Dialogue and Dynamic Facilitation

Dialogue is a deeper quality of talking than discussion. Nobel Prize-winning quantum physicist David Bohm explains that "discussion" has the same root as "percussion" and "concussion." The root "cuss" means "to strike" or to "break things up." In his book, On Dialogue, Bohm says, "Discussion is almost like a ping pong game, where people are batting the ideas back and forth and the object of the game is to win points for yourself." The word, "dialogue," on the other hand, derives from the roots "dia" which means "through," and "logos" which means "the word" or "the meaning of the word." Thus, in dialogue, shared meaning emerges through words.

Dialogue is a transformational process of thinking, where people grow in unforeseen ways. Not only do they deepen their understanding of issues and their connection to others, but they grow as individuals. (A good resource for dialogue is the National Conference on Dialogue and Deliberation.)

Dialogue isn’t well suited to reaching joint conclusions. For that, there is often a shift back to deliberation. Dynamic Facilitation, on the other hand, can engender a dialogue-like form of transformational talking that reaches joint conclusions. This quality of thinking is "Choice-creating."

The chart below illustrates the relationship of dialogue and choice-creating.

	Dialogue	Choice-creating
It is a conversation where people…	Open-mindedly and open-heartedly explore topics. The process yields individual growth and transformation but doesn’t necessarily reach a group conclusion or build a group identity.	Address high-care or “impossible” issues creatively and collaboratively. Progress happens via breakthrough insights, personal transformation and building a strong sense of “we”.
It can reliably be established because …	Each person is aware of the need to inquire together with others without advocating or teaching. If all can do this, often with a talking stick or guidelines, then dialogue is established.	People care deeply about the issue and a “dynamic facilitator” assures that each person's comments are spontaneous, yet valued and appreciated.
The “content” of the conversation is …	A topic, issue, or rich question to be explored but not necessarily decided by the group.	An ill-defined or impossible-to-solve issue having energy— that “bothers” people, that they care about, and want to solve.
The “process” of the conversation …	Is respectful listening, where people seek to understand an issue together. The facilitator is barely present.	Is heartfelt creativity where people address something they care about, where each comment adds to the group's progress.
The “result” of the conversation is …	Individual growth and a sense of shared meaning, rarely consensus on a plan of action. For group decisions there is often a shift from dialogue to deliberation, where people weigh the various options.	A win/win breakthrough, shift, or a unanimous “co-sensing” of what is best. Also, the process of meeting generates individual and group capability, plus a sense of "We."
The participants…	Choose to enter into dialogue and manage themselves. For those seeking dialogue among opposing groups, this often means key participants choose not to attend. A constant problem is “how to include everyone?”	Are people who care about solving a particular issue and who authentically speak for themselves. It's not for "representatives" or those portraying a role.
The group experience	Dialogue engenders personal growth, trust and the feeling of connectedness with life and all people. It’s the spirit of wholeness.	Choice-creating also engenders growth, trust, and connectedness, only with a sense of “We,” agency, and commitment to change.

Dialogue and Choice-creating