The little Peer Assist animation I blogged recently has become a subject of discussion in the Coognitive Edge blog.
I’ve responsed in the discussion there, but my comment hasn’t come out of quarantine yet (it’s my first one on the cognitive edge, so I guess I’m being screened), so I’ll pick up the thread here for now.
Dave Snowden (whose intellect I respect) makes a few points in his post – an assertion (provocatively distorted) about the nature of the peer assist process, and a comment about the way in which simple methods can be turned into recipes (which I entirely agree with), all sugar-coated with a back-handed compliment.
It’s been frustrating to watch the comments build whilst beng unable to respond myself, but interesting to see the way in which the thread has developed. In many ways, it makes the case for Peer Asists better than I could argue it!
The critical distinction that is missing in Dave’s assertion and most of the responses which follow, (and this is where Peer Assists are different to the activities that competent managers have been doing naturally for years) is that Peer Assists are primarily designed to share experience – not advice or opinions.
(To give credit to the red facilitator in the animation – she does state that people “offer suggestions based on personal experience”. Nancy Dixon echos this in Common Knowledge, where she details the origins of the approach in BP)
Sure, you can get up from your desk and wander around the office picking up advice and opinions. You can Google for them too. But that’s not the same as setting up a short meeting in which people only share suggestions based on personal experience.
It’s all too natural to shake up a cocktail of opinions, advice, and experience together without checking the ingredients. The Peer Assist process is unnatural insofar as it limits input to personal experience only. And that’s where the facilitator, whether red, blue or green, adds value.
So to return to the thread in Cognitive Edge blog - we can see a number of Opinions about what Peer Assists might be, but very little voiced Experience from people who have participated or facilitated one. Rather than exploring the topic openly from the standpoint of experience, there is a natural tendency by some (and perhaps an element of group-think – curmudgeonliness is more contagious than appreciativeness) to deconstruct and conform the approach to elements other models. ”Oh a Peer Assist is just …” “x + y + z = peer assist”
My suggestion is – try one out! Use as much of the recipe as you need for the context of your organisation (thanks Bill Kaplan). For BP’s highly facilitative culture where most teams included someone with good facilitation skills, the process needed very little guidance. To quote from Nancy Dixon’s Common Knowledge: “BP wisely chose to offer it as a simple idea without specifying rules or lengthy “how-to” steps.” In other cultures and contexts - perhaps those for whom the animation was designed – there may be more of a need to provide a recipe.
As I said in my reponse on Cognitive Edge, I suggest watching the animation with a large half-full glass of wine in one hand. Curmudgeonliness just fades away.
NB. Don’t try it with a half-empty glass though – somehow it’s just not the same.
February 24, 2007 at 12:22 pm
“….about the way in which simple methods can be turned into recipes…”
Well, isn’t simplicity a concept that is celebrated for the very purpose? So, people can pick it up and learn from it easily… The smart ones will keep working at it and see if it has to be tailored to meet the context and the others may be blind to customization.
I hope your comments get published sooner than later. If not, the blogosphere has failed….in fulfilling some of its promises.
Nimmy
February 25, 2007 at 1:25 pm
Chris, I will confess I am suprise to see you supporting the clip. The Peer Assist process as decribed in your and Nancy’s work is fine. The formalism, the rigid strucutre of the clip is something else. So it was not a back handed compliment. It was instead a “look I know Chris does not mean this sort of recipe”. However If you do then my glass will truly be half empty.
I also have not seen any comment from you on my blog – it would be welcome. Any comments go up straight away if you are registered, if not they come up for approval and I have never (and will never) delete one or censor it. I have once given someone a chance to decide if they really wanted me to post something but that is the limit. It may of course hit the spam filters.
February 25, 2007 at 9:18 pm
I like to believe that I am only curmoudgeonly half the time
But / and my response to your post after having participated in the comments on Dave’s blog, reading them over several times and then coming over and reading here, is …
Give me / us a break ! I don’t know about the other commenters, but I have worked at and with organizational development and learning processes of many types and forms over at least 20 years, and I don’t see anything particularly different or fascinating about Peer Assist. It is a relatively open and participative process for sharing and exchanging information, and it has some jargon or labels attached to the key points. There are quite a few other processes, either orthodox or hybridized that have, can and do deliver the same or similar outcomes.
I’d appreciate learning what is new, innovative and / or unique about Peer Assist, other than the name.
February 26, 2007 at 12:18 pm
Chris, you’re right in a way – the link to the pdf points to a document is is even more rigid.
The trouble is that these well-meant instructions are too idealistic. The pdf is based upon 3 peer assist workshops (only 3!). The video gives guidance about what to do when, and how, and why, in order to succeed.
I don’t say that peer assist can not work in principle – if it works in a particular setting and enviroment and culture, that’s fine. But that does not mean that it can then be transferred just using the “external” aspects of the process how it has emerged in that one specific case.
And my preferred way – what I also experience: change the architecture from single office to multipspace office in order to allow mutual semi-transparency of what’s going on – informal peer assist will emerge naturally : http://www.novartis.com/downloads/about-novartis/campus.pdf . No process at all, but change the external conditions and people will behave differently.
March 5, 2007 at 6:03 pm
Chris, I have to say that I am completely blown away by the reaction to the clip AND to the peer assist methodology! As you correctly state in your Cognitive Edge comment, the animation wasn’t meant as an instruction manual for how peer assists should be held but more as an illustration as to how they could be facilitated.
Bellanet has been involved in using different knowledge sharing methodologies in the international development/development aid sector. The reaction we have gotten so far from the development community to this animation has been incredibly positive, just as has been the use of the peer assist process in many settings all around the world. We have had offers to translate the module into Spanish and Hindi. The University of Ottawa, through their Centre for e-Learning, developed the animation, gave advice on the script and is hosting the Flash clips. But Bellanet developed the script (which originally had two developing country protagonists and a real-life case example), not the University, and it certainly wasn’t intended to be prescriptive.
I am especially struck by the comments on the peer assist process as not being anything new or fascinating. This is exactly what people used to tell me when I started working on KM back in 1999. The best KM (or org learning) processes are not new and are quite simple. Encouraging people to use them is another matter and we thought that by offering an illustration of how you can do it could be useful. Now all I can say is, can’t wait for the comments on the AAR and storytelling Flash modules
March 5, 2007 at 6:29 pm
I don’t perceive that the video is intended as a be-all-end-all of processes or perspectives. I know it reflects input from people in the sector who want to use it. My read is not that Peer Assists are new and different (Hi Jon!), but that the animation is aimed at offering an idea, a perspective, that encourages horizontal peer support and knowledge sharing.
I’m a bit amused at how strongly people responded on Dave’s blog. I wondered if there was any consideration of context, because in the end, context rules. Christian, I agree with your idea about open workspaces, but in development, getting to that point is not a simple, direct path. We need lots of options.
The video was designed for use in international development, which is often very rigid and hierarchical with lots of interesting cultural contexts. And often donor driven. This peer assist video is so much LESS formalized and rigid than the general operating context. So I had to giggle Dave, when you found it rigid. On a continuum with formal, large international development NGOs and your work, I’m sure it is still far from yours. And I do deeply believe their world needs to meet your world, but some need a gentler or different path.
I think it is also worth noting that “positive” feedback is not the same as being uncritical, but I know I won’t have much success carrying that torch with some of my friends. I’ve seen peer assists give VERY critical feedback. For me, the most important benefits of peer assists I’ve participated in have simply been the questions that people ask me. They have often reframed my thinking and given me new directions to take my project or problem. They got me outside of the story in my head, which I need and value.
In the comments on Dave’s site, there was a concern about diminishing the value of an experienced facilitator and, without one, losing the value of nuance in the process. (Jozefa, I believe, who I respect. In fact, I recognized most of the commentors and respect all of them!) This assumes two things: 1. the expert is the right choice (not always in my experience) and 2. that you have the resources for an expert facilitator.
In the donor driven world of international development, there is a bit of a disease of experts. Consultants from the north (yes, I am one of those and am aware of this problem) come to the south and tell people what to do based on the directives and values of the donors from the north. Can you see where an expert might not always be the solution, even in the role of facilitator?
What if you don’t have an experienced facilitator as a resource? What if you had the talent within your group that needed an opportunity to be expressed? Does that mean you should not watch a video and try it?
In the end, it is a privileged view that we can make our wise and knowledgeable assertions. We sit at our nice computers with broadband, our books, with our luxury of time to spend discussing online with our amazing colleagues.
We are operating out of a place of privilege and need to hold that in our perspectives. What we might ask instead is how useful have people in international development, particularly those in the South, found the animation? Did it open up learning for them, or was it trite or too prescriptive? There’s the bottom line for me, not our expert critiques, most often out of context. (Mine included)
One animation won’t change the world, but seeing a different perspective may be the first door we have to walk through to start the process. It is like the process of quitting smoking that we now come to describe as “the seven doors.” It takes the average smoker 7 tries to stay quit. Walking through 7 “doors.” If we don’t go through the first one, we’ll never get to the 7th.
Oh, now I need to get off my curmudgeon’s soap box. I recognize that I am afflicted with the same disease I suggest that others might suffer from: my privileged and sometimes out of touch perspective.
March 5, 2007 at 7:03 pm
I responded to your comment on my blog Nancy so will not repeat here. However to take up your 7 doors metaphor. If the first door you open takes you into a closed room with other smokers then you may never escape …
March 5, 2007 at 7:45 pm
Or you may!
March 9, 2007 at 8:20 am
Wow!
I am quite overwhelmed by the overall response (both positive and “critical”) this little flash animation has engendered! In reading some of the comments it became difficult to decipher what people were taking issue with – the peer assist process, the animation, universities who attempt such interventions…all of the above?
Just to echo some of the comments that Lucie made – this animation was not meant to be an instruction manual for how peer assists should be done – but simply as an illustration as to how they might be facilitated. That’s all.
While some comments suggested that the clip was (unconsciously) naive – I think this word might more aptly be ascribed to those who believe ANY kind of tool or intervention into the social will unproblematically be taken up for the benefit of all. Be that as it may – the collaboration between the Centre for e-Learning at the U of O and Bellanet in the development of this particular module was also seen as a pilot to test the waters for the possible development of a series of similar flash animation modules that might be beneficial for some of those involved in international development. Given the great way in which our teams have worked together, the use the module to date – and feedback it has generated – we are very excited to continue with this collaboration.
Next steps we are presently considering (we are still talking these issues over) is to identify 3 or 4 additional resources to develop, identify funds to do so – and make the script writing of these modules a collaborative endeavor open to anyone who wishes to participate – through moderated wikis perhaps.
This approach – we feel – echoes the collaborative spirit that informed our coming together to try this out. It might be useful to note here – this module (and others to follow) is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
http://creativecommons.org/license/?jurisdiction=ca
This will allow anyone to modify, use as is, or build upon it. We have also created English and French versions and made these texts available to facilitate other translations to unfold.
I would hope that people who have posted comments here – as well as on other online forums – would consider contributing to:
a)identifying what resources we need consider creating, b)helping in the development of, and feedback on, the scripts prior to final phase of production.
All this to say that – this has been a great and enriching learning experience.
Merci
May 20, 2009 at 9:48 pm
Nice site:D will definitely come back soon.