Leading Learning
A Piece of the Truth
Everyone’s version of reality is shaped by their own individual experiences. How do we take those into account when planning meetings?
I am a Midwesterner, only child, urban dweller, world traveler, self-employed, single white male with one foot in the Baby Boomer era and the other planted firmly in Generation X. These are just a few of the lenses through which I see the world, how I make meaning of the people and events in my life, and the decision-making strategies I employ. What experiences, qualities, and characteristics subtly or more overtly affect who you are, what you do, and how you go about doing it?
I believe effectively leading learning in our organizations requires an increased self-awareness of our own lenses, as well as being more conscious about the lenses through which our colleagues and constituents see their world and the choices available to them. As author Meg Wheatley has said, "We don't have to let go of what we believe, but we do need to be curious about what someone else believes."
This is important in the learning process because what we know often begins with what we notice, and what we notice is influenced by the life experiences that shape our current identity. In The Systems Thinking Fieldbook, this process is captured in a simple model known as the ladder of inference. The ladder is essentially contained inside our minds with only its base and its top rung standing free outside of our own thoughts and perceptions.
At its base are data, the factual observations that exist without individual meaning attached to them. At the top rung are the choices and decisions we make based on the meaning, assumptions, and interpretations we have individually attributed to that observed data, what the model deems inferences. Here's a meeting example of an observation: "The general sessions always start 10 minutes late." That's easily verified and is not a subjective judgment. But a variety of possible inferences about that tardiness could be made: The session production is unorganized, people are hard to herd into the main ballroom because they are networking, the break before the session is too short, the sessions should start on time no matter how many people are in the room, etc.
The greater the diversity among your colleagues and constituents, the greater the variety of inferences from the shared events and information observed. The bottom line? The meaning we discern and the choices we make depend on the lenses we bring to the process. More diverse people bring more diverse lenses to the meaning-making process.
In our quest to "better understand where others are coming from," you can help lead learning among your colleagues by having an open and honest discussion about the individual lenses each of you use to make sense of the work you do. Collectively you can discuss the most common lenses among individuals, the unique perspectives only a few people possess, and how the distribution of lenses can enhance or impede your effectiveness.
We often plan our meetings for constituents who may make meaning of their learning experiences very differently than we might. It is helpful to identify traditional demographic characteristics, but to also dig deeper to find other influences like work environments, functional classifications, and daily workflows. You can then brainstorm possible implications of those lenses and the types of meaning they might cause individuals to make of your meeting's components as the program currently exists - and how you might need to shift its elements as a result.
The Quakers have a wonderful expression, "Everyone holds a piece of the truth." Understanding the increasing diversity of the truths others see in your efforts and then helping build a shared understanding from them will make your individual contribution much more valuable.

