Hi Mark, (some links for now and I will return with more)
Louise was the research leader in the Swedish Trust Delegation, associate professor in organization and management (business economics) and work at Stockholm School of Economics and Lund University.
Im called to this platform mainly because of the headline which raises hopes about the possibility of humanity and effectiveness.
Because I myself find that I am trying to create a whole from the parts that I have worked with over the years and that all (in the form of methods, tools, theories) are so well connected. And when I use the parts as a whole, they also become more genuinely rooted in me, in my life and probably also more effective and useful and comprehensible to others.
(But perhaps also a little bit ”stronger”, definitive and uncompromising? Meaning to much change?- to much humanity, to much effectiveness? 😊)
Together with a publisher here in Sweden, I have created an E-course called
Sustainable managers and businesses through trust-based leadership in practice.
I see it as the course creating a whole under the heading of trust and has in it primarily aimed to spread knowledge about trust-based leadership in practice (know how). The course contains various parts: Solution focus approach, empathy, psychological and social safety, roles and positions, facilitation and participation on an individual, group and organizational level.
(Here In Sweden, Trust-based governance and leadership has become a governance model that is talked about a lot and that is in demand in the public sector, but which, in my opinion, has not yet really had an impact in practice. In addition the center of gravity has definitely shifted rapidly now in connection with political changes, so there is some confusion at the moment)
The study presents the value concept as a thick concept, and as a way of approaching user-orientation, but only if several value perspectives and timeframes are included, and if the user’s perspective (not user-perspective) is highlighted.
Thanks again Annika for this. What struck me reading it was the way that value from an individual user's perspective can ripple out in all kinds of (maybe unexpected and therefore difficult to track) ways. This means making space for individuals to add their stories and experiences in an open and non-restricted way (which is hard when data is being collected remotely using computer questionnaires and click boxes). In SF work this is an important aspect; typically asking 'what's better?' in an open way starts this kind of process, and following up with 'what else?' keeps it going.
The 'thick concept' idea is also interesting, being both descriptive AND evaluative. 'What's better?' (or any questions about value) are intrinsically loaded anyway, so it helps not to be side-tracked by thoughts of (scientific?) neutrality when our job is to be interested in actual value to an actual person.
Yes, and I believe SF and FIT are used at least in some of the organizations studied here. But I am unsure whether the managers know that a dialogic OD method is used in the client work.
Hi Annika, that sounds very interesting. Any links please?
Hi Mark, (some links for now and I will return with more)
Louise was the research leader in the Swedish Trust Delegation, associate professor in organization and management (business economics) and work at Stockholm School of Economics and Lund University.
https://portal.research.lu.se/en/persons/louise-bringselius
https://www.bringselius.se/english_summary.html
A link to the course in Swedish though : https://lnkd.in/eTa8rN7X
I see Louise has a chapter in a forthcoming book... would be very interesting to see that when it's published. Do please keep us informed.
Thanks for an inspiring start!
Im called to this platform mainly because of the headline which raises hopes about the possibility of humanity and effectiveness.
Because I myself find that I am trying to create a whole from the parts that I have worked with over the years and that all (in the form of methods, tools, theories) are so well connected. And when I use the parts as a whole, they also become more genuinely rooted in me, in my life and probably also more effective and useful and comprehensible to others.
(But perhaps also a little bit ”stronger”, definitive and uncompromising? Meaning to much change?- to much humanity, to much effectiveness? 😊)
Together with a publisher here in Sweden, I have created an E-course called
Sustainable managers and businesses through trust-based leadership in practice.
I see it as the course creating a whole under the heading of trust and has in it primarily aimed to spread knowledge about trust-based leadership in practice (know how). The course contains various parts: Solution focus approach, empathy, psychological and social safety, roles and positions, facilitation and participation on an individual, group and organizational level.
(Here In Sweden, Trust-based governance and leadership has become a governance model that is talked about a lot and that is in demand in the public sector, but which, in my opinion, has not yet really had an impact in practice. In addition the center of gravity has definitely shifted rapidly now in connection with political changes, so there is some confusion at the moment)
Again, thanks Marc for an inspiring start! 🙏
I'm curious about; What now?
Another link to an article newly published:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14719037.2022.2136398#.Y8-ewT7QdLw.linkedin
The study presents the value concept as a thick concept, and as a way of approaching user-orientation, but only if several value perspectives and timeframes are included, and if the user’s perspective (not user-perspective) is highlighted.
Thanks again Annika for this. What struck me reading it was the way that value from an individual user's perspective can ripple out in all kinds of (maybe unexpected and therefore difficult to track) ways. This means making space for individuals to add their stories and experiences in an open and non-restricted way (which is hard when data is being collected remotely using computer questionnaires and click boxes). In SF work this is an important aspect; typically asking 'what's better?' in an open way starts this kind of process, and following up with 'what else?' keeps it going.
The 'thick concept' idea is also interesting, being both descriptive AND evaluative. 'What's better?' (or any questions about value) are intrinsically loaded anyway, so it helps not to be side-tracked by thoughts of (scientific?) neutrality when our job is to be interested in actual value to an actual person.
Yes, and I believe SF and FIT are used at least in some of the organizations studied here. But I am unsure whether the managers know that a dialogic OD method is used in the client work.