The Co-Intelligence Institute CII home // CIPolitics home
In most official conversations -- and even in many informal ones -- we know exactly what we're talking about and where we're headed. When it is over, we know we're the same people we were at the start, living in much the same world that existed when we started. The defining elements of the situation are relatively stable. The conversations we have in that situation are relatively predictable. We know what to expect. Some of us call such conversations "transactional" because they're essentially about exchange -- a tossing back and forth of ideas and reactions. Transactional conversations are often dysfunctional: They often sustain or degrade already bad situations, such as when a couple gets in one of their habitual arguments. But transactional conversations can also be fruitful. Fruitful transactional conversations -- and the processes and facilitation that structure them, such as many negotiation techniques or Roberts Rules of Order -- provide a context in which participants can exchange ideas and perspectives that expand the stable common ground on which they can work together without rocking their boats. There's nothing wrong with that. But such conversations aren't transformational. They're good for keeping things as they are. They will not get people out of any boxes they need to get out of. Transformational conversations, on the other hand, are all about significant shifts. At the point we enter a transformational conversation we don't know what sorts of outcome there will be -- what solutions we'll find, what problems we'll be addressing, or even who we'll be or what our world will be like when we're done. A conversation can be transformational, however, even when we think we know exactly what's going to happen. We may have thought we were entering a normal transactional conversation. Even when it's done, we may not realize that things have significantly changed. We may only be aware of certain possibilities (that happen to have been unthinkable at the start). So what we think we know is not what's relevant here. The proof is in the pudding: If we were in a transformational conversation, something has shifted by the end of it -- whether we were aware of it or not -- and that shift could not have happened without these "four unknowns" being present -- not knowing what topics we would address and what solutions we'd come up with, and not knowing what we and our world would be like at the end. Since these four unknowns are essential for transformational conversation, any assumptions, circumstances, processes or facilitation methods that restrict their open-ended presence, will restrict the capacity of conversations to be transformational. Conversations will then be transactional, since that's our culture's default setting. The four unknowns are necessary -- but not sufficient -- for real transformation. It is possible to get lost in the unknown, to wander in realms where there is little life-serving energy, but only confusion and reaction. Most people have experienced this, and it is fear of that fruitless disorientation that causes them to retreat into transactional conversations when a transformational conversation is trying to happen. Jim Rough's "choice-creating" process provides ways to help a conversation proceed fruitfully through these "four unknowns", following the life-serving energy that participants are feeling from moment to moment. His "dynamic facilitation" provides lively human guidance to pursue such choice-creating conversations. Of course these guidelines are not hard and fast. Conversations can be more or less transactional, more or less transformational. In addition to dynamic facilitation, other methods -- open space conferencing, nonviolent communication, tribal council process, etc. -- can support transformational conversations. There is much to explore in this territory. But we can use the presence and generativity of these "four unknowns" to identify the extent to which a conversation is transformational, and this can guide our explorations. The four unknowns are listed below in order of their increasing transformational potency. Each is followed by a description of the added choices available at that level. 1) "We don't know what solution we're going to get here." 2) "We don't actually know what topic we're talking about, what problem we're trying to solve." 3) "We don't know who we will be at the end of the meeting." 4) "We don't know what kind of
universe we will live in when we are done." It MAY be that the kind of openness generated by people intentionally not-knowing these things, can increase their tranformative power. What we DO know is that processes exist -- such as choice-creating and dynamic facilitation -- that can bring about transformational conversations even among people who are fully prepared for transactional conversation. The rewards are there to be had, whenever we choose to apply this knowledge.. See also: How to Make a Decision Without Making a Decision How are transactional and transformational conversations different?So, at times you need to move your mindset from a transactional one (what can this person do for me/ what do I need to do for them) to a transformational one - that is more strategic and explorative (i.e., with a growth mindset). This helps to unlock another person's potential to maximise their performance.
What's the difference between a transactional and transformational leader?Transactional leadership is primarily based on processes and control, and requires a strict management structure. Transformational leadership, on the other hand, focuses on inspiring others to follow, and it requires a high degree of coordination, communication, and cooperation.
What is meant by transformational communication?Transformational communication is about transferring meaning, not information. Transformational communication happens through establishing an emotional connection. The recipient needs to feel something. Without feeling, without a genuine connection, we end up with just the illusion that communication has taken place.
What are the similarities between transactional and transformational leadership?Both techniques involve leaders and followers with a shared purpose to benefit from one another; both approaches are motivational in their approaches; and both leadership styles have inherent goals in mind.
|