8/14/2019 Process of Sustained Dialogue

1/3

PROCESS OF SUSTAINED DIALOGUE

Sustained Dialogue as a change process is the conceptualization of two decades of dialogues. Bringing the same group together repeatedly, we began to see that

relationships among participants changed through a recognizable pattern. We thought defining this pattern might enable us to transfer the experience of changingrelationships to other conflicts and to teach the process to others.

SD differs from most other change processes in two ways (1) It focuses on transforming the relationships that cause problems, create conflict, and block change. SDworks within a carefully defined concept of relationshipboth an analytical and an operational tool for SD moderators. (2) Since relationships change only over time,

SD is presented as a five-stage process . The stages are a guide to moderators and participantsnot a ri gid template to be slavishly followed. SD moderators mustbegin by internalizing the concept of relati onship and the special work that defines each of the five stages.Stage One: People in conflict or in change-blocking relationships decide to

engage in dialogue as a way of changing those relationships. They select SD because they feel they need to act and SD is something they can do that would make adifference. This decision can take a long time and may involve a citizens organization to help. [click onchange processfor a more detailed description of what happensin this stage].

Stage Two: Participants come together to talkto map and name the elements of those problems and the relationships responsible for creating and dealing withthem. In early meetings, this talk can be diffuse, and participants vent their grievances and anger with each other. This stage will end at least for a time when thegroup agrees, What we really need to focus on is. . . .

Stage Three: In more disciplined talk, participants probe specific problems to uncover the dynamics of underlying relationships with these aims: (1) to define the mostpressing problems; (2) to probe the dynamics of the relationships that cause them; (3) to identify possible ways into those relationships to change them; (4) to weighthose approaches to come to a sense of direction; (5) to weigh the consequences of moving in that direction against the consequences of doing nothing; and (6) todecide whether to try designing such change.

Stage Four: Together, they design a scenario of interacting steps in the political arena to change troublesome relationships and to engage others. They ask fivequestions: What resources to we have? What are the obstacles to moving in this direction? What steps could overcome those obstacles? Who could take thosesteps? How could we sequence those steps so that they interactone building on anotherto generate momentum behind the plan for acting?

Stage Five: Participants devise ways to put that scenario into the hands of those who can act on it and ways of judging achievement.

To learn more about Dr. Saunders' Concept of a Relationship, Click Here.

A Visual Representation of the Five Stages of Sustained Dialogue

http://www.sustaineddialogue.org/iisd/relationship_model.htm%20http://www.sustaineddialogue.org/iisd/relationship_model.htm%20http://www.sustaineddialogue.org/change_process.htmhttp://www.sustaineddialogue.org/change_process.htmhttp://www.sustaineddialogue.org/change_process.htmhttp://www.sustaineddialogue.org/iisd/relationship_model.htmhttp://www.sustaineddialogue.org/iisd/relationship_model.htmhttp://www.sustaineddialogue.org/change_process.htmhttp://www.sustaineddialogue.org/iisd/relationship_model.htmhttp://www.sustaineddialogue.org/iisd/relationship_model.htm%20

8/14/2019 Process of Sustained Dialogue

2/3

8/14/2019 Process of Sustained Dialogue

3/3

The relational paradigms focus on a multilevel process of continuous interaction among citizens contrasts to the traditional focus on a linear sequence of actions andreactions among institutions as in a chess game. Continuing interactions are the essence of that process. What is important are the interplay and interpenetrationbetween entitiesnot just the action of one on the other.

To capture this dynamic process of continuous interaction, we have used the human word relationship, which has been carefully defined above.The focus widens beyond the structures and instituti ons of state and government to include whole bodies politiccitizens outside as well as inside government.

Picture citizens interacting around common concerns. Each values a number of personal, professional, identity, religious, cultural, and other interests. Each brings thoseinterests into different interactions with others sharing those interests. Each citizens lif e involves a complex of clustered interactionssome overlapping, somenot. These clusters interact with other clusters in numberless ways. Picture clusters, groups, associations of citizens in and out of government thinking, talking, actingtogether because they are concerned about a particular problem. Suspend your inclination to define these clusters in terms of their structures and instead see the

permeable boundaries of each group defined only by the pattern created by their interactionsnot by constitutions and bylaws. Think of the body politic as thekaleidoscope in which these continuously changing groups interact.

This perspective does not minimize government. There are some things that only governments can do. But there are some things that only citizens outside government

can dosuch as transforming conflictual human relationships, modifying human behavior, and changing politi cal culture. The energies and capacities of these citizens

are the greatest untapped resources for meeting the challenges of the 21st century. A paradigm that does not include them is ineffective because it ignores those

resources and immoral because it leaves out most of the worlds citizens.