________________
Sandy Heierbacher
Convenor, National Coalition for Dialogue & Deliberation (NCDD)

[John Spady]

What I like is that the vision is not about NCDD but about the vision that NCDD has for its members, sponsors, and the broader public.

[leilani henry]

this is compelling and has passion!

[lhtorres]

I have mixed feelings about the mission: as has been said, its big and passionate, and there is something in it that resonates -- maybe its the fact that I get it -- wonder how it would work for a non-dialogue and deliberation junkie?

on the other hand, it doesn't actually say much, at least to me it doesn't help me visualize what such a future would look like. to the extent that i feel like people across all those variables do have access to opportunities for meaningful, heartfelt conversations that result in some kind of benefit they exist. on the other hand, i tend to think about structures more than culture in this case. the vision sounds like its oriented more toward a culture shift; if that's true it could be said better, perhaps something like:

"NCDD envisions a future in which all cultures recognize the benefits of regular, lively, heartfelt, thoughtful [and inclusive?] conversations about what really matters to poeple, and provide opportunities for people to participate in ways that have a positive impact."

Something like that ... ?

On the other hand, i see the need for structural changes as well, and the mission doesn't really speak to that for me. Corporations, schools, government -- so many sectors of society can benefit from better discursive skills period. how does the vision speak to propagating that kind of "infrastructure" ... ? Does that even make sense?

[tomatlee]

I understand Lars' concern, and share it, but felt (and feel) that both culture change and structural innovation and institutionalization are necessary to realize -- and thus implicit in -- the stated vision. I didn't find it necessary to make that explicit.

However, unlike Lars, I don't think we already have that capacity. In fact, from my observation, we are VERY far from that vision being true in our world! It is almost as if people won't talk together even if their lives depend on it, in so many circumstances, for both internal and external reasons.

That said, I can imagine adding a sentence to the draft vision statement, to the effect that:

"This capacity is continually expanding, thanks to education and development programs for individuals, groups, organizations, and communities; the formal establishment of innovative structures and processes; and the evolution of increasingly participatory cultures."

(PS: For me, the vision of ALL people participating covers the ground that would be covered by including the word "inclusive" in describing the conversations.)
_________________
Tom Atlee, The Co-Intelligence Institute
co-intelligence.org, taoofdemocracy.com
The Tao of Democracy

[Priya]

First, I'd say congrats to the vision team for getting a clear, consise and passionate few lines out there! That in itself I think is a great accomplishment!

I can also relate to Lar's sentiment, and the only thing I would maybe be to add something about structural change. I wouldn't say "cultures recognize the benefit..." in the actual vision, because i don't think the recognition is as important as the "doing of" if that makes any sense.

In terms of Tom's point that we are far from our vision, I agree, but I would say that that's the point of the vision- and we should not add anything about how far we are from that capacity, or how much we've improved, etc. etc.

The only thing I might add to "heartfelt, lively" conversations, might be "and sometimes difficult" or "and challenging" or something like that- because we're trying to bring people together and create spaces that don't otherwise exist- and as we all know, that can be very difficult. I think maybe adding some adjective in there that adds some sort of tension, and not just fun and lively, might help.

Just some thoughts- don't know if that helps, or if I'm just rambling...(:

[Kenoli]

One could say that this is already going on. People find ways and places to do all of these things.

In my perspective, what we do has something to do with creating a public context in which this goes on, to accomplish this with complex, diverse groups of people, namely, to build a society where this is a core value and practice.

But I don't know if this is what the leadership group in NCDD aspires to.

--Kenoli

[pkorza]

I like Priya?’s addition of ?“and sometimes difficult?” for all the reasons she stated. I?’m tending to agree there is merit in articulating more explicitly a dual vision of both cultural and structural/systemic change. I like Kenoli?’s notion ?“to build a society where this is a core value and practice.?” I wonder if the word ?“communities?” should be added in the first sentence to reinforce this important level of dialogue. Here are some suggested revisions for consideration; probably still a little clunky and long?….


NCDD envisions a future in which all people?—regardless of income, position, background or education?—engage in lively, heartfelt, thoughtful, and sometimes difficult conversations to address [issues/concerns? that] matter to them, in ways that have a positive impact on their lives, communities, and world. We also envision a society in which systems and structures support and advance inclusive [and constructive0not sure this is the best word] dialogue and deliberation.

[wisedemocracy]

I like it in general. I like that it's short and sweet. I am concerned about the definition of all people - "regardless of.." - I think it reinforces a mechanistic paradigm to have a group of us define what "all" means. Instead I would suggest just capitalizing ALL. To emphasize we mean truly all people... But leave it up to the reader to define what ALL really means and engage from their own perspective.

[Lisa Heft]

Lars, how many other hands do you HAVE???

Yes, a vision should be a dream of a world that can be - even a world where our organization would no longer be needed, because what we are working for is a core cultural value and strength permeating through everyone and everything.

Let me try a variation, though a bit clumsy:

"NCDD envisions a future in which every individual voice matters and where all cultures and communities regularly engage the power of inclusive, lively, heartfelt, thoughtful and even challenging conversations about issues that matter and opportunites for positive change."

??

-- Lisa[/code]

[tomatlee]

How about

"NCDD envisions cultures and communities flourishing by welcoming all voices into lively, heartfelt, thoughtful, creative, and challenging conversations that have real impact."

The list is long, but the sudden ending stresses the final result that happens after the long conversation. Saying "voices" means that EVERYONE doesn't have to participate, but all viewpoints, and all types of people, and anyone who WANTS to participate, can. And I like "welcoming" rather than the more precise "enabling", because of the feeling it telegraphs.

If we choose one of the earlier proposals, I'd avoid saying that all people will engage in conversation, because ALL people don't do anything (except perhaps breathe). And we don't want to suggest that they will be forced to do so. In that case, I would talk about ENABLING people to engage.

I also like Lisa Heft's, above.
_________________
Tom Atlee, The Co-Intelligence Institute
co-intelligence.org, taoofdemocracy.com
The Tao of Democracy

[Sandy]

Here is the "working" vision statement I'm including in NCDD's strategic plan:

"NCDD envisions a future in which all people?—regardless of income, position, background or education?—are able to engage regularly in lively, thoughtful, and challenging conversations about what really matters to them, in ways that have a positive impact on their lives and their world.

We envision a society in which systems and structures support and advance inclusive, constructive dialogue and deliberation."


I think this reflects most of the comments people made above, but I recognize that we need to do some more work before we have an "official" vision statement.

If you have feedback on this next iteration of the vision statement, please share it here!
_________________
Sandy Heierbacher
Convenor, National Coalition for Dialogue & Deliberation (NCDD)