Praise for Liberating Structures

This book is so needed and so useful. The authors understand that the world
is changed through small, elegant shifts in the protocols of how we meet,
plan, conference, and relate to each other. The genius of this book is how it
puts in the hands of every leader and every citizen the facilitative power that
was once reserved for the trained expert. This will be a required text for all
programs on leadership and change.
Peter Block Bestselling author of Flawless Consulting, Stewardship, and
Community: The Structure of Belonging

A treasure trove of simple, practical methods to stimulate critical

conversations and liberate the full potential of any group, from the frontline
to the C-suite.
Cheryl M Scott Global Programs Senior Advisor, Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation

Liberating Structures will forever change the way we look at collaboration,

learning and leadership by showing us how structures are critical in the
world of work. Simply put, this book is for every leader who wants
innovative but proven methods to transform his or her organization and
engage its members in that journey of discovery.
Pat Witherspoon Dean, College of Liberal Arts, The University of Texas at
El Paso

As a Wall Street Journal columnist covering executive leadership, I

discovered Lipmanowicz and McCandless in the early days of their work
with Liberating Structures. Today, as an entrepreneur in a complex industry, I
use those practices routinely. Any group, anywhere is inherently poised for
rapid transformation. Liberating Structures make it simple to turn this
potential into reality.
Thomas Petzinger Jr. Founder of five life science companies and former
Wall Street Journal “Front Lines” columnist

The authors have drawn on pioneers in complexity science research, making

insights immediately useful for people in the field. Liberating Structures
invite frontline ownership of challenges by engaging everyone in a way that
encourages them to become part of the solution and take action.
Brenda Zimmerman Associate Professor of Strategy/Policy, Schulich
School of Business, Toronto

Liberating Structures have given me not only many powerful new ways for
engaging employees and customers; they have also succeeded beyond my
imagination in providing endless new approaches to improve productivity
and creativity, all in a fun and enjoyable way!
Guy Eiferman President, Healthcare Services & Solutions, Merck & Co

Billings Clinic has been using many Liberating Structures for a decade. The
engagement and emergence of new and stronger teams that include staff,
leaders, physicians and nurses has helped us to improve patient experience
and safety while reducing costs in an extremely complex healthcare
environment. Highly recommended.
Nicholas Wolter, MD CEO, Billings Clinic

Bringing Liberating Structures into my work is restoring my soul. Thank you.

Deb Witzel Executive Director, Longmont Community Justice Partnership

Being able to manage interactions with Liberating Structures helps me be

more self-confident and a better leader in the eyes of my team and my
customers. Being an early adopter increased my influence in the organization
and is one of the reasons I’m now a member of the senior management team.
Liberating Structures helped me grow in my career.
Vanessa Vertiz Business Unit Director, Lima, Peru
For the past eight years in Latin America and Italy Liberating Structures has
helped me and my teams work through a wide range of issues. They became a
way of doing business and to move organizations and people to new heights.
David Raimondo General Manager Latin America, Coopervision

There are those rare but delicious moments when you stumble across a
resource that transforms everything. Liberating Structures have provided a
delightfully rich repertoire of methods that live up to their bold name—
liberating participants to engage, collaborate and reach into their collective
wisdom to address their concerns and goals. And not just for my practice, but
increasingly as fruitful tools for managers and staff across the Yukon
Government organization.
Barrett W. Horne OD Consultant with the Yukon Government, Canada

A must-read guide to transform how you engage others. Liberating Structures

offer elegant approaches to get the most out of every discussion, meeting or
workshop. Our NGO uses them internally and with our partners around the
world. From Tanzania to NYC, from St. Lucia to Liberia, I have been amazed
watching Liberating Structures unleash the potential of each gathering.
Sean Southey Executive Director, PCI Media Impact

Holy smoke: [Link] might be one of the most useful

websites I’ve been introduced to since Google. The only words that come to
mind are swear words, and I’m on county email.
Ryan Murrey Acting Executive, Washington State CASA
 The
Surprising
Power of
Liberating Structures

Simple Rules to Unleash a Culture of Innovation

Henri Lipmanowicz Keith McCandless

Copyright © 2013 by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith McCandless. Some
rights reserved.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-

NonCommercial-ShareAlike License. This allows others to reproduce,
distribute, adapt and build upon our work non-commercially as long as they
credit us and license their creations under identical terms.
To view a copy of this license visit [Link]
nc-sa/3.0/legalcode
Published by Liberating Structures Press
ISBN 13: 9780615893372 (Liberating Structures Press)

ISBN: 0615893376
Library of Congress Control Number: 2013951395
Liberating Structures Press, Seattle, WA
 CONTENTS

Prologue As Easy As ABC

Chapter 1 SMALL CHANGES, BIG DIFFERENCES
The Invitation
What’s Ahead

Part One: The Hidden Structures of Engagement

Chapter 2 WHY MICROSTRUCTURES MATTER
How invisible structures shape everything that gets done
First, a Few Definitions
The Neglected Power of Microstructures
Microstructures Enable and Constrain
The Elements of Control
Conventional Microstructures: Too Much
Control and/or Too Little Structure
From Too Much or Too Little Control to Well-
Structured and Distributed Control
Chapter 3 LIBERATING STRUCTURES FOR EVERYONE
How easy it is for anyone to radically improve the way people
work together
A Liberating Structure in Action
Harnessing the Power of Small Changes
 Principles and Practices
Measuring Inclusion and Engagement: IE
Quotient
Liberating Structures and Culture Change
Liberating Education
What to Expect
Chapter 4 LIBERATING LEADERSHIP
How leaders can avoid perpetuating the problems they
complain about
The Bad News: Unintended Consequences and
Side Effects
Patching Up the Symptoms
The Good News
The Possibilities
The Choice
A Word to the Skeptic
The Big Shift and Payoff
The Biggest Leadership Challenge
Liberating Leadership Starts with You

Part Two: Getting Started and Beyond

Chapter 5 GETTING STARTED: FIRST STEPS
Menu of Liberating Structures
Safety First
Breaking with Tradition
 Your Own Fears
Three Pathways to Fluency and Routine Use
Immersion Workshops
Chapter 6 FROM FIRST STEPS TO STRINGS
Matching a Challenge with Specific Liberating
Structures
Five Sets of Strings
Chapter 7 FROM STRINGS TO STORYBOARDS

Launching a Multi-Stakeholder Collaborative

Project
Developing Strategy and Building a New
Leadership Team
Advancing a Broad Movement across Many
Regions
Composing for Large-Scale Projects

Part Three: Stories from the Field

Fixing a Broken Child Welfare System: Tim
Jaasko-Fisher
Inclusive High-Stakes Decision Making Made
Easy: Craing Yeatman
Turning a Business Around: Alison Joslyn
Transforming After-Action Reviews in the
Army: Lisa Kimball
Inventing Future Health-Care Practice: Chris
Mccarthy
 Creating More Substance, Connections, and
Ideas in the Classroom By Arvind Singhal
Getting Commitment, Ownership, and Follow-
Through: Neil Mccarthy
Inspiring Enduring Culture Change While
Preventing Hospital Infections: Michael
Gardam
Dramatizing Behavior Change to Stop
Infections: Sherry Belanger
Developing Competencies for Physician
Education: Diane Magrane
Passing Montana Senate Bill 29: Senator Lynda
Bourque Moss
Transcending a Top-Down, Command-and-
Control Culture: Jon Velez

Part Four: The Field Guide to Liberating

Structures
1-2-4-All
Impromptu Networking
Nine Whys
Wicked Questions
Appreciative Interviews (AI)
TRIZ
15% Solutions
Troika Consulting
What, So What, Now What? (W3)
Discovery & Action Dialogue (DAD)
25/10 Crowd Sourcing
Shift & Share
Wise Crowds
Conversation Café
Min Specs
Improv Prototyping
Helping Heuristics
User Experience Fishbowl
Heard, Seen, Respected (HSR)
Drawing Together
Design StoryBoards—Basic
Design StoryBoards—Advanced
Celebrity Interview
Social Network Webbing
“What I Need From You” (WINFY)
Open Space Technology
Generative Relationships STAR
Agreement-and-Certainty Matching Matrix
Simple Ethnography
Integrated~Autonomy
Critical Uncertainties
Ecocycle Planning
Panarchy
 Purpose-To-Practice (P2P)
Afterword
Notes
Acknowledgments and Learning Resources
About the Authors
 Prologue

As Easy As ABC

Do you remember learning the alphabet? And learning to spell your first
words? Cat, dog, bat. Alphabets are not only easy to learn, they are endlessly
adaptable and universally useful. They are the building blocks of words,
ideas, and actions. With the twenty-six letters of the Roman alphabet,
millions of different combinations can be strung together, enough to write all
the words of many languages.
Now imagine having access to only a five-letter alphabet. How many
different words and ideas could you structure with five letters? How
diminished would writing, reading, and talking be? How frustrating would it
be to communicate with just a few words? How boring and repetitive would
your dealings with others be?
This is precisely the situation in which most people find themselves
when working with other people. They are boxed in by the equivalent of a
five-letter alphabet, which consists of the five methods everybody
everywhere uses to organize how groups of people work together. These five
conventional methods are the presentation, the managed discussion, the status
report, the open discussion, and the brainstorm. This tiny alphabet is in good
part the reason why so many meetings or classrooms are boring,
unproductive, or frustrating. Also these conventional methods fail to create a
fertile ground where innovation can emerge easily and flourish.
The purpose of this book is to greatly expand your alphabet of possible
ways to interact and work with others to achieve exceptional results. It
describes and explains thirty-three new “letters,” simple methods that you
can learn without difficulty, with only a small amount of practice.

Figure 1
The Liberating Structures “Alphabet” of Simple Methods

These so-called Liberating Structures make it easy to transform how

people interact and work together in order to achieve much better results than
what is possible with presentations, reports, and other conventional methods.
We call them Liberating Structures because they are designed to include and
engage everybody. They “liberate,” so to speak, everybody’s contribution to
the group’s success.
How well you interact and work with other people often determines not
only your success at work but also in other areas of your life. You will find
that each Liberating Structure has its own specific benefits. By learning to
use some or all of them, you will create your own alphabet and build a
different vocabulary for getting things done with others. Your new language
will be endlessly adaptable and applicable as you create more combinations
to fit every situation that you face in your life, whether challenge or
opportunity, large or small, simple or complex.
You will also find that the power of Liberating Structures is not only
surprising but also infectious. When you use Liberating Structures, people
around you will enjoy the experience and see the unexpected benefits; this
will likely help and encourage them to expand their own alphabets. They will
become your practicing partners and be grateful that you helped them acquire
skills that will serve them forever.
You will find as well that Liberating When asked who are
Structures scale up and down easily for use perfect candidates for
by a small or large team, a department or using Liberating
function, an organization, a class, a school, a Structures, our modest
community, or a social movement. That makes response is simple:
them useful for anything from a single meeting everybody.
to a large project to a system-wide
transformation initiative. You will also discover that they can help you bring
more structure to one-on-one conversations and make them more productive.
And, of course, they can also help you converse with yourself more
effectively and transform how you think, plan, and make decisions.
When asked who are perfect candidates for using Liberating Structures,
our modest response is simple: everybody. Liberating Structures are for
CEOs, senior executives, middle managers, and frontline workers;
professors and teachers, administrators, support staff, and students; hospital
leaders, doctors, and nurses; military officers and soldiers; government
employees and politicians; consultants and coaches; community leaders and
philanthropists—and many more. By everybody we mean everybody!
If the notion that Liberating Structures If this were a book about
can be universally useful sounds to you too tennis, golf, or skiing, you
good to be true, join the crowd; this is a would read it knowing
common initial reaction and is that its value would come
understandable. You will not believe it until only when you have
you discover what Liberating Structures can practiced the methods
do for you by using them yourself and then and learned from them.
using your imagination to extrapolate
adaptations and new applications. In other words, this book contains many
important ideas, but it is not a theoretical or conceptual book. Instead, it is a
practical field guide written to make it easy for you to get started and make
significant progress quickly so that you can find out what place to give
Liberating Structures in your work and in your life.
 Liberating Structures are methods for a purpose: to improve
performance. If this were a book about tennis, golf, or skiing, you would read
it knowing that its value would come only when you have practiced the
methods and learned from them. This is the secret of how to learn and benefit
from Liberating Structures: just do it, plunge in, explore, and practice as
often as possible, taking advantage of the opportunities that abound daily. Be
assured that no matter which Liberating Structure you try, in whatever
situation, you will generate surprisingly better results than expected.
 Chapter 1
Small Changes, Big Differences

For months, a father had been unable to go beyond monosyllabic

responses from his teenage daughter. Then, one day, he made a small
change in the way he started their conversation, and she talked to
him for over an hour.

For months, fifteen managers had been “Not hammer strokes, but
getting nowhere arguing about the dance of water sings
transforming their biweekly meeting, the pebbles to
which they all agreed was frustrating perfection.” R. Tagore
and unproductive. Then, one day, they
made a small change in the way they usually worked as a group. The
payoff? Within thirty minutes, they figured out what their major
problem was and decided how they would address it together.

For years, each new batch of students in a required course attended it

with little enthusiasm, doing the bare minimum to get a decent grade.
Then, one semester, after small changes in the professor’s teaching
methods, the students were animated and eager, feeling engaged and
having fun learning concepts they found relevant to their personal
lives.

For years, the briefings for replacement officers going to Afghanistan

were more numbing and overwhelming than illuminating. Then one
 day, thanks to small changes in the briefing process, returning
officers were able to convey to their replacements the nuances of how
to hit the ground running. Their replacements listened avidly, asked
and got answers for all their remaining questions, and felt more
confident to start their challenging deployment.

For decades, infections had been increasing in a hospital unit despite

regular campaigns to train the staff and introduce best practices.
Then one year, the unit implemented a small change in its approach
to infection reduction and was able to bring down transmissions to
near zero in just twelve months’ time.

As far back as anybody could remember, strategic plan reviews had

always been stressful and unpleasant; you presented your plan to the
management team and they did their best to find faults in it. Then one
year, a small change turned the review into an energizing, productive,
and pleasant event.

All these vignettes encapsulate true stories with a common story line:
small changes in people’s routine practices produced big differences in the
results they were getting.1 All that each individual or group did was to
replace what we call a “conventional microstructure” with something called
a “Liberating Structure.”
What the teenager’s father did differently was to take his inspiration
from a Liberating Structure called Appreciative Interviews. His small
change was to ask his daughter, “What was the best moment of your day
today?” This prompted her to tell a story, and then another, and another …
The small change made by the managers stuck on how to transform their
biweekly meeting was to use two rounds of a Liberating Structure called 1-2-
4-All to address their issues and settle differences of opinion without
conflict.
What the professor did differently was to introduce seemingly minor
variations in her classroom approach: she replaced her lectures with a few
Liberating Structures such as Impromptu Networking, Troika Consulting,
and Conversation Café and created an interactive environment that provided
many spaces for self-discovery and peer-to-peer learning.
 The Afghanistan briefing used to consist mostly of white-paper and
PowerPoint presentations. The simple change the briefing officers made in
the process was to use a Liberating Structure called Users Experience
Fishbowl in which a small group of returning officers shared their on-the-
ground stories with each other while their replacements listened and later
asked questions.
The hospital unit reducing its infection rate simply stopped promoting
top-down campaigns and gradually engaged everybody on the unit in small
and diverse group conversations. How did they do that? They used
Liberating Structures such as Discovery & Action Dialogues and Improv
Prototyping to have participants discover for themselves how they could
contribute to reducing infections. Without buy-in imposed from the top,
people volunteered to take actions on their own.
In the case of the confrontational strategic plan reviews, the small
change was to eliminate the presentation routine and substitute the Liberating
Structure called Ecocycle to engage the whole management team in assessing
strategic options and cocreating the plan together.

The Invitation
Check all that apply when you think about a group or organization you work
with:

Deadly boring or frustrating meetings

Someone else’s best practices imposed
Deciders separated from the doers
Brain-numbing PowerPoint presentations
Difficult conversations routinely avoided
Fear and politics getting in the way
Teamwork that feels like drudgery
Group process that is chaotic
More training but no changes
Great ideas that never leave the drawing board
People excluded because they would “complicate” decisions
Structural changes that don’t deliver the Promised Land
 Being expected to know and anticipate everything
Change driven by resorting to fear or “bribery”
More and more bureaucracy and requests for data
Accountability without adequate autonomy and support
Things that everybody knows don’t work but are never changed

If you are like most of the people we have worked with around the
world, you experience some of these situations and events day in, day out. It
doesn’t matter whether we look at business, government, NGOs, education,
health care, or community service—or neighborhood or civic groups,
advisory committees, or similar organizations—these realities block most
groups’ ability to work together to achieve remarkable results.
Too often, we rely on This book is an invitation to use the
experts to design our methods called Liberating Structures to
world while overlooking organize and engage people in a new way.
the people directly in Too often, we rely on experts to design our
front of us. world while overlooking the people directly
in front of us. With the constellation of
methods and principles explained here, it becomes practical for people at
any skill or hierarchical level to quickly become expert contributors in taking
next steps and innovating.
You can use this book to generate innovative results for yourself, with
your family, with your team at work; these methods will work to improve
your interactions with leaders in your organization and with neighbors in
your community. Everyday use in a conversation or meeting can be as
powerful as application to the big transformation initiative.
At the core of the book is the practical idea that simple shifts in our
routine patterns of interaction make it possible for everyone to be included,
engaged, and unleashed in solving problems, driving innovation, and
achieving extraordinary outcomes. Small changes generate big results
without imported best practices, more training, or expensive buy-in
strategies. This alternative approach is both practical and feasible because,
as you will see, Liberating Structures are quite simple and easy to learn; they
can be used by everyone at every level, from the C-suite to the front line of
any organization, from the neighborhood block club to the global issue-
advocacy association. Rather than complicated frameworks or elaborate
processes to guide work together, Liberating Structures employ simple rules
that are extremely spare and very specific. Liberating Structures have been
used by managers and salespeople, by doctors and nurses, by professors and
students, by military officers and administrators, in business, government,
and the nonprofit sector—all together in more than thirty countries. No
lengthy training courses or special expertise is required. No dependence on
expert facilitators is necessary.

What’s Ahead
We assembled this collection of Liberating Our purpose is to make
Structures by tapping great ideas in the public all of the structures
domain, simplifying them, and adding a few accessible for use by
of our own. Our purpose is to make all of the anyone from the bottom to
structures accessible for use by anyone from the top of any
the bottom to the top of any organization. organization.
Whether you are a leader, facilitator, or part
of any group of people who want to be more innovative, adaptive, and quick
off the mark to achieve better results, this book shows you how to put the
power of Liberating Structures to work immediately.
Part One: The Hidden Structure of Engagement will ground you
with the conceptual framework and vocabulary of Liberating Structures.
Chapter 2 introduces key concepts and contrasts Liberating Structures with
the conventional ways of how people work together. In Chapter 3, we
explain in more depth the features of Liberating Structures and show the
benefits of using them to transform the way people collaborate, how they
learn, and how they discover solutions together; also included in this chapter
are two key performance indicators to assess what we are calling
Engagement Expertise. The intent of Chapter 4, Liberating Leadership, is
summed up in its subtitle: “How leaders can avoid perpetuating the problems
they complain about.” Here we offer insights and alternatives to leaders at
all levels.
Part Two: Getting Started and Beyond offers guidelines for
experimenting with Liberating Structures and learning from your experience
in a range of possible applications, from one-off, small-group interactions to
system-wide change initiatives.
Part Three: Stories from the Field is a collection of real-life case
examples provided by people who have used Liberating Structures around
the world. Their stories unfold in all types of organizations, from health-care
to academic to military to global business enterprises, from local judicial
and legislative systems to national and international R&D efforts. They are
snapshots of the depth and breadth of what Liberating Structures can make
possible in a broad variety of situations.
In Part Four: The Field Guide to Liberating Structures, we give you
a repertoire of thirty-three Liberating Structures. Each Liberating Structure is
carefully designed to include only what is absolutely necessary to generate
innovative results. The Field Guide provides the minimum specifications for
each Liberating Structure (shortened to Min Specs) in a standard format so
that they are easy to follow and easy to use. In describing how to use each
Liberating Structure, we provide a step-by-step explanation of what to do
and what to expect, including:

What is made possible

Five microstructural design elements
Purposes for use
Tips and traps
Riffs and variations
Examples

Throughout the Field Guide, we point you to a host of supporting

materials on our website [Link] to make it easy for
you to start experimenting immediately.
In the Afterword, we share our thoughts about what it means for people
individually and as a group to become regular users of Liberating Structures.
 We believe Liberating Structures are transformational because they are
purposely designed to make it easy to accomplish what is missing in most
organizations, namely to include and engage people effectively and to
unleash their collective intelligence and creativity. They provide a wide
variety of ways to:

Accommodate groups of any size

Let go of control safely
Give everyone equal opportunity to contribute
Facilitate progress through rapid sifting and sequencing
Maximize active participation
Routinely generate better-than-expected results

One Liberating Structure Most important, Liberating Structures

can transform a meeting, are simple enough to fit within normal work
a classroom, or a routines and schedules. They can save
conversation. Using many enormous amounts time by making it possible
of them together, on a to include all the right people from the start.
regular basis, can The thirty-three Liberating Structures
transform an included in this book can be combined in an
organization, a infinite variety of designs that can be tailored
community, or a life. to whatever needs to be accomplished. This
makes them adaptable for shaping next steps
in everything from personal relationships, to tomorrow’s meeting, to big
projects, to strategic work, to organizational transformations, to social
movements.
 PART ONE
The Hidden Structures of Engagement

Part One contains the necessary background “The aspects of things

for working with Liberating Structures. We that are most important to
introduce the concept of Liberating us are hidden because of
Structures, contrast them with the their simplicity and
conventional ways people work together, and familiarity.” Ludwig
describe how using them can transform the Wittgenstein
way people collaborate and discover
solutions together. The last chapter speaks to leaders at all levels about why
the strategies they use to address perpetual problems in organizations usually
do not improve the situation and often make it worse. We propose the use of
Liberating Structures as a proven way to get things done while overcoming
perennial leadership challenges.
 Chapter 2
Why Microstructures Matter
How invisible structures shape everything that gets
done

One day, a CEO preparing for a merger spoke to a large group from
the acquired company. He found himself totally unable to establish
contact with the hostile crowd in spite of his repeated attempts to
reach out. The next time he addressed the same group, he didn’t have
any positive news to deliver, yet he was able to connect easily with
them and even exchanged pleasantries that sparked laughter.

The only thing the CEO did differently “How difficult it is to be

the second time was to change the simple.” Vincent Van
physical structure where he interacted Gogh
with the group. He moved the venue of
his meeting from a long rectangular room to a square one. Then,
instead of standing on a podium at one end, he stood in the middle of
the group and moved around. This made it possible for him to engage
people with stories and questions. Small structural change, big
difference in content!

Whatever we do, there is always a structure to support or guide what is

being done. Without structures, there is just chaos. We see this even in our
most routine activities. When we have dinner with our family, the structure is
provided by the room, the table and chairs, the dinnerware and eating
utensils, and more subtly by who sits where. Most of the time, we pay no
attention to this structure because its elements rarely change. What we notice
is what matters to us: the food, our dining companions, the conversation. We
take the structure for granted and don’t even think of changing it to transform
our dinner.
The same happens at work or at school. We know that big structures
such as buildings, strategies, policies, and processes support and constrain
our activities, but we are not constantly aware of their influence. We tend to
be even less conscious of the way smaller or intangible structures—such as
the room we select for a meeting or who sits where—influence our
interactions with other people. All sorts of structures shape all our
undertakings and accomplishments, and we will explain how and why.

First, a Few Definitions

When we started our work Buildings, strategies, policies, organization
together, these small structures, and core operating processes are
structures didn’t even examples of what we call macrostructures.
have a name. We coined They are built or designed for the long term
the term and can’t be changed easily or cheaply.
“microstructures” to In contrast, meeting rooms, offices,
make talking about them presentations, agendas, questions, and
easier. discussions are examples of microstructures.
They are the small structures that we select
routinely to help us interact or work with other people. They can be changed
easily from one event to another or even in the moment.
Tangible microstructures are the physical spaces where interactions
or work takes place. They are like the room where the family eats dinner.
They also include how we choose to arrange the tangible structural
elements within that space, such as tables, chairs, flip charts, and the like.
Intangible microstructures are how we micro-organize our interactions
with elements such as agendas, presentations, processes, discussions,
questions, seating arrangements, and so forth. Table 2.1 shows some
examples for each type of structure.
For most organizations, the familiar microstructures become fixed in
routine—the usual meeting room, who sits where, the use of PowerPoint
presentations, the format of discussions. Since they are so often the same,
they fade into the background and go unnoticed. In fact, when we started our
work together, these small structures didn’t even have a name. We coined the
term “microstructures” to make talking about them easier.
Microstructures may sound like small Microstructures may
things, but they have a big impact. Consider sound like small things,
three different configurations for a group but they have a big
meeting: long rows of rectangular tables, impact.
clusters of small round tables, chairs with
wheels but no tables. Each one will enable and constrain in a different way
what is possible for the group to accomplish. More subtly, questions will do
the same thing. Asking, “Why is our customer strategy failing?” will launch a
search for solutions in a different direction from asking, “When and how
have you been successful in satisfying a customer?” Both questions enable
searches, but each question constrains the range of appropriate answers.
 Table 2.1
Hierarchy and Examples of Structures

The Neglected Power of Microstructures

People, resources, and structures are conventionally seen as the three
ingredients that drive the performance of all organizations. Simply stated,
people, supported by resources and macrostructures, make decisions and
take actions that generate results. Every organization is looking for the
ideal formula, the precise combination of people, resources, and strategies
that will produce top performance (see figure 2.1).
 In Figure 2.1, “People” includes leaders and managers, the
organization’s workforce, suppliers, and customers. For a school, the people
would be board members, principals, teachers, administrators, students, and
parents. As Table 2.1 shows, “Macrostructures” would include factories,
offices, or other buildings, as well as things like strategies, organization
structures, policies, and procedures. “Resources” include products, services,
patents, property, equipment, capital, and cash flow.
What is missing from Figure 2.1 is the role microstructures play in
shaping decisions, and affecting results since nothing ever happens without
some form of interaction, some exchange of information, and some
discussion, formal or not (see Figure 2.2).

Figure 2.1
An Incomplete Picture: Structure, People, Resources Drive Performance
 Figure 2.2
The Role of Microstructures in Producing Results

Microstructures Enable and Constrain

Microstructures are the way you organize all your routine interactions,
consciously or not. They guide and control how groups work together. They
shape your conversations and meetings. They enable and constrain what is
possible. For our purposes, we can say they come in two flavors:
conventional microstructures and Liberating Structures. Liberating Structures
are adaptable microstructures that make it possible for groups of people of
any size to radically improve how they interact and work together.
In organizations is Conventional microstructures, in one
compounded by excluding form or another, have been around for
the vast majority in centuries. They are designed for convincing,
shaping next steps. In teaching, debating, brainstorming, controlling,
large and small, the or some combination of these purposes. Their
standard decision-making usefulness, however, is limited by side effects
formula is: meet with a that are difficult or impossible to avoid, such
as unengaged participants or audiences,
small circle of coworkers, excessive power dynamics, and competition
decide, and then tell the for attention, bodies present but minds absent.
others. The resulting frustrations spark much talk
about the need for engaging employees (in
academia, the talk is about engaging students), but, in actual practice, there is
too little expertise on how to engage people effectively and broadly.
Routinely uninspiring meetings, classes, or conversations reinforce the
dominant belief that engaging people is very difficult and reserved for the
charismatic few. Because of the perceived difficulty, the myth organizations
large and small, the standard decision-making formula is: meet with a small
circle of coworkers, decide, and then tell the others. The presentation, the
managed discussion, the status report, the open discussion, and the
brainstorm are the most frequently used conventional microstructures in
group interactions—we call them the Big Five. They also shape one-on-one
meetings and conversations. In fact, they dominate all activities in pretty
much all organizations, small or large, no matter their mission.
Whether employed in a sales meeting, a managers’ meeting, an
executive meeting, a customer contact, or a classroom discussion, the impact
of the conventional microstructures is greatly dependent on the skills and
personalities of their users. The reason is that, as structures go, they are
either too tight or too loose in terms of how much control is exerted on the
participant group. For example, presentations, status reports, and managed
discussions are at one end of the spectrum: too tight. Open discussions and
brainstorms are at the other end of the continuum: too loose. Each of these
qualities—too tight or too loose—has its limitations. What’s more, all
conventional microstructures make it impossible to engage more than a small
number of participants. Liberating Structures make it possible to include and
engage everybody, no matter whether the group is small or large.

The Elements of Control

All microstructures—Liberating Structures and conventional structures—are
made up of the same five structural elements (Figure 2.3). These elements
determine how control is exercised over a group of people who are working
together:

1. The invitation
2. How space is arranged and what materials are used
3. How participation is distributed among participants
4. How groups are configured
5. The sequence of steps and the time allocated to each step

The invitation provides direction in the form of a question or a request.

In other words, participation in the group’s work together will depend on
someone’s invitation, explicit or implicit, to listen or speak up, to contribute
to an objective, and so on.

Figure 2.3
Microstructure Elements of Control

How space is arranged and what materials are used refers to all the
choices that can be made about the tangible and intangible elements such as
tables, chairs, podiums, projectors, flip charts, where people are located,
whether they are standing up or sitting down. These arrangements can
contribute to the invitation but often conflict with it as, for example, when a
large group is sitting classroom-style and people are invited to ask questions.
How participation is distributed refers to how much time every
participant will be given to contribute.
How groups are configured refers to the freedom that exists to change
the composition of a group—for instance, by breaking up into small groups
then reconfiguring into another formation.
Every microstructure contains one or more steps, each with a specific
purpose and time allocation.

Conventional Microstructures: Too Much Control

and/or Too Little Structure
Liberating Structures are fundamentally different from conventional
microstructures in the way they control and structure people’s interactions.
Conventional microstructures tend to provide too much control of content or
too little structure to include everyone in shaping next steps. To illustrate,
let’s look at the three most frequently used conventional microstructures.

Presentation (or Speech or Lecture)

Participation in shaping The Presentation is designed to make it

next steps is very limited, possible for one person to tell and show the
if present at all, in the same information to many people
Presentation structure. simultaneously. Its purpose is to give one
person full control about the content while
restricting everybody else to listening … or not. Participation in shaping next
steps is very limited, if present at all, in the Presentation structure.

The structural design of the Presentation is:

 1. The invitation: Audience members are invited to listen to the presenter
from beginning to end (except for questions).
2. How space is arranged and what materials are used: Audiences large
or small are usually sitting and facing the same direction, toward the
presenter. PowerPoint slides dominate, whether in face-to-face
presentations or virtual broadcasts. A podium or a stage is used for
large audiences.
3. How participation is distributed: One person, the presenter, gets nearly
100 percent of the time with the discretion to invite questions from
others either during the presentation or at the end. Everyone else is
given little or no time.
4. How groups are configured: The configuration is static, with the
presenter in front and everyone else in one group.
5. Sequence of steps and time allocation: The first step, the presentation,
gets 90 to 99 percent of the allotted time; the second step, questions,
gets the balance.

The Presentation is neither an inclusive nor an engaging process since a

single person controls the content. Furthermore, that person is the “expert,”
the one who has prepared and is intimately familiar with all details.
Participants are “forced” into a silent role that, instead of engagement, may
invite passive acceptance, defensive reactions, or withdrawal. When the
Presentation is used to convince or persuade others of a predetermined idea
or decision, it tends to discourage engagement and spark resistance. In a
time-constrained agenda, time allocated to the Presentation means time stolen
from group interactions. When the Presentation takes up most of the time
available, it becomes the dominant structure and sets the tone for the whole
meeting (same thing for a class dominated by lectures).

Open Discussion

An Open Discussion is one that is not managed or facilitated. It can have

many different purposes: to collect feedback, share viewpoints, attempt to
reach a consensus, allow people to ventilate, create the illusion of inclusion,
search for new insights.
 The structural design of the Open Discussion is:

1. The invitation: Participants are invited to respond to a topic, a

question, or a presentation in any way each sees fit.
2. How space is arranged and what materials are used: One large group
or several smaller groups sitting in a fixed configuration within a room
(or connected virtually). Microphones are used if needed.
3. How participation is distributed: Participation is not distributed.
Individuals assert their idea or opinion to the whole group at any time
for any amount of time.
4. How groups are configured: The initial configuration remains
unchanging.
5. Sequence of steps and time allocation: A few minutes may be used to
restate the topic. Participants use the rest of the time for expressing their
views and for discussing. Total duration is variable and may or may not
be specified in advance.

In contrast to the Presentation, the Open Open Discussions easily

Discussion operates with very little control of turn into a mess
content, if any. If used to engage people in
shaping direction, it easily turns chaotic, becoming too unconnected to be
productive or too random to shape decisions or next steps. As groups get
larger, Open Discussion becomes less and less open for all as a few people
will inevitably dominate the discussion. In short, the Open Discussion has
too few or too weak microstructural elements to provide everyone a chance
to shape next steps. In simpler terms, Open Discussions easily turn into a
mess. This usually incites someone with authority to take control and manage
the discussion.

Managed Discussion

The standard way of avoiding a mess is to put somebody in charge. In a

Managed Discussion, someone is in charge (leader, chair, professor) and
responsible for guiding the discussion. Managed Discussions frequently
come after a presentation or a status report. Their purpose can be to come to
a conclusion or reach a decision or make some progress.

The structural design of the Managed Discussion is:

1. The invitation: Participants are asked to respond to specific questions

by a person with authority/power.
2. How space is arranged and what materials are used: Participants sit
around a long or U-shaped conference table, or are seated classroom-
style, with the leader in the “power seat.” A presenter may or may not
remain standing during the entire discussion. For large groups beyond a
dozen participants, seating is multitiered.
3. How participation is distributed: Distribution is determined by the
leader, by power relations, by expertise, or by whoever imposes
himself or herself.
4. How groups are configured: The initial configuration remains
unchanging. For regular meetings (or gatherings or classrooms), the
configuration is usually the same, time after time.
5. Sequence of steps and time allocation: Total time is determined
beforehand by an agenda or decided in the moment by the leader. If
addressing the issue requires several steps or tasks, the leader decides,
usually in the moment, how time is allocated between each.

The Managed Discussion The Managed Discussion puts control

puts control entirely into entirely into a single hand, with all the
a single hand, with all the difficulties and complications that this entails.
difficulties and The most common challenge for the leader (or
complications that this chair, or professor, or expert) is giving to all
entails. participants the time they need for
comfortably expressing their views. Making it
safe for everybody to speak up is another common challenge since
acquiescing is the easiest option. Achieving true depth and quality of content
within a predetermined amount of time is often impossible.
Chairing Managed Discussions at senior levels is a special challenge.
Even though senior leaders are likely to be more skilled in expressing
themselves in group discussions, the issues they address are much more
complex and power dynamics tend to be significantly stronger. The boss may
want more participation in shaping next steps, but if everyone doesn’t step
up, this reinforces the pattern of making decisions at the top. Including
participants from lower levels as equal partners in a Managed Discussion
with a group of senior people is an art form too often neglected.

From Too Much Or Too Little Control To Well-

Structured and Distributed Control
By definition, full engagement means that everybody plays an active and
unrestrained role in contributing ideas, discussing options, and shaping next
steps. The descriptions of the Presentation, the Open Discussion, and the
Managed Discussion make it clear how and why conventional structures fail
to make this possible. They provide too much control of content or too little
structure to effectively engage more than a few people in shaping next steps.
In the next chapter, we will describe a Liberating Structure called 1-2-4-All
to exemplify how Liberating Structures make it possible to easily achieve
full engagement regardless of group size.
Figure 2.4 provides a visual summary of these differences between
Liberating Structures and conventional microstructures. It illustrates that:

The Presentation puts maximum control of content in the hands of

one person and has no structure to include/engage others.
The Status Report is essentially like a series of presentations,
putting the control of content into the hands of one person at a time
and with no structure to include/engage others.
The Managed Discussion puts into the hands of one person the
control for including/engaging a small number of participants.
The Brainstorm provides a structure to include/engage a few people
in expressing their ideas without constraints.
The Open Discussion has no control of content and no structure to
include everybody.
 Liberating Structures make it possible to include everybody
regardless of group size and distribute the control of content among
all participants.

Figure 2-4
Liberating Structures and Conventional Microstructures Differences in
Control and Structure

“The range of what we Conventional microstructures perpetuate

think and do is limited by long-running traditions. They are huge time
what we fail to notice. wasters. In many organizations, people, and
And because we fail to leaders in particular, spend an enormous
notice that we fail to amount of time passively listening to
notice, there is little we PowerPoint presentations. This was
can do to change, until we unavoidable decades ago but not anymore.
notice that failing to Current communication technologies make it
notice shapes our possible to share information very effectively
without people having to be in the same
thoughts and deeds.” physical space. This frees up face-to-face
Ronald Laing time to be used for truly interactive activities
designed to generate new ideas or solve
problems. To take advantage of this opportunity, a different kind of
microstructure is needed that can fully engage participants. Liberating
Structures are designed precisely for that purpose.
 Chapter 3
Liberating Structures For Everyone
How easy it is for anyone to radically improve the
way people work together

Liberating Structures are adaptable “To be free is not merely

microstructures that make it quick and simple to cast off one’s chains,
for groups of people of any size to radically but to live in a way that
improve how they interact and work together.1 respects and enhances the
In contrast to the Big Five, Liberating freedom of others.”
Structures are specifically designed to Nelson Mandela
include, engage, and unleash everyone in
contributing ideas and shaping their future. They can be used to complement
the Big Five approaches that people use all the time—or simply replace them.
Instead of oscillating between too much control (Presentation), too little
control (Open Discussion), and too centralized control (Managed
Discussion), Liberating Structures distribute the control of content among all
the participants so that they can shape direction together as the action unfolds.
This liberates energy, unleashes participants’ contributions, stimulates
creativity, and reveals the group’s latent intelligence. Liberating Structures are
designed to transform the way people collaborate, how they learn, and how
they discover solutions together. They support and spark creative adaptability.
A description of a basic Liberating Structure called 1-2-4-All shows how
these features work in practice.
A Liberating Structure in Action
We know that the group is smarter than any single individual. The challenges
are: How to tap into a group’s collective intelligence and creativity when
discussing an issue? How to prevent a conversation dominated by a couple of
people? How to avoid a discussion that goes on, and on, and on?
1-2-4-All is so simple that 1-2-4-All is one of the most effective
it can be used anytime, methods for overcoming those challenges. It is
anywhere, by anyone. so simple that it can be used anytime,
anywhere, by anyone. Learning to use 1-2-4-
All makes it easy to work your way into some of the other Liberating
Structures detailed in Part Four: The Field Guide to Liberating Structures.

1. The invitation: Reflect and share what questions, comments, or

suggestions you have in response to a presentation or question.
2. How space is arranged and what materials are used: Participants must
be able to be face-to-face in groups of two and then in groups of four.
Small tables with four chairs are easiest but not indispensable—people
may sit or stand. Microphones may be needed for groups of four to share
with the whole group if it is large.
3. How participation is distributed: Everybody is given equal time.
4. How groups are configured: First alone, then pairs, then groups of four,
then the whole group
5. Sequence of steps and time allocation:

Reflect alone and write down your thoughts (1 minute)

Share/compare/improve/expand in pairs (2 minutes)
Share/compare/improve/expand in groups of four (2 minutes)
One group at a time shares one important answer with the whole
group moving quickly from group to group and avoiding
repetitions (3 minutes)

The whole cycle can be as short as three minutes and shouldn’t be longer
than fifteen minutes. If an issue warrants more time, it is more productive to
do a second cycle. Two cycles of ten minutes are better than one cycle of
twenty minutes.
Why the Structure Works

Why does the insertion of a four-step structure elevate discussions

consistently to a higher level no matter who the participants are or how senior
or sophisticated they are? First, effective use of 1-2-4-All does not hinge on
expertise or talent. All you have to be able to do, we often say, is count to
four.
Second, unlike Open or Managed Discussion, 1-2-4-All gives everyone
both more time and equal time to contribute. The structure does this
automatically without a “boss” having to give permission to anyone.
Third, it makes space for
silent thoughts that otherwise would
stay in people’s heads to surface
and be written down. Reflection in
silence is an extremely valuable but
consistently underutilized structural
element in meetings
Then, working in pairs
provides the safest possible space
for everyone to articulate and test Harvesting action ideas with 1-2-4-
thoughts for the first time. It All in Peru
guarantees that everyone will express himself or herself at least a little. Since
every voice is heard, the amount and, most importantly, the diversity of ideas
are multiplied compared to a Managed or Open Discussion, resulting in much
richer initial content.
In the groups of four, ideas—especially Working in pairs provides
controversial ones—get a chance to be the safest possible space
discussed and sifted to get them ready to be for everyone to articulate
shared with the whole group. The stepwise and test thoughts for the
progression provides support and time for first time.
ideas to be formed, modified, and
strengthened before being exposed to a large group.
Finally, in the last step, going quickly from group to group and collecting
one main idea at a time levels the playing field to make space for all ideas to
be aired.
 Overall, the progressive nature of the conversation, as it moves from one
to two to four people, provides everyone with the repetition and time for
greater depth and meaning to develop.
1-2-4-All levels the personality playing field, giving safe spaces for the
more timid and preventing the more vocal ones from monopolizing the entire
discussion. Many more good ideas are given the chance to get picked up.
Without having to jostle for space to be heard, participants are freed to focus
on listening. Cocreation rather than advocating for one’s position becomes
more possible. As all participants hear the same information at the same time,
they can discover patterns together. Better ideas, and more of them, are
generated. Open, generative conversations unfold. Ideas are sifted in rapid
fashion and “painlessly.” Solutions, conclusions, or decisions are reached
more quickly.

Liberating Structures What else is made possible?

make maximum use of the
time available by 1-2-4-All transforms discussions from a linear
replacing sequential sequence of single contributions into a series
interventions/contribution of simultaneous conversations. This makes it
s with simultaneous possible to engage within the same amount of
interactions. time groups much larger than what is feasible
with a Managed Discussion; getting
contributions as wide and diverse as an issue requires is to be expected.
More broadly, shared ownership of codeveloped initiatives means simplified
and faster implementation; there is less of a need to explain actions, convince
others, or push for buy-in.
1-2-4-All is so simple that it may easily be seen as a trivial change,
something childish even, that is unlikely to make any difference, particularly
with a group of more senior people. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Replacing any of the Big Five microstructures with 1-2-4-All is one of those
tiny changes that can totally transform the outcome of any group’s discussion.
Seeing 1-2-4-All in action, or even reading about it, illustrates how, with
distributed control, Liberating Structures make maximum use of the time
available by replacing sequential interventions/contributions with
simultaneous interactions. In other words, Liberating Structures like 1-2-4-All
allow parallel versus linear processing. This gives everybody not only a lot
more total time to contribute but also a lot more equal time than conventional
microstructures. Well-structured parallel processing makes it possible for
groups of any size to work effectively and productively together. This
dramatically increases the possible number of stakeholders who can
contribute to shaping decisions.
1-2-4-All also exemplifies how They create lots of safe
Liberating Structures prevent the common side spaces that minimize
effects of conventional microstructures. power dynamics and
Liberating Structures give everyone equal encourage candid
opportunity and time to participate. They exchanges.
provide clear boundaries within which energy
and creativity can be unleashed but channeled. They create lots of safe spaces
that minimize power dynamics and encourage candid exchanges. They invite
and facilitate the cocreation of both agendas and solutions.
These features transform how people collaborate, and how they
discover and cocreate new solutions.

Harnessing the Power of Small Changes

Logic suggests that big progress can only come from big changes and that
small changes will have little or no impact. Hence, the focus of leadership is
nearly always on the larger and more visible ingredients of organizational
performance, for example:

Change “people”: replace, train, increase, or decrease the

workforce or its leaders.
Change “resources”: introduce new product, new equipment;
increase or decrease funding.
Change “macrostructures”: reorganize, change strategy, revamp
some core operating processes.

Changing people often includes training managers, leaders, and others to

develop their skills. Using training to change people is unfortunately a very
slow process and a complex challenge. In contrast, replacing a conventional
microstructure with a Liberating Structure in group work is very quick and
quite easy. It mostly takes the willingness to take a small risk and suffer
through a bit of anxiety the first couple of times around. It takes getting used to
trusting that the structures will—so to speak—“do the work of engaging
people” and the people will do the rest. Multiple experiences reveal that it
takes learning that the structures provide enough control to avoid chaos. A
little believing before seeing is required.
Liberating Structures Liberating Structures also provide many
challenge the myth that practical ways to make one-on-one
engaging people in an discussions more productive and thereby
organization is difficult. transform the overall engagement capability of
an organization. The process often starts with
learning how to use Liberating Structures in groups. From this experience, it
becomes possible to select from among the variety of liberating invitations or
questions those that fit the purpose of each one-on-one meeting—for instance,
“What is your 15% Solution?” Similarly, the steps included in many
Liberating Structures are easily adaptable to what needs to be accomplished
in a group of two—for instance, the debrief structure of What, So What, and
Now What?
Liberating Structures challenge the myth that engaging people in an
organization is difficult. First, they are easy to learn. Second, they don’t
require charisma or any special skills to use. Third, they spread person-to-
person, without formal training, making it possible for everybody to join in
shaping next steps. Liberating Structures quickly boost creative adaptability
across an organization.
Without changing people, resources, or macrostructures, each instance of
using a Liberating Structure will have an impact by affecting how ideas
emerge and are filtered, how choices and decisions are made. The vignettes at
the beginning of Chapter 1 are examples of the power of small structural
changes and their impact. Many changes will have a small impact, but some
will be significant. Cumulatively, their effect will be large because there is an
endless number of opportunities every day for using Liberating Structures in
every corner of any organization.
With Liberating Structures, it is possible to change patterns of
interactions, decisions, and actions between individuals, then within a team,
then across teams, and then across other boundaries. This “liberates” changes
that can radiate in all directions: down, sideways, and up (figure 3.1).

Figure 3.1
Radiating Change in All Directions

Principles and Practices

With Liberating Structures, it is possible, “Everyone thinks of
and not that difficult, to tap an organization’s changing the world, but
collective intelligence and address no one thinks of changing
opportunities and challenges together. This themselves.” Tolstoy
approach to including and unleashing
everyone ensures that every individual not only has influence but also the
structure to contribute something unique. Our experience with groups using
Liberating Structures around the globe confirms that much more can be
achieved by inviting those contributions. In fact, key contributions often come
from unexpected sources when Liberating Structures are used to create the
right conditions.
From our own experience, and the stories our clients have shared, we
have identified ten principles that emerge in organizations when Liberating
Structures become part of everyday interactions:
 1. Include and unleash everyone
2. Practice deep respect for people and local solutions
3. Never start without a clear purpose
4. Build trust as you go
5. Learn by failing forward
6. Practice self-discovery within a group
7. Amplify freedom and responsibility
8. Emphasize possibilities: believe before you see
9. Invite creative destruction to make space for innovation
10. Engage in seriously playful curiosity

Table 3.1 summarizes the full range of what gradually becomes possible
in an organization when Liberating Structures replace or complement
conventional microstructures.
In other words, the principles listed in Table 3.1 become ongoing
practices for how to stimulate positive changes and innovation. For example,
in every situation where we have been involved, without exception,
Liberating Structures made it quickly obvious when a group’s purpose was
not clear or shared by all participants. This happened because, as everyone
became engaged, confusion and differences that might otherwise have been
suppressed came to the surface immediately. A clear, commonly held purpose
is rarely seen for the simple reason that all the participants are almost never
invited to generate jointly the answer to the question, “What is our purpose for
working together now?”
 Table 3.1
Liberating Structures: Principles and Practices

What is standard in most Working with Liberating Structures has

organizations is importing taught us that self-discovery and cocreation
best practices or imposing are the only reliable way to clarify purpose
practices from above. and ensure that it is both common and
meaningful. The idea is to marry Principle #3,
“Never start without a clear purpose,” with #1, “Include and unleash
everyone, and #6, “Practice self-discovery,” and use appropriate Liberating
Structures to make all three come alive. Otherwise, many group members
likely will not endorse a purpose generated without them. They will not put
their energy to advance it or, worse, will resist or block it.
The importance of self-discovery and cocreation doesn’t stop with
purpose. They are just as essential for making sense of challenges and for
developing solutions that are likely to be adopted, adaptable, and successful.
What is standard in most organizations is importing best practices or imposing
practices from above. The assumption that a best practice will work
everywhere is just too convenient to resist. So is the assumption that local
context and people, though important, will not matter enough to make the
difference. Plus, best practices fit nicely with the deep-seated notion that
reinventing the wheel is a waste of time and money. Unfortunately, importing
or imposing best practices usually involves trying to fit a square peg in a
round hole. Context, culture, and people do matter more than we like to admit,
and resistance inevitably emerges when we discount them.

Customer Service the Best-Practice Way

Consider this example of a conventional expert-driven approach to a

customer-service issue (Figure 3.2). The leader of an organization perceives
there is a problem with customer service and competition is increasing for the
attention of customers. An external consultant is brought in to analyze the
dimensions of the problem and report to top management. An external expert
is then hired to generate a solution in the form of a series of best practices for
exceptional service. A plan to launch the new service concept is hatched by a
leader-sponsor who is inspired by a best-selling management book with
success stories from other companies. A training program is designed that
addresses the dimensions of the problem identified in the initial analysis.
Training for frontline employees follows, cascading down the organization. A
series of communications strategies are implemented to generate buy-in and
overcome resistance to change. The project is reported as “Mission
Accomplished.” A few months later, momentum has evaporated and nothing
much has changed about the quality of customer service. Now the program is
rarely mentioned.
The unspoken principles here in the minds of the leaders were: “We
don’t know how to solve this problem, so the people in the middle of it
(those who created the problem and who are less smart than we are) are
even less capable of figuring out what to do. Solutions and innovations can
only come from external experts.”
We would suggest that the so-called nonexperts, the frontline people
close to the challenge, are the ones who are most likely to come up with and
sustain workable solutions to the customer-service issues. BUT, getting there
requires tapping the hidden or unexpressed know-how of the frontline
workers. This is where Liberating Structures come in.
 Figure 3.2
A Top-Down, Expert-Driven Change Progression

Customer Service the Self-Discovery Way

With Liberating Structures, the difference is that from the start, frontline
people, leaders, and users agree there is a problem with customer service
(Figure 3.3). Several project leaders from the internal organization are invited
to step up. The team’s approach to exploring the challenge of providing great
service is primarily focused on learning from frontline staff and the
organization’s customers. They use DAD, Simple Ethnography,
Appreciative Interview, and TRIZ to gradually engage all frontline groups
and a variety of customers. These structures engage the people with the best
knowledge of the situation in identifying successful behaviors and practices in
current use. Improv Prototyping sessions are organized to spread learning
and improve existing practices. New informal leaders step up as local
ownership inspires more people to take action and networks are reinforced
with Social Network Webbing. Barriers are identified and local managers
take the initiative to remove them, calling on more senior leaders only if
needed. As progress on addressing the customer-service situation builds,
confidence grows to look for bolder ideas through 25/10 Crowd Sourcing.
More innovative approaches emerge and spread within and across units
through the strengthened networks. More people are invited to gather
information and ideas with Simple Ethnography and to spread these with
Users Experience Fishbowls. Frontline people create metrics to measure
their own progress, maintain gains, and continue innovating. Good ideas from
the outside seep in without any pressure from above.

Figure 3.3
Self-Discovery, Inside-Out Change Progression

The principles openly expressed by the Our job as leaders is to

leaders in this case are: “We don’t know how remove obstacles and
to solve this problem, but the people closest create the conditions for
to the work (including our customers) self-discovery and
collectively can do it. They are the ones who cocreation.
know what is happening; they are the ones
who need to decide to change; they are the ones that will need to sustain
momentum and continue to innovate over time. Our job as leaders is to
remove obstacles and create the conditions for self-discovery and
cocreation.”

Tapping the Collective Capacity

The strategy of developing homegrown solutions internally, with or without

inspiration or support from outside, requires being confident that they will be
more successful than conventional approaches. If such confidence were
widespread in organizations, internal development would undoubtedly be the
more common approach. Clearly that isn’t the case; otherwise, best practices
would not be so popular. Why is that so?
Two reasons: one, many leaders, no matter their level, don’t realize how
smart their organization as a whole is and can be and, two, they and those
below them haven’t learned how to liberate and tap their organization’s
collective intelligence and creativity. Why is that so?
An organization’s collective capacity comes in three layers: what the
organization knows it knows, what it doesn’t know it knows, and what it has
the potential to invent. Only the first layer is visible to leaders and the view is
often incomplete. The other two layers are invisible; the knowledge in layer
two is there but must be uncovered before its potential contribution can be
developed, and layer three doesn’t even exist until successful experiments
generate valuable innovations.
Leaders who are confident about practicing self-discovery believe that
layers two and three can be exposed to deliver homegrown solutions that will
be successful. They also believe that they and others will know how to unlock
those layers reliably time after time. They build widespread faith and
confidence in the process through repeated successful experiences at many
levels. Creating a growing wave of successes is the only way to build a more
self-sustaining and resilient organization that doesn’t continuously depend on
external experts.
Frontline people are no Groups that discover their innate
longer left out of the productive capacity and creativity through the
innovation action. power of self-discovery don’t want to return
to having external solutions imposed on them. This is their incentive for
developing their own ability to facilitate self-discovery and invite experts
only as needed. They own the changes they have to make, which is the best
preparation for implementation and adaptation. A look at any of the field
stories in Part Three will show that self-discovery is a common thread in all
of them.
Users of Liberating Structures quickly start seeing the drawbacks of
conventional microstructures. It becomes difficult to go back once
“liberated.” Frontline people are no longer left out of the innovation action.
The top no longer decrees solutions to problems. Experts no longer tell
people what to do. Resistance to change fades as conversations flourish and
trust blossoms.

Measuring Inclusion and Engagement: IE Quotient

According to recent research by Gallup Inc., 70 percent of American workers
are not engaged in their work.2 Of that number, 18 percent are actively
resisting what the organization is trying to get done!
These distressing statistics show how big the need is for organizations
of all sorts to transform how they engage people across all levels and
functions. Gallup’s research shows that engagement drives greater business
productivity, lower turnover, and better work quality; other findings from its
study show that organizations in the top 10 percent of engagement outperform
their peers by 147 percent in earnings per share and have a 90 percent better
growth trend than their competition.
Statistics like these explain why achieving high levels of engagement
often is a leadership priority. Unfortunately, the vast majority of people at all
organizational levels have not developed the expertise to include and engage
others effectively. To assess what we are calling Engagement Expertise, we
have created two new key performance indicators (KPI):

One measures the Engagement Expertise of individuals

The second measures and illustrates the Engagement Expertise of
entire groups—teams, departments, functions, or entire organizations
 Both serve as diagnostic tools that identify what needs to be changed
or improved

We call these indicators Inclusion and Engagement Quotients, or IEQs—

not IQ or EQ, but IEQ because engagement must be preceded by inclusion.
While broad engagement metrics such as Gallup’s are useful in grasping the
scope and significance of the problem of disengagement, they are
measurements of the outcomes or consequences of the inability to engage
people. In contrast, IEQs measure the ability to engage directly and therefore
are useful and to the point of what needs to change in order to build the
expertise for achieving higher levels of engagement across the board.

Individual IEQ

An individual’s IEQ is the score achieved from answering a simple

questionnaire (Table 3.2) which can be found on pages 36 and 37.
The questionnaire can be self-administered, filled in through
observations, or done through a 360-degree process. The range of possible
scores is from zero to ten. The answers also provide an immediate diagnosis
of which practices need to be changed to improve engagement expertise.

Table 3.2
Individual IEQ Questionnaire

This questionnaire can be used by or for anyone who regularly or periodically

leads meetings or manages projects. Use the following scale to score points
for all questions except for #3 and #4. When the questionnaire is used to
assess what someone else does, replace “you” and “your” in all the questions
by “he/she” and “his/her.”
 Add up the points to all the questions.

Divide by 15; this is the IEQ score.

Group IEQ
A group IEQ is derived from plotting the cumulative distribution of the
individual IEQs of all group members, as illustrated in Figures 3.4 through
3.6 below. The Group IEQ is obtained by measuring the area under the curve;
it can range from zero to ten. Figure 3.4 illustrates a “perfect” group IEQ: 100
percent of its members have individual scores of ten.

Figure 3.4
IEQ Distribution for a Perfect Group

IEQ of a Group Using Conventional Microstructures

In the example illustrated in Figure 3.5, the Group IEQ is approximately 2.

The curve illustrates the distribution for an organization where only a select
group of people have developed a high level of Engagement Expertise, either
from natural talent or specialized training. Everybody else is using the Big
Five conventional microstructures.
In such an organization, only a small percentage of people have IEQ
scores of five or more (in this example, about 10 percent). The vast majority
have IEQ scores of less than five (in this example, about 90 percent) and a
large proportion have scores between zero and one (in this example, 50 to 60
percent). The resulting IEQ curve is deeply concave, which is typical of an
organization where the majority of people use traditional structures for
meetings and for working together.

Figure 3.5
IEQ Distribution for a Group That Uses Conventional Microstructures

IEQ of a Group Using Liberating Structures

Since Liberating Structures are easy to learn, it is simple for everybody to

quickly boost his or her Engagement Expertise and bring individual IEQs
above five. This makes it possible for a group of any size that chooses to use
Liberating Structures routinely to flip their IEQ curve from concave to
convex. In such an organization, Liberating Structures help everybody—senior
leaders, managers, frontline people—to include and engage others effectively.
Figure 3.6 illustrates the IEQ for this kind of organization, where the
vast majority have IEQ scores of five or above (in this example, about 88
percent) and only a small percentage have IEQ scores below five (in this
example, about 12 percent). The resulting concave curve generates a large
area under it and thus a high Group IEQ, in this example an IEQ of
approximately eight.
With the information from individual and group IEQs, you know where
you stand; you have a clear picture of what needs to be done to transform the
way people collaborate, how they learn, and how they discover solutions
together. As you implement changes, IEQs give you convenient metrics to
track progress and identify where to focus your efforts. If people in your
group start using Liberating Structures on a routine basis, you will be
surprised how dramatically the group’s IEQ curve will flip. This is one of the
reasons why we say Liberating Structures are a disruptive innovation: no one
expects such surprising results and impact on what is a massive and
widespread challenge.

Figure 3.6
IEQ Distribution for a Group That Uses Liberating Structures Routinely

Liberating Structures And Culture Change

Dr. Michael Gardam is the medical director for infection prevention and
control at the University Health Network in Toronto. In 2009, he put together
an eighteen-month research project to prevent the spread of superbugs in
hospitals. Here is his description of what happened.

“This infection control project demonstrated that fundamental

change in habits, values, and beliefs can emerge from including
and unleashing everyone. Liberating Structures focused attention
 on routine behaviors (e.g., hand washing, cleaning surfaces,
transporting patients) and were widely employed in the study
hospitals across Canada. Within a few months local solutions
generated social proof, more diverse participation, and a virtuous
cycle of feedback. The results were so persuasive that the project
made it into popular local and national media. As the discoveries
spread and generated tangible results, values and beliefs also
shifted. Participants in the hospitals broke away from the values
and beliefs that were, along with habits, holding them in place.”

Changing culture was not a formal “What took me by

objective of the Canadian infection-control surprise was how this
project. Instead, culture changes emerged project fundamentally
without anyone “pushing” for them. First, changed people’s lives
participants decided to change some routine and how they work.” Dr.
behaviors and habits. Then their successful Michael Gardam
new routines moved them to reconsider some
of their values and beliefs and to adopt new ones. This surprised both the
project organizers and participants. In the words of Dr. Gardam: “What took
me by surprise was how this project fundamentally changed people’s lives
and how they work.”

Why is this a worthwhile observation? Three reasons:

One, culture is a big deal in organizations, either as an engine of

progress or as a major source of problems or, quite often, both.
Two, entrenched cultures are very resistant to change.
Three, Liberating Structures offer an alternative way to influence
culture that is in sharp contrast to the conventional approach.

To start with a common language about culture, let’s say that culture
shifts as three elements interact and co-evolve (Figure 3.7).3 The first element
in that process is the unexamined, taken-for-granted assumptions about how
things really work. We’ll label those “beliefs.” The second element is the
things people say they value or espouse as principles, standards, strategies,
goals, and justifications. We’ll call those things “values.” Finally, there are
the routine behaviors and patterns of interactions that can be observed. For
purposes of our discussion here, we’ll call those “habits.”
Culture manifests itself as the sum total of all the behaviors of
everybody in a particular organization or community. In a nutshell, culture is
experienced and known by two catchphrases: the way we do things around
here and what we expect around here. When an organization’s culture
changes, you can often feel it or see it before you have words to describe
what is unfolding. People simplify by saying that “life is different” on the unit,
in the company, or in the community. If you dig deep enough, you will find
changes in behaviors and habits that are shifting in concert with more subtle
changes in values and shared beliefs. To describe these changes, we use the
words “more” or “less” to qualify terms like bureaucratic, entrepreneurial,
risk-averse, proactive, silos, rigid, innovative, dynamic, patriarchal, “yes
sir,” “go-go,” customer-focused, and product-focused.
With Liberating In most organizations, efforts to change
Structures, the focus is on the culture are always top-down. They start
changing habits, namely when a leader—often a new leader—
on changing and identifies an important problem that falls into
improving routine the category of culture and makes a decision
practices, behaviors, and about the preferred future. This is new
patterns of interaction. thinking, which must then be translated into
new strategies, goals, incentives, and
justifications for making different decisions. Sometimes this cultural wish
leads to a major, abrupt change—a restructuring, for instance—that is
intended to force a shift toward the desired new culture. The central
assumption in this approach is that this shift in elements that we have labeled
values will drive a change in beliefs and habits. The idea is that new thinking
drives change. Hence the primary focus is on building a top-down, stage-by-
stage logical progression from the current cultural state to the desired one.
The approach focuses attention on compelling others to adopt the ideas and
strategies and act in accordance to them. Transferring know-how takes the
form of training and communications designed to overcome local resistance to
change.
Sometimes it works, often it doesn’t, and sometimes it backfires and
reinforces the existing culture or pushes culture in the wrong direction.
 With Liberating Structures, the focus instead is on changing habits,
namely on changing and improving routine practices, behaviors, and patterns
of interaction. The starting point is the issues or problems that the frontline
people know and want to address. Changes are not forced by leaders from
above but discovered and cocreated by frontline people with the support and
participation of their leaders.

Figure 3.7
Elements of Organizational Culture

Liberating Structures are designed to Successful new habits will

help people notice the existing patterns and influence beliefs about
provide structures for including everyone in what works and what is
discovering more productive practices possible based on
(habits) and for deciding how to shift from the concrete personal and
old to the new. The idea here is that as self- group experience.
discovered and cocreated changes in habits
prove to be successful, they will gradually inspire a rethinking of what makes
sense in the category of values, namely principles, strategies, and goals.
Successful new habits will influence beliefs about what works and what is
possible based on concrete personal and group experience. This is cultural
change that grows organically as people convince themselves that those are
the changes that they can and want to make based on what they have already
been able to achieve with their new habits. That is why we say that it is
possible to “influence culture” instead of “change culture” through the use of
Liberating Structures; the word “change” implies going from A to B, which
suggests that what B is has already been decided.
The difference between the conventional approach and the alternative
offered by Liberating Structures is summarized in Figure 3.8.

Figure 3.8
Difference in Focus for Change Efforts Supported by Liberating
Structures versus Conventional Change Efforts

When people first start using Liberating Structures to address a

challenge, they soon discover that they have more than the solution to a single
problem. At a minimum, they quickly realize that they have found a different
way to work and address challenging situations. As they expand their
experiments in different directions or across functions, their successes invite
them to reflect on and rethink some of their beliefs and values. This is the
equivalent of a personal culture change. With that shift, even if only in a few
individuals, the group and the organization’s performance begin to transform.
Education is a domain where major shifts in strategy are usually
controversial, costly and risky. In contrast, focusing on changing habits,
improving routine practices, and altering patterns of interaction is inexpensive
and low risk since the starting point is the issues or problems that educators
know and want to address. Changes don’t have to be forced from above but
can be discovered and cocreated by the participants.

Liberating Education
If you arrive early enough for one of professor Arvind Singhal’s classes you
will find the usual room set up: rows of chairs, all facing forward, ready for
students to sit facing the professor at the front of the room. However when
students start drifting in you will surprised to see that they don’t plop
themselves into the chairs and open their laptops as they do in their other
classes. Instead, unprompted and before professor Singhal arrives, they start
moving the chairs out of their orderly lineup and into one big circular
arrangement. Only then do they sit down. When professor Singhal comes in,
he too takes a seat in the circle, alongside his students. As the class
progresses chairs continue to be moved into other configurations depending
on which Liberating Structures are used that particular day.
Professor Singhal has been using “I increasingly hear:
Liberating Structures for several years to the ‘This class changed my
delight of his students who look very much life,’”
forward to participating in his classes. As his
story “Creating More Substance, Ideas, and Connections in the Classroom” in
Part Three attests, there are few places where the dramatic changes possible
with Liberating Structures are more quickly evident than in the field of
education. “In the past eight years or so, the nature of the student feedback I
hear has noticeably changed,” he writes. “Qualitatively, it is deeper, more
soulful. I increasingly hear: ‘This class changed my life,’ ‘I learned so much
about myself in this class,’ ‘I am sad that this course is ending for I will miss
my classmates,’ and so on. And, I have even heard students say: ‘Thank you
for teaching me about healthy communities. But thank you also for teaching me
how to learn.’”
The idea of using different teaching methods to foster engagement and
peer-to-peer learning is obviously not new. Discussion circles and small
study groups, for instance, are quite common in some schools. Yet the Big
Five microstructures still dominate and constrain education, with the result
that engaging all the students during their time in the classroom is a major and
often insurmountable challenge. Using Liberating Structures is a simple
change of habits for educators at all levels that will improve their
performance quickly and easily. These new habits will also transform
classroom dynamics and create the conditions students need to build a
supportive community of practice.
Students need to learn Classrooms are privileged spaces. In an
how to interact, work, and ideal world they would be used exclusively
collaborate effectively for what can be done only when students and
with other people well teachers are physically together in the same
before they enter the place. In other words, they would be used
world of work. exclusively for interactions: working together,
discussing, collaborating, asking and
explaining, and so forth. Thanks to modern technologies, transferring
information no longer requires people to be in the same physical space.
Teachers can choose to share a portion of their lectures virtually. Reducing
lecture time makes space for a whole new range of interactions between
students and teachers. The new challenge for teachers is making these
interactions productive. Liberating Structures offer them a larger number of
options to choose from, to experiment with, and to combine with whatever
else becomes available from other sources.
Some educators or entire schools may choose to eliminate classroom
lectures completely. Their flipped classrooms will depend even more for
their success on how well the hands-on work in the classroom is organized.
This will require choosing combinations of microstructures that are well
adapted to the subject matter of each class. Online courses face the same
challenge. They too will need interactive support structures if they are going
to be more than just virtual lectures. With thirty-three different Liberating
Structures an infinite number of combinations can be conceived to redesign
classroom time and activities.
There is another compelling reason to use Liberating Structures in
education: students need to learn how to interact, work, and collaborate
effectively with other people well before they enter the world of work. This
is a skill so basic and important that there is no reason not to give all students
the opportunity to develop their expertise when there exists a set of methods
as simple and easy to learn as Liberating Structures.
If schoolteachers and college professors use them routinely in the
classroom their students will learn their value from direct experience. With a
minimum of effort students will become aware of the importance of
microstructures in working with others. With a little more effort they can be
given the opportunity to master the use of some of the Liberating Structures
before they join the workforce.
The final reason for exposing students to Liberating Structures is that
most are likely to start work in a traditional organization. Therefore, for them,
learning about Liberating Structures in school or college will be their only
chance to discover methods that can transform their ability to succeed.
One last point: Schools and universities are just like any other
organization; they too need innovative methods to address the many difficult
issues, big or small, that they face outside the classroom. They need to find
new ways to break down silos, overcome bureaucratic obstacles, and foster
innovations. These are the never-ending challenges where methods like
Liberating Structures can make a dramatic difference. Complex issues such as
the problem of dropouts also demand new approaches and greater levels of
engagement within the education profession and with the community. Those
who use Liberating Structures in their classrooms will eventually experiment
outside of them and discover that interactions among faculty, between faculty
and administration, across departments, across disciplines, and with the
public can also be transformed by using Liberating Structures.

What to Expect Liberating Structures

change dramatically the
Whether used in health-care or education, way results are generated
business, government, or community without expensive
organizations, Liberating Structures disrupt investments, complicated
conventional patterns in the way groups work training, or dramatic
together. They change dramatically the way shifts in macrostructures.
results are generated without expensive
investments, complicated training, or dramatic shifts in macrostructures. When
Liberating Structures are introduced, many of the conventional approaches
that people use all the time—PowerPoint presentations, open discussions,
managed discussions, status reports, and brainstorms—become even less
attractive than they already are or fall totally out of favor. And with that shift,
everything changes.
Liberating Structures are not best practices imposed on a whole
organization. They do not rely on expensive and lengthy efforts to change
people’s behaviors. They are instead a set of simple microstructures that can
easily and inexpensively replace the conventional ones that are in everyday
use. Individuals and groups can choose the Liberating Structures that suit their
likes and dislikes then mix and match them flexibly to address their
challenges. Liberating Structures are not only for leaders and change experts
but for every person in the organization to use.
Caveat: Once Liberating Structures become everyday practice for your
group, it’s hard to go back to the way things were. Many of the Big Five
conventional approaches will be eliminated from people’s everyday work
practices. As one of our workshop participants put it: “Warning—you may
never be able to tolerate another endless conference/meeting again and might
feel that everyone is in ‘The Matrix’ except you!”
“What is accepted is no As with all disruptive innovations, no
longer valid, what is valid one expects what will happen. Shifts in the
is not yet accepted.” patterns of interaction make it possible for
Jamshid Gharajedaghi inclusion, trust, and innovation to come
forward. Not everyone will be ready at the
same time. However, some people will immediately use the freedom and
responsibility unleashed to make small changes that generate breakthrough
results. Immense sources of untapped knowledge, capability, and momentum
are revealed. Expect surprise! Expect smiles! Expect enthusiasm!
Liberating Structures are fulfilling deep needs for meaningful and
rewarding engagement present in all organizations.
 Chapter 4
Liberating Leadership
How leaders can avoid perpetuating the problems
they complain about

Leaders don’t purposely set out to demotivate employees or to discourage

them from speaking up. They don’t want to discourage cooperation. They
don’t want thousands of useless meetings conducted in their organization.
Quite the contrary! They live with these frustrations because they see no
other choice.
Enter “leadership” in Amazon’s search “A leader is a person who
box and you will get some ninety-two has an unusual degree of
thousand results—and the number keeps power to project on other
climbing. The world is full of “proven” ideas people his or her shadow
on leadership. So why is it that so many or his or her light.”
fundamental issues continue to frustrate Parker Palmer
leaders everywhere?
When we ask leaders what they would like to see change in their
organization, they say:

People contribute too little of their true potential, regardless of how

many long hours they work.
 We waste enormous amounts of energy because people don’t work
well together. They don’t cooperate effectively, and they communicate
poorly.

Internal politics keep people from pulling together with a common

purpose.

Too many good ideas never come to the surface. They stay buried in
people’s heads and don’t ever get a chance to come out.

Managers and their experts often operate in a world apart from the
people closest to the problems. They don’t understand one another or
work well together. They have lost touch with the needs of clients and
with the people they need to solve problems.

Relationships between people and between functions are strained.

Sometimes they don’t exist at all.

Too many people are doing their jobs on autopilot. They are not
enthused about coming to work; they don’t trust the idea of teamwork
and are fed up with meetings.

Inevitable? We think not. But these issues perpetually frustrate leaders,

no matter where they are in the organizational hierarchy. Plus, many of the
strategies they use to mitigate these “perpetual problems” do nothing to
change the situation and sometimes make it even worse.
Around the globe, leaders employ an elaborate and expensive array of
countermeasures to address these frustrations. Reward programs, cross-
functional incentives, change-management experts, personal coaches, and
external consultants are tapped to deliver results such as:

Build trust
Get people to speak up
Break down barriers between functions and levels
 Motivate employees
Control bureaucracy
Reduce resistance to change
Minimize politics
Foster cooperation
Innovate more effectively
Make meetings useful and productive
Empower the frontline
Get people to contribute their full potential

These programs and investments rarely deliver the desired results.

While they have merit in some situations, these approaches don’t have much
influence on a main cause of the problems: how everyday work is performed.
Too often, they make the problems worse and deepen cynicism in all
directions.
Does any of this sound familiar in your situation?

The Bad News: Unintended Consequences and

Side Effects
In spite of their good ideas or intentions, generations of leaders have been
unable to turn their goals for more effective, productive organizations into
reality. The bad news is that unmotivated employees, unproductive meetings,
uncooperative work groups, and the rest of the problems leaders complain
about are inescapable consequences of their leadership practices and of the
way most organizations operate.
Here is why it happens.
Regardless of their own philosophy about leadership, people
everywhere end up learning and using the same conventional top-down,
command-and-control work practices—even leaders who consider
themselves to be inclusive and participatory. Why? Because that is all they
ever get exposed to. These conventional practices are routinely used in the
vast majority of organizations, from first-level supervisor all the way to the
top leadership levels. This grants top-down, command-and-control
approaches unquestioned validity, and they are solidly embedded through all
management layers and functions.
Traditional ways of working together This explains why
exist to get things done and produce results, changes in leadership or
the underlying assumption being that they are organizational
the ones that will use the minimum amount of restructurings usually
resources. Top-down, command-and-control make no difference,
practices are not designed to build trust,
motivate employees, prevent silos, or address any of the other aims that
elude and frustrate leaders. Instead, unwittingly, these practices combine to
create a system that is perfectly designed to generate low trust, feelings of
powerlessness, exclusion, frustration, and fear. The only way conventional
work practices vary from one organization to the other is the leader’s
management style.
Leaders may be more or less inclusive, directive, or authoritarian, but
they still end up using mostly the same practices. This explains why changes
in leadership or organizational restructurings usually make no difference,
because in most cases these routine practices remain the same: unaffected.
Over the years, the dysfunctions turn into norms; they are not seen as
consequences of leadership and work practices but as standard defects of all
organizations. It is quite common to explain them away by blaming
“imperfect employees.” Another common rationalization is, “It’s the same
everywhere.” Without visible alternatives to inspire them, there are no
discussions of what might be.

Patching Up the Symptoms

If/since leaders don’t blame themselves, they don’t feel compelled to change
their ways. Instead, solutions take the form of palliative programs that
attempt to improve the symptoms without addressing their root causes. For
instance, programs to motivate employees, instead of fundamental changes to
avoid demotivating them in the first place (none of us was born with a
demotivating gene). For instance, more wall charts posted in meeting rooms
about running effective meetings, instead of fundamentally changing their
meeting designs and methods of participation. For instance, massive
reorganizations or system-wide training programs, instead of creating
structures to make it easier for everyone to contribute his or her best.
So, on the one hand, it would be fair to say that leaders are to blame for
the chronic problems of their organizations since they are perpetuating the
practices that caused them. On the other hand, it is also fair to say that in fact
they cannot be blamed because they don’t see any other practices being used
around them. Everybody seems to be doing the same thing and having more
or less the same problems. And lots of leaders have been quite successful
and handsomely rewarded in spite of these problems. So why change? Why
even bother looking for something else?
Here are some of the questions to consider.

Does the value of your decisions depend on the input and

expertise of others in your organization?
Is your business becoming more complex and/or less
predictable?
Does your organization need to innovate or boost its rate of
innovation?
Is your competition growing stronger and changing more and
more rapidly?
Is your workforce becoming more diverse and more
geographically dispersed?
Is attracting and retaining top talent becoming more difficult?

If you answered yes to any of these questions, you need to strike at the
root causes of dysfunctional teams, unmotivated employees, tedious and
fruitless meetings, and other side effects of conventional work practices in
your organization. Take a close look at what follows.

The Good News

The good news is that command and control is not the only game in town;
there are other work practices that are much more adapted to the challenges
faced by modern organizations. These alternative ways of working together
are designed to get things done while overcoming typical leadership
challenges. From the start and in every interaction throughout your
organization, you can build trust, engage everybody to participate and speak
up, break down silos, invite people to contribute to their full potential, and
reduce resistance to change. Our thirty-three Liberating Structures are
purposely designed to accomplish these goals. They can be used by
organizations to structure a wide range of their activities, from everyday
interactions, such as meetings, one-on-one conversations, and small and big
projects, to strategizing, change initiatives, and customer interactions.
In Chapter 3, we outlined ten Leadership Principles that become routine
practices when Liberating Structures are used on a regular basis (Table 4.1).
This is how people can choose to relate to others for the purpose of
creating successful organizations where people thrive, but principles are
useless unless they come with the necessary know-how to turn them into
reality. Liberating Structures provide the “how-to-do-it” that makes them
come alive. In our experience, even leaders who most desperately want to be
inclusive don’t know how to do it. When they discover Liberating Structures,
they are thrilled to finally have in their hands practical ways to be the kind of
leader they want to be.
At first glance, “including Used routinely, Liberating Structures
everyone” looks like a make possible the practice of a different form
crazy idea of leadership that can immediately yield
tangible progress because it can be
implemented at any level of activity. We emphasize the word “practice”
because Liberating Structures are not ideas or concepts but concrete
methods. With apologies for our lack of imagination, we call the form of
leadership that uses these methods “Liberating Leadership.” If leaders can let
go of command-and-control practices, they find this form of leadership to be
inclusive, adaptive, and very productive. They also discover that it is
rewarding and enjoyable. The individual and the group are liberated.

When Liberating Structures are part of everyday interactions,

leaders begin to:
 1. Include and unleash everyone
2. Never start without a clear and common purpose
3. Practice deep respect for people and local solutions
4. Build trust as you go
5. Learn by failing forward
6. Practice self-discovery within every group
7. Amplify freedom and responsibility
8. Emphasize possibilities: believe before you see
9. Invite creative destruction to enable innovation
10. Engage in seriously playful curiosity
Table 4.1
Ten Liberating Leadership Practices

We always say that The Possibilities

leaders don’t have a
choice about whether or Let’s illustrate by looking at the first principle
not to include everyone since it is the most fundamental: “Include and
because eventually unleash everyone.” At first glance, “including
everyone that will be everyone” looks like a crazy idea since it is
affected by any of their the total opposite of what the norm is, namely
decisions will have to be “be efficient and include the minimum number
included. of people needed.” Until they see “including
everyone” done with Liberating Structures
and witness the benefits, the reactions we get from leaders when we talk
about including everyone are raised eyebrows plus comments such as
“impossible,” “impractical,” “would take forever to get anything done,”
“we’d never get everybody to agree,” “would cost a fortune.” They are right!
This is what they have seen happen when everyone is “corralled” with
traditional methods/structures to implement decisions, or when initiatives are
cascaded down their organization and large groups are brought together to be
convinced and trained. Corralling, cascading, convincing, and training are
time-consuming and expensive at any scale, but this is what most
organizations are designed to do: make decisions above and implement
below.
 We always say that leaders don’t have a choice about whether or not to
include everyone because eventually everyone that will be affected by any of
their decisions will have to be included. Their only choice is when to
include people and how to include them. Traditionally, the “when” is after
the fact, when decisions have already been made and implementation has to
start. The “how” consists of structures designed for convincing, training,
controlling, troubleshooting, overcoming resistance—and for getting the
infamous “buy-in” that is supposed to guarantee successful implementation.
The Liberating Leadership practice we Once people get over the
advocate is to include people before the fact mental obstacle that
so that they can participate in shaping including everyone is not
decisions and programs that affect and practical or possible, the
implicate them. It is only because Liberating benefits of such a
Structures make it possible to do this practice are not difficult
effectively and economically that we can to imagine.
advocate such a practice. Once people get
over the mental obstacle that including everyone is not practical or possible,
the benefits of such a practice are not difficult to imagine. It is obvious that,
at a minimum, commitment and preparedness for implementation will be
greatly increased. Resistance to change will melt through the gradual process
of cocreation. Crowdsourcing will strengthen the quality of decisions and
programs. Entirely new ideas are more likely to emerge from the vastly
larger number of interactions and discussions. Finally, shared ownership will
get participants much better prepared for adapting decisions to changing
circumstances and making course corrections as needed.
The longer-term benefits of early and systemic inclusion are easy to
imagine. Entirely new professional and social connections will be built
between people of different functions and levels. These will inevitably
strengthen the fabric of the organization and reduce the silo tendency. With
deeper and more frequent interactions, people will get to know each other
much better. Trust will grow because, if for no other reason, there are many
more chances for the untested assumptions that routinely get in the way to
now be exposed and revised. Trust will grow because Liberating Structures
constantly create a big variety of small spaces that make it easy for people to
speak up and interact safely with each other, and to discover how they not
only can work more effectively together but also help each other. Trust will
grow because people will experience that they are more successful together
than separately. Trust will grow because, with Liberating Structures, people
will enjoy their time together much more than with traditional methods.
As trust grows, it creates channels for authentic feedback to flow
upward and sideways. This has enormous implications for the productivity of
any organization and for its ability to reduce or avoid costly mistakes.
Organizations as a whole are smart and well informed about what the
problems are. However, that information and intelligence is widely
fragmented and doesn’t flow spontaneously up to the decision makers.
Liberating Structures can change that pattern.
Liberating Structures create opportunities for many more people to
make influential contributions. Anytime they do, they are acting as leaders
however temporarily or briefly it may be. In that way, Liberating Structures
distribute leadership without taking any of it away from the formal leaders.
Instead, they reveal latent leadership that under traditional practices would
not be given the opportunity to manifest itself. They liberate leadership in
every person, so to speak.

The Choice
You have a choice: continue using traditional work practices and struggle
with their chronic side effects or experiment with practices designed to
avoid them. You can be the main force in deciding to maintain the status quo
or the main force in showing and paving the way to a dramatically different
set of results.
Liberating Structures are Liberating Structures are easy to learn
easy to learn and to use, and to use, but they require breaking some
but they require breaking longstanding habits. Nothing particularly
some longstanding habits. difficult is involved, but, still, you might have
to move out of your comfort zone. For
instance, in your regular meetings, there are probably established patterns
about who sits where, how agenda items are handled, how discussions are
directed. Liberating Structures will change these patterns. To make space for
other people’s contributions, your role and participation as a leader will
have to change.
Getting started may feel clumsy. You will have to get up from your usual
chair, move around, use different methods to energize and inspire your team.
These new structures will loosen your usual level of control and invite you to
become more transparent. They will mean that others have to get out of their
comfort zones too. This is what Michael Gardam, Alison Joslyn, Jon Velez,
and others describe in their stories in Part Three.
If you decide to change your ways, you will soon see how Liberating
Structures improve your performance and the performance of the various
groups that you lead or chair or participate in. Indeed, Liberating Structures
will change the performance of any group by changing the quantity, quality,
and depth of the interactions within it. The formula is quite simple: the same
group with better interactions will perform better, often surprisingly better.
Let’s face it, it’s common for leaders to think that, in the short term, they
are stuck with the way a team or unit is performing because they assume that
the only way to improve performance is to replace people or to train them.
Since both of these changes take time, and are out of the question in the
moment, it’s easy to understand why leaders feel stuck. Fortunately, it is
possible for a group to generate surprisingly better results without replacing
people or training them to change their behaviors. Changing the structures
used by the group to transform the way its members interact and work
together can do it. What’s more, it can be done literally in the moment.
Shifting structures is the only practical option for improving performance in
the short term. With Liberating Structures, leaders can accomplish that shift
quite easily and stop being stuck with inferior performance.

A Word to the Skeptic

At first glance, Liberating Structures may seem too easy, too simple, too
straightforward, too effortless to achieve the kind of big changes that leaders
are interested in, especially those in senior leadership positions. Liberating
Structures may look nothing like the big, sophisticated interventions offered
by famous consulting firms. Some may see them as trivial, not profound or
interesting enough to warrant their attention.
Take a closer look and you will see that simplicity is the power behind
Liberating Structures. Improving performance when using conventional
structures is very difficult and demands lots of talent. But doing it with
Liberating Structures is very easy because the structures spark improvements
in performance automatically, by design. It is the structures that do the work,
so to speak.
Liberating Structures produce big results easily because you do not
have to depend on the talents or expertise of individuals to get engagement.
You replace individual talent with microstructures specifically designed to
tap into the organization’s collective intelligence and get big things done. You
stop trying to achieve results by dragging people along or transforming them
individually. Instead, you accept people as they are and use the appropriate
structures to enable them to feel eager to work and contribute their best. You
discover that people transform their behaviors of their own free will in ways
that no external influence, expert, or training course ever could.
Liberating Structures produce big Liberating Structures
results because they are simple. If they produce big results
weren’t simple, nobody would use them. If because they are simple.
they couldn’t fit easily within people’s work, If they weren’t simple,
schedules, and time frames, they wouldn’t be nobody would use them.
used. It is because they are simple that
everybody in the organization, from top to bottom, can start to apply them in
virtually all of their interactions from day one. When that happens, the
cumulative impact of all these simple changes is huge.
Think of the bamboo structures used as scaffolding for building in Asia.
They appear simple and light, yet are amazingly strong; they can support
putting up a skyscraper as effectively as constructing a small house. Our
thirty-three Liberating Structures are like pieces of a bamboo scaffold. They
can be combined and tailored for each specific construction to address any
level of complexity. Learning to customize Liberating Structures designs to
the specific purpose of each separate complex challenge is an art form that
can be improved over a lifetime.
The Big Shift and Payoff
The big shift that comes from using Liberating Structures is more
collaborative decision making and more crowdsourcing for solving problems
or innovating and for developing strategies. Liberating Structures connect the
doers and the deciders into productive assemblies.
With Liberating Structures, you expand the range of people included in
making decisions and give a voice to those who were traditionally viewed as
only “doers” or “implementers.” Conventional structures mean that, as a
practical matter, the number of people who can be included in shaping the
future is always way too small. Liberating Structures eliminate that
constraint. Liberating Structures plus the use of modern technology mean that
tens, hundreds, even thousands of people—instead of a small group or task
force—can now effectively contribute their knowledge and talent.
However, giving up the “convenience” of making decisions in small
groups behind closed doors is a big shift from long-established habits that
often go back generations. It may not be the easiest thing to do and is likely to
face strong resistance by those who resent losing their traditional privileges.
Some may even find it impossible to accept this new level of participation
and transparency.
Leaders just live with The big payoff of course is that
chronic dysfunctional including a wide variety of people in day-
relationships between today problem solving, decision making, and
people or functions strategy development is the way effective
because they don’t know leaders unleash the vast volume of
how to change them. contributions and innovations that lie hidden
in their organizations.

The Biggest Leadership Challenge

People are the source of the greatest complexity and surprise in
organizational life. Working together successfully requires all our
intellectual, creative, and emotional talent.
 However, the nearly universal approach to working together still
revolves around centuries-old hierarchical practices. A small group decides
and the vast majority is compelled to implement. Though well camouflaged
in participatory jargon, authority continues to rule.
Think about why we are stuck in this way: The performance of groups
of any size is determined by the quality of its members times the quality of
their interactions. Leaders usually focus their attention on improving the
quality of individuals. They find it frustrating and emotionally painful to deal
with how individuals or groups interact with one another and therefore
frequently avoid addressing frictions or conflicts.
What is difficult at the small-group level It is easy to see that
becomes excessively complex at the level of individual talent alone
larger structures—the department, division, does not make a
enterprise or block, neighborhood, successful team. The
community, country. That’s why avoidance is quality of interactions
such a common short-term strategy; in other and relationships is
words, leaders just live with chronic displayed on the field for
dysfunctional relationships between people everybody to see.
or functions because they don’t know how to
change them. Common longer-term responses are to reorganize or to replace
leaders in the hope that these changes will make the conflicts or dysfunctions
disappear. In reality, it is impossible to know in advance what difference
they will make. Too often, they don’t make any difference or, worse, they
destabilize the organization and amplify the dysfunctions.
Yet, to build a high-performing organization, the quality of interactions
between people is at least as important as the quality of the people
themselves, if not more so. Take, for example, a sports team. It is easy to see
that individual talent alone does not make a successful team. The quality of
interactions and relationships is displayed on the field for everybody to see.
The coach and players are evaluated on their ability to execute together as a
team. Chemistry matters.
In organizations, the chemistry of interactions is often concealed or
hidden out of sight. When Liberating Structures are used, they not only foster
a big increase in the number and quality of interactions but they also make
them visible. This visibility invites participants to pay attention to them,
notice the differences, reflect, and make creative adjustments. Some
Liberating Structures—such as Generative Relationships, Ecocycle, What
I Need From You—are designed to diagnose relationship issues. Many
others will nearly automatically generate improvements. Changes coming
from within in this way are likely to make sense, build trust, and be long-
lasting.
The best hope for transforming an organization is for the very people
who will be implementing changes to “own” the changes, in this case the use
of Liberating Structures. “Own” means that they have been included in their
development, they understand them, they believe in them. They are therefore
ready to implement them and to modify them as needed in the future.

Liberating Leadership Starts with You

Liberating Structures Leadership is often a lonely spot, heavy with
spread through personal the weight of decisions and responsibility. It
exposure and experience. is easy to become at least partly isolated.
While you cannot avoid accountability for
making decisions, you can substantially change how decisions are developed
and who is included in the process. Greater inclusiveness will affect the
quality of your decisions and their validity. It will affect their implementation
and your ability to respond quickly to the need for adjustments. It will
liberate you from feeling all the weight on your shoulders. Inclusiveness will
change the quality and the atmosphere of your meetings. It will change the
quality of your work life. These benefits are your incentives for taking a
serious look at Liberating Structures and experimenting with them.
Changing your own behavior and practices is the first step. Because it
takes place when people meet and work together, using Liberating Structures
is a public act and quickly visible; it will send powerful signals throughout
the organization. The message will be that it is OK to replace long-held rigid
traditions with some flexible new structures. When more people become
included in everyday decision making and problem solving, it will be
tangible evidence that “the times they are a-changin’” for real.
Liberating Structures spread through personal exposure and experience.
It isn’t possible to imagine what they can contribute without direct personal
experience. They spread because people appreciate what they do and enjoy
the dynamic conditions they create. That is true at any level, all the way to
the top. Leaders shouldn’t impose them or want everybody to be in lockstep.
However, leaders who provide visible support and strong encouragement for
the use of Liberating Structures will see them disseminate faster and more
effectively and will reap the benefits of the changes they produce.
The most effective way to become aware of what is wrong with your
conventional structures is to experience what happens when you use
Liberating Structures instead. Just a few encounters with Liberating
Structures in action make entrenched, invisible, conventional microstructures
become visible by offering contrasting ways for people to work together and
achieve better outcomes. This visibility is a key success factor because
organizations tend to be stuck in patterns that keep reinforcing themselves,
and they are rarely aware of being caught in these vicious circles. Changing
those patterns requires a break, a rupture, and a successful experience that is
the first step of a new virtuous circle. A success that comes as a surprise is
an invitation for trying again; if more success follows, it is encouragement
for taking another step in a new direction.

There is only one way to learn what Liberating Structures are, what
possibilities they hold, and how to use them: start experimenting with them in
your everyday work. The Field Guide in Part Four is the place to begin to
see what might be possible. What you can accomplish with the thirty-three
Liberating Structures is limited only by your imagination. Combining many
structures holds even greater possibilities. Putting them into practice today
starts your journey toward liberating yourself and others around you. Part
Four, Getting Started and Beyond, will make it easy for you to start to
unleash the power of Liberating Structures.
 PART TWO
Getting Started and Beyond

Part Two will make it easy for you to start to “People tend to play in
unleash the power of Liberating Structures. It their comfort zone, so the
is designed to guide your progress from using best things are achieved
one or two Liberating Structures at a time to in a state of surprise.”
then stringing a few of them together and, Brian Eno
finally, to composing elaborate storyboards
for large-scale initiatives. It features:

Getting started vignettes

Advice for overcoming others’ apprehensions and your own fears
A one-page Menu of Liberating Structures, with abbreviated
descriptions to make it easy for you to pick and choose
Pathways to fluency in using Liberating Structures depending on
your position in an organization
A matching matrix showing which Liberating Structures are
applicable to five broad goals
Descriptions of Liberating Structures workshops
Examples of powerful strings of Liberating Structures that match
well with common challenges
A few examples of detailed Design StoryBoards for large-scale
projects or initiatives
 CHAPTER 5
Getting Started: First Steps

Working with Liberating Structures may seem The momentum of

overwhelming or intimidating at first. How Liberating Structures can
does one possibly master all those structures be started from any
at once and know when and how best to use position in an
them? The answer is, you don’t. You don’t organization, with or
learn them all at once or ever use them all without resources, with or
together. You learn one, you use one. You without position power.
learn another, and then you might use one or
the other or both. You get started with Liberating Structures the same way the
old cliché tells you to eat an elephant: one bite at a time. Or, for another
analogy, think of the way children master building with Lego bricks. First,
they play around and learn to construct simple things like a tower or a simple
cube. Then they tackle more complex structures like houses and bridges and
castles. Next thing you know, they’ve built a whole city, or an airplane!
How you start using Liberating Structures will depend on the
circumstances of your first exposure to them as well as your resources, your
freedom of action, and your tolerance for uncertainty. We like the word
“exposure” because Liberating Structures are like a fever. Most people who
get exposed will catch the fever, and, as they use Liberating Structures in
their daily work, they will expose others who will catch the fever too and
spread it further. That is why the momentum of Liberating Structures can be
started from any position in an organization, with or without resources, with
or without position power. Here are a few vignettes to show how it can
happen.

Larry was a hospital CEO who wanted to foster a dynamic and

innovative culture. Since he had both authority and resources, he
kick-started the use of Liberating Structures by sponsoring a two-
and-a-half-day workshop for the entire IT department plus clinical,
HR, and financial leaders. All told, 180 people attended the
workshop. In the three days after the workshop, Larry personally
used fourteen Liberating Structures in meetings with his executive
team, with physicians, and with his board.

Donia had no authority or resources; she was a market research

analyst in a small department consisting of six analysts and a
manager. After attending a Liberating Structures workshop, she
suggested using Troika Consulting at the beginning of her
departmental meeting. Her manager agreed. The Troika session was a
smashing success and became the first step toward transforming the
working dynamics and relationships in the department.

Vanessa was a public relations manager. She and a product manager

colleague got an acute case of Liberating Structures fever while
attending a Liberating Structures workshop. They decided on the spot
to revamp an upcoming customer symposium. They generated the
entire new design during the workshop and implemented it the
following weekend. The feedback from participants was so
enthusiastic that it convinced Vanessa to start using Liberating
Structures in day-to-day work.

Arvind is a communications professor. After attending a conference

where he witnessed the use of the Fishbowl structure, he started
experimenting with it in his own class. Students responded so
positively that Arvind never looked back. He gradually became a
routine user of other Liberating Structures and then started to
 deliberately spread them to students and other professors by
publicizing his work and organizing workshops. He now calls himself
a Liberated Professor. (You can read his article at:
[Link]
rofessor%[Link]).

Sherry is a nurse committed to patient safety. She started using TRIZ

with her hospital unit to engage everyone in a seriously fun way to
prevent infections. She asked them, “How can we make sure that we
expose every patient to a superbug during their visit?” Everyone got
the message and started making changes that generated safer
practices.

Neil is an OD consultant. He experienced two Liberating Structures

at a national conference and immediately started to bring them into
his consulting practice. With a little coaching over the phone, he
soon had applied twenty-five or more Liberating Structures with
different client groups.

Menu of Liberating Structures

When asked for a simple way to match Liberating Structures to a particular
challenge, we often say, “If your goal is to engage and unleash everyone in
generating great results, any Liberating Structure will be better than a
conventional approach.”
A more serious answer is, “Matching Just begin with your
your challenge to a Liberating Structure favorite structure or with
depends on you and the details.” A good one that seems easiest or
match requires a sense of local context and a most comfortable.
good feel for the history of the group you are
working with. Liberating Structures are flexible enough to be used with your
everyday team, a group organized for a special purpose, or a widely
distributed set of participants, but each use benefits from thoughtfully
matching the potential structures to your goal.
 Look at the Menu of Thirty-Three Liberating Structures (Figure 5.1) and
use the descriptions to clarify the first step in reaching the goal you have in
mind. Ask questions like these: What’s our first step? What do we need to
start with? Who needs to be involved? What kinds of Liberating Structures
can accomplish what we want? Where would each one get us, and what
would we do next? Then pick one of the structures that match the purpose of
your first step toward your goal. Check out the more detailed description in
Part Four: The Field Guide to Liberating Structures or on the website
([Link]/menu).
Don’t think too hard about choosing the right Liberating Structure from
the menu. Just begin with your favorite structure or with one that seems
easiest or most comfortable. Most people get started by using one or more
favorite Liberating Structures in a variety of situations, from routine meetings
to resolving conflicts within their work team. From their initial successes,
they start experimenting with others and expand their repertoire over time.
Don’t worry about finding the perfect choice; there are always several
Liberating Structures that can help your progress if your purpose is clear (see
Figure 5.2, the Liberating Structures Matching Matrix). And remember that
any Liberating Structure will be better than a conventional approach.
 Figure 5.1
Menu of Thirty-Three Liberating Structures
 Figure 5.2
Liberating Structures Matching Matrix

In the matrix, the strengths of each Liberating Structure are arrayed

according to common goals for groups. The five common goals are:

Discovering everyday solutions (problem solving + coordination in

meetings and regular interactions)
Noticing patterns together (looking for ways to explain or make
sense of changes)
Unleashing local action (getting each person engaged in taking
action)
Drawing out prototypes (quickly developing small pieces or chunks
of solutions that can be refined and combined later)
Spreading innovation (spreading ideas/services/products out and
scaling up to higher levels)

Match your group’s goals to Liberating Structures with particular

strengths.

Safety First
To get started with Liberating Structures, select a safe place for your first
attempts. Of course, whether an experiment feels safe or not is different for
each person. Larry, the hospital CEO, not only had resources and authority but
also was personally very confident. So he jumped into using Liberating
Structures immediately after the workshop; nothing held him back from having
every meeting be an opportunity to try as many of them as possible. Someone
else may feel more comfortable starting with only one of the easier Liberating
Structures, such as 1-2-4-All or Troika Consulting. Some may prefer to start
with a small group of trusted colleagues as a safe way to get their feet wet and
gain both confidence and support. There are no rules, no right or wrong way.
All that is needed is to experiment and experience the results. As we have
said so many times, practice is the only way to learn and to discover what
each Liberating Structure makes possible.
We strongly recommend, if at all possible, that you begin your early
experiments with a partner. It is much easier to decide which Liberating
Structure to use via a conversation with a trusted partner than talking about it
alone in your head. You will feel much more relaxed knowing that your
partner can jump in to support you. A partner who observes and helps you
debrief after each experience is the quickest way to learn and it’s much more
fun than practicing alone. Also, a partner will inevitably notice important
details that you will miss. Invite your observer-partner to pay special
attention to your concerns and fears. This may include how you clarify
purpose, invite participation, react to dynamics among group members,
respond to insights and actions that emerge, and adapt as deviations from your
plan unfold.
If you decide to work with a partner when getting started with Liberating
Structures, choose someone who will not be shy about giving you honest and
direct feedback about your performance. Any trusted colleague, regardless of
Liberating Structures expertise, who will be an interested and alert observer
is preferable to “working without a net.”

Breaking with Tradition

Regardless of an organization’s mission and You may be told that “it”
geography, Liberating Structures are usually a will not work here, not in
striking departure from its habits, traditions, “this” culture or with
and culture. For new users, people not “these” people.
familiar with Liberating Structures and the
outcomes they produce, this break with convention can be a source of anxiety
or fear. When working with new users, you need to be mindful of their
apprehensions. For example, you may be warned that people will become
confused or simply refuse to participate. You may be told that “it” will not
work here, not in “this” culture or with “these” people.
Our experience says otherwise. While in Belgium, we proposed using
Impromptu Networking to start a workshop with fifty Flemish cardiologists
who were standing in a large room having a drink before dinner. We were told
this approach would never work, not with this group of high-level specialists.
“Flemish cardiologists will fold their arms, stare you down, and write you
off.” The message was sharp and clear: “Don’t do it, you will embarrass
yourself and us!”
We insisted and, no surprise to us, the cardiologists loved Impromptu
Networking. In fact, it was difficult to get them to stop talking to each other
and sit down for dinner. It was a perfect beginning for a meeting designed to
spark more collaborative action. They engaged immediately into shaping their
next steps with newfound trust and connection.
Clearly, as one should expect, breaking with tradition evokes both
excitement and fear. That is what we have found in multiple countries and in
all types of organizations. Some people couldn’t wait to start using Liberating
Structures, while others worried about acceptance and how their boss,
colleagues, students, or clients might judge them if they moved away from
conventional methods. You may encounter the following:

Concerns that the outcome isn’t predictable

Resistance to the risk of having to step beyond one’s area of
expertise because Liberating Structures will cut across boundaries
Fear that more diversity of perspectives than what is welcome will
be revealed
Fear of losing control or of ending with the “wrong outcome”
Unspecified fear of the unknown and/or uncertainty

Fortunately, such fears dissipate quickly since Liberating Structures

invariably generate much more satisfying and energizing interactions than
participants experience with familiar conventional structures. With Liberating
Structures, outcomes are not predictable in detail, but high levels of
engagement always materialize regardless of context or culture. So while it is
normal for new users to be anxious, you can relax knowing that Liberating
Structures will deliver better-than-expected results. Those experiencing
Liberating Structures for the first time will soon see for themselves that the
possible outcomes easily allay any lingering anxieties.

Your Own Fears

What about your own doubts or fears about introducing Liberating Structures
into your organization? It’s common for people to feel uncertain when getting
started with Liberating Structures. “I don’t want to look like I don’t know
what I’m doing” and “I worry that people will think I’m overreaching my
expertise or responsibilities” and “I’m afraid that this all might look
trivial or touchy-feely” are some of the apprehensions we have heard. Others
have expressed concern that using Liberating Structures in their organizations
might reveal awkward differences of opinion. We have heard about how
uncomfortable it is to stray from the usual approach to problem solving: bring
in the experts. People worry that by using Liberating Structures they will
initiate unproductive, uncontrollable chaos. And then there’s the age-old fear
of learning and doing something new, venturing into something unfamiliar and
unexpected.
To all of them, we must say, Just do it. There is no better way to
overcome your apprehension than to dive right in and put your first Liberating
Structure to work for you immediately. As we have said, it matters not which
Liberating Structures you start with. If you are like most people, you will
begin by using a few favorites and expand your range over time. As you gain
more experience, the particular strengths of each Liberating Structure in
particular circumstances will become clear and you will see how you can
combine them into powerful sequences. You will be learning a new language,
saying things like “Let’s do a TRIZ!” As you become more fluent, your ability
to improvise will grow. You will be able to decide in the moment to use a
particular Liberating Structure or to substitute one for another in response to
what is happening in the moment.
As you grow more and more confident about your ability to be
successful with Liberating Structures, your fears will lessen but never
completely recede because unpredictability never goes away: your success
will always come with many surprises. These are a big part of the satisfaction
you will derive from using Liberating Structures. As you gradually push the
envelope by including more people, more functions, and more levels, and by
embracing more diversity, more surprising and exciting results will emerge.

Three Pathways to Fluency and Routine Use

Where you sit in an organization influences not only your first steps but also
the subsequent paths you can take to develop fluency in the use of Liberating
Structures.

For Senior Leaders

Senior leaders with resources can quickly engage many other people with
workshops for some two hundred people at a time (see Immersion Workshops
below) and they can also put in place mechanisms to encourage dissemination
and to support a growing number of applications. A senior leader who
personally becomes a visible regular user sends a powerful invitation to the
entire organization to join in the experiment. From this, a critical mass can
emerge to overcome the huge inertia of conventional practices that dominate
existing work systems.
We use the word “invitation” purposely because we believe that it is not
a good idea for leaders to use their authority to impose Liberating Structures.
Instead, we advise creating opportunities for people to learn and allowing
them to implement at their own pace and at their own level of comfort. We
believe that the use of Liberating Structures will best flourish when it is left to
grow through the enthusiasm and energy of spontaneous adopters. So the role
of leaders is not to impose but to provide lots of support where it is wanted
and welcomed. In addition, they need to be regular users themselves for there
is absolutely no other way for them to fully make sense of what Liberating
Structures can contribute to the performance of their organization.
Leaders have many opportunities every day to start practices that can
easily be copied by others in their organization. For instance, replacing
conventional meeting agendas with “storyboards” will inevitably support the
use of Liberating Structures since they always specify for each session not just
its purpose but also the detailed structure that will be used to achieve the
purpose.
The use of Liberating Structures spreads most effectively when people
experience and discover what they make possible. For leaders, this means
creating opportunities for people to be exposed to Liberating Structures in
workshops or making it easy for people to learn them in partnership with
others. It means supporting the development of communities of practice in all
organizational functions so that people can easily network and learn peer-to-
peer. It means encouraging experiments and disseminating news of both
successes and failures.

Managers, Individual Contributors, Solo Practitioners

In contrast to senior leaders, managers, frontline workers, and professionals

such as educators or nurses are unlikely to have access to a lot of resources.
So their starting point will not be a workshop but a single application of one
Liberating Structure or a small number of structures in connection with a
meeting with their team or colleagues. In our experience, small but frequent
steps, with a thorough debrief after each step, are the most effective way to
proceed. We always advocate working with a partner as it makes the learning
process so much more effective, faster, safer, and fun.

Don’t try to convince We are frequently asked, “I want to start

anybody, words will not using Liberating Structures myself, but how
do it but experiences will. can I convince the people around me to start
using them?” Our answer always is, “Don’t
try to convince anybody, words will not do it but experiences will.” In other
words, just use a Liberating Structure at your first opportunity and let those
who like it learn from you. Then use your next opportunity, and the next, and
so on. Let people discover and convince themselves of the value of Liberating
Structures through the experiences you create.
Remember too that all new users of Liberating Structures have the
potential to initiate a community of practice if they choose to. It starts with
getting one partner and then being deliberate in attracting and supporting new
users by offering assistance or by inviting them to observe. We have seen
many instances where adopters of Liberating Structures have been asked to
run small workshops as a way of spreading the practice—for example, two to
three hours covering a few basic structures. Or they were asked to help with
designing or facilitating a meeting. Spread can be spontaneous or planned.
Internal or External Consultants

For internal or external consultants with influence but limited resources,

starting to use Liberating Structures in work with their closest clients is the
most effective way to get started. As their experience builds, they will soon
have to make a choice between keeping their new expertise for their own
benefit or turning as many of their customers as possible into users. The latter
obviously is the more powerful strategy, but it requires that the consultant
become a coach and teacher in addition to a being a proficient user. This will
translate into codesigning and co-facilitating with individual clients and will
likely require eventually going beyond individual coaching by organizing
workshops for small or large groups.
As the work progresses, it is likely to involve navigating up the
organization in order to engage and get the support of leaders in more senior
positions than one’s initial clients. It may not be an easy transition for a
consultant to, as quickly as possible, hand off responsibilities for facilitating
Liberating Structures to others. After all, this is like giving away one’s reason
for existence and looks like a lousy business model. Who is going to need you
if at every step you share your experience and invite new users to take over
and expand their practice? While this may sound like a legitimate concern, the
scope of what needs to be accomplished to help an organization get the full
benefit of Liberating Structures is so vast that no single consultant is likely to
run out of work. Expansion or promotion is the much more likely scenario.
Ripples will turn into waves.
Especially for anybody who learns Liberating Structures by reading
instead of direct experience, 1-2-4-All is a very good place for a safe start
(see description in the Field Guide or in Chapter 3). It is such an effective
structure that any meeting would have to be exceptionally unusual not to offer
at least one opportunity for using 1-2-4-All to good advantage. So start with
this structure, and when you feel comfortable, try another. There are more than
a dozen easy structures that are sufficiently simple to jump into and try out—
for instance, Troika Consulting; Impromptu Networking; Appreciative
Interviews; What, So What, Now What?; Conversation Café; Nine Whys;
Wise Crowds; 15% Solutions. Table 5.1 shows options for getting started
from various organizational positions. See the Menu earlier in this chapter
(Figure 5.1) for a quick overview of these Liberating Structures and then
follow the discussion in the Field Guide or on [Link]
to translate into action.
The next step is for you to move up the boldness ladder by combining
two or more structures. Then find others who love the work and share stories
with one another. Experiment with Liberating Structures in as many aspects of
your life as you dare to; they not only have a place at work but also at school,
in your family, and in your social circles.

Table 5.1
Five Ways to Get Started, No Matter What Your Position

Immersion Workshops
Clearly, there are many ways to learn Liberating Structures and get started
using them. We believe that one of the most efficient and effective ways—if it
is possible—is to experience an Immersion Workshop. A Liberating
Structures Immersion Workshop is like a foreign-language immersion course
that temporarily relocates you away from a familiar culture. In an Immersion
Workshop, you experience nothing but the language and practices of
Liberating Structures. There are no presentations, facilitated discussions,
updates, brainstorms, or open discussions. Having a team of people from your
organization participate in an Immersion Workshop—or, even better, when the
organization holds an Immersion Workshop in house—makes it possible for a
critical mass to form around Liberating Structures, making it more likely that
they will take hold and spread.
Liberating Structures are not difficult to Liberating Structures are
learn, but they need to be experienced at least not difficult to learn, but
once to understand and believe what they can they need to be
achieve. The reason is that their impact is experienced at least once
counterintuitive because it cannot be to understand and believe
explained by the logic of top-down command what they can achieve.
and control that dominates organization
cultures. Fortunately, you can develop a practical understanding of most
individual Liberating Structures in less than an hour each, enough to grasp
them and then try them out with little risk. Taking this approach, Immersion
Workshop participants repeatedly act their way into new thinking as they
witness what can be accomplished when letting go of control with the support
of simple but clear structures. Practice and debriefs with peers generate more
confidence in the new methods. The participants discover the validity of the
Liberating Structures principles personally rather than being told about them.

What’s the Purpose?

The purpose of an Immersion Workshop depends in part on whether

participants are all from the same organization or come from different ones.
For Participants from the Same Organization
For participants from the same organization, these are typically the
objectives:
 To have people experience and learn together what they will need to
practice together on the job
To work on real-life challenges and issues that are common concerns
to all participants
To discover what can be accomplished when leaders and frontline
people work together and a diversity of functions are included
To create enough critical mass to allow Liberating Structures to
easily take hold and spread within the organization

By design, the Immersion Workshop is a quick, compressed model of all

of the Liberating Structures principles. For example, one way that Principle
#1, “Include and unleash everyone,” is brought to life is with the structure of
the participant group: the workshop includes people from all layers of the
organization and from the complete range of organizational functions. The
makeup of the workshop group consciously mirrors what participants might
want to emulate on the job when they start using Liberating Structures in their
everyday interactions.
For Participants from Different Organizations
The purposes of an Immersion Workshop for people from many different
organizations are:

To experience many different Liberating Structures in a short time

To appreciate how universally useful Liberating Structures are
To discover what is possible when a group of very diverse people
work together

With various organizations represented in the room, participants are

exposed to many different ideas and to people who come from a variety of
positions and fields. Unlike other types of public workshops, Immersion
Workshops are not tailored for a particular audience, such as leaders or
managers or HR professionals. Instead, they are constructed so that everybody
can bring his or her challenge, with the idea that the more diversity in the
participant group, the richer their experience.
In a multi-organization workshop, people see for themselves what can
be accomplished in very diverse groups. Also, participants have a unique
opportunity to enlarge their network of connections and find support for using
Liberating Structures back in their own organizations. On the other hand, they
miss out on key benefits of same-organization workshops: they must return to
organizations that have not experienced the power of Liberating Structures
and will have to build credibility and critical mass to realize what might be
possible in their actual work groups. A big plus, though, is that they learn how
other organizations are experiencing and addressing the same chronic
problems.

Whom to Include

Liberating Structures are about working together and they are best learned
together. For an in-house workshop, include a diverse mix of leaders,
managers, and frontline workers with shared interests. As long as a
representative sample of the whole organization plus the entire management
layer is included, it is possible for a group of any size to learn rapidly the
approaches together—we have worked with close to two hundred participants
in the same room. A typical invitation plan is illustrated in Figure 5.3.
 Figure 5.3
Liberating Structures Immersion Workshop Invitation Plan

The reasons for including the front line along with leaders is that most
organizational issues of any importance involve multiple functions, levels,
and disciplines, and the place where things get done is on the front line, not in
the management ranks. Putting them in the same room to learn together new
methods of working together creates the opportunity to have them discover
what they can do together to address their challenges. Learning together is a
powerful way to discover how Liberating Structures generate better-than-
expected outcomes. Including multiple layers and diverse functions in the
workshop experience also promotes the communities of practice that can
launch Liberating Structures quickly throughout the organization or community.
Confidence builds when everyone starts on an equal footing and there is no
waiting for permission.
It’s a liberating experience for an organization’s leaders to be part of an
Immersion Workshop: they discover that they don’t have to be in control. As
frontline people find their voice and become more and more assertive about
participating and contributing in the workshop activities, leaders become less
and less concerned about being in charge. It’s as energizing for the
organization’s front line as it is for management to experience together and in
the moment how leadership and letting go can be compatible and
complementary.

What Leaders Should Expect

Leaders who sponsor and participate in the first Immersion Workshop in their
organization can expect a surprising, unnerving, exhilarating, or reassuring
experience—or all of the above. A large workshop is likely to be the first
time that so many layers and functions are gathered in the same space to work
together in a variety of configurations on resolving issues, and so the
discovery of what is possible is likely to be a surprising experience. Letting
go of control, as Liberating Structures require, can be unnerving at first.
Fortunately, benefits become quickly visible, providing reassuring evidence
that letting go of control can be a responsible choice. As more and more
participants gain confidence and contribute, the shared experiences can be
exhilarating: Wow! An Immersion Workshop is particularly attractive for
leaders who are frustrated with traditional approaches and are looking for
innovation; it is rewarding and reassuring to experience the concrete
outcomes from the wide range of activities that include and engage everyone
in the workshop.

Key Elements of an Immersion Workshop

Since 2004, Immersion Workshops have been conducted in some twenty

different countries across Latin America, Europe, Canada, and the United
States. Organizational settings have included multinational business,
hospitals, government, schools, and nonprofit organizations. It’s remarkable
that similar impacts have been achieved in all those spheres, around the
world, regardless of cultural differences.
A three-day Immersion Workshop may feature the themes and methods
shown in Figure 5.4. Each session is designed to address customized
organizational needs, specific innovation opportunities, and shared
challenges. After the workshop, one-on-one consulting sessions are the most
effective way to translate into immediate action what has been experienced
during the workshop.
Immersion Workshops are designed to introduce participants to a large
number of Liberating Structures very rapidly—it’s a fast “do one, do another
one” method of learning. The idea is to create awareness of the range of
possibilities that Liberating Structures open up. Also, covering a wide variety
of structures underscores the notion that there is no single way to address any
particular challenge. Another message that Immersion Workshop participants
get loud and clear: you learn by doing; once you’ve seen a Liberating
Structure in action and practiced doing it in the workshop, you can do it back
home.
An Immersion Workshop treats each Liberating Structure separately. A
design team from the organization helps to identify current issues and
problems that matter to participants and designs workshop experiences to
address those real-life challenges. By covering so many so fast, the workshop
demonstrates that the Liberating Structures playbook has something for
everybody and everything. Every participant learns that there are several
Liberating Structures from which to choose to deal with most situations. In our
experience, different people, for whatever reason, are attracted to different
Liberating Structures. An Immersion Workshop virtually guarantees
participants will experience at least one structure that they like and that will
be appropriate for their challenges.
 Figure 5.4
Sample Three-Day Immersion Workshop
Shorter Immersion Workshops

Since it is obviously not always possible to organize a three-day-long

workshop, series of short workshops are effective alternatives as long as the
following objectives guide their design:

Illustrate how Liberating Structures are useful for a wide range of

challenges
Ensure that every person is likely to find one or more microstructures
he or she wants to start using immediately
Help participants gain confidence together via practice on diverse
issues
Show how Liberating Structures enable new ideas and answers to
repeatedly emerge bottom up
Illustrate how Liberating Structures methods are modular and can be
mashed up easily
Demonstrate how easy it is to generate results with Liberating
Structures
Duplicate the speed of frontline working conditions

As a rough guideline, three-hour workshops can include four to five

Liberating Structures and whole-day workshops twice that many. Inside an
organization, experienced users can also arrange series of miniworkshops that
cover only one Liberating Structure at a time and where participants can also
share their experiences. Agendas, presentation materials, and notes on
process and outcomes from some of our public workshops are available on
our website [Link]

Liberating Structures Coaching

The purpose of coaching sessions is to make it easy for participants to take

their first steps toward having Liberating Structures be an everyday practice.
Participants sign up for one-hour sessions to work on some challenging
problem or goal alone or with colleagues. The objective is to design a
sequence of Liberating Structures that will help them address their challenge.
A typical session would begin with a series of questions to clarify the issue or
bring to the surface the deeper problem. It would continue with more
questions about who needs to be involved, what is the common purpose, what
resources or restrictions exist, what end result is hoped for, and so on. Along
the way, possible steps are identified as well as the Liberating Structures that
could be used to support each of those steps. Participants are encouraged to
come up with their own ideas and preferences about which Liberating
Structures to use. The session ends with at least one concrete design that
participants can start implementing immediately. The strings that are
described in the next chapter are examples that illustrate the kind of designs
that may emerge from a coaching session.
People walk out of a coaching session knowing what they can do, if they
want to, to achieve the outcomes they want. They are quite clear on what to do
and what to expect when they “bring it all back home.” The next step is to fly
solo or to work with some partners in order to apply the same process to
another challenge, and another, and another.
 Chapter 6
From First Steps To Strings

Learning to use Liberating Structures is like “If you truly want to

learning a new language. First you learn understand something, try
individual words. Then you put them together to change it.” Kurt Lewin
into a simple sentence and soon you are
speaking series of sentences in the new language.
In the Liberating Structures Menu in Chapter 5, each structure is
described by a single sentence, there to help you decide when to use it. When
one Liberating Structure is sufficient for handling a small routine situation,
that single sentence will capture and communicate the essence of what will
happen. As you progress from simple applications to attacking more sizeable
projects or more ambitious goals that require more steps, you will need to
connect several sentences to describe and think through what will happen. In
other words, you will need not one or two Liberating Structures but a
sequence of them. We call these sequences strings. Constructing strings that
are adapted to your challenges and have a powerful impact is your second
step in mastering the language of Liberating Structures. Making strings is
serious fun and invariably stimulates a group to discover innovative ways to
solve problems or exploit opportunities. To facilitate this task, we have
created a set of Liberating Structures Design Cards that make it easy to
quickly come up with many combinations. Or you can simply use the
Liberating Structures Menu for inspiration on which structures to include in
your strings.
 Composing strings is particularly useful when done with a partner or in
a group/design team. This approach is always a rewarding investment since
it automatically clarifies the true nature of your challenge and what steps are
required to address it properly. With 1-2-4-All, it is quite easy to engage a
large group in generating many alternative strings simultaneously and then
selecting the most attractive one. Including others in composing and selecting
strings not only gets everybody on the same page, it dramatically improves
the group’s capacity to improvise and adapt quickly.
This chapter offers advice about composing strings and provides a
number of examples. We like to call this activity composing because its
purpose is to create an interdependent whole greater than the mere sum of a
few Liberating Structures. The goal always is to create results that are much
better than could be expected from conventional structures and to build
capacity for rapid adaptations.

Matching A Challenge with Specific Liberating

Structures
Composing always starts Identifying which Liberating Structures can be
with a series of questions useful for addressing a challenge can’t begin
such as, “What are we without a fair amount of clarity about the
trying to accomplish? nature of the challenge and the deeper
Why is that important? purpose of what needs to be accomplished.
Why? Why? Why? Is the Therefore, composing always starts with a
true purpose and deepest series of questions such as, “What are we
need for our work clear? trying to accomplish? Why is that important?
Who is going to be Why? Why? Why? Is the true purpose and
affected? deepest need for our work clear? Who is
going to be affected? Is the purpose
unambiguous and common to all concerned?; if not, what are we going to do?
For whom is it particularly important? Who else could contribute? Are some
people ahead of the game? When this work is done, what will be different?
What connections up, down, and out across what boundaries could make a
difference? What are the main obstacles? How would such a challenge
normally be handled? What conventional approaches would be used? What
first step(s) make the most sense? Then what are logical second and third
steps?”
With the answers to such
questions clarified, it becomes
pretty easy to compose one or more
strings of microstructures that fit the
challenge. If responses are
inadequate or lacking, it is a sign
that one or more Liberating
Structures are needed up front to
generate more clarity. For instance,
if your purpose is not sharp,
consider including Nine Whys in
the early portion of your string. Use
the verbs and words in the
Liberating Structures Menu and/or
the Design Cards to spark your Composing a string with Liberating
memory and intuitive thinking. Structures Design Cards
Terms like “connect,” “debrief,”
“make space,” “uncover,” “success,” “generate ideas,” “share experiences,”
“first steps,” “help each other,” “reflect,” “crowd wisdom,” “spark action,”
and “spread ideas” will trigger different reactions and ideas from situation to
situation. Going through this experience will provide useful hints on
structures that may need to be included in your design.
Additionally, each situation you face may evoke a diagnostic trigger in
your mind, a key aspect or condition that will point toward using specific
structures. Unproductive meetings, groups feeling stuck in a rut,
underperforming products or services, and “analysis paralysis” are examples
of triggers that indicate a particular Liberating Structure or some string of
structures would be in order. Keep a sharp eye out for these useful hints.
Finally, for the first structure of your strings, choose one that you are
comfortable with, that you like, and that you think will draw a positive
response from participants.
Five Sets of Strings
From the thousands of combinations that thirty-three different structures make
possible, we selected a few examples that will quickly give you a good idea
of what you can construct yourself. We grouped them into five broad
scenarios. The sample strings outlined below will get any number of
participants started, whether a large group or one as small as two people.
Don’t hesitate to make up your own pattern of strings!

Goal 1: Finding Everyday Solutions

Look for triggers such as these: meetings are rote or uninspiring, people
spend more time presenting than doing, rigid practices get in the way, top-
down initiatives have no buy-in, imported best practices are not welcome.
Any of them is a clear signal that there is a need for changes such as stopping
unproductive activities, tapping tacit know-how to stimulate new ideas,
discovering local solutions, building trust, and coordinating action.

Sample Strings

TRIZ + 1-2-4-All + 15% Solutions + Troika Consulting

Make space for new ideas with TRIZ by stopping
unproductive activities or rigid behaviors. Invite
everybody to generate new ideas with 1-2-4-All. Ask all
participants to identify what they can do immediately, what
their 15% Solution is, and then invite them to help their peers expand
and enhance their own 15 percent in a Troika Consulting session.

Nine Whys + 1-2-4-All + 15% Solutions + 25/10 Crowd

Sourcing (for groups larger than fifteen)
Clarify purpose with Nine Whys. With 1-2-4-All, invite
all participants to generate 15% Solutions that they can act
on without additional resources, detailed planning, or
special approvals. Then invite all participants to propose
 bold solutions that require more resources. With groups of more than
fifteen people, sift the solutions with 25/10 Crowd Sourcing.

Drawing Together + 1-2-4-All + 15% Solutions + Troika

Consulting
Invite everybody to access and reveal hidden insights and
solutions to a shared challenge through nonverbal
expression. Create shared images via Drawing Together.
With 1-2-4-All, interpret the drawings and sift and sort
emerging solutions and first steps. Ask all participants to
identify what they can do immediately, “What is your 15% Solution?”
Then invite them to help their peers expand and enhance their own 15
percent in a Troika Consulting session.

Users Experience Fishbowl + 1-2-4-All + Wicked

Questions
To pave the way for others to learn and adapt, ask for a
few volunteers to share in a Users Experience Fishbowl
their experiences and behaviors while facing a complex
challenge. With 1-2-4-All, invite everybody to generate Wicked
Questions that reveal the paradoxical goals that the group must
absolutely address with its next steps.

Goal 2: Noticing Patterns Together

Look for triggers such as these: group members are cynical, people no longer
see opportunities for positive change, the group feels stuck in a rut, a
surprising or shocking event has thrown off expectations or disturbed the
market. Any of them is a signal that there is a need for changes such as
finding new ways of understanding a complex challenge; expanding the
boundaries for solutions; determining multiple actions by including many in
finding and diagnosing patterns together; and clarifying requirements for
system-wide coordination.
Sample Strings

What, So What, Now What? + Appreciative Interviews +

Min Specs With What, So What, Now What? clarify the
current reality (where the group is starting, really), what it
means, and what actions this suggests. Uncover with Appreciative
Interviews the patterns and conditions that made past successes
possible. Reduce the list through Min Specs down to the absolute must
dos and must not dos for moving forward successfully. Revisit the Now
What? opportunities for action and identify those that meet the Min
Specs.

Shift & Share + Wicked Questions + 1-2-4-All

Draw a wide variety of innovative activities out into the
open with Shift & Share. Illuminate the narrow path to more
success and novel mash-ups with Wicked Questions. Sort
the follow-up activities or widen the path with 1-2-4-All.

Conversation Café + What, So What, Now What? + …

Next string
Following a surprising or shocking development, engage
everybody with a Conversation Café to reflect on and make
sense of the new situation. Share the facts and insights to decide on the
next steps with What, So What, Now What? Compose a string for
making progress on the next steps.

Impromptu Networking + Generative Relationships + 1-2-

4-All Stimulate sharing, reflection, and a few new
connections with Impromptu Networking. With Generative
Relationships, jointly diagnose the interaction patterns that
are inhibiting the group’s performance and identify what each
person and formal leaders can do to remedy the situation. Use 1-2-4-All
to generate next steps.
 WINFY + What, So What, Now What? Debrief + Wise
Crowds in Fishbowl
Use WINFY to invite participants to clarify their group’s
strategic needs for working effectively with all other
functions and to find out what support each group can or
cannot expect to receive. Follow with each group doing a What, So
What, Now What? Debrief to decide their Now What? End with all
the groups’ spokespeople participating in a Wise Crowds consultation
session to spark better relationships and coordination. Do the Wise
Crowds in a Fishbowl to get everybody on the same page.

Goal 3: Drawing Out Prototypes

Look for triggers such as these: current activities, services, or products

are not performing well; creative individuals are frustrated or isolated;
there are no clear paths for new ideas to attract investment; important
client needs are ignored; patches to current offerings are expensive.
Any of them is a signal that there is a need for changes such as:
revealing and making explicit what is already working while inviting
something new to emerge; drawing out successful “chunks” of what’s
working and combining them in new ways; unleashing everyone in
building prototypes; accelerating coordination, progress, and spread
dramatically.

Sample Strings

Appreciative Interviews + TRIZ + Ecocycle

With Appreciative Interviews, uncover the patterns and
conditions that made past successes possible. Destroy barriers to
innovation with TRIZ. Clarify the status of all products/services in the
portfolio with the Ecocycle and identify opportunities for immediate
action.
 Users Experience Fishbowl + Simple Ethnography +
Improv Illuminate the limits of what is known about
handling a challenge by asking the most knowledgeable
people to share their experiences in a Fishbowl. Use the
information generated to guide the collection of
observations through Simple Ethnography. Use this to create scenarios
for Improv Prototyping.

Simple Ethnography + What, So What, Now What?

Debrief + Design StoryBoard
Use observations gathered with Simple Ethnography to
identify opportunities for prototyping. Review
opportunities through the three steps of a What, So What,
Now What? Debrief. Sketch out detailed plans for field testing and
adaptations with Design StoryBoard.

DAD + 1-2-4-All + Design StoryBoard

Bring hidden solutions to chronic challenges into focus via a
series of DADs. The dialogues will also invite peers to
begin adapting successful behaviors in their own settings.
Use 1-2-4-All to review individual and group successes in
order to reveal what higher-level solutions emerge. Sketch
out the path for determining how to coordinate across groups or units
via a Design StoryBoard.

Goal 4: Unleashing Local Action

Look for triggers such as these: people are not taking risks; people are
waiting for permission to act; layers of red tape stifle creativity; more
time is spent presenting than acting; “analysis paralysis” has taken over.
Any of them is a signal that there is a need for changes such as:
unleashing purposeful action in large groups without detailed plans or
elaborate budgeting; boosting freedom and responsibility with a
 minimal set of enabling constraints; improving coordination of diverse
activities.

Sample Strings

Open Space + Min Specs + 25/10 Crowd Sourcing

Unleash a wide array of local actions with Open Space.
Then, within the well-defined boundaries of Min Specs,
identify bolder initiatives with 25/10 Crowd Sourcing and invite
volunteers to move them forward.

Nine Whys + Improv Prototyping + Design StoryBoard

Clarify with participants the deepest purpose of their work
together with Nine Whys. Use Improv Prototyping to reveal
what challenges emerge when addressing this larger purpose
and what solutions emerge out of diverse participation. Put
the pieces together in a Design StoryBoard for moving forward.

Critical Uncertainties + Wise Crowds + 15% Solutions

Generate robust stress-tested strategies for an unpredictable
future with Critical Uncertainties. Use Wise Crowds and
15% Solutions to provide interdisciplinary advice to each
individual about their implementation.

Goal 5: Spreading Innovation by Scaling Out and Up

Look for triggers such as these: innovations do not spread to other

groups; specifications for adopting an innovation do not fit diverse
operating realities; solutions at the local level do not scale up; formal
efforts to standardize innovative practice are “gamed” or ignored by
local units. Any of them is a signal that there is a need for changes such
as: spreading ideas or innovations out across groups or units; scaling
up from local application to regional, global, or policy levels; fueling
movements and transformations across boundaries.
Examples of Powerful Strings

Nine Whys + Min Specs + Ecocycle + Panarchy

Clarify how your work is justified to the larger community
(purpose) with Nine Whys and specify the must dos and
must not dos with Min Specs. With the Ecocycle, clarify
the status of your portfolio of activities and relationships at
the level of your organization. Use Panarchy to clarify activities and
relationships at all the other levels that affect your initiative and
identify opportunities for actions.

Nine Whys + Social Network Webbing + 15% Solutions

+ Troika Consulting
Clarify purpose with Nine Whys. Then, with Social
Network Webbing, identify all the individuals and groups
that can be attracted to the work with formal or informal
ties. With 15% Solutions, everybody decides what he or
she can do immediately to strengthen and develop the
network. Continue with Troika Consulting for each person to receive
further advice on what to do and how.

Celebrity Interview + Min Specs + Ecocycle

Build deeper understanding and trust with formal leaders
via a Celebrity Interview. Use Min Specs to identify the
must dos and must not dos for spreading change. Draw the
status of activities and relationships on the Ecocycle and identify
opportunities for changes.

DAD + 1-2-4-All + Panarchy + Design StoryBoard

Use series of DADs to discover hidden solutions to chronic
challenges and then 1-2-4-All for all participants to decide
how to adapt successful behaviors to their local settings.
Brainstorm how to insinuate the success at other levels with
 Panarchy. Sketch out pathways for coordinating up, down, and out via
a Design StoryBoard.

Purpose-To-Practice + Drawing Together +

Integrated~Autonomy Create an organizational design
based on shared ownership with Purpose-To-Practice. With
Drawing Together, spark imaginative solutions to the
challenges of integrated yet autonomous operations. Spell out
the specifics of working across widely distributed sites with
Integrated~Autonomy.

These few string examples illustrate how much you can accomplish in a
short time—often less than one hour or ninety minutes—and how easy it will
be for you to compose many others based on the specifics of your own
challenges. Be prepared to be pleasantly surprised! As a rule, we compose
strings that include much more than we imagine can be accomplished in the
time allotted. When we do not complete the entire string, there is a basis for
planning next steps with the group. Be sure to keep records of your strings to
share with others.
 Chapter 7
From Strings To Storyboards

A project or a transformation initiative that is “Any sufficiently

too big to be supported by a single string of advanced technology is
Liberating Structures calls for a indistinguishable from
comprehensive design, which is simply a magic.” Arthur C. Clarke
series of strings and structures linked together
in a logical progression. This chapter describes three examples that are
typical of our experiences in the field:

1. Launching a multi-stakeholder collaborative project via a

meeting
2. Developing strategy and building a new leadership team via a
retreat
3. Advancing a broad movement across many regions via a
summit

As you will see, the designs for some situations can be fairly simple
while others require detailed storyboards.
At first glance, these designs may seem far too ambitious or idealized.
We ask you to suspend your judgment: we have found that as the participants
become more familiar with Liberating Structures, the speed and depth of their
ideas and activity increase. Liberating Structures make much more possible.
The experience can be breathtaking—almost too good to be true. With
increasing inclusion comes more trust. With more trust, it is possible to
believe before you see. With shared beliefs, it is possible to take bigger leaps
and move boldly forward together. This is what we have seen happen time
after time after time.

Launching a Multi-Stakeholder Collaborative

Project
Twenty-five leaders from a variety of organizations—schools, small
nonprofits, and business—are starting to work together to attract
funding from a large foundation for a community-wide initiative. Their
goal is to build a healthier and more vibrant community, but they need
a “big idea” to inspire collaboration and spark a community
movement. A funder has expressed strong interest. The pressure is on.

All designs consist of a The design for the meeting is intended to help
logical sequence of the whole group arrive step by step at a well-
stages, each with its own thought-out big idea. It consists of a logical
purpose and supported by sequence of seven stages each with its own
a specific Liberating purpose and supported by a specific
Structure. Liberating Structure. In the agenda below, the
questions used to spark engagement and idea
generation appear below each Liberating Structure in the design. Notes
regarding important transitions for the facilitator are italicized.

The logical sequence for the design is as follows:

Connect participants with each other

Discover what participants have in common and what’s
different
Find the themes and patterns that cut across all of their
interests
Extract all the big ideas that these themes and patterns inspire
 Determine the most attractive ideas
Dig deeper to find the one with the greatest benefit to the
community and that will attract the most support
Clarify what participants must absolutely not do as a group to
make it possible for their big idea to become reality
Identify who else must be included
Decide on their next steps

Since the twenty-five leaders don’t all know one another, the first step in
the agenda is designed to help them build new connections that will serve
them down the road. The second purpose is to reveal which challenges and
expectations they share and which ones are different. Impromptu Networking
is selected for this first step in the agenda as follows:

Step 1. Impromptu Networking (fifteen minutes)

• What is a challenge you would like our big idea to address? What can
you give and get from a new community initiative?

In step 2, the participants use 1-2-4-All to identify the themes and

patterns that cut across their wishes as follows:

Step 2. 1-2-4-All (one or two rounds) (ten to twenty minutes)

• What will be different as a result of our work together? Be as concrete

as you can about behaviors and tangible health or economic outcomes.

Look for two or three themes to emerge out of the individual

contributions. One round of 1-2-4-All may be enough if responses
are tangible and compelling through the eyes of participants.

In step 3, the best ten bold ideas are sifted with 25/10 Crowd Sourcing
as follows:

Step 3. 25/10 Crowd Sourcing of Bold Ideas (fifteen minutes)

 • If you were ten times bolder, what would you do? What first step will
get the ball rolling?

Call out the top ideas and post on a large wall chart.

In step 4, the participants identify the most promising idea with 1-2-4-
All as follows:

Step 4. 1-2-4-All (ten minutes)

• Which ideas do you think will make a big difference in the community?
Is there one that stands out? Can you and your organization support
and move forward with this idea?

Look for one idea to emerge above all others.

In step 5, participants then clarify what they must absolutely not do.

Step 5. TRIZ to Make Space for Innovation (fifteen minutes)

• How can we make sure that we act as a collaborative community group

in name only… without having the back of anyone but ourselves?

Looking forward to a successful proposal, start to establish a

productive pattern of behavior among participants.

In step 6, they identify who else must be included as follows:

Step 6. Social Network Webbing (twenty minutes)

• Who are the people we need to attract to this initiative? Who are the
people we need to start the work? Who can block and who can enable
fast progress? Who are experts on the periphery of this social network
we need to tap?

Make it real by naming names.

 In the final step, the participants agree on their next steps by clarifying
the five components of their next task (Purpose, Principles, Participants,
Structure, and Practices) as follows:

Step 7. Next Steps

Writing up the proposal.

Purpose-To-Practice to clarify how the proposal will be

readied.

Purpose-To-Practice will deepen the group’s readiness to hit

the ground running when the work to write the proposal
starts.
At the end of an intense but short three-hour session, the twenty-five
leaders were surprised by their experience using Liberating Structures and
delighted with the outcome. They had their big idea, which was the fruit of
their common labor, and they felt clear and prepared for what to do next.

Developing Strategy and Building a New

Leadership Team
A newly appointed system CEO is convening a handpicked executive
“dream team.” The execs and their direct reports (thirty people) are
invited to a one-and-a-half-day strategy retreat. Goals for the retreat
include coming together as a team, developing a more innovative way
of working together, and reviewing and generating market strategies.
The organization is well positioned to make fast progress in its
market.

Here is a storyboard agenda in four parts, each supported by its own tailored
string of Liberating Structures.
 Figure 7.1
Leadership Team Retreat StoryBoard: Part 1

The purpose of Part 1 (Figure 7.1) is to signal that each person is invited
to shape the next steps for coming together as a team and to set the stage for
developing bold strategies. Starting with Impromptu Networking, this series
of Liberating Structures is a dramatic shift from the more controlling practice
of starting with a series of presentations. Immediately, individuals feel more
connected and able to make contributions. The CEO Celebrity Interview
opens the door further by laying out the big challenges that must be addressed
by everyone together. The clear message here is that the boss does not know
the answers in advance of the work being done. Clarifying purpose with Nine
Whys underlines the importance of the group to the larger company and
community. With relationships affirmed and the group’s purpose in sharper
focus, the stage is set for bold action … before the first coffee break!

Figure 7.2
Leadership Team Retreat StoryBoard: Part 2

The purpose of Part 2 (Figure 7.2) is to engage each person in starting to

articulate actions and strategies. Again, this is a dramatic shift since
participants have not been fully included in the past. TRIZ makes space for
new ideas to take hold by identifying actions or behaviors to be stopped or
creatively destroyed. Deciding that big obstacles will be removed often
results in a giddy enthusiasm for launching innovations.
To temper jumping in too quickly, the Mad Tea + Strategy Safari
activities help to quickly create a bigger context in which new strategies will
need to operate.
In the Mad Tea activity, participants form two circles, one inside the
other. Each person faces one other person and completes an open-ended
sentence in less than thirty seconds (see box). When time is up, participants
are invited to move to their right so that they are in front of someone else to
complete the next sentence, and so on. The unfinished sentences focus
attention on every individual and the group answering the Safari questions
together (e.g., If we do nothing, the worst thing that can happen for us is…). In
a seriously fun way, Mad Tea quickly provokes a deeper set of reflections and
strategic insights. Then the big five Strategy Safari questions focus attention
and produce shared understanding of strategy and next steps.

Mad Tea Open Sentences

1. What first inspired me in this work is…

2. Something we must learn to live with is…
3. An uncertainty we must creatively adapt to is…
4. What I find challenging in our current situation is…
5. Before we make our next move, we cannot neglect to...
6. Something we should stop doing (or divest) is…
7. What I hope can happen for us in this work is…
8. A big opportunity I see for us is…
9. If we do nothing, the worst thing that can happen for us is…
10. A courageous conversation we are not having is…
11. An action or practice helping us move forward is…
12. A project that gives me confidence we are transforming is…
13. A bold idea I recommend is…
14. A question that is emerging for me is…

The Big Five Strategy Safari Questions

 1. What is happening around us that demands adaptation?
2. Where are we starting, honestly?
3. Given our purpose, what seems possible now?
4. What is at stake if we do not change?
5. How are we moving away from the current state toward the future?

Table 7.1
Mad Tea + Strategy Safari Activities

With action ideas in mind and a strategic context outlined, What, So

What, Now What? is used for the participants to start harvesting the best
ideas for moving forward well before the end of the retreat. This gives more
time for everyone to contemplate the mix of actions and ideas being
unleashed. Again, every voice is included in making sense of all the
possibilities, and surprising insights will emerge from many participants.
 Figure 7.3
Leadership Team Retreat StoryBoard: Part 3

The purpose of Part 3 (Figure 7.3) is to build on the foundation of the

first two parts and move deeper into solutions for individual and group
challenges. Wise Crowds and 15% Solutions start the work by focusing on
individual concerns first. Peer-to-peer consults build internal confidence and
spark practical action. With more individual confidence in hand, 25/10
Crowd Sourcing generates bold strategies for the group as a whole. Stepping
back to see the forest and the trees, all the new and existing strategies are put
into context with the Ecocycle.
 The whole portfolio of strategies comes into view, and each item on the
Ecocycle suggests a type of action to move the work forward. To build
immediately toward practical results, What I Need From You (WINFY) is
used to focus attention on one big challenge that requires a high level of cross-
functional cooperation. Working out the knots across boundaries for a single
strategy will help with many others. Creative tension builds as group
members see and feel opportunities for advancing their work.
With What, So What, Now What? to end the day, everyone (especially
the more deliberate thinkers) has time to contemplate the day’s action, moving
closer to shared ownership of strategy making and implementation. The group
will be exhausted and exhilarated after a day like this. An evening full of fun
is needed to decompress.

Figure 7.4
Leadership Team Retreat StoryBoard: Part 4

The purpose of Part 4 (Figure 7.4), the next morning, is to plunge the
group into action and set the stage for future work. The group focuses on
action and tactics via Open Space. Building on the ideas from the previous
day’s Ecocycle, 25/10 Crowd Sourcing, and WINFY, Open Space now
concentrates attention on how to advance single strategies. Session conveners
facilitate the group’s work to generate action plans.
Using Critical Uncertainties, the group evaluates how useful each
strategy would be in four future operating environments. The gaps and
innovation opportunities revealed in this activity will be addressed in the next
retreat. This provides creative tension for the group’s ongoing work.
A final round of What, So What, Now What? to end the retreat is used
to draw out all the feelings of camaraderie, accomplishment, and momentum
that have emerged. Detailed action plans and next steps will be compiled in a
proceedings document with a small amount of additional effort. Output from
the Ecocycle, WINFY, Open Space, and Critical Uncertainties will be
particularly helpful for immediate follow-up and for preparing for the next
retreat.

Advancing a Broad Movement across Many

Regions
Two years after launch, sponsors of a national movement invite four
hundred leaders from all fifty states to a summit in the nation’s capital.
Some states are functioning at a high level while others are just getting off
the ground. The goals are to galvanize more diverse participation in each
state, restore hope for transformative change, and ignite bold action while
deepening strategic thinking. Teams from each state will learn and share
over two days.
The storyboard for the summit is in three parts.
 Figure 7.5
National Summit Storyboard: Part 1
The purpose must be The purpose of Part 1 (Figure 7.5) is to
powerful to attract broad signal that each person is invited to shape next
participation—the steps for promoting more diverse
lifeblood of a successful participation and stimulating bold action and
movement. deeper strategic thinking. Beginning with
Impromptu Networking, this series of
Liberating Structures is a clear shift from starting with a presentation or some
other more controlling or unintentionally exclusive conventional practice.
Individuals immediately feel more connected. The Celebrity Interview of
one of the sponsors’ leaders opens the door further by laying out the big
challenges that must be creatively addressed by everyone together,
particularly those closest to the challenge; the clear message here is that even
an expert national leader does not know the answers in advance of the work
being done.
Including everyone in clarifying purpose with Nine Whys underscores
the importance of having diverse individuals and all regions contribute to the
larger national movement. More importantly, the purpose must be powerful to
attract broad participation—the lifeblood of a successful movement. With
relationships affirmed and a more focused purpose established at each level,
the stage is set for bold action. TRIZ unleashes “stop-doing” actions. Seeing
that big obstacles will be removed inspires ideas for transforming the future.
Throughout the summit, as shown in the Notes column in the storyboards,
facilitators, sponsors, graphic recorders, and participants themselves work on
harvesting, synthesizing, and publishing all the wisdom unleashed from this
large group of four hundred. As the summit progresses, insights and action
ideas are collected for a proceedings document to be published by the end of
the meeting.
 Figure 7.6
National Summit StoryBoard: Part 2
 The purpose of Part 2 (Figure 7.6) is to engage each person in generating
action as well as regional strategies. Again, this series of structures is a shift
since participants have not been fully included in the past and have waited for
direction from the center or top. In order to move deeper into solutions for
individual and regional group challenges, Appreciative Interviews start the
work by focusing on the root causes of success, shared through storytelling.
Every person is invited to share a success story with a person from another
state. Paired interviews will build internal confidence and spark practical
action within and across coalitions.
With peer learning unleashed and action ideas in mind, Graphic
Gameplans are used to begin harvesting the top ideas for moving forward in
each regional team. Visual tools like the Graphic Gameplan (Figure 7.7) make
the work on strategy through the rest of the day explicit, inviting, and
transparent to all. Individually and together, participants are able to make
sense of the mix of actions and ideas unleashed throughout the morning. Again,
every voice is included in figuring out all the possibilities for advancing his
or her region and the national transformation strategy.

Figure 7.7
The Strategy Graphic Gameplan
 After lunch, the group moves more deeply into action and tactics via
Open Space. With insights from the Celebrity Interview, Nine Whys, TRIZ,
and Appreciative Interviews in the morning, Open Space focuses attention
on what each region can stop or start to advance the transformation.
Conveners facilitate the group during the session, take notes about follow-up,
and possibly lead the group after the summit if needed. Concrete action plans
are generated.
Mad Tea + Strategy Safari are then used to add serious fun and strategic
context to the tactics emerging. The Mad Tea open sentences provoke a lively,
wide-ranging, and cathartic conversation, with novel ideas and deeper insight
popping out as the Mad Tea unfolds. The big five Strategy Safari questions
focus attention and produce shared understanding of strategy and next steps.
(The Mad Tea + Strategy Safari trigger items are listed in Table 7.1.)
To bring the day to a close, What, So What, Now What? continues the
harvest of best ideas for moving forward. This debrief happens well before
the end of the summit. More deliberate thinkers in each regional group have
time to contemplate the mix of actions and strategies unleashed throughout the
day. Again, every voice is included in making sense of all the possibilities for
advancing his or her region and the national transformation strategy.
Throughout the summit, visual methods Everyone can see how his
like the Strategy Gameplan (Figure 7.7) make or her contributions are
it possible to quickly synthesize, harvest, and informing the others and
publish wisdom from this large group of four the national
hundred. As the summit progresses, insights transformation.
and action ideas are gathered by staff for a
proceedings document to be published by the end of the meeting. Large wall
charts record the work in progress. Everyone can see how his or her
contributions are informing the others and the national transformation. This is
hard work and a little weariness is to be expected. An evening full of fun is
needed to relax and unwind.
Open Space continues through the morning of the second day of the
summit (Figure 7.8). With even more action and momentum unleashed, 25/10
Crowd Sourcing generates and ranks bold strategies in each region and the
nation as a whole. Participants sense that much more is possible—and that it
is within their grasp—locally and nationally. To help participants from each
region hit the ground running on their return home, Graphic Gameplans again
capture the top strategies and the actions that will attract diverse participation
in their state.
 Figure 7.8
National Summit StoryBoard: Part 3
 Stepping back to see the forest and the trees, all the new and existing
strategies are put into context with the Ecocycle. Each regional group
completes its local portfolio map and contributes to a national map of key
strategic relationships. Synergies and gaps between regional and national
activities come into view. Forging new relationships and attracting diverse
participation are some clear challenges that emerge. National and state
leaders gain fresh perspectives on their accomplishments and the path ahead.
In closing this summit of the people, by the people, for the people,
What, So What, Now What? brought out feelings of new camaraderie,
confidence, accomplishment, and momentum. There was a standing ovation
and copies of the proceedings were distributed for everyone to take home.

Composing for Large-Scale Projects

However powerful the sample strings and detailed storyboards described
above may be, we do not want you to copy them. They are not recipes or best
practices. Each of these compositions was matched to a local context and
unique user needs. Composing with Liberating Structures begins and ends
with understanding the needs of users.
Composing for ambitious goals and large-scale events—similar to the
example above about advancing a movement—may look complicated, but it’s
not. The process is actually a simple one: you draw out the deepest needs of
users via a clear purpose and match it with congruent microstructures. A
simple agenda, as in the community-wide meeting example above, might
specify only the structures to be used, the questions designed to spark idea
generation, and the time allotted to each plus notes on key issues to pay
attention to in the transition from one structure to the next.
The more detailed storyboard approach has you carefully define all the
micro-organizing elements needed to achieve your purpose: a structuring
invitation, space, materials, participation, configurations, facilitation, and
time allocations.

Composing Overview
In brief, composing an agenda or a design storyboard for an activity, meeting,
or initiative involves a preparation phase and then a four-step composition
process.

Keep going until you can Preparation

go no deeper.
Clarify purpose by asking why, why, why:
why is this meeting or project or initiative important? Ask, “What will be
different after this experience? What should we start doing and what should
we stop doing?” Keep going until you can go no deeper.

Composition

Choose appropriate Liberating Structures that will help you achieve your
purpose or goals step by step, preferably working with a partner or a diverse
design group (see Chapter 5). For bigger projects that unfold over long
periods of time, working with design groups is highly recommended. For each
goal or challenge standing between where you are now and the desired end
result, you puzzle out answers to the following questions:

1. What Liberating Structure fits this challenge?

Sift and sort through options. Use the Liberating Structures Menu in
Chapter 5 and the What Is Made Possible descriptions in the Field
Guide. Many Liberating Structures are suited perfectly to mash-ups.
Post-it notes can help you arrange and rearrange with creative
abandon.

2. What insights or outcomes may emerge from this activity?

If needed, reread the Liberating Structures Menu and the What Is

Made Possible descriptions, anticipating positive and rapid
movement among group members. What has slowed progress in the
past may evaporate very quickly. Break up your outline into steps or
 chunks that can be designed and can function independently (don’t
try to put together a comprehensive design from the start).

3. What is made possible now?

Try to anticipate leaps in understanding and readiness to take action.

Believe before you see. Liberating Structures will build “group
genius” and velocity. If possible, pretest elements of your design.
Try out your questions or invitations with a design partner or a
sample of people who will be in the group meeting or event.
Consider testing and vetting in waves and in different configurations.
Tap your design team members to do the work.
Bring your experience into your next steps.

4. What next step or activity can follow to build momentum,

breadth, and depth among group members?

Repeat the steps above.

You will make discoveries and create adaptations as you go. Puzzling
out the order and timing may flow quickly or it may require multiple sessions.
Composing is not an exact science; the abbreviated descriptions here simply
show the kind of things to consider for producing a workable design.
It will not matter if one of the activities in your design ends up looking
like it was not the right choice. A Liberating Structures composition is
intentionally modular: when an activity doesn’t work, doesn’t produce the
intended results, improvise; pick another structure and move on. Repeating the
design cycle, whether in advance or in the moment, starting with preparation
and moving through follow-up, will improve your skills very quickly.
 PART THREE
Stories From the Field

We have found people all over the world “It is not because things
using Liberating Structures for anything and are difficult that we do
everything. There are seemingly no limits to not dare; it is because we
the ways Liberating Structures can be put to do not dare that they are
work to achieve dramatic results—from difficult.” Seneca
outcomes as simple as transforming the way a
task force conducts its meetings to turning an entire enterprise around. In our
experience, there is no place or situation where Liberating Structures cannot
be useful. The only limits are your imagination and your willingness to
experiment with new and different structures for your interactions with
others.
In the case examples here, you will meet a lawyer, a business
executive, a professor, a legislator, a nurse, a doctor, a student, and others
who discovered how to put Liberating Structures into practice and
accomplish extraordinary results. Their stories were chosen to show how
simple it might be in your situation to choose one or more Liberating
Structures to introduce into your daily work and reap the benefits of broader
inclusion and greater collaboration with people at all levels of your
organization.1
As you will see, these stories unfold in all types of organizations,
ranging from health-care, academic, and military organizations to global
business enterprises, local judicial and legislative systems, and national and
international R&D efforts. They illustrate the depth and breadth of what
Liberating Structures can make possible in a broad variety of situations.
Each story shows how a leader applied Liberating Structures to help
achieve an ambitious goal—from passing legislation to preventing deadly
infections to turning around a business. Despite hosts of obstacles and
naysayers, these leaders summoned the energy and courage needed to beat a
path forward where there was none. Experimenting with Liberating
Structures, they successfully included many others in shaping next steps.
Along the way, they discovered a better way to organize.
We chose these twelve stories not only to show the range of what is
possible with Liberating Structures but also to illustrate how Liberating
Leadership emerges in the process. All the protagonists invited everyone to
take action or make a contribution. Few decisions were predetermined and
formal authority was used sparingly. Rigid old ways were creatively
destroyed to make space for innovation. With surprising twists and turns,
better-than-expected results materialized.
Here is a summary of the stories and the challenges taken on with
Liberating Structures:

Fixing a Broken Child Welfare System—Tim Jaasko-Fisher

How diverse stakeholders, accustomed to adversarial
interactions and cynicism about system change, work across
functional boundaries to solve chronic problems.

Inclusive High-Stakes Decision Making Made Easy—Craig Yeatman

How inclusive leadership can also be bold and decisive.

Turning a Business Around—Alison Joslyn

How a leader successfully invites everyone in an organization to
take more responsibility for turning around a business.

Transforming After-Action Reviews in the Army—Lisa Kimball

How standardized training by experts is used in concert with
what can be learned directly from people with field experience.
Inventing Future Health-Care Practice—Chris McCarthy
How hard work, technology, imagination, and a novel form of
collaborating bring something really new into being.

Creating More Substance, Connections, and Ideas in the Classroom

—Arvind Singhal
How a professor succeeds by transcending “the sage on the
stage” pedagogy.

Getting Commitment, Ownership, and Follow-Through—Neil

McCarthy
How to pick up the pace of shared decision making and follow-
through among diverse leaders in a multinational business.

Inspiring Enduring Culture Change While Preventing Hospital

Infections—Dr. Michael Gardam
How it is possible to solve a big entangled problem and make
enduring cultural changes simultaneously.

Dramatizing Behavior Change to Stop Infections—Sherry Belanger

How serious and chronic challenges can be successfully
addressed with playfulness.

Developing Competencies for Physician Education—Dr. Diane

Magrane
How doctors and researchers can follow and lead simultaneously
when success requires everyone to discover together what is
working and also make changes together.

Passing Montana Senate Bill 29—Senator Lynda Bourque Moss

In the unforgiving world of legislating, how it is possible to
succeed by building on what is currently working and the
aspirations of constituents.
Transcending a Top-Down Command-and-Control Culture—Dr. Jon
Velez
How it is possible for a leader to responsibly let go of control in
a way that shifts the culture of an IT organization.
Fixing a Broken Child Welfare System:
Tim Jaasko-Fisher
“Child welfare law is a high-stakes field that can literally mean life or death
for a young child,” says Tim Jaasko-Fisher, a young lawyer using Liberating
Structures to change a broken child welfare system.

Tim Jaasko-Fisher is a young lawyer passionate about

transforming child welfare law. His dedication to the
work comes in part from the empathy he feels for the
people trapped in a system that is not working well,
either for those administering the system or for its
intended beneficiaries.
The child welfare system is intended to help families and
children in abuse and neglect situations. But, Tim says, “resources are often
divided into silos despite the fact that virtually everyone working in the field
acknowledges that solving the problem requires cross-discipline
collaboration.” He believes that local solutions are the best bet for fixing the
system, and that they will come from the people doing the work. Working out
of the University of Washington Law School, Tim relies on Liberating
Structures in enabling court systems to unleash cross-functional and
interprofessional innovations in serving children and families. One example is
a conference session he designed for a group of participants representing all
the silos in the system.

Composing a Workshop for Leaders

The people in Tim’s workshop embodied all the functions involved in

children’s welfare work: judges, lawyers, court clerks, social workers. And
there were seventy of them. Getting such a large, diverse group together to
talk with one another was a rare opportunity, and Tim wanted to make the
most of it. His goal for the session was for that roomful of participants to think
about their work in a disciplined way. It was an ambitious idea.
 Tim recalls, “I had two types of participants: the-everything-is-being-
done-TO-me participants and the engaged leaders who were looking for
useful methods.” One participant summed up the everything-is-being-done-
TO-me stance succinctly: “What can you tell me: my court system is a boat
that is on fire, under fire, and taking on water? What can you tell me to do?!”
It was clear to Tim that a rational intellectual framework would not be
the most effective approach for this group of people. The second group, the
engaged leaders, was interested in new approaches and understood that letting
go of overcontrol might unleash more positive change. The Liberating
Structures Tim chose for the session were intended to engage both groups and
spark the system transformation that Tim and others believe is possible.
Tim used Design StoryBoard to draw out the overall intention of the
session as well as the fine details of each segment. The storyboard included,
for example, the method of interaction, a time allocation, a success metric,
and illustrations. The design for the one-hour session included Impromptu
Networking, a form of Social Network Webbing, Agreement-Certainty
Matrix, and 1-2-4-All.

Tim’s Design StoryBoard for leaders in the child welfare system. Tim
wanted participants to think in a disciplined way, just as he has done with
this storyboard. Top-to-bottom headings are Notice (key insight), Time,
Intention, Method, and Activity.
 Tim began the session with Impromptu Networking, not the expected
lecture. He recalls, “This was not a level of interaction participants were
used to in our field, particularly to start a conference. It set the tone that
participants would do the work in this workshop and visibly raised the energy
level in the room.” Participants had the opportunity to briefly share with three
others what leadership challenge they wished to make progress on that day,
what they hoped to get from the workshop, and what insight they brought to the
conversation.
Later, Tim walked participants through a “A legal process designed
Social Network Webbing. He believes this to be adversarial makes
method is especially effective in helping collaboration difficult.”
isolated and disempowered people to
experience the interconnectedness among the various levels and functions in
the court system. “Oftentimes, there is not a high level of agreement as to what
should be done in a case,” he told us, “and the legal portion of the case is
seated in a process that is designed to be adversarial by its nature, making
collaboration difficult at times.”
The mapping process helped the participants visualize a pathway that
would lead from their isolated position to a collaborative network of people
committed to the same issue. It also helped people see how they could be
successful without authority over the entire process.
Later in the session, Tim asked participants to indicate how engaged they
had been in the workshop by raising or lowering their hands: a hand down to
the knees meant not at all engaged and above the head meant very engaged.
Out of seventy participants, not one hand was below shoulder level, and one
judicial officer actually stood on his chair to get his hand higher.
In a final segment, Tim asked people to decide if the leadership
challenge they identified earlier was simple, complicated, complex, or
chaotic. He invited participants to distribute themselves across the room to
illustrate the range of challenges. People standing in the front of the room
indicated a simple problem; at the back of the room were the people
representing chaotic challenges; and the complicated- and complex-problem
people arranged themselves in between. This gave everyone a graphic and
memorable representation of the distribution of the types of problems the
group faced.
 Most of the problems were situated in the realm of complicated and
complex, and a 1-2-4-All exercise ignited a conversation about the leadership
skills needed for each type of challenge. The group noted that as you moved
toward the back of the room—from simple to chaos—the degree of social
interaction necessary to address the issue increased. Simple problems could
largely be solved with authority and expertise, but complex problems
required social interventions, consensus, and dialogue skills. Tim’s intention
and design for the workshop made it possible for the group to discover this
insight for themselves.

“Talking about Reflections on Design StoryBoard

collaboration while
listlessly watching Clearly, the constraints of a Design
PowerPoint presentations StoryBoard drive Tim’s creativity. “A
will not do!” storyboard helps me and others see patterns in
meeting segments,” he says. “Redundancy and
boring patterns are revealed. Talking about collaboration while listlessly
watching PowerPoint presentations will not do!”
That workshop was just the beginning. Tim’s goal for law students and
stakeholders in the court system is to take more responsibility for their own
learning. Apathy is the enemy, Tim believes. When working with stakeholders
on a design, he says, “Open boxes in the storyboard move the process forward
without my intervention in a way that engages all those participating.” Tim
fervently explains: “The answers are not scripted. The gestalt and aesthetic of
the interaction is revealed. I ask more of myself and more of the people
working in the court system.” He says it’s as simple as asking, “You tell me:
what should go in the box?”
Inclusive High-Stakes Decision Making Made
Easy:
Craig Yeatman
Does it pay off for a very well-prepared leader to invite diverse
members of a board or management team to shape next steps
together on new product launches, investments, and other high-
stakes decisions? Not unless the leader starts with a clear
purpose and is willing to let go of overcontrol. Then, bold moves
can be made very quickly and decisively. Keith’s interview with
Craig Yeatman shows how.

Craig Yeatman is the managing director of WorldsView™

Consulting and the CEO of WorldsView Holdings, both based
in South Africa. He has successfully started up numerous
companies and teaches entrepreneurial leadership and organizational
development to professionals in the field. His goal is to advance the craft
of building sustainable organizations. After hearing that Craig was making
big waves back home after a Plexus Institute conference, Keith interviewed
him to learn more about his experience with Liberating Structures in
business.
Keith: Was there a moment in which you decided
there was no turning back from using Liberating
Structures in your practice?
Craig: I frequently teach a two-day “OD
Foundations” program consisting of lectures and
presentations. The material is complex and the room is
filled with delegates that range from seasoned company
executives to young professionals—all of whom are
working in OD. So most afternoons are a complete waste of time—so little
of the material “lands” in the final sessions.
 One day, on the first afternoon, I walked away from the teaching
material and picked up my Liberating Structures handbook. I turned two and
a half hours of lecture into a few questions on the fly, and used 1-2-4-All
instead of the presentation.
Keith: So, you replaced a finely vetted “best practices” presentation
with an improvised 1-2-4-All microstructure. What happened?
“I frequently help leaders Craig: The rest of the afternoon flew
make decisions about past. Delegate questions created powerful
investments, new product conversational teaching platforms. The next
launches, and strategy. morning, I took a deep breath and changed the
Because it is very original class into a Liberating Structures
expensive to bring people design. I combined Impromptu Networking,
together, I feel pressure to Troika Consulting, Conversation Café
make the experience (called Lekgotla in South Africa), and 25/10
intense, creative, and Crowd Sourcing around small snippets of
highly productive. For “teaching.”
this type of meeting, I am All of us were deeply engaged. And
now using Liberating then, almost four months after the workshop, I
Structures.” heard that the group was continuing to
process the material, “voluntarily” taking the
work forward on their own initiative.
That was my moment. Since then, I have become a proper student of
Liberating Structures with action learning as my classroom.
Keith: So, success with the OD Foundations teaching program got
you started. Have you tried Liberating Structures in business settings with
difficult or high-stakes decisions to be addressed?
Craig: I frequently help leaders make decisions about investments, new
product launches, and strategy. Because it is very expensive to bring people
together, I feel pressure to make the experience intense, creative, and highly
productive. For this type of meeting, I am now using Liberating Structures.
For example, in a marketing company meeting I chaired, the executive
board members had three hours to present to the independent nonexecs a
budget, plan, and merger strategy. I recommended they circulate the
presentations in advance and dispense with the on-site presentations
altogether. We worked with the assumption that participants would read the
packets and grasp key issues.
On the day of the meeting, as you might expect, the nonexecs wanted
more information and conventional presentations. I asked that they wait to
see if presentations were needed until after we used the Liberating Structure
1-2-4-All. I asked each individual to write out the story of this business with
the merger and without the merger… as well as asked, “What would the
revenue, margins, and profitability look like with and without the merger two
years into the future?”
Each participant joined in developing elements of the story lines,
progressively adding detail and depth via 1-2-4-All. Execs and nonexecs
mixed and shared ideas, and very quickly everyone internalized the story
lines. This conversation took only fifteen minutes. Then, all the decisions
needed to move forward took only ten minutes. As we moved around the
table taking in the votes, each director was smiling, relaxed, and there was
general agreement afterward that this was a great way to make a decision
such as this.
The balance of the meeting, Craig told us, was used for the nonexecs
to give advice to the executives, in a “Lekgotla” format, an indigenous
variation of Conversation Café. Using this Liberating Structure
strengthened the bond between the two groups and, Craig believes, set the
merger off on the right path.
Craig: No one asked for a presentation. It was not necessary. As a
footnote, the paperwork for the merger was completed within fourteen days,
and the staff of the two companies had come together within thirty days.
Some four months later, I heard some of the staff talking together and saying
that it felt as though they had always been working together—which I like to
think has something to do with the gentle way in which the board made their
decision, and the spirit that the merging executives took from that board
meeting.
Keith: Clearly, you believe the meeting outcomes were very positive.
What was so different about the dynamics of this meeting?
Craig: Reflecting on my own experience in meetings, I know how
quickly I become bored, restless, impatient, and controlling around “time.”
Very often the topics and linear order of the agenda are not compelling. I tend
to be disruptive and impatient when waiting to speak. I cut people off or
make a joke, in large part because the agenda is forcing attention on the
wrong conversation. My contributions are 20 percent of what they could be if
we were only talking about the important challenges.
In this meeting, all of my energy and seemingly most of the energy of the
other members was unfettered.
Keith: What do you think made it possible for you to get positive
results and develop shared understanding so quickly?
Craig: Liberating Structures help people shape the agenda as it unfolds.
The issues move themselves into play through each individual’s
contributions. If the purpose of our agenda item is clear, the conversational
focus is self-sorting, emergent, and we move rapidly into the meaty issues.
This reduces the pressure on the leader or facilitator to figure it all out—the
topics and the order of the agenda—in advance. The creative flow of
questions, ideas, and solutions cannot be scripted beforehand.
Keith: Your expertise in building and sustaining organizations spans
twenty-five-plus years. Your success, in part, comes from mastery of
facilitation methods. What value do Liberating Structures add to the vast
array of change methodologies used in organizations?
“Discovering Liberating Craig: First, Liberating Structures
Structures was a slap in illuminate the limits of the Big Five
the face. The problem was conventional microstructures—presentations,
conventional managed discussions, status reports, open
microstructures—not the discussions, and brainstorms—for engaging
agenda or the people people.
selected to participate. My favorite sandbox since age twenty-
This was obvious to me four is getting people together for start-ups. I
after it was pointed out. spent decades getting the right people in the
The Big Five room and focusing attention on a tightly
conventional approaches planned agenda. Still, with all my skills and
cannot deliver.” detailed preparation, I started to notice how
my best efforts were generating formulaic and
unthinking responses. Was my agenda at fault? Did I invite the wrong people?
Discovering Liberating Structures was a slap in the face. The problem
was conventional microstructures—not the agenda or the people selected to
participate. This was obvious to me after it was pointed out. The Big Five
conventional approaches cannot deliver. It is very practical to have thirty-
three additional structures that are designed for including and engaging
everyone.
Keith: I am curious about you. What made it possible for you to make
these “small changes” in your practice as a consultant, facilitator, and
entrepreneur?
Craig: Three things made it possible for me to first play with, and then
take more seriously, the idea of the Liberating Structures: my nature; the
evangelism and support from Lisa Kimball, Henri Lipmanowicz, and
yourself; and the results I have been seeing.
My nature: I have often joked with my wife that there are only two
places I like to be when a crowd assembles: either on the podium or in the
bar, away from the crowd. I rarely enjoy being spoken at, which has made me
a disruptive force when groups gather.
I love speaking, and I love being in conversation about things that
matter to me. I was taught “write, don’t speak” as a way of managing myself
in groups—which inside me felt like trying to contain a whale of energy in a
bird-sized body.
When a name was given [Liberating Structures] to ways of being in a
group that freed me to engage in a way that I love—without having an
unhealthy effect on those around me—I was intrigued. Could there really be
thirty-three or more “better ways” of being together in day-to-day
organizational life?
Evangelism and support: Lisa Kimball’s work provided some
motivation and inspiration, and then a tipping point was the effort that has
gone into the Liberating Structures website—with the consistent “pattern
language” approach to each Liberating Structure. This gave me confidence to
move from patterns I quickly recognized (1-2-4-All, Conversation Cafe,
Appreciative Interview) to others with which I am less familiar.
Liberating Structures provide massive “I am not done yet
structures for microencounters, and my whale because I see the results,
energy swims easily in that water. It is easy every time I use a
for me to go into Liberating Structures, and so Liberating Structure in
it has been easy for me to bring others with place of a CS—
me. I am halfway through the current “set,” in Controlling Structure, a
that I have used about fifteen Liberating
Structures alone or in combination at least term I made up to
once. I am not done yet. describe conventional
Results: I am not done yet because I see microstructures.”
the results, every time I use a Liberating
Structure in place of a CS—Controlling Structure, a term I made up to
describe conventional microstructures.
Keith: Would you like to offer advice to other leaders getting started
with Liberating Structures?
Craig: Whenever a group of people gets together, it should be for a
purpose. Don’t start before you have clarified the purpose of your gathering.
Print yourself a Liberating Structures manual that you can carry with you. I
love having the “directory” at hand. Plan lightly, drawing your process from
good practices in adult learning research and complexity sciences—and then
use the simpler Liberating Structures methods to gain confidence. Keith and
Henri have thoughtfully set them out in ascending complexity, so you can
begin with Impromptu Networking or 1-2-4-All and progress through the
set. As soon as possible, combine a couple—and before you know it you
will be familiar with the “pattern language” instructions and have the
confidence to draw on the full set as your event unfolds.
Craig’s experience illustrates how Liberating Structures invite people
to shape next steps together, in the moment. We call this phenomenon
“simultaneous mutual shaping.” It is a very productive “flow state” in
which everyone can work at the top of his or her intelligence. Liberating
Structures enable a depth of conversation and bold action that cannot be
planned in advance but rather emerges out of local interaction among
group members.
Turning a Business Around:
Alison Joslyn
“In a dark time, the eye The numbers were all going the wrong
begins to see.” Theodore way, and Alison Joslyn needed to organize a
Roethke business turnaround—fast. She had a strategy
in mind: “We needed to infuse a customer
focus into a company that had been very successful with a product focus.
Only a few of my executive team members embraced the idea. And I felt that
every one of our 250 employees needed to join in.” The question was how.

Alison Joslyn was the general manager of a global

corporation’s Venezuelan subsidiary when she turned to
Liberating Structures to turn her unit around. In just one
year, the unit went from lagging to leading the industry
on key performance metrics.

Alison’s unit had tumbled in market position and

growth. There had been product-supply challenges, loss of
market share, and competitors ascending in customer
perceptions. Employees had become discouraged and it
showed in their satisfaction scores.
Enter Alison’s change initiative, initiated and
sustained by a selection of Liberating Structures. “One
year later,” she says, “all the performance metrics were
going in the right direction. We were hitting it out of the
park. We became number one in growth in Venezuela. Our
internal culture survey score was now ultrahigh.”
“One year later, we were Engaging everyone in
hitting it out of the park.” a change initiative was
uncharted ground for
Alison, a notion not even covered in her management
training. In fact, her experience in graduate school made
her doubtful of the benefits of broad participation: “Working as a team was
an encumbrance. It seemed so hard and frustrating without adding much
value. I would rather do it myself. I was rewarded for my work as an
individual.”
To address the challenge in Venezuela, she started to search for
approaches. As luck would have it, the VP of the Latin American region was
starting a new experiment. “I got myself invited to the weekend leadership
retreat for regional and country leaders,” she recalls. “The bottom-up
approach to include and unleash everyone was a good fit for our situation. A
few months later, we started with an Open Space meeting for all 250
employees.”

Opening Space + Strong Leadership

Alison’s Open Space meeting was a dramatic beginning. More than seventy
projects to support the turnaround were unleashed, many from frontline
employees exercising unexpected leadership. Although Alison and the
management team were not comfortable with all the projects, they were
thrilled with the unbridled enthusiasm and initiative.
In the meantime, Alison attended a Liberating Structures workshop in
Brazil and came back with even more ways to build on the success of the
initial Open Space. With the seventy project leaders, Alison developed Min
Specs to constrain and enable self-organization. Still, it was messy. Out of
seventy projects, seventeen garnered formal support, and ten of those were
able to live within the Min Specs over the next six months.
“While excitement was spreading “I very deliberately
person to person, I took a very firm stance. I fanned the flames.
very deliberately fanned the flames,” Alison Liberating Structures
told us. “Liberating Structures would not be a would not be a one-time
one-time thing.” She extended the use of thing.”
Liberating Structures to her own management
team meetings, the development of marketing strategies, the big sales
convention, and eventually to interactions with customers. “It could have
stopped with the successful Open Space meeting, but I insisted,” she says.
Waves of Internal Then External Experiments

Improving performance and integrating Liberating Structures into the

business came in waves, with different functions and levels adopting
different Liberating Structures at their own pace throughout the organization.
First up was the sales convention. One-way PowerPoint presentations and
formulaic sales training had dominated the traditional convention. The
introduction of lively Liberating Structures approaches sparked fresh
enthusiasm and engagement.
Hesitantly at first, marketing and sales directors brought the interactive
Liberating Structures methods they had experienced into everyday work.
Respected managers in marketing tried Liberating Structures first. One
product manager used a Conversation Café in an evening meeting with
customers, a highly educated professional group. Typically, the meeting
would have included a dry PowerPoint lecture, brief Q&A, and dinner. The
Conversation Café produced true engagement for the first time:
BlackBerries never came out, and peer-to-peer and generalist-to-specialist
exchanges were collegial and full of learning.
The sales force soon got into the act. Everyone in the sales department
was organized top to bottom in a tightly controlled hierarchy and not
expected to embrace the new methods quickly. However, after a major
meeting using 1-2-4-All, User Experience Fishbowl, and Conversation
Café for the first time with physician customers, the sales reps started to hear
back from influential doctors. The customers loved the new meetings. They
wanted more. They wanted to learn Liberating Structures methods to apply in
their own work.
“There were stories that competitors were trying to copy our success,”
Alison told us. “Soon, the sales director and, more importantly, the first-level
sales managers were ‘all in.’ Everyone followed.”
“Once the sales director Other experiments were unfolding.
and the first-level sales Alison and the HR director coached others on
managers were ‘all in,’ the management team. In pairs, they used
everyone followed.” Design StoryBoard to sketch out Liberating
Structures-inspired agendas to formulate
strategy. To build on early successes, the management team wanted a bigger
splash. They designed a “Liberating Structures basic training” session for all
product managers and sales managers.
The basic training workshop started with a familiar work assignment:
design a successful new product launch. No particular process or Liberating
Structure was suggested. The autopilot pattern showed itself. Very large
groups formed. A few individuals dominated. Quiet people retreated.
Relatively weak ideas were put on flip charts. There was very little
collaboration among groups.
The second session of the workshop gave participants the same
assignment with a twist: design a successful launch for the same new product
with using one or more Liberating Structures. The results were like night and
day. 1-2-4-All drew out many more good ideas than the previous approach to
the assignment, and TRIZ helped make space for unexpected innovative
strategies. The participants felt they contributed and were part of the product
launch moving forward. In all, they used six Liberating Structures. They had
liftoff!

Social Proof Arrived before Business Results

Looking back, Alison recalls, “Spread was happening at all levels.” But
what did it all mean? “Social proof preceded conventional proof,” she says.
“I was looking for early indicators: Did many perspectives come out? Are
people high-energy? Are groups mixing? Are Blackberries tucked away? Is
the top group working as peers? And, are sales reps helping each other?”
Alison looked for little things that suggested a bigger turnaround.
Importantly, Alison could also sense “There was freedom to
changes in the company’s relationship with explore and interact at a
customers. “I sat in the back of the room for deeper level.”
our first meeting with sixty general-practice
physicians,” she says. “They were leaning in and listening intently. The
questions were practical, about real concerns. Not the usual ‘I am smarter
than you’ comment. There was freedom to explore and interact at a deeper
level.”
At first, there were worries that expert presenters would experience a
loss of power and prestige: they were not invited to give the traditional
lecture. Surprisingly, the specialist-experts also appreciated the freedom to
explore the deeper and more practical questions facing nonexperts. Everyone
rolled up their sleeves.
“Several months after the meeting,” Alison recalls, “one specialist
presenter called me over. She told me it had been the most amazing
experience. ‘At first I felt exposed, then elated,’ the presenter said. ‘If you do
that again, I would love to be included.’”
The takeaway from customers: Alison “I now know I can drive a
and the management team had learned that the business by engaging
customer response to Liberating Structures everyone from the mail
was no different from what they had seen guy all the way up. It is
inside their organization. Nine months of practical and powerful to
internal experience made it possible and hear every voice.”
relatively comfortable to leap into customer
experiments and reach new levels of engagement and commitment.
But wait. There’s more. For Alison herself, the experience with
Liberating Structures caused a genuine transformation. “Forever, the
turnaround changed my way of leading,” she told us. “Management is not
always about being smarter. I now know that I can drive a business by
engaging everyone from the mail guy all the way up. It is practical and
powerful to hear every voice.”
Transforming After-Action Reviews in the Army:
Lisa Kimball
The US Army has a longstanding practice of using After-
Action Reviews (AAR) to debrief troops returning from
combat duty. This story shows how a simple Liberating
Structure—the Users Experience Fishbowl—replaced a traditional army
structure and yielded deep understanding of what deploying troops would be
facing in the theater of war.
In a typical AAR, each officer is interviewed individually by multiple
organizations over a thirty-day period. The process is closely controlled—
detailed, precise, and demanding. The interviewers collate, analyze, and
summarize the information. It is then incorporated into briefings provided to
the troops entering the war theater, typically via PowerPoint lectures.
In this story of Liberating Structures in action, field officers returning
from Afghanistan were going to be interviewed to transfer their specialized
knowledge to the people who would replace them. The information thought to
be particularly useful to the deploying soldiers was the returning officers’
experience in developing trusting relationships with women in Afghan
villages. With trusting relationships at the local level, soldiers were able to
generate better information to fight the war and possibly dampen the
Taliban’s efforts to recruit successfully.

Lisa Kimball, PhD, the former president of the Plexus

Institute, a nonprofit organization focused on applying
ideas from complexity science to solve social and
organizational problems, started using Liberating
Structures methods in the mid 1980s, with online
networking visionary Frank Burns. She has shown clients in government
agencies, corporations, nonprofit organizations, and educational
institutions just how simple and powerful Liberating Structures like Users
Experience Fishbowl can be.
Transferring On-the-Ground Know-How

Here’s how it happened. Lisa had started introducing Liberating Structures in

an army leadership program for officers called Starfish Adaptive
Leadership.2 Given the program’s focus on action and learning in complex
environments, Liberating Structures were included to help officers exploit
opportunity and continuously learn in situations where they are in charge but
not in control.
An executive from the Army Knowledge “The forthright and
Management function who had participated in heartfelt interaction among
the Starfish program decided to experiment the returning soldiers told
with Users Experience Fishbowl in their story in a way that
conducting AARs. Several officers who had would truly help those
returned from the war were asked to simply being deployed be safe
talk to each other in a fishbowl about their and effective.”
experience of developing trusting
relationships with community members, including local women, in Afghan
villages. The other participants—both the officers being deployed to the war
zone and the members of the knowledge management group responsible for
harvesting field intelligence—sat around the outside listening.

The executive-facilitator of the fishbowl told Lisa:

Everyone was sitting on the edge of their chairs because they felt
they were getting important firsthand, unfiltered information.
Every word was important. Moreover, participants got the
information plus a sense of how the officers worked together and
made sense of confusing signals. The experience AND the
information came through.

For the people who had been interviewers in the traditional AAR
process, it was a revelatory experience. They had a chance to see and feel
what was conveyed between officers leaving the war zone and those entering
it. Some of the questions asked were different and richer than any the
interviewers could have imagined. The officers in the fishbowl took the
questions very seriously and took notes so that they could be sure to answer
all the questions as candidly as possible—if not then, at a later time.
For the officers returning from “They were getting
Afghanistan, the fishbowl was a refreshing important firsthand,
and satisfying experience compared to the unfiltered information.
usual AAR. The traditional AAR interview Every word was
process was often mind-numbing, producing important.… The
repetitive answers to questions that had little experience AND the
local flavor. In contrast, the fishbowl information came
conversation evoked many more memories through.”
and details. One story sparked another.
Equally important, the returning soldiers were able to make sense of
their messy experience together in a way that communicated more detail and
nuance to the departing troops. They felt able to share their on-the-ground
experience in a way that would truly help their colleagues be safe and
effective. The young soldiers who had never deployed were all ears listening
to their leaders have a wide-ranging and candid discussion about their
concerns. “In the space of a couple hours,” the executive facilitating the
experiment said, “there was a huge amount of understanding and progress
made. The interaction among the participants told more of the story.”
“Don’t play what’s there, Inventing Future Health-Care
play what’s not there.”
Miles Davis
Practice:
Chris McCarthy
How do you start inventing the future?
How do hard work, hope and history
rhyme in a way that something really new
comes into being? Members of the
Innovation Learning Network (ILN) are
turning to Liberating Structures to
discover the answers.
ILN network member
Chris McCarthy has organizations
a dual role in inventing the future of health care: he is a
lead at Kaiser Permanente’s Innovation Consultancy,
where he serves as an innovation consultant, and also
leads the ILN. In both roles, Chris’s goal is akin to Dick
Fosbury’s breaking the Olympic high-jump record by an
unimaginable three inches in the 1968 Olympics, where
he reinvented high jumping.
The “Fosbury Flop” involved a straight approach, jumping with both feet,
and twisting the body 180 degrees looking away from the bar. Before
Fosbury’s revolutionary invention, all jumpers faced the bar and launched
off one foot.

The ILN network was launched in 2006 with the support of

the VHA Health Foundation and Kaiser Permanente (KP),
the largest health plan in the United States, as a unique way
to share methods, transfer ideas, and generate opportunities
for interorganizational collaboration. ILN members
realized from the outset that they would need fresh approaches to deepen
their understanding of patient needs and learn how to break away from
current reality. A synergistic mash-up of Design Thinking and Liberating
Structures was put into play. Particularly useful Liberating Structures for the
task include Open Space and Social Network Webbing.

Open Space

Every year since the ILN’s 2006 inception, the group has used Open Space
during one of its face-to-face meetings. Open Space is especially well
suited to the action-orientation and “we fail forward” spirit of innovators,
Chris says. “I believe playful curiosity is the best way to attract people into
this messy work. Open Space gives permission to explore what we know
and more importantly what we don’t know. Without exploring unfamiliar
territory, most innovations fall short.”
In Open Space sessions, innovators “Open Space gives
from different organizations have found others permission to explore
who share their curiosity about venturing into what we know and more
unfamiliar territory. Big questions have fueled importantly what we don’t
expansive action-research themes. Some know. Without exploring
examples: unfamiliar territory, most
innovations fall short.”
Virtual Worlds: How can we use
virtual-world technology to help with inventing new rules?
This question cracked open a door to real-world applications:
localizing disaster planning with real-time Google weather and
traffic data; reducing the spread of infection by incorporating special
virtual-reality segments into training sessions; enriching rehab for
injured veterans by stimulating movement with Wii technology; and
spreading hospital shift-change innovations across the country.
Directly and indirectly, ILN members have been urging each other on
to discover more.

Medication Administration: How can we make the way we

administer medications in our hospitals safer and more human-
centered?
Over the course of just two months, KP, Partners HealthCare,
Alegent, and Ascension shared proprietary facts and figures on their
current state, practices, improvements, and innovations. All four
systems became immediately smarter. KP went on to innovate in the
medication-administration process, inventing a system that became
known as KP MedRite, and then shared the system back with its ILN
partners.

CareAnyWhere: How could we enable patients to receive care

wherever they are instead of having to travel to hospitals, clinics,
or other health-care facilities?
This question led to an expansive research and application agenda.
Radical inventiveness started to unfold in tangible approaches like
hospital-at-home, care at the shopping mall, and home visits, as well
as less tangible care methods like e-ICU, Twitter, and Virtual
Practice. Eyes opened. Approaches that seemed like science fiction
(robo-doc) or retro methods (home visits) started to make practical
sense.

Gamification of Health Care: How could games help people

change their behavior in ways that improve health, prevent
illness, or help them live more fully with a chronic disease?
Applications discovered include a virtual-reality game called Snow
World, used to treat burn patients who cannot tolerate more pain
medication; Nike + iPod “sensor-enabled smart shoes” to help
athletes boost their performance and health; and computer games
that make it fun for children to learn how to live with diabetes.
The games are designed to be used by individuals, and players also
can often be connected to peers or a community with the same
challenges. Skeptics walked away inspired by a wide range of
serious applications in hand as the game designers had demonstrated
how technical, clinical, and social motivations can be combined in
powerful ways.
“When we first started Like other seemingly questionable ILN
the ILN, we weren’t sure experiments, exploring games turned out to be
what it was, where it was both serious and seriously fun. Many of the
going, or how it would ILN discoveries are “game changing,” and
last. Five years later, we each success rose from humble beginnings.
know it’s the sweet spot of The first Open Space sessions had offered
content, technique, and only shadowy hints of what was to come.
friendship that drives us “When we first started the ILN,” says Chris,
to return year after year.” “we weren’t sure what it was, where it was
going, or how it would last. Five years later,
we know it’s the sweet spot of content, technique, and friendship that
drives us to return year after year.”

Social Network Webbing

Part of the hidden capability in the ILN is well-developed Social Network

Webbing via informal networks and relationships. Each member
organization has a designated “network weaver,” responsible for matching
people to people and people to specific projects. This was one result of
detailed social network mapping efforts conducted in 2006 and 2007.
Another result is that many members now have local-internal networks
to match the global-external ILN. Chris notes, “A year after we started the
ILN, we realized that we didn’t even know who the internal innovators were
at KP, let alone from the outside world.” As of this writing, Kaiser
Permanente’s internal network (dubbed the Garfield Innovation Network, or
GIN) has grown to more than four hundred members from five. ILN members
also realized that the members with more robust internal innovation networks
were making more practical use of the global network.

Reflections on Results “Open Space works

because so rarely are
“Open Space is one of those amazing ahas of people who gather at
when you realize that simple is truly better,” meetings ever given the
Chris says. “Who would have thought a group chance to own it, run it,
of people on the fly could construct their own and decide it. Of course
agenda and self-facilitate? Open Space with ownership comes
works because so rarely are people who responsibility!”
gather at meetings ever given the chance to
own it, run it, and decide it. Of course with ownership comes
responsibility!”
Open Space and Social Network Webbing are the main ways ILN
members collectively are inventing the future of health care. A fresh look at
fundamental health-care needs, a creative mix of new technologies, and a
strong social network are combining to bring the future into focus.
Creating More Substance, Connections, and Ideas
in the Classroom
By Arvind Singhal
Arvind Singhal is Samuel Shirley and Edna Holt
Marston Professor, Department of Communication,
The University of Texas at El Paso. He is also
appointed as William J. Clinton Distinguished Fellow,
Clinton School of Public Service, University of
Arkansas. This article was adapted from “A Liberated
Professor Speaks,” published at [Link].

“The nature of the student Professors who revel in their vocational

feedback I hear has calling often hear their students say:
noticeably changed. “Professor, I enjoyed your class. I learned a
Qualitatively, it is deeper, lot. I thank you, and so on.” Such remarks,
more soulful.” whether expressed orally, or penned in course
evaluations and thank-you notes, warm the
heart and buoy the soul. I have been graced and buoyed by such warmth over
the past twenty-nine years.
However, in the past eight years or so, the nature of the student
feedback I hear has noticeably changed. Qualitatively, it is deeper, more
soulful. I increasingly hear: “This class changed my life,” “I learned so much
about myself in this class,” “I am sad that this course is ending for I will miss
my classmates,” and so on. And, I have even heard students say: “Thank you
for teaching me about healthy communities. But thank you also for teaching
me how to learn.” Such statements more than make a professor’s day. They
make a student’s life!
How do I explain this qualitative shift in student feedback? Perhaps it is
because I am getting older, wiser. Perhaps my abilities to connect the
classroom with the real world have multiplied appreciably. Perhaps I have
learned to better manage classroom conflict. Perhaps I can, at the drop of a
hat, pull out a compelling story to illustrate a point. Or, all of the above!
I believe there may be one more explanation. In the past eight years, I
have increasingly been exposed to, and have put to practice, some alternative
ways to approach and design my classroom interactions: Liberating
Structures.
What has the adoption of Liberating Structures done to my classrooms?
One of my students (we’ll call her GC) wrote the following in her learner
reflections:
In Dr. Singhal’s class we practice Liberating Structures in the
way the class is structured and in the way activities are
conducted. These structures provide an easy-to-learn
atmosphere as they are adaptable methods for engagement that
make it quick and simple for individuals from all backgrounds to
integrate themselves into a discussion. This is exhibited by a
simple rearrangement of chairs, removing order and hierarchy
in conversation, and to even have space for a few moments to
communicate free from course intentions. Through these
practices we are working on decentralizing our thinking and
actions. Through Liberating Structures we are learning to not
adhere to an individual position and to not reject what others
have to say.
Acadia Roher, who took my once-a-month Liberating Structures
elective seminar at the Clinton School of Public Service, summarized her
classroom experience with the following sketch and narrative:
My sketch represents the energy, “I chose bright, vibrant
focus, and expanding humanity colors to represent the
that I have witnessed by using electrifying energy that
Liberating Structures in different Liberating Structures
settings and groups. I chose seem to create in a room
bright, vibrant colors to represent full of people.”
the electrifying energy that
Liberating Structures seem to create in a room full of people.
But the energy is not chaotic, it is instead focused and often
creates more substance, connections, and ideas than traditional
structures. The purple nucleus represents the focus that
 Liberating Structures bring, from which the ever-expanding
circles of energy and ideas bounce outward.

Acadia’s portrayal of Liberating Structures and what they help accomplish

The Classroom Comes Alive

“What changes with When I read comments such as GC’s and

Liberating Structures are Acadia’s, I grin from ear to ear. To hear that
certain structural Liberating Structures help create more
conditions that enhance substance, connections, and ideas in a
the quality of interactions classroom—priceless! Interestingly,
among participants, Liberating Structures allow for such to
leading to very different happen with no extra resources. The
outcomes.” classroom, the teacher, the students, the
chalkboard, the laptop, the projector, and the
time spent in the classroom remain the same. What changes with Liberating
Structures are certain structural conditions that enhance the quality of
interactions among participants, leading to very different outcomes.
Let us give some simple examples.3 Physically moving the students
from a traditional rows-and-columns classroom configuration into a circular
seating arrangement changes the nature of the learning environment and the
nature of the interactions. The circle structure allows each participant to be
equally seen, heard, and acknowledged. There are no backbenchers or
frontbenchers. No scope for hiding. The circular setting invites richer
participation, allowing those who are present to verbally and nonverbally
affirm, support, or question others.
Laughter ripples through a circular classroom far more rapidly and
inclusively than in a traditionally structured classroom. I for one have
noticed more smiles and nods. Sighs and gasps are also more visible,
creating opportunities for deliberation, and spaces for corrective action. As a
professor, I experience more winks and nods and quizzical looks and my
antennae are constantly processing feedback that is more authentic, accurate,
and timely. Such feedback enables one to be nimble, to improvise, to change
course, or to maintain it.

Arvind facilitating a Master Class in the Netherlands using a circular

seating configuration
I often introduce a “talking stick” when doing small-group work in my
classrooms. The talking stick represents a simple structure: whoever holds
the stick (can be a pen) will talk, the others will listen. The talking stick has
been used by the Navajos for centuries to bestow respect on the one who is
talking. After one is finished talking, the stick is usually passed on to the next
person. This goes on until all have spoken. In a small-group situation, the
talking stick can go around several times so that participants have an
opportunity to widen and deepen their own thoughts and to build on the
thoughts of the others. No one person dominates and the conversation does
not ping-pong (bounce from one to another) as is customary in a traditional
classroom brainstorm.
The talking stick, perceptibly, slows the conversation down, making it
deeper and richer. [See the Conversation Café in Part Four for details.]
Once the stick is in circulation, participants often get into a zone, playing off
each other—like a jazz improvisation. In ten to fifteen minutes, a small group
can have an orderly, respectful, deep, and creative conversation. And
multiple small-group conversations can be simultaneously carried out in a
classroom, ensuring that all class participants are engaged and participating
at the same time.
Simple structures like sitting in a circle, introducing a talking stick, and
providing people an equal opportunity to be seen and heard changes the
quality of the connections and interactions in a classroom. Imagine if such
happens twice or thrice a week over a sixteen-week-long semester course!
More diverse inputs lead to a wider and deeper understanding of the issue at
hand. Interestingly, within the first week or two, the classroom feels more
dynamic, arms begin to uncross, words begin to flow, smiles and laughter
rise, and sighs and gasps become more visible and acceptable. Trust rises as
relationships deepen over time.
By the third week of classes, even “I experience immense
before I enter the classroom, the din of joy, realizing that the
conversational chatter greets me at the door. class has begun to act
Multiple conversations are under way, like, feel like, an
telephone numbers are being exchanged, and interconnected whole.”
most people know the others by their names.
After class, participants feel comfortable to hang around. Compassion for
others is palpable: someone offers a ride to another, someone puts the chairs
back in rows and columns, and someone erases the chalkboard clean. When
such happens, and with repeated frequency, I experience immense joy,
realizing that the class has begun to act like, feel like, an interconnected
whole. I am reinforced, convinced, and affirmed that we, collectively, must
be doing something right to build a sense of community, a safe collective
space.
 My Personal Transformation
“I have often reflected on
how the practice of I have often reflected on how the practice of
Liberating Structures has Liberating Structures has enhanced my quality
enhanced my quality of of life as a professor. How do I prepare
life as a professor.” differently? What am I mindful of when in
class? Who is the arbiter of knowledge?
When do I speak up? When do I let go of the conversation, and so on? There
are no clear-cut answers, nor any prescriptions to dole out. But my
experiences suggest the following.
The practice of Liberating Structures has helped liberate me from
bearing the sole burden of “professing” in a classroom, i.e., being a Sage on
Stage, a knower, and a content deliverer.
The practice of Liberating Structures has enabled me to see the vast
experiential and intellectual resources participants bring into a classroom,
individually and collectively. These resources are usually hidden, lurking,
and need a safe environment to find utterance. When such happens,
participants learn from peers, a less hierarchical and often more effective
mechanism for co-learning than just being at the mercy of the professor.
Operationally, just “letting go” of the thought of “professing”
profoundly changes the way my classroom is designed.
I am now deeply mindful about how seats are configured—e.g., in a
circle where everyone can be “seen” versus in rows and columns, and how
these spatial configurations (geography) affects pedagogy.
I am now deeply mindful about my “positionality” vis-à-vis the
participants. Am I seated with the class participants, one participant among
many, or am I behind a podium—in control with a PowerPoint clicker? What
do such spatial “positionalities” symbolize?
I am constantly thinking about how I can create and frame the structural
parameters so that participant conversations are focused and yet are allowed
to expand and deepen. I am strategizing about how all participants can be
engaged at the same time, whether as individuals who think in silence, or
with a partner in a conversational space, or in a small group as a contributing
or listening member.
 Now, when I prepare to walk into a classroom, I ask not “What is it that
I need to do?” but rather “What is it that WE need to do?” I focus on what the
participants are “doing” in the classroom for it is the experience of doing that
validates that learning has occurred. I have to constantly remind myself to
curb my urge of lecturing, or professing an answer when a question is asked,
for efficient as it may seem, learning can be quite superficial when people
are just passively watching PowerPoint slides, taking copious notes (so they
could study for an exam), or listening uncritically to the one behind the
podium.
In creating such conditions, the professor in me experiences deep
humility. He realizes that no ONE person is (or can be) the arbiter of
learning, but rather knowledge is created by the collective in the
conversations they have, and the processes they experience.

From Sage on Stage to Chief Enabler

Liberating Structures create the enabling conditions for people to contribute,

to ask for help, to develop skills in listening and paraphrasing, and to build
trust and safety, while valuing (rather celebrating) diversity and difference.
The design aspects of Liberating Structures go way beyond the frame of
“what we need to do in a classroom?” In order for meaningful, collective
conversations to occur in a classroom, I am now deeply mindful of what
individual class participants need to do prior to coming to class—what texts
to read, what lectures/talks to watch in advance, what problems to solve, and
what questions or reflections to bring to share with the collective.
As a professor, one asks how class participants might prepare
themselves to come into a designated interactional space once/twice/thrice a
week at an appointed hour, and benefit from the presence, knowledge, and
experience of others, including the professor. This mindfulness also
influences the design of what the class participants do, individually or in
small groups, in between class sessions to widen and deepen their
understanding, to engage in actions and reflections, and such.
My professorial role is now one of a Chief Enabler whose
responsibility it is to design and enable a process so that all class
participants feel invited, engaged, and allowed to contribute as “whole”
people. As an enabler, I bear the responsibility (and challenge) to create the
safety and supportive conditions for such invitations, engagements, and
contributions to potentially occur. Poetic as it sounds, this process of
“enabling” can be difficult and challenging, as the control of the classroom
space, time, and content is no longer solely with the professor. The professor
exercises some degree of control over the process, and can help provide the
frame for structuring conversations, but cannot completely control (or
predict) what surfaces from the collective. That means Liberating Structures,
necessarily, create the conditions for “surprising” and emergent classroom
outcomes—both of a substantive and relational nature. I have seen how, for
the most part, these outcomes result in opportunities for deeper, experiential
learning for individuals and the collective and deeper friendships and
relationships.
With Liberating Structures, a classroom, its participants, and a
professor are always a work-in-progress. And that is what learning is all
about, no?
Getting Commitment, Ownership, and Follow-
Through:
Neil McCarthy
Seattle leadership coach and consultant Neil McCarthy was working with a
large multinational business client to shift the patterns of conversation and
foster trusting relationships among key leaders. He turned to a couple of
Liberating Structures to help the leaders discover for themselves greater
clarity of commitment, ownership, and follow-through than anyone thought
possible.

Seattle leadership coach and consultant Neil McCarthy uses Liberating

Structures to help leaders and their teams discover for themselves how to
make the transition to higher levels of performance. “Like volleyball, I focus
on being the setter for others to get involved, not on being the one that is
always trying to spike the ball by jumping high above your team, solving the
problem with individual force and intellectualism,” he says “I try to ‘let go’ so
that my clients can practice how to draw out self-discovery and build trust in
their teams.”

Including More People in Coordinating Global Operations

Neil was working with an engineering group “Commitment, ownership,

of forty leaders—including a general and follow-through will
manager, a business manager, global support not come from listening to
based in India, and five functional groups hours of PowerPoint
from technical operations—who needed to presentations.”
plan and coordinate activities for the coming
fiscal year. Normally, this would happen in a meeting with just eight
members of the senior team and be undertaken with relatively low
expectations. Past experience with the traditional meeting format suggested
that clarity of commitment, ownership, and follow-through would be sketchy.
As Neil jested in his conversation with the group leader, “We will
collaborate by listening to PowerPoint presentations for hours followed by a
frenzy of action planning in the last thirty minutes of the meeting.”
This time around, Neil proposed using What I Need
From You (WINFY) and inviting the entire forty-member
leadership team into the conversation. The general manager
and Neil had already started working on inclusion with the senior team. “It
was not that difficult to shape next steps together with a larger group,” said
Neil. Neil’s trusting relationship and a positive track record with the GM
made the use of WINFY possible. Both wanted to create a new conversation
and spark creative relationships among the leadership team. Both had let go
of wanting to know the specific outcomes in advance. Using a new structure
like WINFY would make it possible to extend these changes to the larger
group.

Shifting the Pattern to a Straight-Up Conversation

“There had never been a Eight separate functional groups drafted two
conversation like this. BIG “what I need from you to succeed”
Just about everyone was requests to be dealt with in a fishbowl
on the edge of their seat conversation. The group leaders brought the
the entire time.” requests to the inner circle of the fishbowl,
asking each representative of the other seven
functions for what they needed. Meticulous notes were jotted down. The
larger group looked on in awe. What everyone was seeing for the first time
was people making direct, straight-to-the point requests to one another,
leader to leader. During the debrief, one participant said, “I have never seen
a conversation like this around here. I saw that just about everyone was on
the edge of their seat the entire time.”
The way the leaders paused between hearing a request and responding
to it was remarkable. The quality of listening and capturing the essence of
each request was a big change. One participant said, “It was clean. No
obfuscation. Straight up. Three unequivocal answers and one brush off—yes,
no, I will try, and whatever—stripped away the unessential.”
WINFY helped Neil’s Another participant said, “Now I know
clients see the pattern in why I never get what I need. The way my
their usual interactions leader asked for what our group needs does
and then do something not translate well among his peers. I am going
about it so they could get to have to be very clear about what we ask
on with the work at hand. for and how we ask for it.” “Now I know
Business straight up. what is important for next year,” said another.
As part of the WINFY debrief, two
different leaders in the group said, “I want to do this in my organization.”
The general manager decided to use WINFY every six months to help his
team stay aligned regarding needs.
Why was WINFY so productive? Neil says, “We don’t ask directly for
what we need. Often, it is a long, drawn-out conversation. We talk about and
debate each aspect of the issue so much that the essence of the request gets
watered down to the point where it is meaningless and easy to agree just to
end the conversation. It is also possible to neglect a request because it is not
articulated clearly.” What appears to be a yes becomes a whatever in
practice.
There’s one more payoff, says Neil: “As a facilitator, I use What I
Need From You because it helps me get out of the middle. I am more able to
practice nonattachment to a particular outcome or having my own needs
respected. My credibility as a consultant is not linked to a predetermined
outcome. Rather, my contribution comes with structuring the conversation and
working with what surprises unfold.”
Inspiring Enduring Culture Change While
Preventing Hospital Infections:
Michael Gardam
“What took me by surprise was how a project to prevent the spread of
superbugs in hospitals fundamentally changed culture and the way people
work,” says Dr. Michael Gardam. By the end of the eighteen-month research
project he led, people were working more collaboratively, coming forward
with new ideas, taking action on their own to start other programs to improve
patient care.

Michael Gardam is the medical director for infection

prevention and control at the University Health Network
in Toronto. In 2009, he put together an eighteen-month
research project to prevent the spread of superbugs in
hospitals.

Superbugs are virulent or antibiotic-resistant organisms like MRSA,

VRE, and clostridium difficile that cause serious infections and are famous
for spreading in hospital settings. Despite sustained attempts to break the
chain of transmissions, these infections remain one of health care’s most
serious challenges and transmission rates generally are increasing each year.
Michael’s research project to attack the problem involved five hospital
sites across Canada. To fund the project, Michael went way out on a limb
with the sponsor. He recommended Liberating Structures and another
unknown social intervention called Positive Deviance4 to solve the complex
infection-control problem.
It looked like an insurmountable “What took me by
problem at the outset. But just three years surprise was how this
later, there was solid proof that Michael’s project fundamentally
novel approach succeeded. “We have changed culture and the
scientific evidence that a social intervention way people work.”
works!” he told us. “Infection rate reductions
of 40 to 100 percent across hospital sites get the attention of the medical
establishment.” The unanticipated bonus was the culture change in the
participant hospitals that quickly spread across their systems.

A Deeper Look into Culture Change with Social Network Analysis and
Ethnography

The research team used Social Network Mapping to measure how

relationships grew over the study period among people in different functions
and units. Before-and-after data revealed that participation in prevention
work had increased at all five sites; staff members increased the number and
types of hospital staff that they worked with to control infections. Better still,
a diverse mix of nonexperts from multiple functions was taking an active role
in prevention for the first time. For example, the work of hospital
housekeeping staff is critical to protecting patients from superbugs. Yet,
before this project, housekeeping had rarely been part of the conversation.
Now, housekeepers were being included in the prevention effort.
Clearly, participation was way up, but very little was
known about the quality of working relationships that had
formed. The researchers were eager to dig into this
question more deeply. The research team also wanted to
learn if and how culture had shifted. In the last months of
the project, they conducted Simple Ethnography inquiries
at each site, focusing on cultural attributes such as visible
habits, espoused values, and beliefs (unexamined
assumptions). They interviewed people in different
functions and levels—from room cleaners to VPs to
project coordinators—using an Appreciative Interview
format. They asked about successful experience in
preventing infections and what made the success possible.
“Some of the answers moved me,” Michael said. “I am not
a super-emotional guy … but I was. It is wonderful to think
that a research project could have this type of effect on
people.”
 Two stories from the field linger for Michael: “A unit manager told me,
‘I used to come to work braced to find out what kind of trouble the nurses
had gotten into. I was expected to fix it. Now when I come in, they tell me
what they have done to fix anything that came up.’”
“Now, locally grown In the second story, a unit participating
ideas surface and in the superbug project was starting a new
frontline people on the cardiac program. Staff members took it on
unit take action. People themselves to form a cardiac club. They knew
can see their own ideas they were the experts on planning a launch on
spread.” their unit. After the fact, they told the project
manager about creating the club.
“The interviews revealed much more than scientific proof,” Michael
asserts. “Culturally speaking, I think we got beyond a point of no return. We
will not be able to put the toothpaste back in the tube.”
Michael’s reading on some of the significant changes the project
produced? “Now, locally grown ideas surface and frontline people on the
unit take action. People can see their own ideas spread. That’s enticing. After
experiencing the freedom and the results that you can achieve, I cannot
imagine going back to the old way.”

Cultural Attributes, Opposing Yet Comingling

Michael and project coinvestigators are still “People are more able to
trying to make sense of the larger cultural work collaboratively
shift afoot. Most surprising, the new and old while tapping the up-and-
“behaviors” are comingling. One set is not down functional expertise
displacing the other. A creative melding is as needed. Managers can
under way. encourage more self-
For example, the interviews revealed organization and let go of
that staff more often go to people with local overcontrol.”
know-how, ask more questions, and use
stories to communicate what works. At the same time, dominant patterns
persist: paying attention to rank in the hierarchy, “telling not asking,” and
using hard scientific data to make decisions.
 “Most welcome is the enhanced capability to work collaboratively
while tapping the up-and-down functional expertise as needed,” Michael
says. “More frontline staff see their role in the context of a larger system. As
a result, managers can step back and responsibly encourage more self-
organization while letting go of overcontrol. Nirvana.”

Frontiers Ripe for Liberation

“While the results of this study are very “This work has changed
promising, this work has affected me in ways the way I work and
that other studies I have been involved with interact with others.”
have not,” says Michael. “It is hard to
recognize that many of the behaviors that are unintentionally drilled into you
in medicine, such as ‘I talk, you listen,’ are contributing to problems rather
than helping to bring about solutions. This work has changed the way I work
and interact with others—I am far, far more likely to answer a question with
a question. I’m sure it irritates some people to no end, but I am interested in
their opinion and approach to the problem. Why should I think that I should
be the one with all the answers just because I’m a doctor?”
This project demonstrated that expecting fundamental change to emerge
from the bottom up was a sound and practical idea. The results were so
persuasive that the project even made it into the popular media.5 What’s
more, even before the project’s end, study participants had started to apply
Liberating Structures and Positive Deviance to new challenges, in and out of
hospital settings. Improv Prototyping, Discovery & Action Dialogue, and
TRIZ were widely employed in the study hospitals.
“I don’t believe that many Without much direct help from Michael
things are impossible. and the research team, diverse projects have
Like surfing a big wave, if blossomed in nursing homes, clinics, and
you don’t try to control NGOs across Canada.
everything, it’s a great Looking forward, Michael muses, “I
ride.” find I am more attracted to complex problems
—the impossible stuff. In part because I don’t
believe that many things are impossible. Like surfing a big wave, if you don’t
try to control everything, it’s a great ride.”
Dramatizing Behavior Change to Stop Infections:
Sherry Belanger
Sherry Belanger knew better than anyone that the behaviors that spread
superbugs are resistant to change. She also knew that prevention ideas
coming from outside rarely work. “Anything imposed on my staff—new
policies, laminated posters, or free coffee coupons—will not work well,”
Sherry says. “If it does not come from them, follow-through will suffer.” So
she found a novel way to reduce infections in her unit: Improv Prototyping.
“Improv is really fun, visual, and powerful,” Sherry says. “No one can watch
it and not be influenced!”

Sherry Belanger is a nurse who serves as a patient-care

coordinator on 4-East at Kelowna General Hospital
(KGH) in British Columbia, Canada. She also is the
energetic project manager of a core group working to
stop the transmission of superbugs (antibiotic-resistant
organisms such as MRSA, VRE, and C-difficile) that
cause stubborn infections. In addition to using Improv Prototyping to
motivate prevention within her unit and across hospital departments, the
group employed Social Network Webbing to coordinate action and attract
cross-functional participation.

Within three weeks of returning from the “Anything imposed on my

kickoff meeting for the national Improv staff will not work well. If
Prototyping project in Toronto, Sherry and it does not come from
her team had staged Improv scenes in one of them, follow-through will
the hospital units and with the senior suffer.”
leadership team.6 Their debut with the top
leaders was an especially big hit, Sherry recalls: “We wanted to get leaders
talking about superbug prevention.” The playful approach Sherry’s team took
unleashed serious attention, energy, and momentum among the managers
beyond expectations.
From that early success, Sherry’s team members were ready, literally
and figuratively, to act their way into promoting safer practice. The team
visited units and groups across the hospital and often used Discovery &
Action Dialogues to learn about challenges specific to each unit, which they
then used to generate “the material” for Improv Prototyping. For example,
on a drug rehab unit, staff wanted to help patients with infections safely visit
the communal kitchen. The team’s dialogues yielded the plotline for a scene
dubbed “Mr. Munchie” to highlight the issue and promote careful use of the
kitchen facilities.
Another pair of Improv skits the team developed was called
“Speaking Truth to Power” and came from its work with a group of
second-year nursing students. The aim was to help student nurses
remind others about safe practice, particularly when the person
being reminded holds a more powerful position.
“I might not have stopped Sherry recalls the scenes:
him if I hadn’t seen the “We asked for volunteers and two students
Improv. I realized that it stepped up to do the acting. Along with a
is everyone’s member of our core group, they acted out two
responsibility to speak up scenes. Scene 1: A student nurse is in an
to stop the transmission isolation room with a patient when a
of superbugs.” physician enters without isolation gear on,
carrying the patient chart. The physician is
very overbearing and brushes off the student. Scene 2: A replay of the scene
with the student nurse inviting the physician to step aside, away from the
patient, and helping the physician get into the isolation gown.” A lively group
debrief followed the two scenes.
Three weeks later, a group of second-year students that had experienced
the skits was doing part of their clinical rotation on Sherry’s unit. A
physiotherapist stopped Sherry in the hall and let her know how impressed
she was that one of the students had stopped a physician who was entering an
isolation room without the proper gear. Just like the Improv scene, the doctor
was rushing into the room, carrying the patient chart, without donning a gown
or gloves.
 “I went to find the student,” Sherry told us, “to let her know she was
doing a fantastic job. Her name is Marisa.”
When Sherry spoke with her, Marisa said, “I didn’t even have to think
about what I was going to say—it just came out. I might not have stopped him
if I hadn’t seen the Improv. I realized that it is everyone’s responsibility to
speak up to stop the transmission of superbugs.”
The physician did not comply with her attempt to stop him from going
into the room unprotected, but Marisa was not intimidated. “When it comes to
safety,” she told Sherry, “there should be no hierarchy. We should all do our
part to protect ourselves and our patients. We shouldn’t be less important
because we are students.”

The story spread through the hospital like

wildfire.

Capturing everyone’s imagination is central to

making progress with superbug prevention. To
succeed, everyone, from doctors to student nurses to Marisa in front of an
room cleaners, has to change his or her habits and isolation
routines. Marisa inspired many others to “speak truth precautions room
to power.” Just as important, Marisa developed the
real-life confidence to do the right thing to stop the transmission of
superbugs.
Developing Competencies for Physician Education:
Diane Magrane
How to enable medical-school faculty to follow the lead of their students and
nonphysician colleagues in undertaking a complex research project? When
success requires that everyone on the research team discover what is working
and together make changes, doctors have to follow and lead simultaneously.
Here’s how Liberating Structures helped to guide a multidisciplinary study of
how medical students can better attend to the spiritual needs of patients.

Diane Magrane, MD, is the director of the International

Center for Executive Leadership in Academics at Drexel
University College of Medicine, where she works with
physician leaders who are so smart and so successful, they
sometimes have difficulty learning new behaviors. So she
often turns to Liberating Structures to engage fellow
academic leaders and lays each one out like a teacher’s lesson plan.
“Education cuts through the politics and the educator then becomes an
inside advocate for new ideas,” says Diane.

Diane Magrane was asked to facilitate a national conference

to develop uncommon competencies and learning objectives for
medical-student education. She agreed to the project on the
condition that the group approach the task collaboratively, with an
open mind for new insights from exploring how physicians might
better attend to the spiritual needs of patients.
The people selected to work on the project were
exceptionally diverse: the teams of participants represented eight different
medical schools and included professors, palliative-care specialists,
pastoral-care professionals, and a handful of students. So Diane chose a
variety of Liberating Structures for the competency-development process,
beginning with Discovery & Action Dialogues (DAD) weeks before the
conference. She explains:
 I had previously guided different groups through a process of designed
competencies for medical-student training. We always used creative
methods and interdisciplinary small-group discussions. As the
facilitator, I ended up doing a lot of cataloguing and using my formal
authority to move the project forward. Too often, participants
advocated and jockeyed to protect their discipline. The process
required a powerful mediator.
I wanted this project to be different!
Diane introduced the DADs first with the project organizers and then
with each team in a telephone conference. Each group conducted three or
more DADs in academic and clinical settings and then contributed reports of
their findings as source materials for the summit (see box).

Action Research with Discovery & Action Dialogue

In preparation for our conference, you are responsible for facilitating and
collecting data from three DADs. A variety of settings is recommended:
with medical students only; with a preselected mix of students, residents,
RNs, MDs, and patients; with a mixed group on a hospital unit; and in an
extreme setting in which attending to spiritual needs is MORE difficult
(e.g., ICU).

Here are the dialogue questions:

1. How do you know when the spiritual needs of patients are being
neglected?
2. How do YOU attend to your own spiritual needs and the spiritual
needs of patients?
3. What prevents you from doing this or taking these actions all the time?
4. Is there a person or a unit/group that seems to be particularly
successful at attending to spiritual needs? How do they do it?
5. Do you have any ideas?
6. What steps would start to bring these ideas to life? Any volunteers?
7. Who else needs to be involved?
 “It was fascinating watching them learn
“Participants learned how to suspend their assumptions about how
how to suspend their spirituality shows up in clinical care and
assumptions and discover watching them discover how much they could
how much they could discover by using their natural curiosity,”
discover by using their Diane says.
natural curiosity.” The premeeting work took them to a
different place than they would have been
without those explorations. By using DADs, they discovered a much deeper
and richer perspective on how spiritual needs were tended to under a wide
range of situations and extreme conditions.
A surprise came when an unusual group of suspects emerged, Diane told
us.
Medical students were a major source of insight. Whereas many of
the clinicians felt encumbered by the crunch of time in clinical
encounters, grousing that they did not have time to tend to
spiritual needs in addition to the medical needs of patients,
students on clinical rotations observed physicians doing just that
—sharing difficult diagnoses with patients in a manner that
respected spiritual needs. They could tell us how busy doctors
were able to compassionately attend to spiritual needs while
completing the rest of their technical duties.
The work was extremely collaborative and open—and continued to
produce unforeseen insights. For example, in the course of analyzing the
DADs conversations, one unexpected competency the participants identified
was tending not only to the spiritual needs of patients but also to those of
practitioners and students.
What’s more, Diane says, “they surprised themselves by integrating
spirituality into their work at the conference.” A striking example occurred in
the final moments of the gathering:

“In the closing circle, when we read “A deep respect for each
out loud the top ten ideas from 25/10 individual emerged. A
Crowd Sourcing, a deep silence community of belonging
followed. I recall discomfort until one formed.”
 of the members asked, “Can we read the others?” We proceeded to
read and acknowledge every single idea. A deep respect for each
individual had emerged. A community of belonging had formed.”

By the end of the conference, participants had developed medical-

school competencies as well as methods of assessment and evaluation in six
areas:
Knowledge: Acquire the foundational knowledge necessary in
integrating spirituality in the care of patients.
Patient Care: Integrate spirituality into daily clinical practice.
Communication: Communicate with patients, family, and health-
care team about spiritual issues.
Compassionate Presence: Establish a compassionate presence
with patients, family, and colleagues.
Professional Development: Incorporate spirituality into
professional development.
Health Systems: Apply knowledge of health-care systems to
advocate for spirituality in patient care.
Using more DADs, participants had identified the behaviors that would
enable effective practice of each of the competencies. The behaviors, in turn,
helped to generate evaluation of teaching and learning methods.

Reflecting on Learning and Leadership

“This is not a rule-driven Diane’s goal is to help leaders feel confident

process but something in messy situations, believing more in
that emerges. Leaders see themselves when the path forward is
themselves in a new way.” challenging. She is keenly aware that she does
not solve problems for people. Rather, she
helps them discover their own solutions: “I am there to catch them if they fall
back.”
Diane genuinely believes that if we dig deeply enough, we all can find
more courage to lead, and teach. “I push people and myself to cognitive,
spiritual, and emotional deepening,” she says. “This is not a rule-driven
process familiar to academics but rather something that emerges. Leaders see
themselves in a new way. Emergence is not in their vocabulary.”
In the case of Diane’s competency-development conference, Liberating
Structures helped to construct a research project that included many voices
not often heard. The structure made it possible to integrate insights from
unusual suspects (e.g., students, clergy) and on-the-ground experience in
extreme settings. The group experienced powerful learning and generated
very practical results for medical-student education.
Passing Montana Senate Bill 29:
Senator Lynda Bourque Moss
A legislative session seems an unlikely setting for giving away power to gain
widespread support. That didn’t stop senator Lynda Bourque Moss, who had
inherited a very complicated bill to address driving under the influence of
alcohol in her state. She chalks up her success in getting SB 29 passed to her
use of Liberating Structures.

Montana state senator Lynda Bourque Moss is an artist

with a master of fine arts degree. She brings an intuitive
sensibility to her work in the legislature and in heading up
a regional foundation. The community is her “palette.” She
believes that Liberating Structures give more shape and
depth to how we relate, and she attributes the passage of SB 29 to the way
Liberating Structures enabled including and engaging traditionally
opposing voices in the DUI conversation.

It is exceptionally difficult to pass a bill that mandates new behavior,

much less a bill that ignites the passions of industry and advocacy groups.
Key constituent groups see the challenge from different perspectives,
typically opposing ones. “Mandatory bills are seen as negative and can be
killed by invoking ‘too much government,’” Linda told us. “Plus, the liquor
industry is very powerful. They can make or break legislation like this.”
To get the process going on Montana Senate Bill 29: Responsible
Alcohol Sales and Service Act, Lynda engaged the whole spectrum of
concerned citizens and special-interest groups. She convened conversations
with MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving), the gambling association, the
taverns association, the restaurant association, convenience store owners, the
Montana Highway Patrol, and the Department of Revenue, which oversees
taxing and distribution of alcohol in Montana. Two Liberating Structures
helped guide Lynda along the way to passage: Appreciative Interviews and
Min Specs.
 Lynda started with Appreciative Interviews. “Most legislation is
grounded in existing law,” she told us. “You amend by adding or deleting.
For SB 29, nothing in the law was used as reference. Rather, I asked ‘What
do we need to do?’ and ‘What works now?’”
This line of questioning sparked engagement and unleashed
a set of fresh perspectives.

Let It Happen, Don’t Make It Happen

“Unlikely parties came Each constituent group knew the DUI

together. I was more a challenge inside out. Novel ideas on what
facilitator than a law- worked to prevent alcohol-related tragedies
MAKER.” came from their unique perspectives. The
organizations selling alcohol were held liable
for accidents. The people serving and selling alcohol lost needed jobs.
MADD parents lost children and family members. State agencies picked up
the pieces. Lynda tapped the experience and imagination of everyone at the
table. She recalls, “Unlikely parties came together: all the amendments came
from them, not me. I was more a facilitator than a law-MAKER.”
The stories from the Appreciative Interviews also revealed Min
Specs to Lynda: the must dos and must not dos for everyone to share
responsibility for preventing DUIs.
First, she learned that training for servers and sellers must be
mandatory, as should be personal fines and the threat of license revocation
for the employer. This would reduce liability premiums and give the
legislation teeth. Second, the requirements for servers must be reasonable,
respectful, and flexible. For example, part-time workers needed their training
certificates to be transferable as they changed jobs. Third, servers and
sellers needed to learn how to truly say “no.” Clearly, the core behaviors and
social skills needed to do their job were not trivial, nor widely practiced.
“The very inclusive In the last hour before the final vote, a
approach used to create threat popped up. All the work done to craft
SB 29 made it the bill could have been lost. Surprisingly, a
unmistakably a product of group of Senate staffers who had not been
directly involved in the process stepped
all the constituents’ forward with support. Why? Lynda suspects it
voices.” had everything to do with the very inclusive
approach used to create SB 29. This
legislation was something new, unmistakably a product of all the
constituents’ voices.
Transcending a Top-Down, Command-and-Control
Culture:
Jon Velez
“When I became chief information officer, IT was known as the place you
went to be told, ‘You can’t have that,’” Jonathan Velez told us. “Employees
in the department were valued for doing what they were told and saying,
‘Yes, sir.’ There is a cultural legacy of top-down, command and control.”

Jonathan Velez, MD, is chief information officer of

Memorial Health System in Colorado Springs. He has
joined with system CEO Larry McEvoy to shift the culture
toward more interdependency and shared accountability
everywhere in the organization.

Jon started working shoulder to shoulder with Memorial Health System

CEO Larry McEvoy to transform the culture and create a more collaborative
relationship-centered organization. Both Jon and Larry are MDs, trained as
emergency-medicine physicians, so they appreciate the importance of trust,
coordination, and autonomy among team members to accomplish goals
quickly.
They also appreciate that the dominant command-and-control culture is
a dragon with two heads. Hospitals are filled with experts who embrace
control. It’s not only the IT experts but also the busy nurses and doctors who
can overuse command-and-control behaviors. For many of the challenges
these groups handle, including and unleashing others is unnecessary. Whether
it’s solving certain technical IT problems or providing “simple” acute
medical care, customers and patients don’t need to be trusted partners to
succeed.

Immersion Workshop to Turn Novices into “To turn innovation

Expert Contributors novices into expert
Nonetheless, Jon and Larry have big ideas. contributors, everyone
Their strategy is to shift patterns in internal was invited to a
operations (for example, in information Liberating Structures
technology and finance) as well as to support Immersion Workshop.”
a patient-centered Bedside Trust Initiative.
With the goal of unleashing innovation novices to become expert
contributors, everyone from top to bottom in the Memorial Health System IT
department was invited to a Liberating Structures Immersion Workshop.
“Staff meetings are now One hundred thirty members of the IT
like magic because people department (plus forty of their internal
contribute in ways they customers from the finance and clinical
did not anticipate.” departments) spent three days together,
applying Liberating Structures methods to the
challenges they care about most.
That workshop sparked a wide range of
improvements, from advancing clinical transformation
projects, through innovations like the Bedside Trust
Initiative and physician partnerships, to redesigning the IT
request process, to radically shifting how everyday
meetings are conducted. “Staff meetings are now fun,” Jon
says. “It feels like magic because people contribute in
ways they did not anticipate.”
Jon and other users have incorporated their favorite
Liberating Structures into their daily work. Jon regularly
uses 1-2-4-All, Min Specs, and What, So What, Now What? He reports,
“Staff members moved from the assumption that ‘my idea is not that
important’ to seeing that not only did ‘my idea’ add value but also others are
thinking along the same lines. Once everyone believes their contribution
matters, the team gets much smarter about solving complex challenges.”

Mountains Beyond Mountains

Similar progress has been made in patches across the organization. However,
it feels like there are mountains beyond mountains yet to climb. The legacy
culture runs very deep: the unwanted dependent tendencies to wait for
someone else to take responsibility, game the system, and blame managers
for what is wrong linger. Jon and Larry want more interdependency and
shared accountability everywhere in the department.
Even though Jon is doing his best to help employees to let go of
overcontrol and practice more self-organization, old behaviors pop up. “The
other day, two employees referred to themselves as ‘peons,’” Jon told us. “I
cringed.” Clearly, some employees seem unable to believe that this cultural
transformation is anything more than talk. “On the one hand, employees want
to make more decisions. On the other hand, when invited to create an IT
decision-making council—made up of nonmanagement employees and with
the responsibility of making some important decisions—the response has
been less than enthusiastic.”
Not deterred, Jon keeps the focus on culture and behaviors. For
example, a federal Medicare inspection turned into a big success. The visit
had revealed a long list of tasks and fixes with a deadline to comply with
confidentiality and safety regulations. The work was done in record time
with few flaws. Jon asked the staff, “Why? How can we build on this
success?”
Jon had his own answers in mind. “A Wicked Question
Precisely four. He convened the team to deal emerged: how to invite
with the question using 1-2-4-All. Quickly, and insist on liberation
the answers expanded from four to eight. throughout the
“Four of the key factors were not on my list,” department?”
Jon told us. “I was thrilled, although that
doesn’t mean I liked everything I heard.”
In the process, Jon and the team discovered a surprising paradox: their
success in the Medicare inspection hinged on tapping elements of the old
command-and-control culture. “They said it felt like we met in the war
room,” Jon shared. “The general laid out strategy and tactics to get all the
tasks done. The chain of command helped us move quickly and accurately.”
A surprising paradox indeed.
The revelation left Jon wondering, “Does the organization need a break
from working on interdependency, or do I need to push harder? It seems
counterintuitive, but I am contemplating telling them to just do it. A Wicked
Question indeed. Liberate yourselves now!”
Paradox: Leaders Stepping Up While Stepping Back

Jon is transforming along with the IT “Like a newborn colt, a

department. Individually and collectively, new culture that
they are shaping a way forward. His original transcends and includes
idea about transformation is not as simple as the old is wobbling its
stopping command and control and starting way into existence.”
liberated self-organization. Rather, he is
working with two opposing tendencies: control and letting go. Depending on
the situation, comingling approaches can create robust and productive
results.
“In some places, the culture seems to be stuck in a dependent rut,” Jon
muses. “You can tell a team about a better way to work together and even get
agreement. What you don’t always get is movement. In other words, I might
need to dictate, ‘Come on, we’re moving out of the rut!’ to get a team
unstuck.”
These paradoxical tendencies make it hard to know when to step up and
when to step back. On the other hand, Jon can see clearly that members of his
group are learning a new pattern for themselves. Now they have access to
more than a single command-and-control structure to achieve results. A new
culture that includes and transcends the old is coming into existence.
 PART FOUR
The Field Guide to Liberating Structures

Part Four contains your ready-to-use repertoire of thirty-three Liberating

Structures.
For each structure here, we provide a “I can’t understand why
step-by-step outline of what to do to put it into people are frightened of
practice immediately plus a brief description new ideas. I’m frightened
of what to expect as a result, tips on of the old ones.” John
successful use, and ideas for designing Cage
variations. Also included are examples of
how managers, frontline workers, and facilitators have used each structure in
different types of organizations and communities as well as information on
sources and some suggestions for getting additional information or supporting
materials.

How To Navigate The Field Guide

The information on all thirty-three Liberating Structures is displayed in the
same format. Under its name in the main heading, there is a tagline that
expresses its essential characteristic and an estimate of the approximate
minimum time required to use the structure in a group setting.
 We then describe each structure in a standard format that includes the
following entries:

WHAT IS MADE POSSIBLE: A brief explanation of what you can

accomplish

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS: What to do and

how to do it, step by step:

1. Structuring the invitation

2. How space is organized and materials needed
3. How participation is distributed
4. How groups are configured
5. Sequence of steps and time allocation

WHY? PURPOSES: Primary reasons for using this Liberating Structure

TIPS AND TRAPS: Useful advice for ensuring the best possible
outcomes

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS: Alternatives or embellishments for you to

try and ideas for designing others

EXAMPLES: A few actual applications to inspire you to find

opportunities that exist in your context

ATTRIBUTION: Sources of inspiration or invention

COLLATERAL MATERIAL: Useful presentation materials and

templates plus illustrations of Liberating Structures in action. Additional
materials are available on the website: [Link]

Before—and after—you use any Liberating Structure, we recommend

that you read through its entire description. Obviously, it is necessary to read
all the way through the step-by-step explanation of what to do before
attempting to use a structure for the first time. It also never hurts to do a dry
run, mentally or with a pilot group. After each experience using a Liberating
Structure, take the time to reread the description and to reflect on what
happened; it will greatly accelerate your learning, deepen your understanding,
and spark ideas for creative variations and combinations (use What, So
What, Now What?). Finally, recall that Part Two: Getting Started and
Beyond is full of ideas and advice on how to put Liberating Structures to
work in various settings, from a one-time meeting to large-scale
organizational change initiatives.
However you decide to begin, remember that this Field Guide is not
meant to be an instruction manual. The descriptions are brief synopses of
essential points to remember: the minimum instructions you need to start using
any of the Liberating Structures. For many of the structures, there are volumes
of additional materials available on our own and others’ websites and in
books and articles. To dig deeper, start with the references here in Tips and
Traps and Attributions and, at the end of the book, in the Learning Resources.
Finally, this Field Guide is a map, not the territory. The territory will be
discovered through your lived experience with Liberating Structures. The map
is simply designed to help you with designing a wide range of activities. The
Design Storyboards Liberating Structure and Part Two: Getting Started and
Beyond are good points of departure for your exploration. You may also find
it useful to have Liberating Structures Design Cards handy for composing; see
[Link]

Playfully Serious Icons

Every icon in the Field Guide was designed to One Liberating Structure
illustrate the particular essence of each can transform a meeting,
Liberating Structure. The fabulous artist a classroom, or a
Lesley Jacobs worked with us to create conversation. Using many
images that are playful but have a serious of them together, on a
purpose: to become over time a form of visual regular basis, can
shorthand that jogs the memory of users and transform an
signals what is coming without the need for organization, a
explanation. The icons also provide you with community, or a life.
symbols that you can use to simplify your
planning and designing activities. Their deliberately playful style is intended
to attract your attention and incite you to use them. Finally, the icons are a
reminder that playfulness is positive energy that promotes participation in the
lively search for answers that is unleashed by Liberating Structures.

Menu Of 33 Liberating Structures V 2.2

This menu represents version 2.2 of a growing collection of Liberating
Structures. We recommend that you start with the simpler Liberating
Structures in the left-hand column (e.g., 1-2-4-All), build your experience, and
then move to the more intricate ones in the next two columns. Some of the
simpler Liberating Structures are used as building blocks for others.
However, should some tagline in column three inspire you, all the information
you need to start experimenting can be found here in the Field Guide.
1-2-4-All
Engage Everyone Simultaneously in Generating
Questions, Ideas, and Suggestions (12 min.)

What is made possible? You can immediately include everyone regardless

of how large the group is. You can generate better ideas and more of them
faster than ever before. You can tap the know-how and imagination that is
distributed widely in places not known in advance. Open, generative
conversation unfolds. Ideas and solutions are sifted in rapid fashion. Most
importantly, participants own the ideas, so follow-up and implementation is
simplified. No buy-in strategies needed! Simple and elegant!

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
Ask a question in response to the presentation of an issue, or about a
problem to resolve or a proposal put forward (e.g., What
opportunities do YOU see for making progress on this challenge?
How would you handle this situation? What ideas or actions do you
recommend?)

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Unlimited number of groups
Space for participants to work face-to-face in pairs and foursomes
Chairs and tables optional
Paper for participants to record observations and insights

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Everyone in the group is included (often not the facilitator)
Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute
4. How Groups Are Configured
Start alone, then in pairs, then foursomes, and finally as a whole
group

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Silent self-reflection by individuals on a shared challenge, framed
as a question (e.g., What opportunities do YOU see for making
progress on this challenge? How would you handle this situation?
What ideas or actions do you recommend?) 1 min.
Generate ideas in pairs, building on ideas from self-reflection. 2
min.
Share and develop ideas from your pair in foursomes (notice
similarities and differences). 4 min.
Ask, “What is one idea that stood out in your conversation?” Each
group shares one important idea with all (repeat cycle as needed). 5
min.

WHY? PURPOSES

Engage every individual in searching for answers

Avoid overhelping and the overcontrol-dependency vicious cycle
Create safe spaces for expression, diminish power differentials
Express “silent” conversations and expand diversity of inputs
 Enrich quality of observations and insights before expression
Build naturally toward consensus or shared understanding

TIPS AND TRAPS

Firmly facilitate quiet self-reflection before paired conversations

Ask everyone to jot down their ideas during the silent reflection
Use bells for announcing transitions
Stick to precise timing, do another round if needed
In a large group during “All,” limit the number of shared ideas to
three or four
In a large group, use a facilitator or harvester to record output not
shared
Invite each group to share one insight but not to repeat insights
already shared
Separate and protect generation of ideas from the whole group
discussion
Defer judgment; make ideas visual; go wild!
When you hit a plateau, jump to another form of expression (e.g.,
Improv, sketching, stories)
Maintain the rule of one conversation at a time in the whole group
Do a second round if you did not go deep enough!

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Graphically record insights as they emerge from groups

Use Post-it notes in Rounds 2 and 3
Link ideas that emerge to Design Storyboards, Improv Prototyping,
Ecocycle Planning
Go from groups of 4 to groups of 8 with consensus in mind.
Colleague Liz Rykert calls this Octopus!
 Above: 1-2-4-All generates lively engagement in Puerto Rico

EXAMPLES

Use after a speech or presentation, when it is important to get rich

feedback (questions, comments, and ideas), instead of asking the
audience, “Any questions?”
A group of managers used two rounds of 1-2-4-All to redesign their
less-than-stimulating weekly meeting.
For a spontaneous conversation that starts after the topic of a
meeting has been announced
For a group that has been convened to address a problem or an
innovation opportunity
For unlocking a discussion that has become dysfunctional or stuck
In place of a leader “telling” people what to think and do (often
unintentionally)
For a group that tends to be excessively influenced by its leader
Read Craig Yeatman’s story in Part Three: Stories from the Field
about using 1-2-4-All to help manage a merger decision, “Inclusive
High Stakes Decision Making Made Easy.”
ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless

Above: multiple pairs “parallel processing” a shared challenge in Seattle

Impromptu Networking
Rapidly Share Challenges and Expectations, Build
New Connections (20 min.)

What is made possible? You can tap a deep well of curiosity and talent by
helping a group focus attention on problems they want to solve. A productive
pattern of engagement is established if used at the beginning of a working
session. Loose yet powerful connections are formed in 20 minutes by asking
engaging questions. Everyone contributes to shaping the work, noticing
patterns together, and discovering local solutions.

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
Ask, “What big challenge do you bring to this gathering? What do
you hope to get from and give this group or community?”

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Open space without obstructions so participants can stand in pairs
and mill about to find partners

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Everybody at once with the same amount of time (no limit on group
size)
Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

Pairs
Invite people to find strangers or colleagues in groups/functions
different from their own

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

 In each round, 2 minutes per person to answer the questions. 4-5
min. per round
Three rounds

WHY? PURPOSES

Initiate participation immediately for everyone provided the

questions are engaging
Attract deeper engagement around challenges
Invite stories to deepen as they are repeated
Help shy people warm up
Affirm individual contributions to solutions
Emphasize the power of loose and new connections
Suggest that little things can make a big difference

TIPS AND TRAPS

Use one challenge question and one give-and-take question

Ask questions that invite participants to shape the direction of their
work together
Use Impromptu Networking before you begin meetings and
conferences
Use bells (e.g., tingsha) to help you shift participants from first, to
second, to third rounds
Ask questions that are open-ended but not too broad
Invite serious play
Have three rounds, not one or two
If you choose to share output, do it carefully and preserve
confidentiality

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Play with different questions: What problem are you trying to solve?
What challenge lingers from our last meeting? What hunch are you
trying to confirm?
Taking a group outside a meeting room increases the fun factor
Link to Social Network Webbing
Invite participants to make a simple plan to follow up via 15%
Solutions
Make it slower or faster depending on your schedule
 Above: Al fresco Impromptu Networking in Colorado

EXAMPLES
For sparking deeper connections on the first day of class, college
professors have asked their students, “Why did you choose to attend
this class? What do you want to learn from and offer to members of
this class?”
For jump-starting a cross-functional, interdisciplinary learning
session, Tim Jaasko-Fisher used Impromptu Networking with
judges, lawyers, clerks, and social workers. See “Fixing a Broken
Child Welfare System” in Part Three: Stories from the Field.
For connecting far-flung innovators and disparate prototypes among
members of the Innovation Learning Network. See “Inventing Future
Health-Care Practice” in Part Three: Stories from the Field.

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by June Holley, network weaver.
Nine Whys
Make the Purpose of Your Work Together Clear (20
min.)

“If you want to build a What is made possible? With breathtaking

ship, don’t drum up simplicity, you can rapidly clarify for
people to collect wood individuals and a group what is essentially
and don’t assign them important in their work. You can quickly
tasks and work, but rather reveal when a compelling purpose is missing
teach them to long for the in a gathering and avoid moving forward
endless immensity of the without clarity. When a group discovers an
sea.” Antoine de Saint- unambiguous shared purpose, more freedom
Exupery and more responsibility are unleashed. You
have laid the foundation for spreading and
scaling innovations with fidelity.

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• Ask, “What do you do when working on ______ (the subject matter or
challenge at hand)? Please make a short list of activities.” Then ask,
“Why is that important to you?” Keep asking, “Why? Why? Why?” up to
nine times or until participants can go no deeper because they have
reached the fundamental purpose for this work.

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Unlimited number of groups
Chairs for people to sit comfortably face-to-face; no tables or
equipment needed.

3. How Participation Is Distributed

• Everyone has an equal opportunity to participate and contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

• First pairs, then groups of four, then the whole group (2-4-All)

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Each person in a pair is interviewed by his or her partner for 5
minutes. Starting with “What do you do when working on ____?”
the interviewer gently seeks a deeper answer by repeating the query:
“Why is that important to you?” Switch roles after 5 minutes. 10
min.
Each pair shares the experience and insights with another pair in a
foursome. 5 min.
Invite the whole group to reflect by asking, “How do our purposes
influence the next steps we take?” 5 min.

WHY? PURPOSES

Discover what is truly important for the group members

Lay the groundwork for the design that will be employed
Ignite organizational momentum through the stories that emerge
Provide a basis for progress evaluation
Generate criteria for deciding who will be included
TIPS AND TRAPS

Create a safe and welcoming space; avoid judgments

Keep going! Dig deep with compassion. Vary the ways of asking
“why?” For example, ask, “If last night, while you slept, your dream
came true, what would be different?”
Make sure the question asked is, “Why is it important to YOU?”
(meaning not THE amorphous organization or system but you
personally)
Share the variety of responses and reflect on differences among
group members. What common purpose emerges?
If someone gets stuck ask, “Does a story come to mind?”
Maintain confidentiality when very personal stories are shared
Make clarifying purpose with Nine Whys a routine practice in your
group

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Ask the small groups whether “a fundamental justification for

committing time and money to the work” emerged in the
conversation. A clear personal purpose plus a community
justification can quickly fuel the spread of an initiative. Work
 toward a single sentence that powerfully justifies the group’s work
to others: “We exist to…!”
In a business context, ask, “Why would people spend their money
with you? Why would leaders want you to operate your business in
their country?”
Add 10 how questions after you have clarity around why (it
becomes MUCH easier).
A good purpose is never closed. Make it dynamically incomplete by
inviting everyone to make contributions and mutually shape
understanding of the deepest need for your work.
Record answers on Post-it notes, number them, and stick on a flip
chart. You can arrange the answers in a triangle: broad answers on
the top and detailed answers on the bottom. Compare and debrief.
Ask, “Why is that important to your community?” “Why? Why?
Why?…”
Use the chat function during a webinar to start formulating a purpose
statement: participants reflect on the Nine Whys questions, sharing
their ideas in the chat box.
Link to Purpose-To-Practice; Generative Relationships; Wise
Crowds; What, So What, Now What? and many other Liberating
Structures.

EXAMPLES

For crafting a compelling shared purpose to launch a collaborative

research organization. The Quality Commons, a health-service
research network composed of representatives from seven health
systems across the United States, used Nine Whys as one step in the
Purpose-To-Practice Liberating Structure.
For the beginning of any coaching session, including Troika
Consulting or Wise Crowds.
For clarifying the purpose behind the launch of a new product.
For anchoring each element of a Design Storyboard by asking,
“Why is this activity or element important to you? What does it add
to the flow of exchanges among participants?”
 For you as an individual to clarify your personal purpose

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by Geoff Bellman, author and consultant.
COLLATERAL MATERIALS

Below: presentation materials we use to introduce Nine Whys

Wicked Questions
Articulate the Paradoxical Challenges That a Group
Must Confront to Succeed (25 min.)

“How wonderful that we What is made possible? You can spark

have met with a paradox. innovative action while diminishing “yes,
Now we have some hope but…” and “either-or” thinking. Wicked
of making progress.” Questions engage everyone in sharper
Niels Bohr strategic thinking by revealing entangled
challenges and possibilities that are not
intuitively obvious. They bring to light paradoxical-yet-complementary
forces that are constantly influencing behaviors and that are particularly
important during change efforts. Wicked Questions make it possible to
expose safely the tension between espoused strategies and on-the-ground
circumstances and to discover the valuable strategies that lie deeply hidden
in paradoxical waters.

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• Ask, “What opposing-yet-complementary strategies do we need to pursue
simultaneously in order to be successful?”

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Groups of 4 to 6 chairs with or without small round tables
Paper for recording

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Everyone involved in the work or topic is included
Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute
4. How Groups Are Configured
Individually
Small groups (6 people or smaller)
Whole group

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Introduce the concept of Wicked Questions and paradox. Illustrate
with a couple of examples of Wicked Questions. Give the
following template, “How is it that we are … and we are …
simultaneously?” as the sentence to complete by inserting the two
opposite strategies that are at play. 5 min.
First alone then in small groups, each participant generates pairs of
opposites or paradoxes at play in his or her work using the Wicked
Question format. 5 min.
Each group selects its most impactful and wicked Wicked Question.
All selected Wicked Questions are shared with the whole group. 5
min.
Whole group picks out the most powerful ones and further refines
the Wicked Questions. 10 min.

WHY? PURPOSES

Describe the messy reality of the situation while engaging collective

imagination
Develop innovative strategies to move forward
Avoid wild or “bipolar” swings in policy and action
Evaluate decisions: Are we advancing one side or the other or
attending
Ignite creative tension, promoting more freedom and accountability
as the discovery process unfolds

TIPS AND TRAPS Wicked Questions engage

everyone to both? in
sharper strategic thinking
by revealing entangled
 Make sure that participants express challenges and
both sides of the paradox in an possibilities that are not
appreciative form: “How is it that intuitively obvious.
we are ____ and we are ____
simultaneously?” and not in opposition of each other
Use a variety of examples to make the paradoxical attributes
accessible
Work in quick cycles, failing forward as you make the questions
perfectly wicked
Avoid nasty questions that appoint blame or are unbalanced on one
side. Here is an example of a nasty question: “How can we focus on
our customers when we are forced to spend more and more time on
the headquarters’ bureaucracy?”
Avoid data questions that can be answered with more analysis
Invite participants to include others in making their questions more
wicked
Draw on field experience; ask, “When have you noticed these two
things to be true at the same time?”
There are no quick fixes to Wicked Questions and you may need to
return to the challenge periodically with additional rounds of
Wicked Questions
Often a handful of people are very skilled at generating Wicked
Questions: let them shine and inspire the rest of the group!

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Use Wicked Questions to evaluate and launch Improv

Prototyping, Ecocycle, and 25/10 Crowd Sourcing
When you have a strong Wicked Question, don’t stop there! Follow
with 15% Solutions and 1-2-4-All to generate and sift ideas.
Making progress on any one Wicked Question can shift what is
possible.
Learn more from Brenda Zimmerman in Edgeware and
[Link]/[Link]
EXAMPLES

For parenting advice: “How is it that you are raising your children
to be very loyal/attached to the family and very independent
individuals simultaneously?”
For helping leaders discover how to include everyone in stopping
infections: “As infection-control leaders, how is that you have
stepped up and stepped back to help a unit take more ownership of
prevention practices?”
For managing large global operations: “How is that we are always
and never the same… an organization with a singular global identity
and we are uniquely adapted to each local setting? How is it that we
are integrated and autonomous?”
For a functional department, such as HR, finance, legal, etc., to
bring to light the Wicked Questions that capture the essence of the
function in the context of the department’s organization
For surfacing personal Wicked Questions, for instance, with respect
to one’s relationship to one other person or in connection to a
personal challenge. For instance, “How is it that I am
simultaneously dedicated to my work and being fully present for my
family?”
 Above: Developing Wicked Questions in Madrid

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by professors Brenda Zimmerman (see Edgeware) and
Scott Kelso (see The Complementary Nature).
Appreciative Interviews (AI)
Discovering and Building on the Root Causes of
Success (60 min.)

What is made possible? In less than one hour, a group of any size can
generate the list of conditions that are essential for its success. You can
liberate spontaneous momentum and insights for positive change from within
the organization as “hidden” success stories are revealed. Positive movement
is sparked by the search for what works now and by uncovering the root
causes that make success possible. Groups are energized while sharing their
success stories instead of the usual depressing talk about problems. Stories
from the field offer social proof of local solutions, promising prototypes, and
spread innovations while providing data for recognizing success patterns.
You can overcome the tendency of organizations to underinvest in social
supports that generate success while overemphasizing financial support,
time, and technical assistance.

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• Ask, “Please tell a story about a time when you worked on a challenge
with others and you are proud of what you accomplished. What is the
story and what made the success possible? Pair up preferably with
someone you don’t know well.”

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Unlimited number of groups
Chairs for people to sit in pairs face-to-face; no tables needed.
Paper for participants to take notes
Flip chart to record the stories and assets/conditions
3. How Participation Is Distributed
Everyone is included
Everyone has equal time and opportunity to contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

First pairs, then groups of 4.
Encourage groups to be diverse

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Describe the sequence of steps and specify a theme or what kind of
story participants are expected to tell. 3 min.
In pairs, participants take turns conducting an interview and telling a
success story, paying attention to what made the success possible.
7–10 min. each; 15–20 min. total.
In groups of 4, each person retells the story of his or her pair
partner. Ask participants to listen for patterns in conditions/assets
supporting success and to make note of them. 15 min. for groups of
4.
Collect insights and patterns for the whole group to see on a flip
chart. Summarize if needed. 10-15 min.
Ask, “How are we investing in the assets and conditions that foster
success?” and “What opportunities do you see to do more?” Use 1-
2-4-All to discuss the questions. 10 min.

WHY? PURPOSES

Generate constructive energy by starting on a positive note.

Capture and spread tacit knowledge about successful field
experience.
Reveal the path for achieving success for an entire group
simultaneously
By expecting positive behaviors, you can bring them forth
(Pygmalion effect)
Spark peer-to-peer learning, mutual respect, and community
building.
Give permission to explore complex or messy challenges
 Create a new exciting group narrative, e.g., “how we are making
order out of chaos!”
Repeating interviews in rapid cycles may point to positively
deviant local innovations

TIPS AND TRAPS

Flip malaise and negative themes to “When is it that we have

succeeded, even in a modest way?”
Start with, “Tell me a story about a time when….”
Ask people to give a title to their partner’s story
Invite additional paired interviews before building up to patterns
Invite participants to notice when they form a judgment (about what
is right or wrong) or an idea about how they can help, then to “let it
go”
Make the stories and patterns visible to everyone
Learn more from Appreciative Inquiry practitioners at
[Link]

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Graphically record story titles and conditions/assets on a large wall

tapestry
Write up and publicize a few of the most inspiring stories
Draw out stories that help participants make a leap of understanding
from a small example of behavior change to a broad change in
values or a shift in resource allocation (or both!). Give participants
an example.
Track how the stories start to fill in and bring life to the group’s
vision
Groups of eight instead of four are an option
Follow with Min Specs, exploring the must dos and must not dos
required for future success
 Below: an Appreciative Interview under way in Peru

EXAMPLES

For bringing customer focus to life with “stories when you had a
creative and positive interaction with a customer”
For revising college courses with “stories when a course or
learning experience had a profound influence on your life”
For repairing a relationship between a patient and a doctor with
“stories when you were able to accept openly responsibility for
making a medical error”
For building trust and morale in an NGO with “stories when you
experienced here in the office the esprit de corps of work in the
field. What made that possible?”
For looking beyond the launch of a transformation initiative with
“stories of first successes in the field that can guide our strategy for
the next two years”

ATTRIBUTION
Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith
McCandless. Inspired by and adapted from professor David Cooperrider,
Case Western Reserve University, and consultant Dr. Tony Suchman.

COLLATERAL MATERIALS

Above: Appreciative Interview wall tapestry illustrating the assets and

conditions that support success in the stories
Triz
Stop Counterproductive Activities and Behaviors to
Make Space for Innovation (35 min.)

What is made possible? You can clear space “Every act of creation is
for innovation by helping a group let go of first an act of
what it knows (but rarely admits) limits its destruction.” Pablo
success and by inviting creative destruction. Picasso
TRIZ makes it possible to challenge sacred
cows safely and encourages heretical thinking. The question “What must we
stop doing to make progress on our deepest purpose?” induces seriously fun
yet very courageous conversations. Since laughter often erupts, issues that are
otherwise taboo get a chance to be aired and confronted. With creative
destruction come opportunities for renewal as local action and innovation
rush in to fill the vacuum. Whoosh!

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• In this three-step process, ask: 1. “Make a list of all you can do to make sure
that you achieve the worst result imaginable with respect to your top
strategy or objective.”
2. “Go down this list item by item and ask yourselves, ‘Is there
anything that we are currently doing that in any way, shape, or form
resembles this item?’ Be brutally honest to make a second list of all
your counterproductive activities/programs/procedures.” 3. “Go
through the items on your second list and decide what first steps will
help you stop what you know creates undesirable results?”

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

 Unlimited number of small groups of 4 to 7 chairs, with or without
small tables
Paper for participants to record

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Everybody involved in the work is included
Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

Groups with 4 to 7 participants
Established teams or mixed groups

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

After introduction, three segments, 10 minutes for each segment
Introduce the idea of TRIZ and identify an unwanted result. If
needed, have the groups brainstorm and pick the most unwanted
result. 5 min.
Each group uses 1-2-4-All to make a first list of all it can do to make
sure that it achieves this most unwanted result. 10 min.
Each group uses 1-2-4-All to make a second list of all that it is
currently doing that resembles items on their first list. 10 min.
Each group uses 1-2-4-All to determine for each item on its second
list what first steps will help it stop this unwanted
activity/program/procedure. 10 min.

WHY? PURPOSES

Make it possible to speak the unspeakable and get skeletons out of

the closet
Make space for innovation
Lay the ground for creative destruction by doing the hard work in a
fun way
TRIZ may be used before or in place of visioning sessions
Build trust by acting all together to remove barriers

TIPS AND TRAPS

 Enter into TRIZ with a spirit of serious fun
Don’t accept ideas for doing something new or additional: be sure
suggestions are about stopping activities or behaviors, not about
starting new things. It is worth the wait.
Begin with a VERY unwanted result, quickly confirm your suggestion
with the group
Check in with groups that are laughing hard or look confused
Take time for groups to identify similarities to what they are doing
now and explore how this is harmful
Include the people that will be involved in stopping the activities that
come out and ask, “Who else needs to be included?”
Make real decisions about what will be stopped (number your
decisions 1,2,3…) in the form of “I will stop” and “we will stop.”

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Go deeper with a second or third round to refine or deepen

understanding of unwanted results.
Link these results (creative destruction) to a broad review of
activities via Ecocycle Planning.
Share action steps: then go deeper and string together with Troika
Consulting, Wise Crowds, or Open Space.

EXAMPLES

For reducing harm to patients experiencing safety lapses (e.g.,

wrong-side surgery, patient falls, medication errors, iatrogenic
infections) with cross-functional groups: “How can we make sure
we always operate on the wrong side?”
For helping institutional leaders notice how it is they inadvertently
exclude diverse voices: “How can we devise policies and practices
that only work for a select few?”
For IT professionals: “How can we make sure we build an IT system
that no one will want to use?”
For leadership groups: “How can we make sure we keep doing the
same things with the same people while asking for different results?”
ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by the eponymous Russian engineering approach.

COLLATERAL MATERIAL

Below: presentation materials for introducing TRIZ

15% Solutions
Discover and Focus on What Each Person Has the
Freedom and Resources to Do Now (20 min.)

What is made possible? You can reveal the “You cannot cross the sea
actions, however small, that everyone can do merely by standing and
immediately. At a minimum, these will create staring at the water.” R.
momentum, and that may make a BIG Tagore
difference. 15% Solutions show that there is
no reason to wait around, feel powerless, or fearful. They help people pick it
up a level. They get individuals and the group to focus on what is within their
discretion instead of what they cannot change. With a very simple question,
you can flip the conversation to what can be done and find solutions to big
problems that are often distributed widely in places not known in advance.
Shifting a few grains of sand may trigger a landslide and change the whole
landscape.

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• In connection with their personal challenge or their group’s challenge, ask,
“What is your 15 percenty? Where do you have discretion and freedom to
act? What can you do without more resources or authority?”

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Unlimited number of groups.
Chairs for people to sit in groups of 2-4; no tables required.

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Everyone is included
Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute
4. How Groups Are Configured
First alone
Then in pairs or small groups

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

First alone, each person generates his or her own list of 15%
Solutions. 5 min.
Individuals share their ideas with a small group (2 to 4 members). 3
min. per person and one person at a time
Group members provide a consultation to one another (asking
clarifying questions and offering advice). 5 to 7 min. per person and
one person at a time

WHY? PURPOSES

Move away from blockage, negativism, and powerlessness

Have people discover their individual and collective power
Reveal bottom-up solutions
Share actionable ideas and help one another
Build trust
Remember unused capacity and resources (15 percent is always
there for the taking)
Reduce waste
Close the knowing-doing gap

TIPS AND TRAPS

Check each item to assure that it is within the discretion of the

individual
Be ready for BIG things to emerge via the butterfly effect
Reinventing the wheel is OK
Each 15% Solution adds to understanding of what is possible
Clear, common purpose and boundaries will generate coherence
among many 15% Solutions
Make it a routine to ask for 15% Solutions in meetings (15%
Solutions are otherwise commonly unnoticed and overlooked)
 While introducing the idea, tell a story about a small change made
by an individual that sparked a big result
Learn more from professor Gareth Morgan, who has popularized the
concept at [Link]/[Link] under the tab Provocative
Ideas

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Natural fit with Troika Consulting, Wise Crowds, Open Space,

Helping Heuristics, and Integrated~Autonomy
Returning to a group, you can ask, “What have you done with your
15 percent lately?”

EXAMPLES

For any problem-solving or planning activity in which you want

individuals to take initiative
For inclusion in the conveners report in Open Space sessions
For any challenge that requires many people to change for success to
emerge
For generating small “chunks” of success that can be combined into
a simple prototype that is easy and cheap to test (low-fidelity
prototype)

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by professor Gareth Morgan.

COLLATERAL MATERIAL
Below: presentation materials for introducing 15% Solutions
Troika Consulting
Get Practical and Imaginative Help from Colleagues
Immediately (30 min.)

“To listen is very hard, What is made possible? You can help people
because it asks of us so gain insight on issues they face and unleash
much interior stability local wisdom for addressing them. In quick
that we no longer need to round-robin “consultations,” individuals ask
prove ourselves by for help and get advice immediately from two
speeches, arguments, others. Peer-to-peer coaching helps with
statements or discovering everyday solutions, revealing
declarations. True patterns, and refining prototypes. This is a
listeners no longer have simple and effective way to extend coaching
an inner need to make support for individuals beyond formal
their presence known. reporting relationships. Troika Consulting is
They are free to receive, always there for the asking for any individual
welcome, to accept.” who wishes to get help from colleagues or
Henri Nouwen friends.

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• Invite the group to explore the questions “What is your challenge?” and
“What kind of help do you need?”

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

• Any number of small groups of 3 chairs, knee-to-knee seating preferred.
No table!

3. How Participation Is Distributed

 In each round, one participant is the “client,” the others
“consultants”
Everyone has an equal opportunity to receive and give coaching

4. How Groups Are Configured

Groups of 3
People with diverse backgrounds and perspectives are most helpful

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Invite participants to reflect on the consulting question (the
challenge and the help needed) they plan to ask when they are the
clients. 1 min.
Groups have first client share his or her question. 1-2 min.
Consultants ask the client clarifying questions. 1-2 min.
Client turns around with his or her back facing the consultants
Together, the consultants generate ideas, suggestions, coaching
advice. 4-5 min.
Client turns around and shares what was most valuable about the
experience. 1-2 min.
Groups switch to next person and repeat steps.

WHY? PURPOSES

Refine skills in asking for help

Learn to formulate problems and challenges clearly
Refine listening and consulting skills
Develop ability to work across disciplines and functional silos
Build trust within a group through mutual support
Build capacity to self-organize
Create conditions for unimagined solutions to emerge

TIPS AND TRAPS

Invite participants to form groups with mixed roles/functions

Suggest that participants critique themselves when they fall into
traps (e.g., like jumping to conclusions)
 Have the participants try to notice the pattern of support offered.
The ideal is to respectfully provoke by telling the client “what you
see that you think they do not see”
Tell participants to take risks while maintaining empathy
If the first round yields coaching that is not good enough, do a
second round
Beware that two rounds of 10 minutes per client is more effective
than one round of 20 minutes per client.
Keep the spaces safe: if you share anything, do it judiciously
Questions that spark self-understanding or self-correction may be
more powerful than advice about what to do
Tell clients to try and stay focused on self-reflection by asking,
“What is happening here? How am I experiencing what is
happening?”
Make Troika Consulting routine in meetings and conferences

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Meld with 15% Solutions: each client shares a 15% Solution,

asking for coaching
Inviting the client to turn around and sit facing away from his or her
consultants once the question has been shared and clarified deepens
curiosity, listening, empathy, and risk taking for all. The alternative
of not turning around is an option.
Restrict the coaching to generating only questions to clarify the
challenge: no advice giving (aka Q-Storming)
String together with Helping Heuristics; Heard, Seen, Respected;
Nine Whys

EXAMPLES

For the beginning or end of staff meetings

After a presentation, for giving participants time to formulate and
sift next steps
 For students to help one another and to promote peer-to-peer
learning
In the midst of conferences and large-group meetings
As a self-initiated practice within a group

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless.
COLLATERAL MATERIAL

Below: presentation materials for introducing Troika Consulting

What, So What, Now What? (W3)
Together, Look Back on Progress to Date and Decide
What Adjustments Are Needed (45 min.)

What is made possible? You can help groups reflect on a shared experience
in a way that builds understanding and spurs coordinated action while
avoiding unproductive conflict. It is possible for every voice to be heard
while simultaneously sifting for insights and shaping new direction.
Progressing in stages makes this practical—from collecting facts about What
Happened to making sense of these facts with So What and finally to what
actions logically follow with Now What. The shared progression eliminates
most of the misunderstandings that otherwise fuel disagreements about what
to do. Voila!

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• After a shared experience, ask, “WHAT? What happened? What did you
notice, what facts or observations stood out?” Then, after all the salient
observations have been collected, ask, “SO WHAT? Why is that
important? What patterns or conclusions are emerging? What hypotheses
can you make?” Then, after the sense making is over, ask, “NOW WHAT?
What actions make sense?”

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Unlimited number of groups
Chairs for people to sit in small groups of 5-7; small tables are
optional
Paper to make lists
Flip chart may be needed with a large group to collect answers
3. How Participation Is Distributed
Everyone is included
Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute at each table
Small groups are more likely to give a voice to everyone if one
person facilitates and keeps everybody working on one
stage/question at a time.

4. How Groups Are Configured

Individuals
Groups of 5-7
Whole group
Groups can be established teams or mixed groups

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

If needed, describe the sequence of steps and show the Ladder of
Inference. If the group is 10–12 people or smaller, conduct the
debrief with the whole group. Otherwise, break the group into small
groups.
First stage: WHAT? Individuals work 1 min. alone on “What
happened? What did you notice, what facts or observations stood
out?” then 2–7 min. in small group. 3–8 min. total.
Salient facts from small groups are shared with the whole group and
collected. 2–3 min.
If needed, remind participants about what is included in the So
What? question.
Second stage: SO WHAT? People work 1 min alone on “Why is that
important? What patterns or conclusions are emerging? What
hypotheses can I/we make?” then 2–7 min. in small group. 3–8 min.
total.
Salient patterns, hypotheses, and conclusions from small groups are
shared with the whole group and collected. 2–5 min.
Third stage: NOW WHAT? Participants work 1 min. alone on “Now
what? What actions make sense?” then 2–7 min. in small group. 3–8
min. total.
Actions are shared with the whole group, discussed, and collected.
Additional insights are invited. 2–10 min.
WHY? PURPOSES

Build shared understanding of how people develop different

perspectives, ideas, and rationales for actions and decisions
Make sure that learning is generated from shared experiences: no
feedback = no learning
Avoid repeating the same mistakes or dysfunctions over and over
Avoid arguments about actions based on lack of clarity about facts
or their interpretation
Eliminate the tendency to jump prematurely to action, leaving
people behind
Get all the data and observations out on the table first thing for
everyone to start on the same page
Honor the history and the novelty of what is unfolding
Build trust and reduce fear by learning together at each step of a
shared experience
Make sense of complex challenges in a way that unleashes action
Experience how questions are more powerful than answers because
they invite active exploration

TIPS AND TRAPS

Practice, practice, practice … then What, So What, Now What?

will feel like breathing
Check with small groups to clarify appropriate answers to each
question (some groups get confused about what fits in each
category) and share examples of answers with the whole group if
needed
When sharing in the whole group, collect one important answer at a
time from different small groups. Avoid long repetitive lists from a
single group. Seek out unique answers that are full of meaning for
the group’s participants.
Intervene quickly and clearly when someone jumps up the Ladder of
Inference
 Don’t jump over the So What? stage too quickly: it can be
challenging for people to link observations directly to patterns,
meanings, or conclusions. This is the most difficult of the three
questions. Use the Ladder of Inference as a reminder of what steps
are included in So What?
Appreciate candid feedback and recognize it
Build in time for the debrief—don’t trivialize it, don’t rush it
Make it the norm to debrief with W3, however quickly, at the end of
everything

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Insert a “What If? question, “What can we/should we try, test, or

explore?” between So What? and Now What? to develop ideas for
research or experiments.
For the What? question, spend time sifting items that arise into three
categories: facts with evidence, shared observations, and opinions
For the So What? Question, sift items into patterns, conclusions,
hypotheses/educated guesses, beliefs
Invite a small group of volunteers to debrief in front of the whole
room. People with strong reactions and diverse roles should be
invited to join in.

EXAMPLES

For drawing out the history and meaning of the events prior to your
gathering, start a meeting with W3
For debriefing any meeting topic that generates complex or
controversial responses
For groups with people who have strong opinions or individuals
who dominate the conversation
For groups with people who have difficulty listening to others with
different backgrounds
For use in place of a leader “telling” people what to think, what
conclusions to draw, or what actions to take (often unintentionally)
 As a standard discipline at the end of all meetings
Right after a shocking event

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Chris Argyris introduced the “Ladder of Inference” in
Reasoning, Learning, and Action: Individual and Organizational (San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1982). Peter Senge popularized it in The Fifth
Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization (New York:
Doubleday, 1990).

COLLATERAL MATERIAL

Below: Presentation materials for introducing What, So What, Now

What?
Discovery & Action Dialogue (DAD)
Discover, Invent, and Unleash Local Solutions to
Chronic Problems (25–70 min.)

“Live the questions now What is made possible? DADs make it easy
and perhaps without for a group or community to discover
knowing it you will live practices and behaviors that enable some
along someday into the individuals (without access to special
answers.” Rainier Maria resources and facing the same constraints) to
Rilke find better solutions than their peers to
common problems. These are called positive
deviant (PD) behaviors and practices. DADs make it possible for people in
the group, unit, or community to discover by themselves these PD practices.
DADs also create favorable conditions for stimulating participants’
creativity in spaces where they can feel safe to invent new and more
effective practices. Resistance to change evaporates as participants are
unleashed to choose freely which practices they will adopt or try and which
problems they will tackle. DADs make it possible to achieve frontline
ownership of solutions.

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• Invite people to uncover tacit or latent solutions to a shared challenge that
are hidden among people in their working group, unit, or community. Ask
anybody interested in solving the problem to join a small group and
participate in a DAD. In the group, ask seven progressive questions:
1. How do you know when problem X is present?
2. How do you contribute effectively to solving problem X?
 3. What prevents you from doing this or taking these actions all
the time?
4. Do you know anybody who is able to frequently solve problem
X and overcome barriers? What behaviors or practices made
their success possible?
5. Do you have any ideas?
6. What needs to be done to make it happen? Any volunteers?
7. Who else needs to be involved?

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

DADs take place in a local setting or unit
Groups may be standing or sitting around a table
Paper, flip chart, or software/projection equipment needed to record
insights and actions

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Facilitator introduces the questions
Everyone who is around is invited to join and be included
Everyone in the group has an equal opportunity to contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

Facilitator works with a partner to serve as a recorder
Group size can be 5–15 people
Diversity in roles and experience is an important asset

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

State the purpose of the initiative being discussed and the DAD and
invite brief round-robin introductions. 5 min.
Ask the 7 questions one by one in the order given in the Invitation.
Address them to the whole group and give everyone the opportunity
to speak to each question. Make sure your recorder captures insights
and action ideas as they emerge—big ones may emerge when you
least expect it. 15–60 min.
Ask your recorder to recap insights, action ideas, and who else
needs to be included. 5 min.
 Above: button from a Canadian infection-control project that employed
DADs extensively

WHY? PURPOSES

Engage frontline people in finding solutions to thorny challenges

Discover tacit and latent behaviors and practices that are positively
deviant from the norm
Spark the emergence of new solutions
Inspire rather than compel behaviors that solve complex problems
Generate changes that are sustained because they are discovered and
invented by the people doing the work, rather than imported and
imposed
Solve local problems locally and spread momentum across units
Build relationships between people in diverse functions and levels
that otherwise don’t work together to solve problems

TIPS AND TRAPS

Question #2 often consists of two parts: how the problem affects the
individual personally and how it affects others. For instance, “What
do you do to protect yourself from infections and what do you do to
prevent infection transmissions?” or “What do you do to keep your
 students engaged and what do you to keep yourself energized and
enthusiastic?”
Hold the DADs where the participants work to minimize obstacles
for participation
Make impromptu invitations for people to join in as you enter the
area
Create an informal “climate,” starting with introductions and an
anecdote if appropriate
Maintain eye contact and sit with the group (not higher or away from
the group)
Be sure you talk much less than participants, encouraging everyone
to share stories and “sift” for action opportunities
Draw out stories that help participants make a leap of understanding
from a small example of behavior change to a broad change in
values or a shift in resource allocation (or both!). Ask questions that
invite participants to be as descriptive as possible. Read
“Dramatizing Behavior Change to Stop Infections” in Part Three:
Stories from the Field
Notice when you form judgments in your head about what is right or
wrong, then count to ten and “let it go” before you say anything (you
may need to ask for the help of your recorder or a facilitator
colleague)
Avoid statements like “that’s a good idea” and leave space for
participants to make their own assessments
Demonstrate genuine curiosity in everyone’s contributions without
answering the questions yourself: study at the feet of the people who
do the work
Do not give or take assignments!
Don’t judge yourself too harshly: it takes practice to develop a high
level of skill with this approach to facilitation. Be sure to ask your
recorder for direct feedback.

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

 Use TRIZ-like questions instead of the first three, namely: (1) What
can you do to make sure that problem X becomes much worse? (2)
Is there anything you are doing that in any way, shape, or form looks
like any of the practices you just listed? (3) What is preventing you
from stopping these practices?
Use insights and barriers that surface to develop scripts for Improv
Prototyping scenes and organize Improv sessions
Use the same sequence and type of questions to guide one-on-one
conversations
With virtual groups, use the chat function to share answers to each
question, then select powerful stories/behaviors/actions to be
vocalized with the whole group

EXAMPLES

For reducing harm to patients experiencing safety lapses (e.g.,

wrong-side surgery, patient falls, medication errors, iatrogenic
infections) with cross-functional groups
For use as an ethnographic data-collection tool within a multisite
research project
For eliminating practices that keep professionals from helping
clients change unproductive behaviors
For a series of local dialogues to help community members discover
solutions to a chronic problem (e.g., disruptive children in a
classroom, a cycle of violence that is not solved only by punishing
offenders)
For researching and unleashing action to build professional
competencies (e.g., in medical schools and social-service
agencies). See “Developing Competencies for Physician Education”
in Part Three: Stories from the Field.
For use in a one-on-one conversation to find approaches to a tough
challenge

ATTRIBUTION
Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith
McCandless together with a group of coaches working to eliminate MRSA
transmissions in hospitals: Sharon Benjamin, Kevin Buck, Lisa Kimball, Curt
Lindberg, Jon Lloyd, Mark Munger, Jerry Sternin, Monique Sternin, and
Margaret Toth. Inspired by Jerry and Monique Sternin’s work in Positive
Deviance.
COLLATERAL MATERIAL

Below: presentation materials to introduce DAD

25/10 Crowd Sourcing
Rapidly Generate and Sift a Group’s Most Powerful
Actionable Ideas (30 min.)

“Reality is only a What is made possible? You can help a large

consensual hunch.” Lily crowd generate and sort their bold ideas for
Tomlin action in 30 minutes or less! With 25/10
Crowd Sourcing, you can spread innovations
“out and up” as everyone notices the patterns in what emerges. Though it is
fun, fast, and casual, it is a serious and valid way to generate an uncensored
set of bold ideas and then to tap the wisdom of the whole group to identify
the top ten. Surprises are frequent!

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• Invite participants to think big and bold and discover the most attractive of
their ideas together by asking, “If you were ten times bolder, what big
idea would you recommend? What first step would you take to get
started?”

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Open space without chairs or tables
Participants will be standing and milling about
Index cards, one for each participant

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Everyone is included and participates at the same time
Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

 Individually to generate bold idea and first step and write on index
card
Everyone standing to pass cards around
Pairs to exchange thoughts
Individually to score the card participants have in their hand
Whole group for sharing highest final scores and ideas

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Explain the process. First, every participant writes on an index card
his or her bold idea and first step. Then people mill around and
cards are passed from person to person to quickly review. When the
bell rings, people stop passing cards and pair up to exchange
thoughts on the cards in their hands. Then participants individually
rate the idea/step on their card with a score of 1 to 5 (1 for low and
5 for high) and write it on the back of the card. When the bell rings,
cards are passed around a second time until the bell rings and the
scoring cycle repeats. This is done for a total of five scoring rounds.
At the end of cycle five, participants add the five scores on the back
of the last card they are holding. Finally, the ideas with the top ten
scores are identified and shared with the whole group. 3 min.
Demonstrate one exchange-and-scoring interaction using a sample
index card to clarify what is expected during the milling, namely no
reading aloud of the cards, only passing the cards from person to
person so that each person has one and only one card in hand. The
process can be confusing for some people. 2 min.
Invite each participant to write a big idea and first step on his or her
card. 5 min.
Conduct five 3-minute exchange-and-scoring rounds with time for
milling (and laughing) in between. 15 min.
Ask participants to add the 5 scores on the back of the card they are
holding
Find the best-scoring ideas with the whole group by conducting a
countdown. Ask, “Who has a 25?” Invite each participant, if any,
holding a card scored 25 to read out the idea and action step.
Continue with “Who has a 24?,” “Who has a 23”…. Stop when the
top ten ideas have been identified and shared. 5 min.
 End by asking, “What caught your attention about 25/10?” 2 min.

WHY? PURPOSES

Develop a group’s ability to quickly tap their own sources of

wisdom
Obtain results that are more likely to endure because they were
generated transparently from within and without imported advice
Spark synergy among diverse views while building coherence
Encourage novice innovators to think boldly and come up with
practical first steps
Create an environment in which good ideas can bubble up

TIPS AND TRAPS

Some of the scoring may be erratic. If a participant at the end of

round five has a card with more or less than five scores, ask the
participant to calculate the average of the scores and multiply this
average by 5.
Invite the group to choose one big idea and first-action step and
revise it so that it is expressed even more clearly and compellingly
Suggest a seriously fun but clear rating scale, for example: 1 = not
your cup of tea to 5 = sends me over the moon. The crowd needs to
understand and agree with the rating system if it is to be used for
decisions.
As you start and demonstrate one exchange-and-scoring interaction,
take your time and ask for feedback, particularly if it is a large
group.
To make it hard to peek at scoring from earlier rounds, cover the
back of the card with a Post-it note
Post all the cards on a wall or on tapestry paper, with the highest-
scoring cards on the top
 Below: workshop participant in Italy posting the top-performing bold
ideas

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Move to developing action plans or to Open Space with your Top

10
Do a second round of 25/10 Crowd Sourcing that includes others
not in the present group (aka Cloud Sourcing!)
Include 25/10 Crowd Sourcing at the beginning and end of a
meeting
Array your Top 10 in an Agreement-Certainty Matrix
Instead of asking for bold ideas, ask, “If you could unmake one
decision that is holding you back, what would it be? What is your
first step to unmake it?”
Instead of bold ideas, ask, “What courageous conversation are you
not having? What first step could spark your courage?”
Instead of bold ideas, ask, “What do you hope can happen in the
future? What practical first step can you take now to tip the balance
 in this direction?”

EXAMPLES

For prioritizing ideas and galvanizing the community after an Open

Space Technology or “Unconference” (participant-driven) meeting
For illuminating bold ideas at the start of a conference or task-force
meeting
For wrapping up an important meeting
For a closing circle to share ideas and reinforce bonds among group
members. See “Developing Competencies for Physician Education”
in Part Three: Stories from the Field

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by improvisationalists, including Keith Johnstone.
Shift & Share
Spread Good Ideas and Make Informal Connections
with Innovators (90 min.)

What is made possible? You can quickly and effectively share several
innovations or useful programs that may lie hidden within a group,
organization, or community. Shift & Share gets rid of long large-group
presentations and replaces them with several concise descriptions made
simultaneously to multiple small groups. A few individuals set up “stations”
where they share in ten minutes the essence of their innovations that may be
of value to others. As small groups move from one innovator’s station to
another, their size makes it easy for people to connect with the innovator.
They can quickly learn where and how new ideas are being used and how
they might be adapted to their own situations. Innovators learn from the
repetition, and groups can easily spot opportunities for creative mash-ups of
ideas.

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• Invite participants to visit several innovators who will share something
new or innovative they are doing and that may be of value to them

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

A large space where 5 to 8 stations can be set up far enough from
each other to minimize interference with one another
A suitable number of chairs to accommodate the small groups at
each station
Space for a display as needed by presenters

3. How Participation Is Distributed

 A few members of the group, the presenters, share their work
Everyone else in the small groups has an equal opportunity to
participate and contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

Presenters set up their individual stations
The whole group is split into the same number of small groups as
there are presenters, for instance, 7 small groups if there are 7
presenters
Groups stay together while they rotate through all the innovation
stations

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Describe the process: explain that small groups will move from
station to station for a 10-minute presentation and brief questions
and feedback period. If it wasn’t done in advance, identify the 3 to 7
presenters for the innovation stations (can be people who volunteer
in the moment). Form the same number of small groups as there are
presenters. 5 min.
Each small group goes to a different station, where presenters
conduct their sessions (repeated up to 7 times). 10 min. per
station/session
Participants ask questions or provide feedback. 2 min. per
station/session
Small groups move to the next station. 1 min. per move
Repeat until groups have visited all stations.
Total time for visiting 6 stations is approximately 90 minutes.

WHY? PURPOSES

Quickly share ideas and innovations

Enable people to recognize that they are innovating or have the
potential to innovate
Build trust and a community of practice among members
Reveal how the formal technological hierarchy can obscure the
hidden contributions of frontline innovators
Quickly give participants a sense of the innovation landscape
Explore and expose bottom-up and fringe-in innovations
Spark friendly competition, mash-ups, and collaboration
Below: a group gathered for an eight-minute Shift & Share presentation in
Seattle

TIPS AND TRAPS

Pick presenters by digging deep into the informal social networks

(presentation skills and charisma are less important than content for
this approach)
Keep tightly to the schedule: use a loud sound or tingsha bells to
signal the shift from one station to the next
When possible prepare the presenters: 10 minutes is much shorter
than they are used to!
Invite presenters to tell stories that help the audience make the leap
from understanding a small example of behavior change to seeing a
broad change in values or a shift in resource allocation, or both
Invite presenters to supplement their presentations with examples
and objects that participants can see and touch
Encourage presenters to entertain and engage the imagination of the
audience
 Trust that people will follow up to get more depth if they are
interested

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Invite the roving groups to use What, So What, Now What? to

debrief what they experienced
Like a PechaKucha Night presentation, add snacks and drinks at
each station
Shorten the presentation time to 8 minutes
Do not establish set groups; instead mash up with Open Space
(individuals use their two feet to go where they are most curious
about and where they are learning something)
If you do a second round, leave a few stations open for impromptu
presenters
Use with virtual groups by creating a series of chat rooms. The
groups then select a handful of sessions they want to attend
String together with Improv Prototyping to generate variations on
ideas presented

EXAMPLES

For orienting new members of a research consortium to the depth

and breadth of innovations within the whole community
For introducing technology applications at a conference, mixing
presenters from within the field with commercial vendors
For highlighting the programs and people from two “sides” of a
newly merged organization

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by Chris McCarthy and the Innovation Learning
Network.
COLLATERAL MATERIAL

Below: presentation materials we use to introduce Shift & Share

Wise Crowds
Tap the Wisdom of the Whole Group in Rapid Cycles
(15 min. per person)

What is made possible? Wise Crowds make “Every journey has a

it possible to instantly engage a small or large secret destination of
group of people in helping one another. You which the traveler is not
can set up a Wise Crowds consultation with aware.” Martin Buber
one small group of four or five people or with
many small groups simultaneously or, during a larger gathering, with a group
as big as one hundred or more people. Individuals, referred to as “clients,”
can ask for help and get it in a short time from all the other group members.
Each individual consultation taps the expertise and inventiveness of everyone
in the group simultaneously. Individuals gain more clarity and increase their
capacity for self-correction and self-understanding. Wise Crowds develop
people’s ability to ask for help. They deepen inquiry and consulting skills.
Supportive relationships form very quickly. During a Wise Crowds session,
the series of individual consultations makes the learning cumulative as each
participant benefits not only from being a client but also from being a
consultant several times in a row. Wise Crowds consultations make it easy to
achieve transparency. Together, a group can outperform the expert!

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS FOR a SMALL Wise

Crowds

1. Structuring Invitation
Ask each participant when his or her turn comes to be the “client” to
briefly describe his or her challenge and ask others for help.
Ask the other participants to act as a group of “consultants” whose
task it is to help the “client” clarify his or her challenge and to offer
advice or recommendations.
2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed
Groups of 4 or 5 chairs arranged around small tables or in circles
without tables
Paper for participants to take notes

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Everyone is included
Everyone has an equal amount of time to ask for and get help
Everyone has an equal opportunity to offer help

4. How Groups Are Configured

Groups of 4 to 5 people
Mixed groups across functions, levels, and disciplines are ideal
The person asking for help, the “client,” turns his or her back on the
consultants after the consultation question has been clarified.

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Each person requesting a consult (the client) gets fifteen minutes broken
down as follows:
The client presents the challenge and request for help. 2 min.
The consultants ask the client clarifying questions. 3 min.
The client turns his or her back to the consultants and gets ready to
take notes
The consultants ask questions and offer advice, and
recommendations, working as a team, while the client has his or her
back turned. 8 min.
The client provides feedback to the consultants: what was useful
and what he or she takes away. 2 min.

WHY? PURPOSES

Generate results that are enduring because each individual and the
group produced them together without “outside expertise”
Refine skills in giving, receiving, and asking for help
Tap the intelligence of a whole group without time-consuming up
and sideways presentations
 Liberate the wisdom and creativity that exists across disciplines and
functional silos
Replace boring briefings and updates with an effective and useful
alternative
Actively build trust through mutual support and peer connections
Practice listening without defending

TIPS AND TRAPS

Invite a very diverse crowd to help (not only the experts and
leaders)
Invite participants to critique themselves when they fall into traps
(e.g., jumping to action before clarifying the purpose or the
problem). See Helping Heuristics for a complete list of unwanted
patterns when helping or asking for help.
Remind participants to try to stay focused on the client’s direct
experience by asking, “What is happening here? How are you
experiencing what is happening?”
Advise the consultants to take risks while maintaining empathy
Avoid having some participants choosing not to be clients:
everybody has at least one challenge!
If the first round is weak, try a second round
Invite participants not to shy away from presenting complex
challenges without easy answers

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Restrict the consulting to asking only honest, open questions,

focusing on helping the client gain personal clarity. In other words,
forbid recommendations and advice (thinly veiled as a question) or
any speeches whatsoever! This is also called Q-Storming and is
similar to a Quaker Clearness Committee.
Can be used with groups of up to 7 people but not more.
The “large format” of Wise Crowds makes it possible for one
person to ask a whole room for help. See the detailed description of
 the five structural elements/min specs below.
Use Wise Crowds with virtual groups by using the chat function to
share answers from a small number of consultants, then opening the
chat line and whiteboard to the whole group for additional feedback
Link to and string with Helping Heuristics plus Heard, Seen,
Respected (HSR), Nine Whys, Troika Consulting, What I Need
From You, and Appreciative Interviews. These Liberating
Structures offer a variety of productive choices for helping.

Below: self-administered aid to deepen listening during Wise Crowds

Wise Crowds For Large Groups
(1 hr.)

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS FOR LARGE

GROUPS

1. Structuring Invitation
Ask the participant who is the “client” to describe his or her
challenge, the status of any work in progress, and the advice or help
he or she is looking for
Ask the other participants to act as a group of “consulting teams”
whose task it is to help the “client” clarify his or her challenge and
to offer advice or recommendations.

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

One chair for the client in the front of the room
Screen and projector only if absolutely indispensable
Three chairs for the primary consultants in the front of the room
Groups of 5–8 chairs arranged around small tables, or in circles
without tables, for all the satellite consulting teams
Paper for participants to take notes
Index cards at each table to write recommendations
Microphones for the client and primary consultants

3. How Participation Is Distributed

The client has a specific amount of time to present and ask for help
The primary consulting team has a fixed amount of time to offer help
Everyone else on each consulting team has an equal opportunity to
contribute help during the balance of the time, which is also fixed

4. How Groups Are Configured

Individual client
 One group of 2 to 3 primary consultants
Any number of satellite groups of 5 to 7 people as consulting teams
Mixed groups across functions, levels, and disciplines are ideal

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Each person requesting a consult (the client) gets one hour broken down
as follows:
The client presents his or her consulting question and selects the 2-4
individuals who will form the primary consulting team. The primary
consultants move and occupy their chairs in the front of the room. 2
min.
The client presents the challenge and request for help. 10 min.
The primary consultants pose clarifying questions to the client, using
microphones so that all participants can hear them. 10 min.
The client turns his or her back to the primary consultants and gets
ready to take notes.
The primary consultants jointly form advice and recommendations,
working as a team while the client has his or her back turned.
Microphones are used so that all others in the room can follow their
discussion. 7 min.
Every satellite consulting team separately critiques the work of the
primary consulting team and generates its own recommendations for
the client. 10 min.
While the satellite teams work, the client turns around and uses this
ten-minute period to discuss with the primary consulting team.
Do one round to gather the critiques from the satellite teams first and
then a second round to gather their recommendations. Gather only
one comment or recommendation per team, with no repeats. It may
be useful to ask the satellite teams to write their recommendations
for the client on 3-by-5-inch index cards. 10 min.
The client provides feedback to the consultants: what was useful
and what he or she takes away. 2 min.
Invite a full-group conversation reflecting on the process, so what,
and now what. 5 min.
NOTE: The timing for each step can be adjusted depending on the
complexity of the problem and the size of the group, but it is
 essential to stick strictly to the schedule and not let discussions drag
beyond the time set. It is always better to have a second round
instead.

EXAMPLES

For multisite research/learning groups to support and learn from

each other
For professionals in a national fellowship program to share
progress and get help with the action learning projects
To replace progress presentations and reviews
For managers trying to solve problems associated with a merger
For foundation grantees trying to scale up their socio-tech
innovations
For getting advice on improving a relationship with one other
person
For salespeople (distributed over a large geography) getting help
with developing and keeping new customers

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by Quaker Clearness Committees.
Conversation Café
Engage Everyone in Making Sense of Profound
Challenges (35 to 60 min.)

What is made possible? You can include and engage any number of people
in making sense of confusing or shocking events and laying the ground for
new strategies to emerge. The format of the Conversation Café helps people
have calm and profound conversations in which there is less debating and
arguing, and more listening. Sitting in a circle with a simple set of
agreements and a talking object, small groups will engage in rounds of
dialogue with little or no unproductive conflict. As the meaning of their
challenge pops into focus, a consensual hunch is formed that will release
their capacity for new action.

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• Invite all the participants to gather in small groups to listen to one
another’s thoughts and reflect together on a shared challenge while
respecting six dialogue agreements.

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Unlimited number of 5 to 7 chairs around small tables
Talking object (e.g., talking stick, stone, or art object)
Markers and one or two pieces of flip-chart paper per table optional

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Everyone is included
Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

• Mixed, diverse groups of 5–7 participants

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

State the theme of the conversation, usually in the form of a question
Explain there will be four rounds of conversation at every table,
two first rounds using a talking object, the third one as open
conversation, and a final round with the talking object. Give the
duration of each round.
Distribute the talking objects
Read the six Conversation Café agreements. See text in Collateral
Material below.
Ask for someone at each table to volunteer as the host. The host is a
full participant whose role is to gently intervene only when a
participant visibly fails to observe one of the six agreements, most
frequently talking on and on
First round with the talking object: each person shares what he or
she is thinking, feeling, or doing about the theme or topic. 1 min. per
person
Second round with the talking object: each person shares thoughts
and feelings after having listened to everybody at the table. 1 min.
per person
Third round: open conversation (option to use talking object). 20–
40 min.
Fourth round with the talking object: each member shares
“takeaways.” 5–10 min.

WHY? PURPOSES

Make sense of a complex, difficult, or painful situation and lay the

ground for being able to move on
Generate new ideas and momentum for innovation
Build shared understanding of how people develop different
perspectives and ideas
Avoid arguments based on lack of understanding
Build trust and reduce fear with an opportunity for catharsis
 Help participants appreciate that conversation involves talking and
listening

TIPS AND TRAPS

Always use the talking object: they make the difference

Have the host or participants reread the six agreements before
starting the first round
Do not assign tasks: there should be no intention that the dialogue
will directly lead to action
Host the dialogue like a dinner party, encouraging everyone to
contribute while keeping the conversation open-ended and
spontaneous
Use Wicked Questions to deepen conversation
If there is a problem, ask, “Are we following our agreements?”
Encourage people to speak their mind
Encourage quiet people to talk
Select talking objects that may have symbolic meaning for
participants
Encourage participants to draw or record insights on the flip-chart
“tablecloth”
Learn more from Vicki Robin and friends, who created the
Conversation Café for use in communities @
[Link]

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

All participants but one at each table can move to different tables
every 20 minutes World-Café style (see [Link] for
more information).
Link to Graphic Recording. Place flip-chart paper on each table to
collect insights from each group. Encourage drawing and playful
exploration.
To move into action, string together with W3 (What, So What, Now
What?), 15% Solutions, Design StoryBoards, User Experience
Fishbowl, or Open Space.
 Below: a talking object invites deeper listening in Paris

EXAMPLES

For making sense of and start recovering from a major setback or

shock in the market or operating environment (e.g., first used in US
communities after 9/11)
For exploring a new topic or trend that is not well understood
For handling a topic where there will be strong feelings expressed
For reflecting after a major change: What does it mean? What
assumptions can we make? What conclusions make sense? What can
we now believe?

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by and adapted from Vicki Robin and Susan Partnow,
codevelopers of Conversation Cafés.
COLLATERAL MATERIAL

Below: presentation materials we use to introduce Conversation Café

Min Specs
Specify Only the Absolute “Must dos” and “Must not
dos” for Achieving a Purpose (35 to 50 min.)

“A designer knows What is made possible? By specifying only

perfection is achieved not the minimum number of simple rules, the Min
when there is nothing Specs that must ABSOLUTELY be respected,
more to add but when you can unleash a group to innovate freely.
there is nothing more that Respecting the Min Specs will ensure that
can be taken away.” innovations will be both purposeful and
Antoine de Saint-Exupery responsible. Like the Ten Commandments,
Min Specs are enabling constraints: they
detail only must dos and must not dos. You will eliminate the clutter of
nonessential rules, the Max Specs that get in the way of innovation. Often two
to five Min Specs are sufficient to boost performance by adding more
freedom AND more responsibility to the group’s understanding of what it
must do to make progress. Out of their experience in the field, participants
shape and adapt Min Specs together, working as one. Following the rules
makes it possible for the group to go wild!

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
In the context of a challenging activity or a new initiative, invite the
participants to first generate the entire list of all the do’s and don’ts
that they should pay attention to in order to achieve a successful
outcome. This is the list of maximum specifications (Max Specs).
After the list of Max Specs has been developed, ask the participants
to reduce it to the absolute minimum needed to achieve their
purpose. Invite them to sift through the list one item at a time and
 eliminate every rule that gets a positive answer to the question, “If
we broke or ignored this rule, could we still achieve our purpose?”

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Groups of 4 to 7 chairs around small tables
Paper to record Max and Min Specs

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Everyone involved in the activity or program can participate
Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

Start individually then small groups of 4 to 7
Whole group for sharing

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Generate the list of all must-do and must-not-do activities (Max
Specs), at first alone for one minute then consolidate and expand in
the small group for five minutes. Make list as complete as possible
in a short time. 6 min.
Each small group tests each spec on its Max Spec list against the
purpose statement. If the spec can be violated and the purpose still
achieved, the spec is dropped from the list. 15 min.
Do a second round if needed. 15 min.
Compare across small groups and consolidate to the shortest list. 15
min.

WHY? PURPOSES

Evaluate and decide what is absolutely essential for success

Open space for new possibilities
Reduce frontline frustration and free people from micromanagement
Focus or redirect resources and energies where it matters
Help guide scaling up and spreading innovations with fidelity

TIPS AND TRAPS

 Start with a complete list of dos
Include as many players/stakeholders as possible
Be ruthless in dropping dos: don’t allow max specs to creep in
Do extra rounds as needed
Make the Min Specs official! Live by them (no “yes but”)
Give more weight to direct experience in the field rather than
conceptual knowledge
Keep the Min Specs alive by adapting them based on field
experiences and Simple Ethnography observations
If groups are having difficulty, you may need to circle back to clarify
purpose and make sure that it is down to what is truly important.
Learn more in Brenda Zimmerman’s Edgeware or at
[Link]/edgeware/archive/think/

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Do a second round of purpose testing with the question, “If you

followed all the Min Specs except this one, would you achieve your
purpose?” If yes, you can drop that spec from the list.
Instead of developing Min Specs for the present, ask people to
speculate on what Min Specs should shape action in the future. Use
them to inform the present.
Do Min Specs with virtual groups by using the chat function to share
answers to each “can you violate this specification and achieve your
purpose?” question. When your Min Specs list is getting shorter and
tighter, open the voice conversation to all.
Simple Ethnography or Nine Whys may reveal implicit or tacit
Min Specs (dig deeper!)
 Below: Min Specs guide a self-organizing pattern in Brazil

EXAMPLES

Senator Lynda Bourque Moss used Min Specs to identify the must
dos and must not dos for all the stakeholders to share responsibility
for preventing the habit of driving while intoxicated and support
new state legislation. Read Lynda’s story, “Passing Montana Senate
Bill 29” in Part Three: Stories from the Field.
After a company-wide Open Space meeting, Alison Joslyn
developed a set of Min Specs with the new project leaders of a
corporate turnaround. See “Turning A Business Around” in Part
Three.
Include Min Specs with any assignment given or received.

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by professor Kathleen Eisenhardt and author Paul
Plsek (see Zimmerman, Lindberg, and Plsek Edgeware).
COLLATERAL MATERIAL

Below: presentation materials we use to introduce Min Specs

Improv Prototyping
Develop Effective Solutions to Chronic Challenges
While Having Serious Fun (20 min. per round)

“To be playful is not to be What is made possible? You can engage a

trivial or frivolous, or to group to learn and improve rapidly from
act as if nothing of tapping three levels of knowledge
consequence will happen. simultaneously: (1) explicit knowledge
On the contrary, when we shared by participants; (2) tacit knowledge
are playful with one discovered through observing each other’s
another, we relate as free performance; and (3) latent knowledge, i.e.,
persons, and the new ideas that emerge and are jointly
relationship is open to developed. This powerful combination can be
surprise; everything that the source of transformative experiences and,
happens is of at the same time, it is seriously fun.
consequence, for Participants identify and act out solutions to
seriousness is a dread of chronic or daunting problems. A diverse mix
the unpredictable of people is invited to dramatize simple
outcomes of open elements that work to solve a problem.
possibility. To be serious Innovations represented in the Improv
is to press for a specified sketches are assembled incrementally from
conclusion. To be playful pieces or chunks that can be used separately
is to allow for unlimited or together. It is a playful way to get very
possibility.” James Carse serious work done!
 Sources of Knowledge & Innovation, adapted from Alan Duncan, MD
(Mayo Clinic), designed for VHA Health Foundation (2006).

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• Invite participants to identify a frustrating chronic challenge in their work,
then to playfully experiment, invent, and discover better ways to address
the challenge by acting out the situation and possible solutions.

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

An open space or stage at the front or in the middle of a room
If needed, props for the scene or scenes to be offered
Small clusters of chairs to accommodate all participants

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Everyone is included either as players or observers
A few volunteers to be “players”
Everyone else acts as observers and evaluators, then cocreative
players
4. How Groups Are Configured
One small group of players on “the stage”
All others, the observers, in small groups in front or around the
stage

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Explain what will be done and describe the sequence of steps. 2
min.
Set the stage by describing the scenario that will be acted out and
the various roles. 3 min.
Players on stage enact the scene. 3–5 min.
Each small observer group debriefs with 1-2-4-All to identify
successful and unsuccessful “chunks” from the scene that they just
observed. 5 min.
Each observer group then pieces together the successful chunks into
a new prototype and volunteers from within the group act out the
new prototype for their own group only. 5 min.
Participants from one of the observer groups who judge that they
have an improved prototype volunteer to come on stage and enact
their version in front of the whole group. 3–5 minutes.
Continue with as many rounds as necessary to arrive at one or more
prototypes that are good enough to put into practice.

WHY? PURPOSES

Enable people to act their way into new thinking: Improv

Prototyping is a rehearsal for real life
Break a task that seems daunting into smaller pieces
Engage and focus everyone’s imagination on solving messy
challenges
Break through frozen or resistant behaviors
Create an engaging and fun alternative to dry or unproductive
training
Work across functional and disciplinary barriers
Help people learn from peers that have behaviors that solve the
problem
TIPS AND TRAPS

Be as inclusive as possible: invite everyone in different roles to

join in
Draw meaningful themes and dramatic lines for each scene from
Discovery & Action Dialogues and Simple Ethnography
Consider creating three supporting roles depending on the
complexity of the scenario: stage manager, creative director, and
facilitator.
Replay scenes that do not capture the imagination or generate new
ideas
Invite people to let go of assumptions and biases by putting
themselves in the shoes of others, e.g., doctor plays nurse and nurse
plays doctor, student plays professor
Invite creative director to gently redirect the players as needed

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

With the goal of discovering better (and worse) actions, invite the
audience to replay the scene in small groups. Start with separate
small groups staging their own impromptu Improvs, then invite face-
off competitions judged by an “applause-o-meter”
Link to and string with Design StoryBoards, Shift & Share, and
User Experience Fishbowl to help spread the innovations (specify
what is and what could be)

EXAMPLES

Hospital trainers have substituted Improv Prototyping for

conventional courses
For sales reps to invent new ways to interact with their customers
For managers to make their interactions with people who report to
them more productive
For health-care providers to practice end-of-life and palliative-care
conversations with patients and family members
 For teachers to discover effective responses to disruptive classroom
behaviors
For training young nurses to stand their ground on safety issues (see
“Dramatizing Behavior Change to Stop Infections” in Part Three:
Stories from the Field).

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by Antonas Mockus (former mayor of Bogota) and
Improv artists.
COLLATERAL MATERIAL

Below: presentation materials we use to introduce Improv Prototyping

Helping Heuristics
Practice Progressive Methods for Helping Others,
Receiving Help and Asking for Help (15 min.)

“You cannot help a man What is made possible? Participants can

permanently by doing for gain insight into their own pattern of
them something they interaction and habits. Helping Heuristics
could and should do for make it possible for them to experience how
themselves.” Abraham they can choose to change how they work
Lincoln with others by using a progression of
practical methods. Heuristics are shortcuts
that help people identify what is important when entering a new situation.
They help them develop deeper insight into their own interaction patterns and
make smarter decisions quickly. A series of short exchanges reveals
heuristics or simple rules of thumb for productive helping. Try them out!

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
Invite participants to view all human interactions as offers that are
either accepted or blocked (e.g., Improv artists are trained to accept
all offers)
Ask them to act, react, or observe four patterns of interaction
Invite them to reflect on their patterns as well as to consider shifting
how they ask, offer, and receive help

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Any number of participants, standing
No tables in the way of people standing face-to-face!

3. How Participation Is Distributed

 Everyone has an equal opportunity to learn and to contribute
Participants switch into one of three possible roles as the activity
progresses

4. How Groups Are Configured

Groups of 3: two participants interacting face-to-face in the roles of
client and coach plus one observer
Whole group for the debrief

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Explain that there will be four rounds of 1–2-minute improvised
interactions. Groups choose one member to be a “client,” another a
“coach,” with the third acting as “observer.” Roles can stay the
same or change from round to round. The fourth round will be
followed by 5 minutes of debrief. 2 min.
During every round the person in the role of client shares a
challenge he or she is passionate about. While the observer pays
close attention, the coach responds in a sequence of patterns that is
different for each round as follows.
During the first round, the response pattern is “Quiet Presence”: the
coach accepts all offers with compassionate listening (see the
Liberating Structure Heard, Seen, Respected (HSR)). 2 min.
During the second round, the response pattern is “Guided
Discovery”: the coach accepts all offers, guiding inquiry for mutual
discoveries (see the Liberating Structure Appreciative Interview).
2 min.
During the third round, the response pattern is “Loving
Provocation”: the coach interjects advice, accepting and blocking as
needed when the coach sees something that the client does not see
(see the Liberating Structure Troika Consulting). 2 min.
During the fourth round, the response pattern is “Process
Mindfulness”: the coach and client accept all offers from each other,
working at the top of their intelligence while noticing how novel
possibilities are amplified. 2 min.
Debrief the impact of all four helping patterns as experienced by
clients, coaches, and observers. 5 min.
 Based on the debrief, repeat all rounds or only some for all
participants to practice various response patterns.

WHY? PURPOSES

Reduce/eliminate common errors and traps when people are giving

or asking for help
Change unwanted giving help patterns that include: premature
solutions; unneeded advice; adding pressure to force use of advice;
moving to next steps too quickly; trying too hard not to overhelp
Change unwanted asking for help patterns that include: mistrusting;
not sharing real problem; accepting help without ownership; looking
for validation, not help; resenting not getting enough

TIPS AND TRAPS

Encourage people to change roles in each round

Develop trust, inquire humbly, create climate of mutual discovery
Focus on patterns that will help the client finding his or her own
solutions (self-discovery in a group)
Do not ignore status differences, the setting, body language,
demeanor, subtle signals
The first cycle of four rounds can be used as preparation for deeper
work on any single pattern
After initial cycle, let trios choose the patterns they want to focus on
in their group

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Invite participants to create their own profile, self-identifying their

default patterns and opportunities for growth
Incorporate the helping progression into other Liberating Structures
that focus on give-and-take: Troika Consulting, Wise Crowds,
What I Need From You, Improv Prototyping, Simple
Ethnography
 Start with “fun” patterns: neutral (zero response) and blocking by
ignoring or interrupting

EXAMPLES

Used when Wise Crowds or What I Need From You does not
achieve a group’s intended purpose—for example, when
participants have fallen into one of the unwanted asking for or
giving help patterns
For nurses, coaches, teachers, or anyone else in the helping
professions to renew and learn new relational skills
For any group working to improve interprofessional coordination
For Liberating Structures facilitators to dig deeper into underlying
patterns that cut across many Liberating Structures
For expanding options when frustrated with trying to help another
person

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by author/professor Edgar Schein (see Helping in
Learning Resources).
COLLATERAL MATERIAL

Below: presentation materials we use to introduce Helping Heuristics

User Experience Fishbowl
Share Know-How Gained from Experience with a
Larger Community (35 to 70 min.)

What is made possible? A subset of people with direct field experience can
quickly foster understanding, spark creativity, and facilitate adoption of new
practices among members of a larger community. Fishbowl sessions have a
small inside circle of people surrounded by a larger outside circle of
participants. The inside group is formed with people who made concrete
progress on a challenge of interest to those in the outside circle. The
fishbowl design makes it easy for people in the inside circle to illuminate
what they have done by sharing experiences while in conversation with each
other. The informality breaks down the barriers with direct communication
between the two groups of people and facilitates questions and answers
flowing back and forth. This creates the best conditions for people to learn
from each other by discovering answers to their concerns themselves within
the context of their working groups. You can stop imposing someone else’s
practices!

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
Ask those in the fishbowl to describe their experience—the good,
the bad, and the ugly—informally, concretely, and openly. Invite
them to do it in conversation with each other as if the audience
wasn’t there and they were sharing stories around a watering hole or
stuck in a van on the way to the airport. Firmly, ask them to avoid
presenting to the audience.
Invite the people outside the fishbowl to listen, observe nonverbal
exchanges, and formulate questions within their small groups.
2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed
Three to 7 chairs in a circle in the middle of a room
Microphones for inner circle if whole group is larger than 30 to 40
If possible, a low stage or bar stools make it possible for people in
the outer circle to better see the interactions
As many chairs as needed in an outer circle around the inner circle,
in clumps of 3 to 4 chairs
In large groups, have additional microphones ready for outside
circle questions

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Everyone in the inner circle has an equal opportunity to contribute
Everyone in the outer circle has an equal opportunity to ask
questions

4. How Groups Are Configured

One inner circle group of 3–7 people
One outer circle in multiple small satellite groups of 3–4 people
1-2-4-All configuration for the debrief

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Explain the fishbowl configuration and steps. 2 min.
Inner circle conversation goes on until it ends on its own. 10 to 25
min.
Satellite groups in outer circle formulate observations and
questions. 4 min.
Questions submitted to the inner circle are answered, and back-and-
forth interaction between inner and outer circles goes on as needed
until all the questions are answered. 10 to 25 min.
Debrief using W3(What? So What? Now What?) and ask, “What
seems possible now?” 10 to 15 min.

WHY? PURPOSES

Get down-to-earth field experience and all the questions and

answers about new endeavors out on the table for everyone to
 understand at the same time
Create conditions for new ideas to emerge
Make space for every participant’s imagination and experience to
show up
Build skills in listening, storytelling, pattern-finding, questioning,
and observing
Celebrate early adopters and innovators who have gained field
experience (often failing forward and vetting the prototype)

TIPS AND TRAPS

For inner circle, pick only people with direct personal experience
(without regard to rank)
Pick people for the fishbowl (inner circle) who are representative
of the distinct roles and functions that require coordination for
success
Encourage inner-circle people to share concrete, very descriptive
examples rather than opinions
Advise inner-circle people to imagine being in a car or a bar
sharing stories and having a conversation
Encourage everyone to share both successes and failures, “the good,
the bad, the ugly”
Enforce the “no speeches” and “talk to each other, not to the outer
circle” rules!
Have fun and encourage animated storytelling

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Leave an open chair or two in the inner circle for someone

unexpected to jump in
With virtual groups, people in the outside circle use the chat
function to share questions “to all” or in “pairs” as the conversation
unfolds among “the fishes of the inner circle.”
Mash-up or string together User Experience Fishbowl with Improv
Prototyping, 25/10 Crowd Sourcing, Ecocycle Planning, Simple
 Ethnography, Shift & Share

EXAMPLES

For transferring on-the-ground knowledge from officers returning

from Afghanistan to those replacing them (see “Transforming After-
Action Reviews in the Army” in Part Three: Stories from the Field).
During a Liberating Structures workshop, a few experienced
practitioners share stories to deepen the understanding of new users
about how to get started and how to get practical results
During a doctors’ meeting, an inner circle of specialists discussed a
challenging case in the middle of a group of primary-care
physicians, sparking a discussion of the case from specialist and
primary-care perspectives
A pilot group of salespeople shared with the rest of the sales force
their experience with a new handheld reporting device. The User
Experience Fishbowl helped everybody become comfortable that
they knew all they needed to know to adopt the innovation.
For a public-sector organization trying to expand beyond “hidden”
pockets of uplifting service
Members of an executive management team conducted their meeting
in a fishbowl surrounded by all their managers.

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless and inspired by immersing ourselves in many different kinds of
fishbowls over the years.

COLLATERAL MATERIAL
Below: presentation materials we use to introduce Users Experience
Fishbowl
Heard, Seen, Respected (HSR)
Practice Deeper Listening and Empathy with
Colleagues (35 min.)

“Empathy removes the What is made possible? You can foster the
blocks to action in a way empathetic capacity of participants to “walk
that is inclusive. It in the shoes” of others. Many situations do not
creates power through have immediate answers or clear resolutions.
partnership and Recognizing these situations and responding
cocreation, resolving with empathy can improve the “cultural
what appears to be climate” and build trust among group
knotted and bound.” members. HSR helps individuals learn to
Dominic Barter respond in ways that do not overpromise or
overcontrol. It helps members of a group
notice unwanted patterns and work together on shifting to more productive
interactions. Participants experience the practice of more compassion and the
benefits it engenders.

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
Invite participants to tell a story to a partner about a time when they
felt that they were not heard, seen, or respected.
Ask the listeners to avoid any interruptions other than asking
questions like “What else?” or “What happened next?”

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Chairs facing each other, a few inches between knees
No tables

3. How Participation Is Distributed

• Everyone has an equal amount of time, in turn, to participate in each role,
as a storyteller and a listener

4. How Groups Are Configured

In pairs for the storytelling
Then foursomes for reflecting on what happened

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Introduce the purpose of HSR: to practice listening without trying to
fix anything or make any judgments. 3 min.
One at a time, each person has 7 minutes to share a story about NOT
being heard, seen, or respected. 15 min.
Partners share with one another the experiences of listening and
storytelling: “What did it feel like to tell my story; what did it feel
like to listen to your story?” 5 min.
In a foursome, participants share reflections using 1-2-4, asking,
“What patterns are revealed in the stories? What importance do you
assign to the pattern?” 5 min.
As a whole group, participants reflect on the questions, “How could
HSR be used to address challenges revealed by the patterns? What
other Liberating Structures could be used?” 5 min.

WHY? PURPOSES

Reveal how common it is for people to experience not being heard,

seen, or respected
Reveal how common it is for people to behave in a way that makes
other people feel they are not being heard, seen, or respected
Improve listening, tuning, and empathy among group members
Notice how much can be accomplished simply by listening
Rely on each other more when facing confusing or new situations
Offer catharsis and healing after strains in relationships
Help managers discern when listening is more effective than trying
to solve a problem
TIPS AND TRAPS (for introducing HSR)

Say, “Your partner may be ready before you. The first story that
pops into mind is often the best.”
Make it safe by saying, “You may not want to pick the most painful
story that comes to mind.”
Make it safe by saying, “Protect carefully the privacy of the
storyteller. Ask what parts, if any, you can share with others.”
Suggest, “When you are the listener, notice when you form a
judgment (about what is right or wrong) or when you get an idea
about how you can help, then let it go.”

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

If you are feeling brave, replace the word “respected” with “loved”
(i.e., the agape form of love—seeking the highest good in others
without motive for personal gain.)
String HSR together with other Liberating Structures that help to
mend relationships: Troika Consulting, Helping Heuristics,
Generative Relationships STAR, Appreciative Interviews,
Conversation Café

EXAMPLES

For regular meetings to improve the quality of listening and tuning in

to each other
For transition periods when questions about the future are
unanswerable (e.g., post-merger integration, market disruptions,
social upheaval) and empathetic listening is what is needed
When individuals or groups have suffered a loss and need a forum
to share their grief or despair
To improve one-on-one reporting relationships up and down in an
organization

ATTRIBUTION
Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith
McCandless. Inspired by Seeds of Compassion practitioners and consultant
Mark Jones.
COLLATERAL MATERIAL

Below: presentation materials we use to introduce HSR

Drawing Together
Reveal Insights and Paths Forward Through Nonverbal
Expression (40 min.)

What is made possible? You can help people “A vivid imagination

access hidden knowledge such as feelings, compels the whole body
attitudes, and patterns that are difficult to to obey.” Aristotle
express with words. When people are tired,
their brains are full, and they have reached the limits of logical thinking, you
can help them evoke ideas that lie outside logical, step-by-step understanding
of what is possible. Stories about individual or group transformations can be
told with five easy-to-draw symbols that have universal meanings. The
playful spirit of drawing together signals that more is possible and many new
answers are expected. Drawing Together cuts through the culture of
overreliance on what people say and write that constrains the emergence of
novelty. It also provides a new avenue of expression for some people whose
ideas would otherwise not surface.

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• Invite participants to tell a story about a challenge they face, or a common
challenge, using only five symbols and no words

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

An open wall with tapestry paper or easels with blank pages in flip
charts
Water-based markers; soft pastels if you are feeling colorful

3. How Participation Is Distributed

 Everyone is included since the five symbols are easy for everyone
to draw
All participants make their individual drawings simultaneously

4. How Groups Are Configured

Individually to practice the drawing of the symbols
Individually to make first and second drafts of their drawings
Small groups of 1–4 others to interpret the drawings
Whole group for debrief (using 1-2-4-All for large groups)

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

• Introduce the idea of drawing together by drawing and describing the
meaning of each symbol. 5 min.

― Circle = wholeness;
― Rectangle = support;
― Triangle = goal;
― Spiral = change;
― Star person [equidistant cross] = relationship

Invite participants to practice drawing the five symbols: circle,

rectangle, triangle, spiral, star person. 5 min.
Invite participants to combine the symbols to create the first draft of a
story, working individually and without words, about “the journey” of
working on a challenge or an innovation. 10 min.
Invite participants to create a second draft, in which they refine their
story by dramatizing the size, placement, and color of the symbols. 10
min.
Ask participants to invite another individual or their small group to
interpret their drawings. Remind them that the person who has done the
drawing does not speak. 5 min.
Ask the whole group, “Together, what do the drawings reveal?” Use 1-
2-4-All with larger groups. 5 min.
 Below: visual stories created in 40-minute Drawing Together sessions

WHY? PURPOSES

Reveal insight or understanding not accessible with verbal or linear

methods
Tap all the sources of knowledge for innovation (explicit, tacit,
latent/emergent)
Signal that a quest or journey in search of new discoveries is under
way
Develop and deepen shared understanding of a vision or complex
dynamics
Create closer connections among group members

TIPS AND TRAPS

Remind participants that the drawing is not the object by saying,

“Refined drawing skills are not required—get over your need for
perfection! Childlike drawing looks playful and captures the
imagination of others!”
 Don’t help too much with drawing skills
Help participants accept whatever emerges in the drawings (there
are often surprises)
Draw or present an example of a story that helps others make a leap
of understanding
Record the participants drawing with cameras and video recorders
Return to the drawings when you reconvene as a group
Remember that drawing can be powerfully therapeutic; be prepared
for emotional responses

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

One person can visually map conversations during a meeting (add

words if you must)
Start small: use a single sheet of 8½ ” by 11” paper to get started
Computer tablets can be used instead of paper for participants to
learn how to tell a story with the five symbols on their tablets
Use the Hero’s Journey as a template for the stories
Use as a template a progression from status quo, through call to
novelty, discovery, validation, early adoption, and spread

EXAMPLES

For a refreshing change of pace in a long meeting when a creative

burst is needed
When there are strong differences in perspective and the group is in
a rut
For visual facilitation of a meeting or conference, where drawings
are created as the conversation unfolds
For revealing obscure or hidden relationships when working on a
complex project (e.g., one doctoral student had a eureka moment via
Drawing Together)
For helping a vision statement come to life (particularly for visually
oriented people)
 For individual work, to visualize tacit or latent approaches to a
challenge

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by David Sibbet (The Grove, [Link]) and
Angeles Arrien (see Signs of Life).
Design StoryBoards—Basic
Define Step-by-Step Elements for Bringing Meetings
to Productive Endpoints (25–70 min.)

What is made possible? The most common causes of dysfunctional meetings

can be eliminated: unclear purpose or lack of a common one, time wasters,
restrictive participation, absent voices, groupthink, and frustrated
participants. The process of designing a storyboard draws out a purpose that
becomes clearer as it is matched with congruent microstructures. It reveals
who needs to be included for successful implementation. Storyboards invite
design participants to carefully define all the micro-organizing elements
needed to achieve their purpose: a structuring invitation, space, materials,
participation, group configurations, and facilitation and time allocations.
Storyboards prevent people from starting and running meetings without an
explicit design. Good designs yield better-than-expected results by
uncovering tacit and latent sources of innovation.
FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• Invite a design team (a representative subset of the group) to create a
detailed plan, including visual cues, for how participants will interact to
achieve their purpose

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

An open wall with tapestry paper or flip-chart pages
2-by-4-inch Post-its and/or Liberating Structures Playing Cards
A blank storyboard (see Collateral Material)

3. How Participation Is Distributed

• Everyone involved in the design and planning of the meeting has an equal
opportunity to contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

• 1-2-All or 1-All in rapid cycles for each step below

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Clarify the purpose of your work together (use Nine Whys if
needed). 2 to 5 min.
Describe the standard approach or microstructure you would
normally use for this session (including who is normally present)
and assess how it succeeds and fails in achieving the stated purpose.
5 to 10 min.
Reexamine and strengthen the purpose statement if needed. 2 to 5
min.
Reexamine and decide who needs to participate or be involved. 2 to
5 min.
Brainstorm alternative microstructures (both conventional and
Liberating Structures) that could achieve the purpose. Determine
whether the purpose can be achieved in one step. If not, what must
be the purpose of the first step? Continue with first step only. 5 to 10
min.
Determine which microstructures are best suited to achieving the
purpose; choose one plus a backup. 2 to 10 min.
Decide who will be invited and who will facilitate the meeting.
Enter all your decisions in the blank storyboard. 2 to 10 min.
Determine the questions and process you will use to evaluate your
design (e.g., Did the design achieve desired outcomes? Did the
group work together in a productive way? Does something new
seem possible now? Use What, So What, Now What?) 2 to 5 min.
If multiple steps are needed, confer with the design team and
arrange a meeting to work on an Advanced Design StoryBoard
(see description below). 5 to 10 min.

WHY? PURPOSES

Evoke a purpose that is clear for all

Make the work in meetings productive and enjoyable for all
Give everyone a chance to make contributions
 Foster synergy among participants
Help everyone find his or her role by making the design process
visible
Reveal the weaknesses of the current practice and step up from it
Tap all the sources of knowledge for innovation (explicit, tacit,
latent/emergent)

TIPS AND TRAPS

Encourage and seriously play with fast iterations; repeat and deepen
your design
At a minimum, work in pairs (a second set of eyes and ears really
helps) or small groups
Use icons and sketches to quickly develop shared understanding and
actionable ideas
Always include a design debrief (What, So What, Now What?)
Don’t skimp on the time necessary to generate a good design. A
good design will reduce wasted meeting time by much more than it
took to create it. A bad design will generate frustration.

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Use the same approach to map ethnographic observations of a

current practice
Use a pie chart to illuminate and balance the goals and flow of your
design

EXAMPLES

For management meetings of all stripes

Project reviews
Classroom sessions
Brainstorming sessions
One-on-one meetings
 Planning a learning session for a conference. See “Fixing a Broken
Child Welfare System” in Part Three: Stories from the Field.

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless.
Design StoryBoards—Advanced
Define Step-by-Step Elements for Bringing
Transformation and Innovation Initiatives to
Productive Endpoints (18 hours to days/weeks)

What is made possible? You can avoid many of the traps that turn
transformation initiatives and innovation projects into failures: the lack of a
clear and common purpose, overall and for every stage of the initiative;
inadequate engagement and participation; voices that are essential but not
included; frustrated participants and nonparticipants; resistance to change;
groupthink; nightmarish implementation for a disproportionally small impact.
A comprehensive design is a series of basic designs (see Design
StoryBoards–Basic above) linked together over a period of time. The design
unfolds iteratively over days, weeks, months, or sometimes years depending
on the scale of the project. Small cycles of design operate within larger
cycles, scaling up and out as the initiative proceeds. You can easily include
more people and more diversity in the design group for larger-scale projects.
You can reflect the twists and turns in a transformation or innovation effort by
a careful and ad hoc selection of participants (including unusual suspects
since they are often the source of novel approaches).

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• Invite an initial design team to create a detailed plan, including visual
cues, for how participants will interact to achieve their purpose

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

An open wall with tapestry paper or flip-chart pages
2-by-4-inch Post-its and/or Liberating Structures Playing Cards
 A blank storyboard template (see Collateral Materials)

3. How Participation Is Distributed

• Everyone on the design team involved in the design and planning of the
project has an equal opportunity to contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

• 1-2-All or 1-All in rapid cycles for each step below

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Determine the composition of a design team that includes all
relevant stakeholders and assemble the team (the composition can
be adjusted ad hoc over time as the work progresses). 1 to 3 hrs.
Design team clarifies the overall purpose of the initiative (use Nine
Whys or a more elaborate microstructure as needed). 1 to 6 hrs.
Describe in detail what happens when people use the current
product, service, or approach that you wish to transform/improve.
You may need to use a method like the Liberating Structure called
Simple Ethnography to gather data for an accurate description of
this current user experience. 6 hrs. to days or weeks.
Based on the users’ experience, assess how the current product,
service, or approach succeeds and fails in achieving the stated
purpose. 3 hrs. to days.
Reexamine and strengthen the purpose statement if needed. 1 to 6
hrs.
Reexamine and decide who needs to participate in the core design
group and who needs to participate on the periphery to help with
vetting or field testing. 1 to 3 hrs.
Brainstorm and outline alternative microstructures (both
conventional and Liberating Structures) that help achieve the
purpose. 3 hrs. to days.
Break up your outline into steps or chunks that can be designed and
function independently (don’t try to put together a comprehensive
design from the start). 1 to 6 hrs.
 Determine a design for one step, selecting microstructures that are
suited to achieving the purpose; choose one plus a backup. Repeat
and continue with each step. 1 to 6 hrs.
Decide whether any testing or vetting of your design is feasible or
desirable. Consider testing in waves and in different configurations.
1 to 6 hrs.
Implement the first step in a simulated or field setting. Continue
testing in more extreme conditions.
Evaluate the first and then the subsequent steps of your design.
Determine the questions and process you will use to evaluate your
overall design (e.g.: Did the design achieve desired outcomes? Did
the group work together and coordinate tasks in a productive way?
Does something new seem possible now? Use What, So What,
Now What?).
Repeat design cycle and refine the design for the next step, and so
on…

WHY? PURPOSES

Make a significant and enduring advance by breaking away from

current reality
Provide enough time for new behaviors to take shape and spread,
expanding what others believe is possible to accomplish
See additional Purposes under Design StoryBoards–Basic above.

TIPS AND TRAPS

Resist the urge for action and do not skimp on time spent designing
the storyboard then assessing and adjusting it
Establish a core design team and keep the door open to others that
want to join in
Don’t forget to include users!
Share the design widely
Remember that a design makes it possible to improvise as you go: if
one element of your design is not achieving its purpose, go to your
 backup (or a backup of your backup)
Shoot for the moon with your feet firmly on the ground (i.e.,
anchored in user’s experience research)
Use icons and sketches to quickly develop shared understanding

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

In place of focus groups with users, invite the users to participate in

designing a storyboard to improve their experience with a product
or service
Find an illustrator or cartoonist to dramatize your work

EXAMPLES

For redesigning the exchange of information and responsibilities at

shift change
For transforming from a product-centric to a customer-focused
market strategy
For reforming how academic training prepares students for practice
in the field
Read “Turning a Business Around” in Part Three: Stories from the
Field. Alison Joslyn’s management team used Design StoryBoard to
formulate strategy discussions and launch Liberating Structures
“basic training” for product managers and sales reps.
See examples in Chapter 7, “From Strings to Storyboards”

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless.
Celebrity Interview
Reconnect the Experience of Leaders and Experts with
People Closest to the Challenge at Hand (35 to 60
min.)

What is made possible? You can enable a large group of people to connect
with a leader or an expert (the celebrity) as a person and grasp the nuances
of how that person is approaching a challenge. With a well-designed
interview, you can turn what would otherwise be a passive, often boring
presentation into a personal narrative that is entertaining, imparts valuable
knowledge, and reveals the full range of rational, emotional, and
ethical/moral dynamics at play. You can often turn the interview into an
invitation to action, drawing out all the elements needed to spark the
participant group’s imagination and encourage cohesive action.

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
Invite the celebrity to let go of his or her formal presentation or
speech and answer the harder questions on everyone’s mind in a
casual “talk show” format
Invite group members to listen, see the person behind the celebrity,
and write down questions with colleagues

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Interviewer and celebrity in the front of the room where everyone
can see and hear the interaction (lapel microphones, bar stools, or
living-room furniture recommended)
Unlimited number of people in a space where they can sit to view
the interview and later form small groups (theater-style seating is
OK)
 3-by-5-inch cards to collect questions generated via 1-2-4

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Part one, interview: everyone has an equal opportunity to listen
Part two, questions: everyone has an equal opportunity to engage
with one another to formulate questions

How Groups Are Configured

Whole group for interview
Individuals, pairs, small groups for 1-2-4 to generate questions

Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Interviewer welcomes and introduces the celebrity and topic to be

discussed. 3 min.
Interviewer asks questions that the audience would be expected to
ask (both humor and gravity are appropriate). 15–30 min.
Invite participants to generate additional questions in a 1-2-4
conversation and then on 3-by-5-inch cards. 5–10 min.
Interviewer sifts the cards, looking for patterns and asking
additional questions to the celebrity. 5–10 min.
Interviewer makes closing comments, thanks the celebrity. 1 min.

WHY? PURPOSES

Create or boost a connection between an expert or leader and an

audience
Give substance and depth to a topic
Avoid boring lectures and PowerPoint presentations
Engage every individual in generating questions for further
exploration
Shed light on the person behind the position or expertise
Bring big concepts to life with stories that come out in the interview

TIPS AND TRAPS

 A good sequence of starting questions is: What first inspired you in
this work? What challenges you in this work? What keeps you going
in this work? What do you hope can happen for us in this work?
Give the questions to the celebrity in advance
If possible, send background materials to participants in advance
Do not allow the introduction to become a minilecture
Interview questions should not be trivial or easy to answer
Interviewer must ask repeatedly for stories and concrete details that
illustrate concepts
Interviewer may ask the celebrity, “Why is _____ important to YOU
(not the larger organization or system)?”

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Have fun with riffs from the talk-show genre: channel Oprah,
Stephen Colbert, or your favorite celebrity interviewer
The interviewer can conduct research in advance of the session,
asking participants, “What do you want to know but would not dare
to ask? What is the most important thing you want to know about this
person or the work ahead?”
Use a storytelling template to structure your interview (e.g., the
Hero’s Journey).
For strategy sessions, dig deeper into challenges by asking: What is
happening around us that demands creative adaptation? What
happens if we do nothing? Given our purpose, what seems possible
now? If our current strategies were obliterated last night, what parts
would you bring back today?
Use with virtual groups. Conduct the voice/video interview while
inviting all other participants to develop questions and comments in
pairs or groups. Share the top questions via the chat function to “all”
when the interview is complete.
String together with User Experience Fishbowl, Open Space,
DAD, and What I Need From You

EXAMPLES
 For a leader or leaders to help launch a new initiative
To welcome and get to know a new leader coming into the
organization
To personalize and deepen the contributions of an expert
For debriefing the experience of a few participants in an important
event
As an alternative to a case-study presentation: the interviewer helps
to revive the story and the local context underneath the analysis

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by seriously playful improvisers in Venezuela.
Social Network Webbing
Map Informal Connections and Decide How to
Strengthen the Network to Achieve a Purpose (1 hr.)

What is made possible? Social Network Webbing quickly illuminates for a

whole group what resources are hidden within their existing network of
relationships and what steps to take for tapping those resources. It also
makes it easy to identify opportunities for building stronger connections as
well as new ones. The inclusive approach makes the network visible and
understandable to everybody in the group simultaneously. It encourages
individuals to take the initiative for building a stronger network rather than
receiving directions through top-down assignments. Informal or loose
connections—even your friends’ friends’ friend—are tapped in a way that
can have a powerful influence on progress without detailed planning and big
investments.

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
Invite the members of a core working group with a shared purpose
to create a map of their network and to decide how to expand and
strengthen it
Ask them to name the people they are currently working with and
those they would like to include in the future (i.e., people with
influence or expertise they need to achieve their purpose)
Invite them to “weave” connections in the network web to advance
their purpose

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

A long open wall with a tapestry paper or multiple flip-chart pages
2-by-2-inch Post-it notes in at least 8 colors
 Bold-tip black pens (e.g., Sharpies)

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Everyone involved in the core working or planning group is
included
Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

1-2-4-All to generate the names of all the key groups
Everyone together to generate the names of people in the network
and construct the map

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Create a legend of all the key groups in the network and assign a
Post-it color or symbol for each. 5 min.
Every core group member prints clearly his or her name on a Post-
it. Put the Post-its in a group in the center of the wall. 5 min.
Ask all core group members, “What people do you know that are
active in this work?” Tell them to create a Post-it with each of their
names. Ask them to arrange the Post-its based on each person’s
degrees of separation from each design group member. 10 min.
Ask all core group members, “Who else would you like to include
in this work?” Invite them to brainstorm and create Post-its for the
other people they would like to include. Ask them to build the map
of Post-its as a web with a core and periphery structure (mimicking
the actual and desired spread of participation). They may need to
add new legend categories and colors. 10 min.
Tell the core group to step back and ask, “Who knows whom? Who
has influence and expertise? Who can block progress? Who can
boost progress?” Ask them to illustrate the answers with connecting
lines. 15 min.
Ask the group to devise strategies to: 1) invite, attract, and “weave”
new people into their work; 2) work around blockages; and 3) boost
progress. 10 min.

WHY? PURPOSES
 Tap the informal connections that have indirect yet powerful
influence on behavior and results
Disseminate knowledge and innovation across scales and through
boundaries—within and beyond the organization
Develop more frontline ownership and leadership for change
Help people see connections and “black holes”
Help people self-organize and develop groups that are more
resilient and able to absorb disruptions
Tip the balance toward positive change
Operate without big budgets and extensive planning by tapping the
informal social networks and inviting people to contribute.

TIPS AND TRAPS

Ask the core group to focus on developing a core group that gets
things done and a diverse periphery that adds new ideas and growth
Encourage members to dream BIG when considering whom they
want to include in the future
Do not include more than 10 functions or distinct groups in the
legend: it gets too confusing!
Write down people’s names whenever possible instead of
positions/titles
When weaving and connecting people, tell core members to think
small (e.g., pairs, small interest groups)
Learn more from Smart Networks cofounder June Holley at
[Link]/

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Come back to the maps frequently: update who is involved now and
growth patterns
Use software to make the network maps, providing more detail and
metrics
String webbing sessions together with follow-up action steps via
15% Solutions, Design StoryBoards, 1-2-4-All
EXAMPLES

For a hospital core team working to engage everyone in preventing

the spread of infections
For a group of Lean coaches to informally spread skills and methods
among frontline staff
For middle managers in a financial organization to develop
prototypes and launch new products in multiple markets
For provincial government leaders “translating” policy-to-practice
initiatives across diverse settings
For expanding the use of a new technology, the early adopters
gathered and mapped out their network to identify potential new
users

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by June Holley, network weaver.
COLLATERAL MATERIAL

Below: presentation material we use to introduce Social Network

Webbing, featuring a map of relationships to improve safety
“What I Need From You” (WINFY)
Surfacing Needs and Working across Functions and
Disciplines (55 to 70 min.)

What is made possible? People working in different functions and

disciplines can quickly improve how they ask each other for what they need
to be successful. You can mend misunderstandings or dissolve prejudices
developed over time by demystifying what group members need in order to
achieve common goals. Since participants articulate core needs to others and
each person involved in the exchange is given the chance to respond, you
boost clarity, integrity, and transparency while promoting cohesion and
coordination across silos: you can put Humpty Dumpty back together again!

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
Invite participants to ask for what they need from others (often in
different functions or disciplines) to be successful in reaching a
specific goal
Invite them also to respond unambiguously to the requests from
others

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Large room to accommodate 3 to 7 functional clusters of
participants in different sections
Chairs for a group of 3 to 7 people to sit in a circle in the middle of
the room
Paper for participants to record needs and responses

3. How Participation Is Distributed1

Everyone is included in his or her functional cluster
 Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

Three to 7 functional clusters (no limit on number of participants in
each cluster)
One group of 3 to 7 spokespersons to speak on behalf of each
functional cluster

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Explain the process by describing the steps below. Reiterate the
goal or challenge being addressed to make sure that the context is
the same for all. Emphasize that requests must be clear and specific
if they are to receive an unambiguous yes or no response. Make it
clear that no answers other than yes, no, I will try, and whatever
will be allowed. Position the functional clusters around the room. 3
min.
Functional clusters use 1-2-4-All (or 1-2-All) to make a list of their
top needs from each of the other functions in the room. Needs are
expressed as requests that can be delivered with care and nuance in
the following form: “What I need from you is _____.” Clusters
reduce their lists to two top needs, write these down in their
expected form, and select a spokesperson to represent the cluster. 5–
15 min.
All spokespersons gather in a circle in the middle of the room.
One by one, spokespersons state their two needs to each of the other
spokespersons around the circle. At this stage, spokespersons take
notes of requests, but no one gives answers or responses. 15 min.
Working individually (or by conferring with others in their
functional cluster), each spokesperson writes down one of four
responses to each request: yes, no, I will try, or whatever (whatever
means the request was too vague to provide a specific answer). 5–
10 min.
Addressing one spokesperson in the group at a time, every
spokesperson in the circle repeats the requests made by him or her,
then shares his or her responses (yes, no, I will try, or whatever).
No discussion! No elaboration! 10 min.
 Debrief with What, So What, Now What? 15 min.

WHY? PURPOSES

Learn how to articulate functional and/or personal needs clearly

Practice asking for what functions and/or individuals need
Learn how to give clear answers to requests
Reestablish and/or improve communication inside functional
clusters
Make progress across functional silos
Mend connections that have been broken
Get all the issues out on the table at the same time for everyone to
see
Reduce frustration by eliminating preconceptions and rumors
Build trust so that group members can share accountability with
integrity

TIPS AND TRAPS

Remind participants that a whatever response means their request

was too vague to provide a specific answer
Strictly enforce the “no immediate response” rule
Strictly enforce the rule that the only responses are yes, no, I will
try, or whatever (no further elaboration is allowed)
Encourage everyone to ask for what they truly need to be successful
Have fun and encourage a safe amount of drama
Don’t include more than 7 roles/functions (the waters get too
muddy)
In debriefing, try to draw out that people are good at complaining
and not so good at asking for what they need. WINFY helps you
move from complaints to valid requests.
Use question-and-response cards to help groups sharpen how they
express their requests

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

 Consider a second round if too much appears to be unresolved or
unclear: making concrete and clear requests is an essential skill!
In the debrief, give participants a chance to articulate what was not
asked of them: something neglected that would help achieve the
groups’ purpose but was not requested
Instead of functional clusters, use the same WINFY sequence with a
group or a team of individuals who are interdependent
String together with Helping Heuristics, Integrated~Autonomy,
Appreciative Interviews, Ecocycle

EXAMPLES

For a global technical group (with members in multiple countries)

facing the need to make decisions in a fast-changing market (see
“Getting Commitment, Ownership, and Follow-Through” in Part
Three: Stories from the Field).
For three top executives who are struggling to give consistent
direction to the next level of leaders in the organization
For hospital executives and managers launching a patient-centered
care initiative that requires multi-specialty collaboration
For helping one-on-one relationships become more generative

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by consultant Kathie Dannemiller and professor Dan
Pesut.

COLLATERAL MATERIAL
Below: presentation material we use to introduce WINFY
Below: a hearty and cathartic laugh while working out cross-functional
knots in health care
Open Space Technology
Liberate Inherent Action and Leadership in Groups of
Any Size (90 minutes and up to 3 days)

What is made possible? When people must One day a student asked,
tackle a common complex challenge, you can “What is the most
release their inherent creativity and difficult part of
leadership as well as their capacity to self- painting?” The master
organize. Open Space makes it possible to answered, “The part of
include everybody in constructing agendas paper where nothing is
and addressing issues that are important to painted is the most
them. Having cocreated the agenda and free to difficult.” Painting Zen
follow their passion, people will take
responsibility very quickly for solving problems and moving into action.
Letting go of central control (i.e., the agenda and assignments) and putting it
in the hands of all the participants generates commitment, action, innovation,
and follow-through. You can use Open Space with groups as large as a
couple of thousand people!

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
Invite people to come and address a complex problem
Invite participants to co-construct the agenda by posting sessions
that they will convene on topics they are passionate about
Invite participants to join any session that they care about

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Chairs in concentric circles for 10–1,000 people in a large room or
open space
Microphones needed for groups larger than 40
 Large blank agenda posted on easels and flip charts, long tapestry
paper, or whiteboard
Agenda to include slots for enough concurrent sessions to
accommodate what is likely to emerge given the challenge and the
number of participants. (One rule of thumb is that 3 out of 10
participants will post a session, e.g., there will be 15 sessions
posted from 50 participants.)

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Everyone who cares about the challenge at hand and accepts the
organizers’ invitation is included
Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute
The “Law of Two Feet” governs the participation of all attendees in
the various sessions. It says: “Go and attend whichever session you
want, but if you find yourself in a session where you are not learning
or contributing, use your two feet!”

4. How Groups Are Configured

Start together in one large circle (or as many concentric circles as
needed)
Continue with groups of various sizes self-organized around agenda
topics

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

WHY? PURPOSES

Generate action and build energy, commitment, and shared

leadership
Address intractable problems or conflicts by unleashing self-
organization
Make sure that ALL of the issues that are most important to the
participants are raised, included in the agenda, and addressed
Make it possible for participants to take responsibility for tackling
the issues that they care about and for what does or doesn’t happen

TIPS AND TRAPS

To get started, we recommend reading Open Space Technology: A

User’s Guide by the founder of Open Space, Harrison Owen. All the
 elements to try Open Space for the first time are included and
described very clearly.
A compelling challenge and attractive invitation are key
requirements.
Write up the entire proceedings in a single document, completed and
distributed/shared immediately during the meeting.
The facilitator should introduce the Law of Two Feet, Four
Principles, and the mechanics of Open Space in a seriously
entertaining fashion.
As the facilitator, notice when you form a judgment (about what is
right or wrong) or an idea about how you can help, then “let it go”:
do one less thing!
A meeting without the Law of Two Feet—namely, one where the
agenda is created by the participants but people are not free to
attend the session of their choice—is NOT Open Space!

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Reopen the Marketplace a second time each morning (bigger

collaborations may emerge)
String together with Celebrity Interview, Appreciative
Interviews, and/or TRIZ before you start Open Space and with
25/10 Crowd Sourcing after closing.
Other forms of Open Space are called unconferences and
BarCamps.

EXAMPLES

For management meetings of all stripes

Read “Turning a Business Around” in Part Three: Stories from the
Field. Alison Joslyn launched a business transformation by inviting
all employees to a three-day Open Space meeting.
Read “Inventing Future Health-Care Practice” in Part Three. Chris
McCarthy uses Open Space to set direction for collaboration among
the creative members of the Innovation Learning Network.
 Immediately after a merger, for bringing together all the employees
of both companies to shape next steps and take action together.
To share IT innovation prototypes and unleash collaborative action
among widely distributed grantees.

ATTRIBUTION

Invented by Harrison Owen (see Open Space Technology: A User’s Guide).

Short form developed to fit in Liberating Structures milieu by Henri
Lipmanowicz and Keith McCandless.
COLLATERAL MATERIAL

Below: an Open Space circle in Madrid

Generative Relationships S T A R
Reveal Relationship Patterns That Create Surprising
Value or Dysfunctions (25 min.)

What is made possible? You can help a group of people understand how
they work together and identify changes that they can make to improve group
performance. All members of the group diagnose current relationship
patterns and decide how to follow up with action steps together, without
intermediaries. The STAR compass tool helps group members understand
what makes their relationships more or less generative. The compass used in
the initial diagnosis can also be used later to evaluate progress in developing
relationships that are more generative.

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• Invite participants to assess their working group or team in terms of four
attributes:

S Separateness: the amount of diversity in perspective,

expertise, and background among group members
T Tuning: the level of listening deeply, reflecting, and making
sense of challenges together
A Action: the number of opportunities to act on ideas or
innovate with group members
R Reason to work together: the benefits that are gained from
working together
Invite them to jointly shape action steps to boost generative
results
2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed
Tables for small groups of 4, with a STAR compass graphic and
pens for each individual
A STAR compass graphic on a flip-chart page for each small group
A STAR compass graphic on a flip-chart page for the whole group

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Everyone in a working group or team is included
Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

Individually to make initial assessments
Small groups
Whole group

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

• Participants individually assess where the team is in regard to each of the
four elements (5 min.):

S How diverse are we as a group? Do we draw out our

diverse perspectives among members?
T How well are we in tune with one another?
A How much do we act together?
R How important is it that we work together? How clear is our
purpose?

In small groups, participants place a dot along each compass point,

then talk with their neighbors (1-2-4) about their placements,
looking for consensus and differences. 5 min.
Small groups decide what type of results are generated by the
pattern of interaction they have identified (e.g., high Tuning + no
Action = we get along well but accomplish little, high Action + low
Tuning = routine results with no innovation, high Tuning + high
Separateness + high Action + low Reason = many false starts, etc.).
5 min.
 In small groups, brainstorm action steps to boost elements that need
attention. 5 min.
Whole group assembles list of action steps and decides “What first
steps can we take right now?” 5 min.

WHY? PURPOSES

Improve the performance of a team

Help a team become more self-managing and autonomous
Sharpen the purpose and identity of the group
Help people step away from blaming individuals and move toward
understanding their patterns of interaction
Combine “diagnosis and treatment” without separating the planners
from the doers
Reduce frustration of people not happy with team dynamics and
results

TIPS AND TRAPS

Work up from the individuals to pairs, then table conversations

Avoid making right or wrong judgments about where people assess
the team
Encourage team members to research, organize, and act on their own
remedies
Finish the activity with at least one specific action for each
participant
Make sure that who is going to do what by when is clear for all

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

• String together with Liberating Structures that may boost low compass-
point assessments:

― Separateness (Conversation Café; Shift & Share; What, So What,

Now What?)
 ― Tuning (Wise Crowds; Troika Consulting; Agreement-Certainty
Matrix; Heard, Seen, Respected)
― A Action (25/10 Crowd Sourcing, 15% Solutions, Open Space,
Min Specs)
― Reason (Nine Whys, What I Need From You)

• Use with virtual groups by inviting participants to place their STAR

assessments with a dot on the chart on the whiteboard, then chat in
pairs and with the whole group about the pattern that emerges. You
may want to create a “synthesizer” role to help keep things moving.
Generate action steps via a chat version of 1-2-All.

EXAMPLES

For a strategy retreat, focusing attention on group dynamics and

results
For deciding the composition and purpose of a new team or task
force to be formed
For two people to use in mending their relationship

ATTRIBUTION

Developed by professor Brenda Zimmerman (learn more from Professor

Zimmerman at [Link]/[Link]). Adapted by
Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith McCandless.
COLLATERAL MATERIAL

Below: presentation material we use to introduce Generative

Relationships STAR
Agreement-and-Certainty Matching Matrix
Sort Challenges into Simple, Complicated, Complex,
and Chaotic Domains (45 min.)

What is made possible? You can help “If I had an hour to solve
individuals or groups avoid the frequent a problem and my life
mistake of trying to solve a problem with depended on the solution,
methods that are not adapted to the nature of I would spend the first 55
their challenge. The combination of two minutes determining the
questions makes it possible to easily sort proper question to
challenges into four categories: simple, ask….” Albert Einstein
complicated, complex, and chaotic. A
problem is simple when it can be solved reliably with practices that are easy
to duplicate. It is complicated when experts are required to devise a
sophisticated solution that will yield the desired results predictably. A
problem is complex when there are several valid ways to proceed but
outcomes are not predictable in detail. Chaotic is when the context is too
turbulent to identify a path forward. A loose analogy may be used to describe
these differences: simple is like following a recipe, complicated like
sending a rocket to the moon, complex like raising a child, and chaotic is
like the game “Pin the Tail on the Donkey.” The Liberating Structures
Matching Matrix in Chapter 5 can be used as the first step to clarify the
nature of a challenge and avoid the mismatches between problems and
solutions that are frequently at the root of chronic, recurring problems.
 Source: adapted from professors Brenda Zimmerman and Ralph Stacey

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
Invite participants to categorize their current challenges as simple,
complicated, complex, or chaotic
Ask them to place every challenge in the matrix based on their
answers to two questions: What is the degree of agreement among
the participants regarding the challenge and the best way to address
it? What is the degree of certainty and predictability about what
results will be generated from the solutions proposed for addressing
the challenge?
Ask them to think about the approaches they are using or considering
to address each challenge, evaluate how well these fit, and
determine where there are mismatches

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Chairs for people to sit in groups of 4–6, with or without small
round tables
Long open wall with a large tapestry paper illustration of the matrix
taped to the wall
 One page with a blank matrix for every participant
Post-it notes and markers for everybody

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Everyone involved in the work team or unit under discussion (not
only leaders)
Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

Individually to make initial assessments
Small groups of 4 to 6
Whole group

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Ask participants to individually generate the list of challenges that
take up their time. 5 min.
Still working individually, participants place challenges in their
individual matrixes. 5 min.
Ask participants to discuss in pairs. 5 min.
Invite them to chat with others in a group of 4–6 to find points of
agreement, difference, and where there are mismatches. 10 min.
Invite everyone to post their challenges on the large wall matrix. 5
min.
Ask participants to form small groups and step back to reflect on,
“What pattern do we see? Do any mismatches stand out that we
should address?” 5 min.
Invite whole group to share reflections and decide next steps. 10
min.

WHY? PURPOSES

Reduce wasted effort by matching challenges with methods

Identify where local experiments may help solve larger problems
Make visible to everyone the range and the nature of the challenges
facing people in the organization
 Reduce the frustration of people not making progress on key
challenges by identifying mismatches
Share perspectives across functions and levels of the organization

TIPS AND TRAPS

Clarify what type of challenges and activities are being included

Work up from the individual, then into pair and table conversations
Avoid making judgments about where people put their activities
Explore items that fall into more than one sector by asking, “Does
this challenge have multiple dynamics at play? How is it
simultaneously simple and complex?”
Learn more from professor Brenda Zimmerman @
[Link]/[Link]

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Ask, “Where are there mismatches in your approach; what

countermeasures make sense?”
Create a table that captures the mismatches and any action steps that
will be taken
Use the same approach for a single issue people are facing in their
work
Link to or string together with Liberating Structures aimed at
developing strategies: Critical Uncertainties, Purpose-To-
Practice, Ecocycle, Panarchy, Integrated~Autonomy, Discovery
& Action Dialogue

EXAMPLES

For introducing managers trained only in linear cause-and-effect

analysis to what is different about complex challenges
For selecting a mix of change methodologies at the start of a new
improvement project
 For helping a planning group move beyond “analysis paralysis” into
an action phase
For organizing the projects of a department

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Adapted from the work of professors Ralph Stacey and Brenda
Zimmerman.
COLLATERAL MATERIAL

Below: participant Post-its illustrate Agreement and Certainty Matrix

placements for all to see— each Post-it represents an activity or program
in the organization
Simple Ethnography
Observe and Record Actual Behaviors of Users in the
Field (75 min. to 7 hrs.)

What is made possible? You can enable “The future is already

participants to find novel approaches to here. It is just not
challenges by immersing themselves in the uniformly distributed.”
activities of the people with local experience William Gibson
—often their colleagues on the front line or
anyone who uses their product or service. You open the door to change and
innovation by helping participants explore what people actually do and feel
in creating, delivering, or using their offering. Their observations and
experience can spur rapid performance improvements and expedite prototype
development. The combined observations may make it easy to spot important
patterns.

STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• Invite participants to silently observe people with experience relevant to
the challenge at hand and then follow up with interviews for more insight
2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed
In a local setting (workplace, client organization, neighborhood)
with a convenient space for sharing findings, photos, and videos
Provide notebook, camera, video, permission (if needed)

3. How Participation Is Distributed

All core-group members working on a challenge are included as
ethnographers
Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute
4. How Groups Are Configured
In 1s or 2s distributed among sites being observed
Whole group for debrief

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Explain the problem to be solved and the current understanding of
the situation. 5 min.
Identify sites to observe and people to shadow that will reveal user
experience in depth. 5 min.
Invite participants to visit sites and observe without speaking
interactions and activities, recording details and internal reflections
as they go. 10–180 min.
Ask participants to then select behaviors observed that address the
challenge in a novel fashion (in part or in whole) and follow up by
asking the individuals they observed what they were feeling and
doing as they engaged in the behavior. 20–180 min.
Reconvene the group of ethnographers and use 1-2-4-All to compare
notes and find patterns across observations or exceptional solutions.
15 min.
Write up observations or compose stories that highlight needs and
opportunities. 10–20 min.
Feed insights into brainstorming and prototyping efforts. 10 min.
Repeat steps until the core-group members feel they have a
particularly powerful new approach to prototype

WHY? PURPOSES

Help invisible routines become visible

Identify fundamental needs and innovative solutions
Reveal tacit and latent knowledge not accessible by asking users for
explicit needs (e.g., with focus groups)
Show respect and trust by observing and interviewing people on the
front line

TIPS AND TRAPS

 Avoid adding meaning and interpretations too quickly to the
observations
Be prepared to repeat steps if the core-group members don’t feel
they have a particularly powerful new approach to prototype
Be aware that insight comes from inconspicuous, often overlooked
details
Focus on the intrinsic qualities; ignore material or technological
hierarchy
Look for what is irregular, intimate, unpretentious
Look for comfort with ambiguity
Don’t ignore what is imperfect, crude, or impermanent—deviance
can be positive
Do one or more rounds of simple ethnography after you implement
your new approach

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Use a storytelling template to structure observations (e.g., the

Hero’s Journey)
Ask participants to draw or build a model of the challenge (be ready
to be surprised by the deeper insights that nonverbal methods
produce)
Include clients in the observations (e.g., invite clients to record their
own behaviors and share the images or video with the group)

EXAMPLES

For sales representatives to discover how some of their colleagues

are getting better results without additional resources or privileges
For understanding how some clinicians are able to attend to the
spiritual needs of patients and other are not
For understanding why patients wander out of hospital isolation-
precaution rooms despite repeated warnings
For understanding how to reduce the patient falls in hospitals
 For understanding the differences between effective and ineffective
meetings

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by Chris McCarthy and ethnographers in the
Innovation Learning Network.

COLLATERAL MATERIAL

Below: studying at the feet of people with local expertise via quiet
observation and video capture in a Montana hospital
Integrated~Autonomy
Move from Either-or to Robust Both-and Solutions
(80 min.)

What is made possible? You can help a “There are two kinds of
group move from either-or conflicts to both- truth. There are
and strategies and solutions. You can engage superficial truths, the
everyone in sharper strategic thinking, mutual opposite of which are
understanding, and collaborative action by obviously wrong. But
surfacing the advantage of being both more there are also profound
integrated and more autonomous. Attending to truths, whose opposite are
paradox will reveal opportunities for equally right.” Niels Bohr
profound leaps in performance by addressing
questions such as: What mix of integrative control and autonomous freedom
will advance our purpose? Where do our needs for global fidelity and
consistency meet the needs for local customization and creative adaptability?
This makes it possible to avoid bipolar swings in strategy that are frequently
experienced by many organizations.

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• Invite your group to explore the questions, “Will our purpose be best
served by increased local autonomy, customization, competition, and
freedom among units/sites? Or, will our purpose be best served by
increased integration, standardization, and control among units/sites? Or,
both?”

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Chairs for people to sit in groups of 4, with or without small tables
 An “Integrated Autonomy Worksheet” for each participant and a
large one on the wall.
Paper for recording activities and action steps

3. How Participation Is Distributed

All central unit leaders and local unit leaders involved in the
challenge at hand are included
Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

Individually to generate topics
Small groups of 4
Whole group

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Introduce the idea of Integrated~Autonomy for the topic at hand by
asking, “How is it that we can be more integrated and more
autonomous at the same time?” Have examples from past experience
ready for sharing. 5 min.
Use 1-2-4-All to generate a list of activities that require attention by
asking, “Where is there tension between our desire to standardize
and the request for more customizing or autonomy?” 10 min.
Ask participants to work in groups of four, and pick one activity
from the list and ask, “What is the rationale for standardizing? What
is the rationale for customizing?” 10 min.
Using 1-2-4 develop action steps that achieve standardization. Using
1-2-4, develop action steps that achieve customization. 10 min.
Ask, “Which actions boost both standardization (group A) and
customization (group C)?” See worksheet below. 5 min.
Ask, “What modifications or creative ideas can be adopted to move
some actions from group A to group B or from group C to group B?”
See worksheet below. 15 min.
Using 1-2-4-All, prioritize the most promising actions that promote
both integration and autonomy. 10 min.
Refine action steps by developing some effective Liberating
Structures strings with the help of Wise Crowds or Troika
Consulting and 15% Solutions. 15 min.
Below: presentation materials we use to introduce Integrated~Autonomy

WHY? PURPOSES

Develop innovative strategies to move forward.

Avoid wild or “bipolar” swings in policies, programs, or structures.
Identify the complementary-yet-paradoxical pairs that are important
and manage the paradoxical decisions productively.
Evaluate decisions by asking, “Are we boosting or attending to both
sides?”
Evaluate and launch new strategies

TIPS AND TRAPS

A productive starting question has balance and sparks curiosity or a

search for what is working. Avoid making one side of the wicked
question bad or less valuable to success such as, “How does our
effort to be ONE integrated organization squash local autonomy?”
Instead make your question equally appreciative of both sides,
“How is it that we are both integrated and autonomous in our current
operations?”
 Draw on field experience and imagination in asking questions such
as, “How can we do more of both?”
The goal is fidelity in a few core global attributes and
differentiation in each local setting
Laughter and groans (e.g., arrgh) help to identify progress
You may need to encourage the group to try many experiments
simultaneously
There often are no quick fixes and you may need to return to the
challenge periodically with additional rounds of
Integrated~Autonomy
When you start, the creative tension between the central and the
local sides is relatively invisible. If the group gets stuck or starts to
argue, tell each side to put on the hat of the other side and argue the
opposite point of view.

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Making progress with Integrated~Autonomy can shift what is

possible for the whole organization as people start to understand
that what helps them succeed in addressing a particular challenge
applies across the board. Whenever this happens, use Min Specs to
go deeper into must dos and must not dos.
Substitute collaboration and competition for integration and
autonomy

EXAMPLES

For hospital-system leaders to develop the contents of new

management contracts for small hospitals in the same region
For a group of political leaders trying to formulate what should be
legislated at the federal level and what should be decided locally
For infection-control experts trying to create hospital-wide policies
that do not inhibit unit-based innovations

ATTRIBUTION
Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith
McCandless.
Critical Uncertainties
Develop Strategies for Operating in a Range of
Plausible Yet Unpredictable Futures (100 min.)

What is made possible? You can help a “To be prepared against

diverse group quickly test the viability of surprise is to be trained.
current strategies and build its capacity to To be prepared for
respond quickly to future challenges. This surprise is to be
Liberating Structure prepares a group for educated.” James P.
strategy making. It does not produce a plan to Carse
be implemented as designed but rather builds
resilience: the capacity to actively shape the system and be prepared to
respond to surprise. This means being better able to see different futures
unfolding, better prepared to act in a distributed fashion, and more ready to
absorb disruptions resiliently.

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
Invite the group to identify and explore the most critical and
uncertain “realities” in their operating environment or market
Then invite them to formulate strategies that would help them
operate successfully in those different situations

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Four groups of chairs around tables
Paper, Post-it notes, flip charts, or tapestry paper for each group

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Everyone responsible for planning and executing strategy is
included
 Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

Have a group large and diverse enough to break it up into four
separate small groups to develop the four scenarios and related
strategies
If not, make two small groups

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Describe the sequence of steps. 2 min.
Invite participants to make a list of uncertainties they face by asking,
“In your/our operating environment, what factors are impossible to
predict or control their direction?” 5 min.
Prioritize the most critical factors by asking, “Which factors
threaten your/our ability to operate successfully?” 10 min.
Based on the group’s history and experience, select the two most
critical and most uncertain (X and Y). 5 min.
Create a grid with two axes—X & Y—with a “more of less of”
continuum for the factor to be represented on each axis. For
example, for the X axis, if the number of new products is a critically
uncertain factor, one end of the X axis is a large number of new
products and the other is no new products. Repeat for the Y factor
and axis. For instance, if patent protection is a critical factor, one
end of the Y axis is strong patent protection and the other is no
patent protection. Four quadrants are created. See example below. 5
min.
Each of the four groups creatively names and writes a thumbnail
scenario for one of the quadrants. 10 min.
The four groups share their scenarios briefly. 2 min. each
Each group brainstorms three strategies that would help the group
operate successfully in the scenario that it has described. 10 min.
The four groups share their strategies briefly. 2 min. each
The whole group sifts results to identify which strategies are robust
(strategies that can succeed in multiple quadrants) and which are
hedging (strategies that can succeed in only one scenario but protect
 you from a plausible calamity). The balance of strategies can
succeed only in one scenario. 10 min.
Each small group debriefs with What, So What, Now What? 10
min.
The four groups share their debriefs and the whole group makes
first-steps decisions about their Now What. 10 min.

WHY? PURPOSES

Test the viability of current strategies by exposing assumptions and

uncertainties
Increase capacity of everyone to adapt quickly and absorb
disruptions resiliently
Differentiate priorities in terms of robust and hedging strategies
Develop more organization-wide confidence in managing the
unknowable future
Widen the range of strategic options
 Below: presentation material we use to introduce Critical Uncertainties

TIPS AND TRAPS

When brainstorming uncertainties, recall predictions-gone-wrong

and events that caught the group off guard
Challenge wishful thinking
Use 1-2-4-All in very short cycles for each step
Have fun with naming each quadrant (song and book titles work
nicely)
Have fun developing the scenarios, for instance, by turning them into
newspaper reports about a future situation
Post-it notes help with combining and recombining ideas
Regardless of role, a few people are naturals: celebrate their
skillfulness

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

 Build from this short session to a full-blown scenario-planning
initiative
For each scenario, invite small groups to dramatize a typical client
interaction or product from the future that puts your strategies into
play
String together with Conversation Café, Purpose-To-Practice,
WINFY, Open Space, Wicked Questions, and Min Specs

EXAMPLES

For exploring what features should be included in a product or

service that will be launched
For national policy and operating leaders to shape next steps in a
health-care reform initiative
For IT leaders preparing for implementation challenges across
multiple countries in one region
For executives and operational leaders to create a 10-year strategic
vision
For NGO executive directors responding to unexpected changes in
funding and public perception
For counseling youth in unstable settings, likely to drop out of
school or start living on the street

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by consultant Jay Ogilvy.
Ecocycle Planning
Analyze the Full Portfolio of Activities and
Relationships to Identify Obstacles and Opportunities
for Progress (95 min.)

What is made possible? You can eliminate or mitigate common bottlenecks

that stifle performance by sifting your group’s portfolio of activities,
identifying which elements are starving for resources and which ones are
rigid and hampering progress. The Ecocycle makes it possible to sift,
prioritize, and plan actions with everyone involved in the activities at the
same time, as opposed to the conventional way of doing it behind closed
doors with a small group of people. Additionally, the Ecocycle helps
everyone see the forest AND the trees—they see where their activities fit in
the larger context with others. Ecocycle Planning invites leaders to focus also
on creative destruction and renewal in addition to typical themes regarding
growth or efficiency. The Ecocycle makes it possible to spur agility,
resilience, and sustained performance by including all four phases of
development in the planning process.
 Below: presentation material we use to introduce Ecocycle Planning

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
Invite the group to view, organize, and prioritize current activities
using four developmental phases: birth, maturity, creative
destruction, and renewal
Invite the group to formulate action steps linked to each phase:
actions that accelerate growth during the birth phase, actions that
extend life or increase efficiency during the maturity phase, actions
that prune dead wood or compost rigid practices during the creative
destruction phase, actions that connect creative people or prepare the
ground for birth during the renewal phase. The leadership stance
required for each phase can be characterized as entrepreneur,
manager, heretic, and networker.

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

A room with an open flat wall and open space for participants to
stand comfortably in front of the wall
 Chairs for people to sit in groups of 4, with or without small round
tables
A blank Ecocycle map worksheet for each participant and a large
wall-poster version posted on the wall
Post-it notes for each activity

3. How Participation Is Distributed

Everybody involved in the work is included, all levels and functions
Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

1-2-4-All
Small groups for action steps

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Introduce the idea of the Ecocycle and hand out a blank map to each
participant. 5 min.
Ask participants to generate their individual activity lists: “For your
working group (e.g., department, function, or whole company), make
a list of all the activities (projects, initiatives) that occupy your
time.” 5 min.
Ask them to work in pairs to decide the placement of every activity
in the Ecocycle. 10 min.
Invite them to form groups of four and finalize the placement of
activities on the Ecocycle map. 15 min.
Ask each group to put its activities on Post-it notes and create a
whole-room map by inviting the groups one by one to place their
Post-its on the larger map. 15 min.
Ask each group to step back and digest the pattern of placements.
Ask them to focus on all the activities on which there is consensus
about their placement. Ask, “What activities do we need to
creatively destroy or stop to move forward? What activities do we
need to expand or start to move forward?” 15 min.
In small groups, for each activity that needs to be stopped (activities
that are in the Rigidity Trap), create a first-action step. 10 min. or
more depending on the number of activities and groups.
 In small groups, for each activity that needs to start or get more
resources (activities in the Poverty trap), create a first-action step.
10 min. or more as above.
Ask all the groups to focus on all the activities for which there is no
consensus. Do a quick round of conversation to make sense of the
differences in placement. When possible, create first-action steps to
handle each one. 10 min.

WHY? PURPOSES

Set priorities
Balance a portfolio of strategies
Identify waste and opportunities to free up resources
Bring and hear all perspectives at once
Create resilience and absorb disruptions by reorganizing programs
together
To reveal the whole picture, the forest AND the trees

TIPS AND TRAPS

Don’t do your first Ecocycle Planning session with your group’s

entire portfolio of market strategies. Start with a simpler program,
something tangible with shared experience.
Remind participants that all phases of the Ecocycle must be parts of
a healthy organization
Be very clear on the domain or type of activities being considered—
check activities to be sure they are on a similar scale and domain
Include views from inside and outside the organization or function
(diverse participants and clients can help)
Preparations and explicit criteria for each quadrant may help or
interfere
Don’t hesitate to do a second round
Identifying the Rigidity and Poverty Traps, plus connecting specific
activities with these labels, launches the search for solutions
Learn more from professor Brenda Zimmerman at
[Link] and see the excerpt from her book Edgeware
 under the tab Publications

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Ask participants to make a list of all their important relationships

with internal and external customers/suppliers (in addition to their
activities) and to place them on the Ecocycle. Ask them to evaluate
the relationships with the same questions used for the activities and
to include them in the last four steps of the Ecocycle planning
process. Highly recommended!
String together with Panarchy, 1-2-4-All, WINFY, and Open Space
TRIZ can help to deepen the Creative Destruction quadrant
Use with virtual groups by inviting participants to place their
Ecocycle assessments with a dot on the whiteboard, then chat in
pairs and with the whole group about the pattern that emerges.
Before you enter into full-group placements, use silence and paired
chat (1-2-All) to build understanding. You will need to agree on a
short common list of activities or relationships to help simplify
mapping. Number or letter each item and invite placements one by
one. Sift and sort answers with a whiteboard and a person playing a
“synthesizer” role. Don’t worry about perfection in the first rounds.
Virtual sessions can deepen or complement face-to-face exchanges.
What, So What, Now What? and 25/10 Crowd Sourcing can help
spur action about activities or relationships when the group seems to
be stuck.

EXAMPLES

For service portfolio review with an information technology

department
For nursing executives and academics transforming their approach to
education (evaluating the history as well as proposed change
initiatives)
For planning changes in an individual’s personal life, sifting through
activities and shaping next steps
 For accelerating performance of an executive team in the midst of
integrating a newly acquired company (sifting through a mixture of
two product lines and research opportunities)

ATTRIBUTION

Adapted by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith McCandless from professor

Brenda Zimmerman (see [Link]) and ecologists (see
[Link]
COLLATERAL MATERIAL

Below: a portfolio of market strategies arrayed around the Ecocycle by

members of a management team. Each number represents a strategy in play
or under consideration.
Panarchy
Understand How Embedded Systems Interact, Evolve,
Spread Innovation and Transform (2 hrs.)

“If a living system is What is made possible? You can help a large
suffering from ill health, group of people identify obstacles and
the remedy is to connect it opportunities for spreading ideas or
with more of itself.” innovations at many levels. Panarchy enables
Francisco Varella people to visualize how systems are
embedded in systems and helps them
understand how these interdependencies influence the spread of change.
Participants become more alert to small changes that can help spread ideas
up to other system levels; they learn how shifts at larger or lower system
levels may release resources to assist them at another level. With better
appreciation of the Ecocycle dynamics at play, the group creates
“opportunity windows” for innovations to spread among levels and across
boundaries.
 Below: presentation material we use to introduce Panarchy

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• Invite participants to identify what is contributing to the existence of a
challenge at levels above and below them. Ask them also to specify
different strategies and opportunities for change within each level and
across multiple levels.

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

A room with an unobstructed flat wall and open space for
participants to stand comfortably in front of the wall
A blank Panarchy chart handout
A large wall-poster or flip-chart version of the Panarchy chart
Post-it notes for each participant
Flip-chart pages for the Panarchy graphic
3. How Participation Is Distributed
Everyone involved in spreading a transformation or innovation
effort is included
Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute
4. How Groups Are Configured
• Individuals, pairs, groups of 4, whole group: 1-2-4-All

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Introduce the idea of the Panarchy (and the Ecocycle if needed).
Show an example, such as the MRSA infection Panarchy in
Collateral Material below, and hand out a blank Panarchy chart to
each participant. 5 min.
Invite participants to work individually to generate the set of system
levels that influence the spread of their ideas/innovation in three
steps.
First step alone to make a list of factors by asking, “What are the
smallest-to-the-largest factors influencing your/our chances for
success?” Include micro (particles, individual people, teams), meso
(organizations, networks), and macro (culture, politics, myths)
factors that contribute to the existence of the challenge being
addressed. 5 min.
Second step in pairs to “translate” the factors into levels and create
labels for each level (4–7 levels are sufficient). 10 min.
Third step in groups of four to compare their levels and finalize
their chart with Post-its. 10 min.
If there are multiple groups of four, create a single chart, by inviting
each group to place any levels not previously included on the larger
chart. 10 min.
Invite participants to work in groups of four to reflect on the
following questions: “On which levels have attention and resources
been invested to date? Which levels have been neglected? What do
I/we know about the status and dynamics in play at the different
levels?” 10 min.
In the whole group, share reflections from a few groups. 5 min.
Ask groups of two or four to explore one level in depth with the
Ecocycle. Each group should pick one of the 4-7 levels. Distribute
people with experience at the different levels to those groups. Ask,
“At this level, what is going on right now and what actions are being
taken for the challenge that our innovation addresses? Is the
 response to the challenge in an entrepreneurial,
bureaucratic/management, heretical, or renewal phase?” Create a
rough draft of Ecocycle assessments for this level. 15 min.
Collect the Ecocycle assessments from the groups. Each group
presents the Ecocycle assessment of their level briefly. 10 min.
In small groups, brainstorm a list of obstacles and opportunities in
regard to efforts to spread ideas/innovations. Ask, “Looking up and
down the levels, what opportunities and obstacles do you see for
changes across the levels? What windows for new ideas are opening
above? What resources are flowing downward from creative
destruction unfolding above? What small-scale developments from
below are disrupting the level above?” Encourage the groups to go
wild and have fun. 15 min.
Prioritize the opportunities and obstacles that emerge. 10 min.
For each opportunity and obstacle on your list, create one first-
action step using 1-2-4 by asking, “What action can you take
immediately to influence levels above and below you?” And, “Who
do you know that has influence in more than one level
simultaneously?” 10 min.
Share action steps with the whole group by placing Post-it notes on
each level of the large Panarchy chart. 15 min.
Invite the group to take a close look at the chart. Use What, So
What, Now What? to make sense of and prioritize all of the
possible next steps. 15 min.
Revisit and update the Panarchy chart periodically as the group
continues work to spread its innovation.

WHY? PURPOSES

Identify a mix of strategies at multiple levels to move transformation

efforts forward
Create an opportunity for people from many different levels to work
together
Prepare for serendipity as opportunity windows open or close
 Identify people that span levels and can help the group move
forward
Help a whole group see the whole picture (forest AND the trees
AND the bioregion)
Create resilience and absorb disruptions by reorganizing together

TIPS AND TRAPS

Use 1-2-4-All for all or most of the steps even if it feels like a
chore: the objective is to identify ALL opportunities and obstacles
at ALL levels!
Include people or perspectives from each level (the more
participants, the better)
Look to research when you are unfamiliar with dynamics at smaller
and bigger scales
Do not neglect history and its role in defining what is possible at
each level.
To learn more, see professor Frances Westley’s contributions to the
SIG Knowledge Hub on scaling
([Link]
his work in Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Human and
Natural Systems (Gunderson and Holling, eds.), and other writing.

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

String together with Ecocycle, 1-2-4 Whole, What I Need from

You, Social Network Webbing, Celebrity Interview
W3(What, So What, Now What?) can help spur focused action
steps
Use Panarchy for individuals by asking, “What is contributing to
the existence of your challenge at levels above and levels below
you? What elements are perpetuating the challenge you are facing?
What are the different speeds for effecting changes at each of the
levels?”
EXAMPLES

Native American school administrators advanced education

opportunities for their students with innovations ranging from
individual student advising to dispelling social myths
Safety advocates in one hospital planned the spread of their
innovations locally, regionally, nationally, and internationally
Foundation grantees planned dissemination of their disaster-
preparedness innovations from prototype to national adoption
An individual artist sketched out how her work can influence change
at different scales

ATTRIBUTION

Adapted by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith McCandless from the work of

professor Frances Westley (see, e.g., Gunderson and Holling, Panarchy:
Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems)
COLLATERAL MATERIAL
Purpose-To-Practice (P2P)
Design the Five Essential Elements for a Resilient and
Enduring Initiative (2 hrs.)

What is made possible? By using P2P at the “Very real crises mark
start of an initiative, the stakeholders can our time. And as much as
shape together all the elements that will we might like it
determine the success of their initiative. The otherwise, it appears that
group begins by generating a shared purpose doing what we have
(i.e., why the work is important to each always done, only harder,
participant and the larger community). All will not solve them.”
additional elements—principles, participants, Charles Johnston
structure, and practices—are designed to help
achieve the purpose. By shaping these five elements together, participants
clarify how they can organize themselves to adapt creatively and scale up for
success. For big initiatives, P2P makes it possible to include a large number
of stakeholders in shaping their future initiative.
 Below: presentation material we use to introduce P2P

FIVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS—MIN SPECS

1. Structuring Invitation
• Invite all or most stakeholders to participate in the design of their new
initiative in order to specify its five essential elements: purpose,
principles, participants, structure, and practices.

2. How Space Is Arranged and Materials Needed

Chairs and small tables for people to work in groups of 4
A large wall with poster paper for recording the P2P result for each
element
For each participant five worksheets, one for each of the five
elements

3. How Participation Is Distributed

All individuals who have a stake in launching the initiative are
included
 Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute

4. How Groups Are Configured

1-2-4-All
Whole group for finalizing each element

5. Sequence of Steps and Time Allocation

Introduce the idea of P2P, the five elements, and related questions,
and hand out blank worksheets. 5 min.
To clarify the first element, Purpose, ask the question: “Why is the
work important to you and the larger community?”
Use 1-2-4 to generate individual ideas and stories for Purpose. 10
min.
In groups of four, compare, sift, and amplify the top ideas. 10 min.
As a whole group, integrate themes and finalize ideas for Purpose.
10 min.
Move to the remaining P2P elements, in turn, repeating the three
steps of 1-2-4-All. Be prepared to go back and revise previous
elements as needed (expect some messy nonlinearity). Use the
following questions to guide the development of the next four
elements:

Principles: “What rules must we absolutely obey to succeed in

achieving our purpose?”
Participants: “Who can contribute to achieving our purpose and
must be included?”
Structure: “How must we organize (both macro- and
microstructures) and distribute control to achieve our purpose?”
Practices: “What are we going to do? What will we offer to our
users/clients and how will we do it?”

After each element, ask, “Has this element shed new light that
suggests revisions to previous elements?” 5 min.
When all elements have been completed, ask participants to step
back and take a close look at their draft of the five elements
together. Ask them to use What, So What, Now What? in small
 groups to make sense of all of the possible next steps and prioritize
them as a whole group. 15 min.
After the initiative has been launched, invite the participants to
revisit their P2P design periodically and adapt elements based on
their experience.

WHY? PURPOSES

Engage and focus everyone’s imagination in designing the collective

future of participants.
Avoid “design” by a small group of people behind closed doors
Pull together all the elements needed to launch and sustain an effort,
thereby avoiding a fragmented process
Develop innovative strategies that can be implemented and spread
quickly because there is shared ownership
Increase resilience and the ability to absorb disruptions by
distributing power fairly
Build the capacity to rapidly adapt any of the elements to changing
circumstances

TIPS AND TRAPS

Crafting a powerful, wildly attractive “purpose” is the most

important step: you may want to use Nine Whys, Appreciative
Interviews, or TRIZ to deepen the conversation
A purpose may be expressed as something positive you are going to
start/create or something negative you are going to stop
Work in quick cycles, failing forward iteratively
Multiple sessions spread out over weeks or even months may be
required
“Structure” usually is the element that requires the most imagination
and leaps away from top-down to more distributed control
Principles: Must dos and must not dos often come from hard
lessons learned in the field (positive and negative)
Rely on small groups to do the heavy lifting, and keep it moving
 Keep rounds on schedule and when more time is needed, do two
rounds
Rely on and draw out the inspiring-and-despairing experience of
group members
Invite the participants to use their intuition as the process unfolds
Invite talented participants to take on roles (e.g., writing, drawing,
synthesizing)

RIFFS AND VARIATIONS

Start with one 30-minute, very rapid cycle covering all five
elements to illustrate the need for a strong and clear purpose:
without one, it is easy to come up with a half-baked design
Graphic recording helps to hold attention and focus through the
rigorous design process
You can add questions to enrich the conversation about Practices:
What is happening around us that creates an opportunity? What is at
stake if we do not take a risk? Where are we starting, honestly?
When integrating all five elements for a project is too much, just do
the one or two design elements that seem most important
Use the five P2P questions routinely as an easy checklist for small
projects
Use with virtual groups by inviting participants to answer the five
questions via a chat version of 1-2-All. Sift and sort answers with a
whiteboard and a person playing a “synthesizer” role. Don’t worry
about perfection in the first rounds. Virtual rounds can deepen or
complement face-to-face exchanges.
Use P2P to structure a much longer design session (e.g., a planning
or strategy retreat)

EXAMPLES

By the leaders of the Conversation Café dialogue movement

The Quality Commons, a group of researchers from eight health
systems, used P2P to successfully create their consortium
 Going through the first stage of the P2P, a management team
discovered a much deeper purpose than it expected. The new
purpose and shared experience inspired the team to rethink its
business model.

ATTRIBUTION

Liberating Structure developed by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith

McCandless. Inspired by Dee Hock (see his book Birth of the Chaordic
Age).
COLLATERAL MATERIAL

Below: output for each of the five P2P questions

 AFTERWORD

Liberating Structures start with something so

simple and essential as not to seem worth doing
and end with something so powerful and profound
that it hardly seems possible.

“Liberating Structures have been life changing for me! I really mean
it. And there are ripple effects with other people I’m collaborating
with. Loving it.”

“Liberating Structures are like magic; every time I use them

something that seems impossible just happens as if by magic.”

“Using Liberating Structures transformed my way of leading and me

as a leader.”

“The student feedback I hear has “We must find a way to

noticeably changed. I increasingly get Liberating Structures
hear: ‘This class changed my life;’ ‘I into the drinking water!”
learned so much about myself in this
class;’ ‘Thank you also for teaching me how to learn.’”

“Liberating Structures have also influenced my interactions with my

teenage children. I realized the poor impact I had when I just told
them what to do. Now I listen more, let them express their feelings,
and let them reach conclusions on what is best for them.”
 “Employees were once valued for doing what they were told and
saying ‘yes sir’. Now staff meetings are fun. It feels like magic
because people contribute in ways they did not anticipate.”

“I have never seen a conversation like this around here. Just about
everyone was on the edge of their seat the entire time.”

“After experiencing the freedom and the results that you can achieve
with them, I cannot imagine going back to the old way.”

“We must find a way to get Liberating Structures into the drinking
water!”

We continue to be blown away by how positive people are when they

tell us what learning to use Liberating Structures has meant to them. Their
gratitude has been our greatest reward both emotionally and professionally.
We love the stories of all the small and big successes that Liberating
Structures have made possible for them. We glow in the pleasure they get
from their transformed relationships and working conditions.
Feedback of this sort has convinced us that Liberating Structures have
universal and enduring value. This is what motivated us to dig deeply to
uncover the fundamental principles behind Liberating Structures and
document our fieldwork. It was the people who learned and used Liberating
Structures who convinced us to create a website and pushed us to write a
book. It took a good hard push.
In our work with all kinds of organizations around the world, we have
yet to meet anyone who could not address one or more challenges he or she
is facing more effectively with Liberating Structures. This tells us that
everybody would benefit from learning at least a few of them. Every teacher
and professor should use some routinely. Exposure to Liberating Structures in
the classroom would prepare students to be more effective contributors in the
workplace. Managers should know at least all the basic Liberating
Structures. Frontline workers would improve their everyday outcomes by
simply mastering a few on their own. Internal and external consultants would
enlarge the scope and impact of their work by becoming skilled at using
Liberating Structures and would expand their offerings to their clients. Yet
only a tiny fraction of the seven billion-plus people in the world have even
heard of Liberating Structures!
We want to make it as This is why we have chosen not to
easy as possible for copyright any of our work and instead publish
everyone to feel free to it under a Creative Commons License. We
use, copy, and want to make it as easy as possible for
disseminate this material everyone to feel free to use, copy, and
and make his or her disseminate this material and make his or her
corner of the world a corner of the world a better place.
better place. Join us in getting Liberating Structures
into the drinking water!
 NOTES

PART ONE: THE HIDDEN STRUCTURES OF ENGAGEMENT

Chapter 1. Introduction: Small Changes, Big Differences

Unless otherwise noted, all examples and stories in this book are actual
cases or composites of experiences from our consulting practice or related in
our workshops; they are used with the permission of the individuals
involved. The titles and affiliations of the subjects or contributors of this
material may have changed after the book’s publication date; whenever
possible, we have updated this information on our website.

Chapter 3. Liberating Structures for Everyone

1 The term Liberating Structures was first introduced by William Torbert, a
professor at Boston College. He explored the notion of forms of organization
structure that gave guidance to people in a way that they developed skills to
guide themselves. He advanced a theory of power that generates productivity,
justice, and inquiry; and a theory of “liberating structure” through which
organizations can generate continual quality improvement (contributed by
Lisa Kimball).
2 Gallup Inc. “State of the American Workplace: Employee Engagement

Insights for U.S. Business Leaders,” 2013.

[Link]
[Link] accessed July 14, 2013. Gallup defines engaged employees
as “those who are involved in, enthusiastic about, and committed to their
work and contribute to their organization in a positive manner” (p. 12).
3 Adapted from Edgar Schein, Organizational Culture and Leadership, 4th

ed. (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2010).

PART THREE: STORIES FROM THE FIELD

1 Except as noted, the stories here were developed from interviews we

conducted with twenty-five leaders using Liberating Structures all over the
world. We selected these twelve examples for their ability to show the
power of Liberating Structures to address many different types of issues and
opportunities in a broad range of organizations.
2 Ori Brafman and Rod A. Beckstrom. The Starfish and The Spider: The

Unstoppable Power Of Leaderless Organizations (New York: Portfolio,

2007). 3 Professor Singhal recommends the following videos for additional
examples: UnScripted: Liberating Structures by Arvind Singhal
[Link] 10’20”; Liberating Structures: Inviting and
Unleashing All: Lipmanowicz in Convo with Singhal
[Link] 8’ 30”; Liberating Classroom: Lipmanowicz
in Convo with Singhal [Link] 8’ 20”
4 Positive Deviance is based on the observation that in every community

there are certain individuals or groups whose uncommon behaviors and

strategies enable them to find better solutions to problems than their peers,
while having access to the same resources and facing similar or worse
challenges. The Positive Deviance approach is an asset-based, problem-
solving, and community-driven approach that enables the community to
discover these successful behaviors and strategies and develop a plan of
action to promote their adoption by all concerned. See, e.g., Pascale,
Richard, Jerry Sternin, and Monique Sternin, The Power of Positive
Deviance (Boston: Harvard Business Press, 2010) and
[Link]
5 The CBC news show The National featured Michael and the hospitals in

this project in a segment aired on March 19, 2012 called “Germ War: One of
Canada’s Leading Infection Control Experts Has Started a Simple But
Unorthodox Project That’s Getting Incredible Results in the Battle against
Hospital Infections.”
[Link]
58/?page=6
6 KGH was part of a demonstration project to prevent infections in five

hospital sites across Canada that concluded in 2011 [see Inspiring Enduring
Culture Change While Preventing Hospital Infections in Part Three:
Stories from the Field]. Sherry served as leader of a core group that
managed the prevention effort within her unit and across hospital
departments. To coordinate action and attract cross-functional participation,
the group employed Social Network Webbing.
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND LEARNING
RESOURCES

Acknowledgments

Through thick and thin, hundreds of people kindly supported us in the

developmental years (2003–2013). Here we name a handful.
Curt Lindberg brought together a fabulous network of complexity-
crazed scholars and leaders. This community intellectually clothed and fed
us in the beginning. Inklings of a Liberating Structures strategy were launched
in Ohio with the front line of the Veterans Administration health system.
Among complexity scholars, Brenda Zimmerman shines like the North Star.
Her theoretical brilliance and practical bent illuminated a path forward. Liz
Rykert was the first dedicated reader/editor, working through the details of
each Liberating Structure’s description.
Grey Warner opened the door wide for getting started in Latin America.
Alison Joslyn was the first executive to boldly try everything we had to offer.
We inspired her and she inspired us in equal measure. Tadeu Alves went out
on a limb to sponsor our first workshop in Brazil. Its success sowed the
seeds for leaders to follow suit in Mexico, Central America, Colombia,
Peru, Chile, and Puerto Rico. We owe special gratitude to all the frontline
people in Latin America who had the courage to break new ground and
innovate. Their accomplishments taught us a lot about what Liberating
Structures made possible. Big hugs to David Gasser, Nicole Schmidlin,
Nilton Tojar, Gracio Reis, Marcio Martins, Pablo Quintana, Ricardo
Schrader, Nilda Bigott, Sidnei Castro, Vanessa Vertiz, Eduardo Guerra,
Andres Bruzual Cristobal Bravo, Sean Hughes, Rafael Suarez, and Tim
Daveler. Special kudos to the indefatigable Dave Raimondo!
As Liberating Structures were developing momentum in Latin America,
a US-based group was working with Positive Deviance to prevent the spread
of superbugs. Sharon Benjamin, Kevin Buck, Joelle Everett, Lisa Kimball,
Mark Munger, Jerry Sternin, Monique Sternin, and Margaret Toth shared
their talents as we practiced side by side. Diane Magrane believed in us and
challenged us to try Liberating Structures in medical-school settings. In our
work with community leaders in Montana, Harvey Stewart insisted we
develop principles. Linda DeWolf and Chris McCarthy helped launch the
Innovation Learning Network with a Liberating Structures twist. Michael
Gardam invited us to help guide a Canada-wide superbug-prevention effort.
In Europe, Antonio Mosquera, Jan Van Acker, Kari Jarvinen, and Guy
Eiferman opened the doors to their organizations and gave us the opportunity
to demonstrate the adaptability of Liberating Structures to many different
cultural environments. There, too, progress and learning rested on the
shoulders of courageous frontline early adopters. Big hugs to Cristina Lopez
Vilchez, Miguel Angel Soria, Erik Plas, Istvan Grof, Philippe Decerf, Ans
Heirman, Reginald Decraene, Bruno Klucasr, Donia Cherifi, Veronique
Rosset, and Clarisse Lhoste.
The application of Liberating Structures in education and social change
is expanding and spreading in large part thanks to professor Arvind Singhal.
He created and nurtures a growing community of Liberating Structures
Changemakers. Big hugs to professor Lucia Dura, professor Helen Hua
Wang, professor Harry Meeuwsen, professor Robert Ulmer, Dr. Virginia
Lacayo, professor Marie Lindquist, Dr. Karen Greiner, Erin Stock, Marc
Peters, Rafael Obregon, Acadia Roher, and Carliene Quist.
Fabulous designer Lesley Jacobs gave playful form to each Liberating
Structure. Our developmental editor, Leslie Stephen, made this book possible
by pulling out of us the best each had to offer and filling the gaps. A deep
bow to Annie Jacobs for style editing, head shrinking, and loving care after
far too many days away from home. Endless gratitude goes to Riitta
Lipmanowicz for her selfless nurturing, infinite patience, and endless
reservoir of TLC. It could have never happened without you.

Attributions and Learning Resources

More than any single book, Edgeware launched our quest for practical
applications of complexity science. We stand on the shoulders of Curt
Lindberg, Paul Plsek, and Brenda Zimmerman. The view was fabulous!
Earlier, in the 1980s, consultants Lisa Kimball and Frank Burns started work
with groups to “focus beyond meeting content-only to designing engaging
experiences.” They borrowed a concept with a catchy name from a Boston
University professor named William Torbert—Liberating Structures.
In the Field Guide, we give attribution and credit to authors and
developers who have inspired us. With a deep bow to these pioneers, thank
you. Earlier influences are hard to trace but no less important. There are
other mothers, fathers, and gurus behind most of the methods. Let us know
whom we missed.
In addition, to build an understanding of the theories behind Liberating
Structures, we recommend the following books and articles:

Alexander, Christopher, Sara Ishikawa, and Murray Silverstein. A

Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1977.
Anderson, Ruth A., and Reuben R. McDaniel Jr. “Taking
Complexity Science Seriously: New Research, New
Methods.” In On the Edge: Nursing in the Age of
Complexity, edited by Clair Lindberg, Sue Nash, and Curt
Lindberg, 73–95. Bordertown, N.J.: Plexus Press, 2008.
Arrien, Angeles. Signs of Life: The Five Universal Shapes and
How to Use Them. New York: Tarcher/Penguin, 1998.
Axelrod, Richard H. Terms of Engagement: Changing the Way We
Change Organizations. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler,
2000.
Beinhocker, Eric D. “Strategy at the Edge of Chaos.” McKinsey
Quarterly, no. 1 (1997): 24–39.
Bellman, Geoffrey M. The Consultant’s Calling: Bringing Who
You Are to What You Do. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1992.
Block, Peter. Community: The Structure of Belonging. San
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2008.
Boal, Augusto. Theatre of the Oppressed. New York: Theatre
Communications Group, 1985.
Brafman, Ori, and Rod A. Beckstrom. The Starfish and the Spider:
The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations. New
York: Portfolio, 2010.
Caballero, María Cristina. “Academic Turns City into a Social
Experiment: Mayor Mockus of Bogotá and His Spectacularly
Applied Theory.” Harvard Gazette, March 11, 2004.
Cooperrider, David L. “Positive Image, Positive Action: The
Affirmative Basis of Organizing.” In Appreciative
Management and Leadership: The Power of Positive
Thought and Action in Organizations, edited by Suresh
Srivasta and David L. Cooperrider, 91–125. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass, 1990.
Giddens, Anthony. Central Problems in Social Theory: Action,
Structure, and Contradiction in Social Analysis. London:
Macmillan, 1979
Greenhalgh, Trisha, Glenn Robert, Fraser Macfarlane, Paul Bate,
and Olivia Kyriakidou. “Diffusion of Innovations in Service
Organizations: Systematic Review and Recommendations,”
Milbank Quarterly 82, no. 4 (2004): 581–629.
Gunderson, Lance, and C. S. Holling, eds. Panarchy:
Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural
Systems. Washington, DC: Island Press, 2002.
Hand, Eric. “Citizen Science: People Power.” Nature 466 (2010):
685–87.
Heifetz, Ronald A. Leadership without Easy Answers. Cambridge,
MA: Belknap Press, 1994.
Hock, Dee, and VISA International. Birth of the Chaordic Age. San
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2000.
Holman, Peggy, Tom Devane, and Steven Cady. The Change
Handbook: The Definitive Resource on Today’s Best
Methods for Engaging Whole Systems. San Francisco:
Berrett-Koehler, 2007.
Lanham, Holly Jordan et al. “How Improving Practice
Relationships among Clinicians and Nonclinicians Can
Improve Quality in Primary Care.” Joint Commission Journal
on Quality and Patient Safety 35 (September 2009): 457–66.
Kelso, J. A. Scott, and David A. Engstrom. The Complementary
Nature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2010.
Kimball, Lisa. “Liberating Structures: A New Pattern Language for
Engagement.” OD Practitioner 43, no. 3 (2011): 8–11.
Lipmanowicz, Henri, and Keith McCandless. “Liberating
Structures: Innovating by Including and Unleashing
Everyone.” Performance 2, no. 4 (2009): 6–19.
Macy, Joanna, and Molly Young Brown. Coming Back to Life:
Practices to Reconnect Our Lives, Our World. Gabriola
Island, BC: New Society, 1998.
Malone, Thomas W., Robert Laubacher, and Chrysanthos
Dellarocas. “Harnessing Crowds: Mapping the Genome of
Collective Intelligence.” Working paper 2009-001, MIT
Center for Collective Intelligence, 2009.
McKnight, John. The Careless Society: Community and Its
Counterfeits. New York: Basic Books, 1996.
Morgan, Gareth. Images of Organization. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage, 1997.
Oshry, Barry. Seeing Systems: Unlocking the Mysteries of
Organizational Life. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 1995.
Owen, Harrison. Open Space Technology: A User’s Guide, 3rd ed.
(San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2008).
Palmer, Parker J. The Courage to Teach: Exploring the Inner
Landscape of a Teacher’s Life. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
1998.
Pascale, Richard, and Jerry Sternin. “Your Company’s Secret
Change Agents.” Harvard Business Review, May 2005.
[Link] your-companys-secret-change-agents.
Patton, Michael Quinn. Developmental Evaluation: Applying
Complexity Concepts to Enhance Innovation and Use. New
York: Guilford Press, 2010
Schein, Edgar H. Helping: How to Offer, Give, and Receive Help.
San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2009.
———. Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass, 2004.
Singhal, Arvind, Prucia Buscell, and Keith McCandless. Saving
Lives by Changing Relationships: Positive Deviance for
MRSA Control and Prevention in a U.S. Hospital. Positive
Deviance Wisdom Series, no. 3. Boston: Tufts University,
Positive Deviance Initiative, 2009.
Stacey, Ralph D. Complex Responsive Processes in Organizations:
Learning and Knowledge Creation. London: Routledge,
2001.
Suchman, Anthony L. “A New Theoretical Foundation for
Relationship-Centered Care.” In supplement 1, Journal of
General Internal Medicine 21 (January 2006): S40–S44.
Surowiecki, James. The Wisdom of Crowds. New York: Anchor,
2005.
Torbert, William R. The Power of Balance: Transforming Self,
Society, and Scientific Inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage,
1991.
Weick, Karl E., and Kathleen M. Sutcliffe. Managing the
Unexpected: Resilient Performance in an Age of
Uncertainty. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2007.
Weick, Karl E., Kathleen M. Sutcliffe, and David Obstfeld.
“Organizing for High Reliability: Processes of Collective
Mindfulness.” Research in Organizational Behavior 21, no.
s 81 (1999): 81–123.
Westley, Frances, Brenda Zimmerman, and Michael Q. Patton.
Getting to Maybe: How the World Is Changed. Toronto:
Random House of Canada, 2006.
Wheatley, Margaret J., and Myron Kellner-Rogers. A Simpler Way.
San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 1996.
Zimmerman, Brenda. “HIV/AIDS in the Developing World: The
Brazil Story.” In “Complicated and Complex Systems: What
Would Successful Reform of Medicare Look Like?,” by
Shalom Glouberman and Brenda Zimmerman, discussion
paper no. 8, York University,Toronto, July 2002, 16–20
Zimmerman, Brenda, Curt Lindberg, and Paul Plsek. Edgeware:
Insights from Complexity Science for Health Care Leaders.
Irving, TX: VHA, 1998.
 ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith McCandless have partnered since 2002 to

develop Liberating Structures. They have worked with organizations ranging
from neighborhood groups to global business enterprises in more than thirty
countries. Updates on their ongoing work are reported on their website
[Link].

Henri Lipmanowicz is the former

president of Merck’s Intercontinental Region
and Japan and a cofounder of the Plexus
Institute.

My previous passion was building

organizations all over the world where people
thrived and were successful beyond their
wildest expectations. My current passion is
the development of Liberating Structures and their dissemination across
all five continents. One passion follows naturally the other since
Liberating Structures make it possible for people to build organizations
where they flourish and succeed beyond their expectations.

I enjoy mentoring people and seeing them grow. I love asking

questions and looking at issues from unexpected angles. I thrive on
complexity and take pleasure in challenging senior leaders.

Liberating Structures is a labor of love and I am excited about their

present and future contributions. Coaching people about their use has
been invariably rewarding and has convinced me that everybody can
benefit from learning how to use them. That is why I hope that more and
more students will start learning about Liberating Structures in
educational settings so that they can be better prepared to use them at
work.

Henri retired from Merck in 1998 after a thirty-year career during

which he progressed from managing director in Finland to president of the
Intercontinental Region and Japan (the world minus the United States and
Western Europe) and a member of Merck Management Committee. In 2000,
Henri cofounded the Plexus Institute and served as chairman of the board
until 2010.

Born in Carcassonne, France, Henri holds a MS degree in industrial

engineering and management from Columbia University and a MS degree in
chemical engineering from France. His career gave him the opportunity to
live in seven countries and made him a perpetual world traveler. He resides
in the United States with his Finnish wife; their joy in their two daughters and
seven grandchildren is beyond their wildest expectations. While in France,
he drives around in a 1961 Citroen 2CV.
 Keith McCandless is cofounder of the Social
Invention Group.

I help people in organizations innovate and

manage complexity by working with groups to
unleash creativity, discover opportunities, and
build on momentum.

I am a founding partner of the Social

Invention Group since 2000, and my eclectic
skills are grounded in organization development,
complexity science, business strategy, and graphic facilitation—all with
an improvisational twist.

It was kismet that I met Henri while serving on the Scientific

Advisory Board of the Plexus Institute. We shared a hunch that complexity
science had practical applications and could be accessible to everyone.
My keen interest in transformational learning and planning methods
clicked with Henri’s business acumen as we fielded early prototypes. Over
twelve years, our hunch metamorphosed into a powerful repertoire for
changemakers. Gleefully, we cut across academic disciplines, tapped
spiritual practices, roamed the planet, and deepened scientific insights
along the way.

What delights me most is the range of challenges, big and small,

where this work can have a positive influence. Professional, functional,
and interpersonal boundaries seem to dissolve when using Liberating
Structures. I love creating the conditions for social inventiveness to
flourish and to help people to take on their most entangled challenges with
newfound confidence.
 From 1992–2000, Keith led executive learning initiatives for the Health
Forum (HF) in San Francisco. He was responsible for working with field-
based learning collaboratives and managing education and research efforts.
Prior to the Health Forum, Keith founded and served as the executive
director of the Foundation for Health Care Quality in Seattle. The foundation
brought together business and health leaders in a unique partnership to
improve value in health care.

Born in Cincinnati, Ohio, he holds a master’s in management of human

services from Brandeis University in Boston and a BA from Evergreen State
College in Olympia, Washington. Keith lives in Seattle with his wife, Anne,
and Deacon, a whippet with talent to amuse.