Thank you all for the wonderful responses on this thread!
I've been thinking a lot since raising the question a few weeks ago. I've
also been watching my own work during the period.
I wrote in LO2475:
>>>One of the features touted in electronic meeting support systems is
Anonymity. That is, where each participant can add their ideas, comments,
and evaluations anonymously...
All this makes sense to me, but if anonymity is such a valuable idea, we
don't need fancy electronic meetings rooms, we could have been doing this
with with low-tech devices all along. <<<
Although initially resistant to the idea of anonymous statements, I've
found myself participating in the process, playing the game. I'm more
aware that in consulting (and other) situations, I'm often working to
identify what's in the "air" that's not being said openly or not being
heard. And, I'm often finding it useful to get these comments into the
discussion (consultant's role as "truth" teller). Since opening this
thread, I realize I'm doing this more than I thought.
I'm looking at two levels: 1) How bringing out the unsaid can create
progress, and 2) What's keeping significant unsaids from being said
openly.
I've decided that in the ideal world, we wouldn't need anonymity, that
people would be able to say what's important, and I work to move things
in this direction. But, I've also decided that in today's reality some
devices are often valuable. I've decided to be comfortable using them,
but still feeing that it's a pretty awesome responsibility.
I've decided that the electronic facilities for anonymous comments
probably are efficient and effective, if used with moderation and care.
Thanks again for all the comments!
--
Richard Karash ("Rick") | <http://world.std.com/~rkarash>
Innovation Associates, Inc. | email: rkarash@world.std.com
3 Speen St, Framingham MA 01701 | Host for Learning-Org Mailing List
(508) 879-8301 and fax 626-2205 | <http://world.std.com/~lo>