13.01.2013 Views

HUB RESEARCH PAPER - Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel

HUB RESEARCH PAPER - Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel

HUB RESEARCH PAPER - Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Process consultation revisited 23<br />

remains silent. Everybody remains silent. The consultant observes “we are all here around the<br />

table”. Silence follows. After a little while a group member articulates his hopes and fears<br />

concerning the ongoing change process as it relates to his own job. Others join in the<br />

conversation and actors frame and reframe their and others’ concerns, mutually and respectfully<br />

explore thoughts and emotions, reflectively inquire into here-and-now group dynamics, and give<br />

advise to each other. The consultant remains ‘low key’ (e.g., Schein, 1999b), in the background,<br />

and only intervenes (with a content, procedure or process intervention) if he or she feels that this<br />

is helping to foster learning and helping relationships. Also, the consultant, as a behavioral<br />

model, frequently puts aside his own judgments or reactions to create space for input of the<br />

actors involved. This is an important working principle of dialogue as helping conversational<br />

form (e.g., Schein, 1999a, 2003b). Acting in this way is another exemplary behavior of the<br />

consultant that is experienced by the team leader as a ‘high quality’ intervention because it<br />

facilitates mutual learning and co-ownership of the process. The team leaders, and the team<br />

members, gradually incorporate this consultation behavior through closely observing the<br />

consultant, jointly reflecting on her-and-now interactions and relationships, experimenting with<br />

own interventions, and getting feedback from the consultant and co-actors. In doing so, they<br />

expand their (inter)action repertoire to enhance the interactivity and reflexivity, and thus the<br />

quality of the ongoing process. One team leader expresses “that what works” in intervision as<br />

“now, we are talking directly to each other instead of talking about each other behind someone’s<br />

back” (e.g., Shotter, 2004).<br />

Assembling relational practices. As mentioned earlier, the process of including and<br />

excluding voices in a certain relational practice is a very central concern when taking a relational<br />

practices perspective. It is also a central concern in the organizational change process of the

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!