Some questions

[super_yacht@hotmail.com]

At our practise group on Tuesday I we were looking at space work and two questions came up.
1. How often do you ask the question about moving to another space?
“is there a space that knows about that, and can you goto that space”
In David’s Emergence work you work on getting to the client to download (to ‘B’) as much as possible. So this follows that you should you download form the first space, possible identifying the other spaces. Do these then need to be physically visited?
The tension around the initial space grows as more spaces are identified and eventually moving form it can have deeper effect as opposed to just moving from space to space. Discuss.

2: How much information do you give a client about the process? Just asking questions either Clean Language or Emergence sometime the client doesn’t have an answer but may feel obliged by the facilitator to give one. There is a fine line here between ‘Clean’ and client led and being facilitator lead. I spent time with David working out an introductory talk which gives the client some information but minimal. What do others use?

Cheers
John Farrell

[Corrie van Wijk]

Dear John,

I try to think of an answer:

First of all, I don't think you should mix up clean space and emergence.

1. As for your first question: a clean space facilitation can begin with either A, B or C (after you established them). Moving to another space can follow the initial question "What do you know from there?", possibly followed by "And is there anything else?". You can ask people to move as much as you want (try six to begin with!), but very often they spontaneously move themselves among their landscape. If they visit a particular space rather often, you also may try the spin.

2. As for your second question: give the client as much information he or she needs to trust you and understand the meaning of the facilitation.


Corrie

[phil]

First of all, I don't think you should mix up clean space and emergence.

Why not "mix" them?

[super_yacht@hotmail.com]

Maybe its a new process that we have not heard about yet. I'm struggling to come up with a process that doesn't use Emergence in space work. CL (which isn't Emergence) can use space but then is it CL? I would be interested in knowing now you can use space without emergence. :confused:
John

[Corrie van Wijk]

Quote Phil: "Why not "mix" them?"

Clean language, symbolic modelling, clean space and emergence are all different processes. In order to be able to mix them, you really have to know what you're doing, and sometimes it would be impossible, because you would risk to get yourself or your client confused and the process will stop.

All these processes have in common that they use 'clean questions': the ones that do not add any information or judgement to the client's thinking, but just facilitate him or her to move on.

Different questions are asked in different processes. James and Penny identified them for metaphors, in the thread 'Process thinking' you find most clean space questions in the Nasrudin story, and emergence questions are still being developed.

Quote John: "I would be interested in knowing how you can use space without emergence."

Use space questions:
A : "What do you know from there?" (+AE)
Space of A: "What does that space know?" (+AE)
B : "What does B know?" (+AE)
Space of B: "What does that space know?" (+AE)
C : "What does C know?" (+AE)
Space of C: "What does that space know?" (+AE)

Space directions:
"And is there another space that wants you to move to?"
"Move over there".
(Spin)
"Turn around"
"Keep turning".

A solution will possibly "emerge" from this, though!

Emergence:
The set-up of emergence is similar to clean space, because you establish A, B and (implicitly) C, but you don't (necessarily) need to move around.

Emergence-question: "What is there now?" (ask this question six times, regardless of the answer)
"And what do you know now?"
Repeat this six times.

Discussion:
If you use 'And then what happens', you move forward in time;
if you use 'What's the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth' you get an order of things.

In my opinion these last two aren't working, because you don't repeat the same system, so you won't get the variation, but you add different (aspects of) experiences.

Anyone else?

Corrie