Julie Huffaker and Karen Dawson are collaborators at Deeper Funner Change, a consulting collective dedicated to unleashing collaborative intelligence. As “pracademics,” both are wildly curious about what transpires when organizational and leadership theory meet the reality of complex day- to-day business challenges.
朱莉·霍菲克和凯伦·道森是深度资助者变革组织的合作者，这是一个致力于释放协作情报的咨询团体。作为“学者”，两人都非常好奇组织和领导理论面对复杂的日常商业挑战时会发生什么。
Jenelle is a dynamic, red-headed CEO of a fast-growing real estate agency. Her vision for the agency was to reinvent how they do real estate. We were surprised and delighted when she called to share how she had used what she had learned with us during a one-day workshop. “This is a total transformation of my ability,” she said, “an ‘Aha!’ of how to show my commitment and to share where I’m coming from and listen without getting so defensive.”1
詹妮尔是一家快速发展的房地产经纪公司的一位充满活力的、红头发的首席执行官。她对该机构的愿景是重塑他们的房地产经营方式。当她打电话来分享她在一天的研讨会上使用她和我们学到的东西时，我们感到惊讶和高兴。“这是我能力的完全转变，”她说，“啊哈！如何展示我的承诺，分享我的来自，在不那么防御的情况下倾听。“1
The workshop Jenelle attended was about shifting team and organizational culture to enable co-creative change. We had donated the day as a fundraiser for Living Yoga, a Portland-based nonprofit that provides yoga to people in prison and drug and alcohol rehabilitation centers. The workshop was open enrollment at $500 per seat, all of which went to the organization. Other supporting businesses donated the venue, food, and champagne for a closing toast.
詹妮尔参加的研讨会是关于改变团队和组织文化，以实现共同创造的变革。我们把这一天捐赠给了生活瑜伽的筹款活动，这是一个总部设在波特兰的非营利组织，为监狱和毒品和酒精康复中心的人们提供瑜伽。工作室以每个座位500美元的价格开放注册，所有的资金都捐给了组织。其他支持企业捐赠了会场、食物和香槟作为闭幕祝酒。
Unlike the heart of our work with clients, where we engage deeply over time, this workshop was for a single day. Not knowing the participants beforehand, we emailed them three weeks prior and invited them to arrive with a real change challenge, personal or professional, through which to explore a radically collaborative approach to change. Twenty people gathered from across a wide professional spectrum: senior leaders from large, global companies, nonprofit executive directors, a lawyer exploring how to shift his practice, and Jenelle.
与我们与客户工作的核心不同，随着时间的推移，我们深入参与，这个研讨会为期一天。事先不了解参与者，我们在三周前给他们发电子邮件，邀请他们提出真正的改变挑战，个人或专业挑战，探索根本合作的改变方法。20人聚集在广泛的专业人士中：来自全球大型公司的高级领导人、非营利性执行董事、探索如何改变实践的律师，以及杰妮尔。
For the previous year, Jenelle had been struggling to gain her company’s commitment to her vision for the future, but the harder she pushed her ideas on them, the more resistance she encountered. She hoped the workshop would help her use her upcoming annual State of the Union speech as an opportunity to get her company on board.
在过去的一年里，珍妮尔一直在努力争取公司对未来愿景的承诺，但她的想法越难，遇到的阻力就越大。她希望这个研讨会能帮助她利用即将到来的年度国情咨文演讲作为让她的公司加入的机会。
She shared with us that after the workshop, her State of the Union was more like a conversation than a presentation. She asked her company members powerful questions, allotted time for discussions, and distributed markers to collect their ideas on flip charts. Jenelle engaged them in the beginning to create a shared vision for the future. “Last year, when the presentation was all about me, it was, ‘This is the bus, and you can get on or off.’ This year, it was, ‘This is our bus.’”
她和我们分享说，在研讨会结束后，她的国情咨文更像是一场对话，而不是一场演讲。她问了她的公司成员强有力的问题，分配了讨论的时间，并分发标记来在翻转图上收集他们的想法。珍妮尔一开始就让他们为未来创造一个共同的愿景。“去年，当演讲都是关于我的时候，它是，‘这是公共汽车，你可以上下车。’今年是，‘这是我们的巴士。’”
We use the workshop Jenelle experienced in many different forms, all aimed at unleashing the collaborative intelligence of a team, department, or organization.
我们使用珍妮尔所经历的各种不同形式的研讨会，所有都旨在释放团队、部门或组织的协作智慧。
Our Big Shift in Applying Improvisation
For the past twenty-plus years, we have been using the tools of improvised theatre to help clients make behavioral changes. If participants could only learn how to listen deeply, make bold offers, let go of controlling, and expand their attention ... surely, we thought, this would support more collaborative interactions and generative relationships back at the office. It made sense: our clients often described their challenges in terms of the behaviors that weren’t working for them. They hired us to help interact and relate differently so they could get different results. Part of the magic of improv is that the methods are pretty darned accessible to non-improvisers. Yet even when participants left our sessions raving, the translation back to their real worlds rarely met their (or our) goal to enable groups to work in a profoundly different way over time. Our intention all along was to catalyze lasting change.
在过去的二十多年里，我们一直在使用即兴戏剧的工具来帮助客户进行行为上的改变。如果参与者只能学会如何深入倾听，提出大胆的提议，放弃控制，扩大他们的注意力……当然，我们认为，这将支持办公室里更多的协作互动和生成关系。这是有道理的：我们的客户经常根据不利于他们的行为来描述他们的挑战。他们雇佣我们来帮助我们不同的互动和联系，这样他们就可以得到不同的结果。
Our big shift came from considering that in improv, like in any emergent system (Lichtenstein 2014), the interaction of system elements may be what enables creating a whole that’s greater than the sum of its parts. The behavioral practices we were teaching were just one element of the overall system。
我们的重大转变来自于考虑到在即兴表演中，就像任何紧急系统（利希敦士登2014），系统元素的相互作用可能能够创建一个大于其部分总和的整体。我们所教授的行为实践只是整个系统的一个要素。
What if we looked beyond behavioral practices and focused on the vital interplay among system elements? What if we included not just behaviors but the beliefs underneath them, and even the organizing structures of the games? By “behaviors,” we mean the practices of improv: accepting offers, noticing more, playing big, letting go, and supporting each other to look brilliant. By “beliefs,” we mean the mind-sets improvisers bring to the stage—like “we’ve got each other’s backs.” By organizing structures of the games, we mean the rules that both support and constrain participants’ activities—like each person adding just one word in a word-at-a-time story. In our use of applied improv, we had never before focused in a meaningful way on the interplay between these aspects. We are now making each of these elements visible and deliberately playing at their intersection.
如果我们超越行为实践，关注系统元素之间的重要相互作用怎么办？如果我们不仅包括行为，还包括它们背后的信念，甚至包括游戏的组织结构呢？我们所说的“行为”是指即兴表演的实践：接受邀请，注意到更多，做大、放手、互相支持，让他们看起来很出色。我们所说的“信念”是指即兴创作者带上舞台，比如“我们互相支持”。通过组织游戏结构，我们是指支持和限制参与者活动的规则——就像每个人在一个单词的故事中只添加一个单词一样。在我们使用应用的即兴表演时，我们以前从未以一种有意义的方式关注过这些方面之间的相互作用。我们现在让这些元素都可见，并故意在它们的十字路口演奏。
If we think of team members as fish, the way they organize themselves is the fishbowl. Interestingly, as humans we are rarely aware of the structures we’re swimming in—let alone how we ourselves participate in creating them. The focus of our work now is to help participants see this fishbowl, and then intentionally make the most meaningful fishbowl possible.
如果我们把团队成员当成鱼，他们组织自己的方式就是鱼缸。有趣的是，作为人类，我们很少意识到我们正在游泳的结构——更不用说我们自己如何参与创造它们了。我们现在工作的重点是帮助参与者看到这个鱼缸，然后有意地使最有意义的鱼缸成为可能。
What follows is an overview of the one-day workshop and how an applied improv experience can be translated to day-to-day organizational worlds. Then we share a bit of who we are and how we came to this work and explain our emerging point of view in relation to the wide world of organizational thinkers. After that we provide more detail about the key components of the workshop. We wrap up with a few burning questions currently on our minds, hoping you’ll join us in exploring them over time.
下面是对为期一天的研讨会的概述，以及如何将所应用的即兴演示经验转化为日常的组织世界。然后，我们分享一些我们是谁，以及我们是如何完成这项工作的，并解释我们与广泛的组织思想家世界之间的新兴观点。之后，我们提供了有关研讨会的主要组件的更多细节。我们总结了一些棘手的问题，希望你能随着时间的推移加入我们一起探索它们。
The Fish and the Fishbowl in One Day
We play with combining three primary components in a core experience. First, we start by helping people begin to see their own fishbowl. Second, we facilitate first-hand experience with a collaborative leadership culture that is a big step away from their organizational world (no surprise to anyone reading this book, we use improv theatre). Through rich debrief, we make visible the mind-sets, practices, and structures that enable this way of working. Third, with laser focus, we expose people to everyday tools that help translate these mind-sets, behaviors, and structures directly back to their world.
我们在一个核心体验中结合了三个主要组件。首先，我们首先从帮助人们开始看到他们自己的鱼缸开始。其次，我们促进了合作领导文化的第一手体验，远离他们的组织世界（读这本书的人都不惊讶，我们使用即兴戏剧）。通过丰富的介绍，我们可以实现这种工作方式的思维、实践和结构。第三，通过激光聚焦，我们让人们接触到日常工具，帮助人们将这些心态、行为和结构直接转化回他们的世界。
We think of the day in six distinct phases: creating a learning community; proposing our point of view; curating an experience of a new way of working; translating that experience to participants’ real worlds; practicing with sample tools that make a difference; and finally, supporting each other (using the new tools) to take the experience back to work. Participants describe the journey as exhilarating, challenging, and deeply personal (with a side helping of pure fun). In a nutshell, here’s what unfolds between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
我们将这一天分为六个不同的阶段：创建一个学习社区；提出我们的观点；策划一种新的工作方式的经验；将这些经验转化为参与者的现实世界；用产生不同的样本工具练习；最后，相互支持（使用新工具）将经验带回工作岗位。参与者将这次旅程描述为令人兴奋、具有挑战性和深刻的私人体验（一边帮助纯粹的乐趣）。简而言之，以下是在上午8点半到下午5点之间展开的内容。
Creating a Learning Community: As participants arrive, funky music is playing, colorful charts are hung to frame the day’s activities, and chairs are arranged in a semicircle, a journal on each one. After a warm welcome, we plunge into a rapid-fire speed dating game, starting with, “Tell a story about your quirkiest relative” to “Share a one-minute story of your life that ends with the sentence ‘and that’s why I signed up for this workshop!’” We watch participants physically loosen up as they strive to learn each other’s names in a zippy name game, delighting in a few wild “failure WHOOPS!” as mistakes are acknowledged, not punished. And then, just as quickly as the play begins, we transition to silent reflection and journaling as participants dig deep to explore their burning questions about organizational change and describe their very real work challenges to each other.
创建一个学习社区：当参与者到达时，时髦的音乐正在播放，彩色的图表来安排一天的活动，椅子被安排成半圆形，每一个都有日志。在受到热烈的欢迎之后，我们开始了一个快速的约会游戏，以“讲述一个你最奇怪的亲戚的故事”开始，“分享你生活的一分钟故事，这就是我报名参加这个研讨会的原因！我们看着参与者在一个活泼的名字游戏中努力学习彼此的名字，享受一些疯狂的“失败欢呼！”因为错误是承认的，而不是受到惩罚。然后，就像戏剧开始一样快，我们过渡到无声的反思和日志，参与者深入探索他们关于组织变革的尖锐问题，并描述他们非常真实工作之间的挑战。
Proposing Our Point of View: In a no-more-than-ten-minute lecturette, we share the axes and arrow diagram (Figure 9.1; described in detail on page 187) and George Box’s (1979) reminder that all models are wrong and some are useful and that we think our model is quite useful.
提出我们的观点：在不超过10分钟的演讲中，我们分享轴和箭头图（图9.1；第187页详细描述）和乔治贝克斯的（1979）提醒，所有的模型都是错误的，有些是有用的，我们认为我们的模型非常有用。
Participants are invited to lean into a neighbor and explore how the axes and arrow model connects to their worlds. This is when things really get cooking, the room buzzing with lively stories of the participants’ own organizations. We struggle to interrupt the conversations as participants begin to share questions about how to actually create a collaborative leadership culture described in our model’s upper right quadrant. We’ve got their full attention and it’s barely 9:40 a.m.
参与者被邀请倾斜到邻居身上，探索轴头和箭头模型如何与他们的世界相连。这是事情真正开始烹饪的时候，房间里充斥着参与者自己组织的生动故事。我们努力打断对话，因为参与者开始分享问题，关于如何真正创建一个合作领导文化在我们的模型的右上象限。我们得到了他们的充分关注，现在是上午9点半。
Curating an Experience of a New Way of Working: It is at this point in the day that we deliver what some participants call a bombshell. We explain that we are about to take a huge step away from the world of work, with a promise that we will build on the experience to help make direct connections to their very real change challenges. “There are groups of people who work together in an ‘upper right quadrant’ way passionately and consistently,” we say, “and one of those groups are theatre improvisers.” We tell them that in approximately two hours an audience will arrive to watch a thirty-minute improv show. We announce: “You are the actors who will be performing that show. We define a successful show as one that has your audience leaning forward in their seats, delighted by your performance.” Gasps of disbelief, furrowed brows, looks of dismay, and mutterings of “You’ve got to be kidding” erupt.
策划一种新的工作方式的体验：正是在今天的这个时候，我们提供了一些参与者所说的重磅炸弹。我们解释说，我们将从工作世界迈出一大步，并承诺我们将建立在经验的基础上，帮助与他们真正的变革挑战建立直接联系。“有一群人热情地以‘右上象限’的方式一起工作，”我们说，“其中一个是戏剧即兴表演。“我们告诉他们，大约两个小时后，观众将来观看30分钟的即兴表演。我们宣布：“你将是表演那个节目的演员。我们将一场成功的节目定义为让你的观众靠在座位上，为你的表演而高兴。怀疑的喘息、皱着眉头、沮丧的表情，以及“你一定在开玩笑”的抱怨。
We introduce Jess Lee, our cherished collaborator and one of the world’s finest teachers of improvisation. In a clear, confident voice Jess promises the group that they will have everything they need to perform beautifully in two hours and that she is there to support them to do just that. With a blend of fierce “Let’s get ‘er done” and warm acceptance of whatever questions and concerns participants have, Jess introduces the practices of improvisation through exercises and skill drills that build improv muscles fast. Side-coaching like crazy, focused intently on the quickly approaching performance, Jess nimbly reinforces improv practices and affirms how the players will relate and support each other to co-create within a generous improv ensemble. The show lasts less than thirty minutes, is comprised of four performance games, and every workshop participant plays in at least two of the games.
我们介绍杰西·李，我们珍爱的合作者，世界上最好的即兴创作老师之一。杰西用清晰、自信的声音向团队承诺，他们将在两个小时内完成他们需要的一切，她会支持他们这样做。通过激烈的“让我们完成吧”和热情接受参与者的任何问题和担忧，杰西介绍了通过练习和技能练习来快速建立即兴肌肉的即兴练习。像疯狂一样侧指导，专注于快速接近的表现，杰丝灵活地加强即兴表演练习，并确认玩家将如何联系和支持，在一个慷慨的即兴表演合奏中共同创造。该节目持续不到30分钟，由四场表演游戏组成，每个工作坊的参与者至少要玩两场游戏。
In every workshop we’ve done, participants astound themselves (and each other) with their collective capacity to perform; our invited audiences (composed of friends and colleagues whom we thank with chocolate) applaud loudly, appreciating with delight the deep, courageous learning they are witnessing.
在我们所做的每一个研讨会上，参与者都惊叹于自己（以及彼此)的集体表演能力；我们被邀请的观众(由朋友和同事组成，我们感谢巧克力）大声鼓掌，高兴地欣赏他们所目睹的深刻、勇敢的学习。
Translating the Experience to Their Real World: The “big turn” in our day happens after a delicious lunch as we invite participants to unpack the shared experience they have just had. Journals in hand, participants sink into silent reflection. What was your journey? How did you feel? How did you relate with each other to co-create the performance? What did you notice Jess doing that allowed you to perform so well together? How did the structures of the games (the rules) invite you to play big, let go, and notice more? After participants have shared their (often emotional) reflections, we invite them back to the axes and arrow model。
将体验转化为他们的现实世界：我们一天中的“大转折”发生在美味的午餐之后，我们邀请参与者打开分享的内容他们刚刚有过的经验。手里拿着日记，参与者们陷入了沉默的思考之中。你的旅程是什么样子的？你的感觉怎么样？你们如何联系起来来共同创建性能？你注意到杰西做什么让你一起表现得这么好？游戏的结构（规则）如何邀请你玩大，放手，并注意到更多？在参与者分享了他们（通常是情感的）反思后，我们邀请他们回到斧头和箭头模型。
The time is finally ripe to make visible the interrelated dance among the mind-sets, structures, and practices of improvisation, and how all three elements are integral to the extraordinary improv performance they have just created together. The big idea, and the idea on which this workshop is based, is our suggestion that this way of relating—the magic they have just experienced together—is indeed possible in organizations. We promise them that we are going to spend the rest of the day looking at the integrated dance of behaviors, structures, and mind-sets that, when incorporated mindfully and deliberately, can help shift how people organize themselves to do real work, and that we will do this together by diving into their very real change challenges.
时间终于成熟了，可以看到即兴创作的心态、结构和实践之间相互关联的舞蹈，以及这三个元素是如何与他们刚刚共同创造的非凡的即兴表演不可或缺的。这个研讨会的主要想法是我们的建议，这种联系的方式——他们刚刚一起经历过的魔力——在组织中确实是可能的。我们向他们承诺，我们将花一天剩下的时间看的综合舞蹈行为，结构，和心态，当合并认真和故意，可以帮助改变人们如何组织自己做真正的工作，我们将一起通过潜入他们非常真正的变化挑战。
Practicing with Sample Tools That Make a Difference: We are so grateful to have discovered the beautiful work of inventive practitioners Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith McCandless (2013). Henri and Keith offer a toolkit of facilitation structures, which they call liberating structures. The liberating structures we introduce in this one-day workshop offer “rules of the game” just as improvisational activities have rules. One common rule in many of the structures, for example, is for participants to write for one minute in silence before turning to a partner to speak. A simple rule? Yes. Does the rule shift how a group behaves in response to a provocative question? Definitely. The most important aspect of this phase of the workshop is that we quickly hand over facilitation duties to our participants (these structures are easily facilitated and practicable). They dive in, wholeheartedly. Participants get to take these structures for a test drive on their very real questions about change in this newly co-created learning community (think fishbowl) crafted to practice new ways of being together. Our intention is twofold.
用简单的工具练习，这会很不一样！我们非常感激发现了创造性的从业者亨利·利普马诺维奇和基思Mc无蜡烛（2013）的美丽工作。亨利和基思提供了一个促进结构的工具包，他们称之为解放结构。我们在这个为期一天的研讨会中引入的解放结构提供了“游戏规则”，就像即兴活动也有规则一样。例如，许多结构中的一个共同规则是，参与者在转身向伴侣交谈之前，要沉默地写一分钟。有一个简单的规则吗？是的。这个规则是否改变了一个群体在回应一个挑衅性问题时的行为方式？当然可以。讲习班这一阶段最重要的方面是，我们迅速将便利的职责交给我们的参与者（这些结构很容易促进和切实可行）。他们全心全意地潜入水中。参与者可以用这些结构来测试他们关于这个新创建的学习社区的变化（想想鱼缸），以练习新的合作方式。我们的意图有双重。
First, we aim to nourish the growing awareness of the similarities between liberating structures and the rules of the games in their improvisation experience (and the behaviors that are invited by those structures). Second, we aim to nurture their confidence in facilitating these liberating structures by demonstrating that they too can quickly and easily create a fishbowl that unleashes collaborative intelligence back in their workplaces. This is the sweet spot in which the likelihood of meaningful translation comes alive for participants.
首先，我们的目标是培养越来越多的意识，即解放结构和游戏规则在其即兴创作体验中的相似性（以及这些结构所邀请的行为）之间的相似性。其次，我们的目标是通过证明他们也可以快速、轻松地创建一个鱼缸，在工作场所释放鱼智能，来培养他们促进这些解放结构的信心。这是对参与者进行有意义的翻译的可能性依然存在的甜蜜地点。
Supporting Each Other to Take This Back to Where They Have Influence: The day ends with a liberating structure called Troika Consulting that allows each participant to create greater clarity regarding their own change challenge and how they might move forward more effectively. Participants depart with a clear, go-forward next step for finding a situation in which they will give one of their “new structures” a whirl, just as Jenelle did with her fresh approach to her State of the Union.
互相支持，让这一切回到他们有影响的地方：这一天以一种叫做三驾马车咨询的解放结构结束，让每个参与者能够更清楚地了解自己的变革挑战以及如何更有效地前进。参与者们带着明确、前进的下一步离开，寻找他们将尝试他们的“新结构”，就像杰内尔用她对待国情咨文的新方式一样。
Who We Are and How We Came to This
Like everyone, our respective backgrounds influence what we can see and want to explore. Julie is a cultural anthropologist who fell into business by accident, working as a marketing strategist for Starbucks Coffee Company in the early 1990s. Later, taking a class with dynamic improviser Gary Hirsch (see Chapter 1) as part of an MBA program, she became fascinated by the links between improvisation and the high-performing teams she had seen and been a part of. For the next fifteen years, Julie worked with Gary and others to build On Your Feet, a global boutique business consultancy that applies improvisation as its key methodology. Karen had been a flying instructor in the Canadian Military Air Cadet program, a high school theatre teacher, university business school faculty, and had fifteen years of experience as an executive coach. When our paths crossed at an Applied Improvisation conference in 2003, our interest in collaborating began. Julie brought Karen in to help leaders in a fast-paced global organization get better at difficult conversations.
和每个人一样，我们各自的背景也会影响着我们所能看到的和想要探索的东西。朱莉是一位文化人类学家，她偶然破产了，在20世纪90年代初在星巴克咖啡公司担任营销战略家。后来，她和动态即兴表演者加里·赫希一起上课（见第一章），作为MBA课程的一部分，她对即兴表演和她看过的高表现团队之间的联系所着迷。在接下来的15年里，朱莉与加里和其他人合作，建立了在你的脚，一个全球精品商业咨询公司，应用即兴创作作为其关键方法。凯伦曾是加拿大军事航空学员项目的飞行教练，高中戏剧教师，大学商学院的教员，并有15年的高管教练经验。当我们在2003年的一次应用即兴创作会议上相遇时，我们对合作的兴趣开始了。朱莉带着凯伦进来帮助一个快节奏的全球组织的领导者们更好地进行困难的对话。
In partnership with talented theatre director Ian Prinsloo, Karen invited Julie to the Banff Centre to help incubate a week-long Creating Positive Change Program. We had a hunch then that exploring the creative processes of theatre and improvisation would help organizational leaders create change more effectively. We explored that hunch through five years of vigorous experimentation at the Banff Centre and with our own clients, alongside our respective doctoral journeys focusing on leadership development and organizational change.
与才华横溢的戏剧导演伊恩·普林斯卢合作，凯伦邀请朱莉到班夫中心帮助孵化为期一周的创造积极改变计划。当时我们有一种预感，探索戏剧和即兴创作的创作过程将帮助组织领导者更有效地创造变革。我们在班夫中心和我们自己的客户进行了五年的有力实验，探索了这种直觉，同时我们各自的博士之旅也专注于领导力发展和组织变革。
Now, we are evolving this work as part of a fabulous (and fun) consulting collective, Deeper Funner Change. We facilitate game-changing collaboration initiatives to build culture, leadership, and teams (Figure 9.2).
现在，我们正在发展这项工作，作为一个极好的（和有趣的）咨询集体的一部分，更深入的有趣的改变。我们促进了改变游戏规则的协作计划，以建立文化、领导能力和团队（图9.2）。
What We’re Assuming
We know today’s organizations must meet the challenges of rapidly shifting environments. Across all sectors and in all shapes and sizes, organizations are encountering complex problems that no single thinker or decision-maker can solve on his or her own. Geography, the speed of changing markets, advancements in technology, and demands for increased transparency combine to demand shifts in the way we organize. Our newest generations joining the workforce are better educated than ever before. They seek meaning, purpose, and values-driven organizations in which to contribute, learn, and develop. In our minds, all this makes organizations ripe for new mind-sets, practices, and structures as they explore new ways of organizing themselves. We see unleashing collaborative intelligence to develop new, collaborative leadership cultures as a potent place to focus.
我们知道，今天的组织必须应对快速变化的环境所面临的挑战。在所有部门和各种形状和规模，组织正在遇到复杂的问题，没有一个思想家或决策者能够自己解决。地理、市场变化的速度、技术的进步和对提高透明度的需求结合了我们组织方式的转变。我们最新一代加入职场的员工比以往任何时候都受过更好的教育。他们寻求意义、目的和价值驱动的组织来贡献、学习和发展。在我们看来，所有这些都使组织在探索新的组织方法时时机成熟，可以形成新的心态、实践和结构。我们认为释放协作智慧来发展新的协作领导文化是一个强有力的焦点。
Leadership Is a Process That Happens between People
We define “leadership” not as what an individual in a position of power is or does. Instead, thanks to Bill Drath and his colleagues (2008) at the Center for Creative Leadership, we define it as a relational, social process that produces direction (where we are going), alignment (how our work fits together so we make progress), and commitment (how we stay inspired by a shared goal, above our individual interests).
我们将“领导”定义为处于权力地位的个人现在或行为。相反，感谢比尔·德拉斯和他的同事（2008）创意领导中心，我们将其定义为一个关系性的社会过程，我们将产生方向（方向）、协调（我们的工作如何协调一致，以便我们取得进展）和承诺（我们如何保持共同目标的激励，高于我们的个人利益）
Aligning with psychological anthropologist Barbara Rogoff (2003), we define “culture” as the common ways a group pursues a shared goal they care about. This definition assumes that while culture influences individuals, individuals also influence culture. An organization’s leadership culture can be defined as the common ways organization members work together to create direction, alignment, and commitment.
结合心理人类学家芭芭拉·Rogoff（2003），我们将“文化”定义为一个群体追求他们所关心的共同目标的共同方式。这个定义假设，虽然文化会影响个体，但个体也会影响文化。组织的领导文化可以定义为组织成员共同努力以创建方向、一致性和承诺的共同方式。
The Must-Have Is Relentless Learning
Individual and collective learning is essential to co-creating. Learning is not always comfortable. Working collaboratively demands rigor and discipline. A myth that deserves busting is that collaborative cultures are wishy-washy and loose-y goose-y. One of Robert Kegan and Lisa Lahey’s (2016: 35) clients, for example, describes their deliberately developmental organization committed to both continuous learning and business results: “Growth and development does not always equal ‘feeling good.’ Our culture is not about maximizing the minutes you feel good at work. We don’t define flourishing by sitting-around- campfire moments. We ask people to do seemingly impossible things ... and you won’t be given any time to sit on the sidelines and observe.”
个人和集体的学习对共同创造至关重要。学习并不总是舒适的。合作工作需要严谨和纪律。一个值得打破的神话是，合作文化是空洞的和松散的。例如，RobertKegan和LisaLahey（2016：35）的客户描述了他们的发展组织，致力于持续学习和商业发展成果：“成长和发展并不总是等于‘感觉良好’。“我们的文化不是为了最大化你工作良好的时间。我们不会通过坐在篝火旁的时刻来定义繁荣。我们要求人们做一些看似不可能做的事情……你也不会有任何时间坐在一旁观察。”
Organizations all over the world are breaking new ground, living into the intersection of adaptive learning and collaborative co-creation. Few people are arguing against transforming the ways we organize. The challenge, it seems, is figuring out how to do it and where to start.
世界各地的组织正在开创新的领域，进入了适应学习和协作合作创造的交叉路口。很少有人反对改变我们的组织方式。挑战似乎是弄清楚如何这样做，以及从哪里开始。
Seeing, Experiencing, and Creating a New Fishbowl
As mentioned before, this workshop combines three primary components in a core experience: (1) Helping people see their own fishbowl, (2) creating a first- hand experience with a truly collaborative leadership culture, and finally (3) exposing them to tools to help translate these mind-sets, behaviors, and structures directly back to their world. Below we describe each component in detail and how combining them unlocks their power.
如前所述，本研讨会结合了核心体验的三个主要组件：（1)帮助人们看到自己的鱼缸，(2)创建具有真正协作的领导文化的第一手体验，最后(3）让他们接触工具来帮助将这些心态、行为和结构直接回到他们的世界。下面我们将详细描述每个组件，以及组合它们是如何解锁它们的能力。
1. Help People See Their Fishbowl: The Axes and the Arrow--1.帮助人们看到他们的鱼缸：斧头和箭头
We use two axes to characterize the four types of organizational fishbowls we typically see (see Figure 9.1). Imagine a line in front of you, stretching from your left to your right. This line represents a spectrum, the distribution of voices (how many and which voices) invited to weigh in and make significant decisions. At the left end of the line we have one voice, the boss. On the opposite end, to your right, we hear from all voices: frontline workers, administrative assistants, people from up, down, and across the entire organization. This left-to-right spectrum of one-to-many voices is the horizontal axis of our model.
我们使用两个轴来描述我们通常看到的四种组织鱼缸（见图9.1）。想象一下在你前面有一条线，从你的左边延伸到你的右边。这条线代表了一个频谱，分配的声音（有多少和哪种声音）被邀请参与并做出重大决定。在左边的左边，我们有一个声音，老板。另一方面，在你的右边，我们也能听到来自所有的人的声音：前线工人、行政助理、来自上下和整个组织的人。这个从左到右的一对多声音的频谱是我们的模型的水平轴。
Now, imagine another line that runs vertically, bisecting that first line, from ceiling to floor. This line also represents a spectrum, the way information is shared within this organization. At the bottom of the vertical axis is a traditional organizational chart in which information flow is controlled and typically moves down from the leader at the top, from layer to layer, toward the rest of the organization at the bottom. While information may also move up from the bottom, in our observation it rarely gets more than halfway up to the senior positions at the top. When it does, it’s often been misconstrued, censored, or watered down. Back to this axis, at the top of the vertical axis the traditional organizational chart has been replaced with a webbed network in which information flow is fluid. Information passes through the network in all directions and in many different ways, evenly distributed and interconnected. People have immediate, easy access to all data and information, whenever they need it.
现在，想象一下另一条垂直运行的线，把第一条线从天花板到地板一分为二。这一行还表示一个频谱，即在这个组织内共享信息的方式。在垂直轴的底部是一个传统的组织结构图，其中信息流被控制，通常从顶部的领导者从一层到另一层向下移动到底部的其他组织。虽然信息也可能从底部向上移动，但在我们的观察中，它很少会上升到顶部的高级职位的一半。如果这样做，它经常被误解、审查或淡化。回到这个轴，在垂直轴的顶部，传统的组织结构图已经被一个信息流流动的网络网络所取代。信息通过网络的各个方向，以许多不同的方式传递，均匀分布和相互连接。人们在任何时候需要的时候，就可以立即、方便地访问所有的数据和信息。
Where do most organizations you know operate most of the time? Of course, these axes are not binary. They each represent a spectrum. Depending on the project, role, or context, input on decisions might be gathered from one or a handful of people (left) or a large group (right). Information may flow formally and hierarchically (floor) or in a networked way (ceiling). In our minds, no quadrant is inherently bad or good. Each is, however, well-suited to a specific set of circumstances.
你知道的大多数组织大部分时间都在哪里运营的？当然，这些轴并不是二进制的。它们各自都代表了一个光谱。根据项目、角色或上下文，有关决策的输入可能从一个或少数人（左）或一个大群体（右）中收集。信息可以正式和分层地（楼层）或以网络方式（天花板）流动。在我们看来，没有一个象限本身是坏的或好的。然而，每一种方法都非常适合一套特定的情况。
Top-Down Command-and-Control Leadership Culture (Lower Left)
Like Jenelle, most of our clients self-identify as living somewhere in the bottom left quadrant. We refer to this quadrant as a traditional way of organizing: top- down, centralized command-and-control. One or a handful of people make key decisions, and most organizational information flows downward from the top. This approach was an improvement over the days of divine rights and getting your head chopped off if you didn’t do what you were told. The bottom left quadrant is not bad or wrong; there are contexts in which it serves quite well. Think of environments that are relatively stable and known, the “only game in town” without pressure to innovate, or that attract members who like the structure and predictability of a top-down approach.
和珍妮尔一样，我们的大多数客户都自称住在左下角的某个地方。我们将这个象限称为一种传统的组织方式：前下，集中的命令和控制。一个或少数人做出关键的决策，大多数组织信息从顶部向下流动。这种方法是对神权时代的一种进步，如果你不做你被告知的事，你的头就会被砍掉。左下角的象限不是坏的或错的；在某些情况下，它服务得很好。想想那些相对稳定和已知的环境，“城里唯一一个没有创新压力的游戏”，或者吸引那些喜欢自上而下的方法的结构和可预测性的成员
This doesn’t describe what most of our clients want. Instead, they come to us with hopes of creating the conditions for ongoing change. They want to operate in a more collaborative, agile, and innovative culture.
这并不能描述我们的大多数客户想要什么。相反，他们来到我们这里，希望能为持续的变革创造条件。他们希望在一个更具协作性、敏捷性和创新性的文化中运作。
Collaborative Leadership Culture (Upper Right) 协作领导文化（右上角）
As we’ve described, some fear that organizing in an upper right quadrant manner implies loose-y goose-y laissez faire workplaces in which few decisions get made and chaos is the norm. Early exploration of these forms (e.g. McCauley et al. 2008; Laloux 2014; Huffaker 2017) shows quite the opposite! Collaborative behaviors, expressive of certain mind-sets and invited and reinforced by specific structures, when systematically and rigorously practiced do allow groups to create and evolve in response to their rapidly changing environments. Many people have a say in the decisions that affect them, and authority for making decisions is distributed across the system to those close to the work. Information flows fluidly across networks of relationships; cross-functional groups regularly come together to cross-pollinate perspectives; and individuals proactively share and solicit information and insights with and from others for the sake of collective success (Laloux 2014; Huffaker 2017).
正如我们所描述的，一些人担心，以右上象限的方式组织意味着自由放任的工作场所，很少做出决定，混乱是常态。对这些形式的早期探索。McCauley等人。2008；Laloux2014；赫芬克2017)则恰恰相反！协作行为，表达某些思维集，并受到特定结构的邀请和加强，当系统和严格的实践时，确实允许团队能够创造和进化，以应对他们快速变化的环境。许多人对影响他们的决策有发言权，而做出决策的权力在整个系统中被分配给那些接近工作的人。信息在关系网络中流畅地流动；跨职能团体经常聚集在一起，形成跨种传粉的观点；为了集体的成功，个人积极地与他人分享和征求信息和见解(Laloux2014；Huffaker2017)。
Open-Boundary (Upper Left) and Hub-and-Spoke (Lower Right) Organizations
开放式边界（左上）和中心和分支（右下）组织
We don’t spend too much time on these quadrants because—at least at this point —we see them as less critical to understanding the change in leadership culture most helpful for contemporary organizations. Understandably, a few investigative participants come up to us during a break to ask about them.
我们不会在这些象限上花费太多的时间，因为至少在这一点上，我们认为它们对于理解对当代组织最有帮助的领导文化的变化并不那么重要，可以理解的是，一些调查参与者在休息时来向我们询问他们
We think that the upper left quadrant can best be typified by open-boundary communities where information flows fluidly and proactively across a network, yet one or a few people control ultimate decisions. A venture like open-source software Linux is a good example. The lower right quadrant is typified by a franchise organization with a hub-and-spoke configuration. License-granting headquarters sit at the center, making key decisions and pushing them out to member franchisees. Most information flows outward from HQ to the franchisees.
我们认为左上象限最好是开放边界社区，其中信息通过网络流动和主动流动，但一个或少数人控制着最终决策。像开源软件Linux这样的企业就是一个很好的例子。右下象限的典型特征为具有中心和分支配置的特许经营组织。许可授予总部坐落在中心，做出关键的决定，并将其推给会员加盟商。大多数信息从总部向外流向特许加盟商。
2. To Understand a Different Leadership Culture, You Must First Experience It
Playing improv games and observing herself in real time enabled Jenelle to notice more about her drive to control a situation. She loved being able to jump in to a game, but it was hard for her to share control and wait her turn, or watch others stumble and not be able to fix it. Then hearing others reflect on how it felt to play with her opened her eyes to the impact her style might be having on those around her. She had always thought that her ability to get things done was a strength—now she was seeing that it often resulted in others not feeling heard. Jenelle described the improv as “totally getting out of myself and onto the other side, their side, the other peoples’ side.” Our improv coach extraordinaire, Jess, put it this way:
玩即兴表演游戏和实时观察自己，让珍妮尔能够更多地注意到她控制情况的动力。她喜欢能够跳进一个游戏，但她很难分享控制，等待轮到她，或者看着其他人跌倒，无法解决它。然后听到别人思考玩她的感觉，她睁开眼睛看到她的风格可能对周围人的影响。她一直认为自己完成事情的能力是一种力量——现在她看到这经常让别人感觉听不到。杰内尔形容即兴表演“完全摆脱了我，在另一边，他们的一边，别人的一边。”我们杰出的即兴表演教练杰西，这样说
The performance gives them real feedback because it’s a test. Not a pass/fail test, but they can’t help but learn from this. They will have new information about themselves after this performance ... about how ensemble works, how they feel as part of it, what it’s like to play big and trust each other under pressure. “I think this will be easy” doesn’t wash; strengths and weaknesses are now laid out.2
性能给了他们真正的反馈，因为这是一个测试。这不是一个通过/失败的考试，但他们不禁从中学习。演出结束后，他们会获得关于自己的新信息……关于合奏是如何工作的，他们作为其中一部分的感受，在压力下大力发挥和相互信任是什么感觉。“我认为这很容易”不会洗；现在阐述了优点和弱点。2
To prepare participants, Jess side-coaches to focus everyone on the fast- approaching show. “What went well? What helped it go well? Let’s do more of that in your performance!” She encourages, teaches, and challenges all same time: “Every one of you will be out there performing together, soon, and we have a job to do. High stakes. We are doing these drills and honing these skills for something real, not abstract. We have one project to work on—your show. And, by the way, we are going to be wildly successful together.”
为了让参与者做准备，杰西的教练把每个人都集中在快速到来的节目上。“一切都进行得很顺利呢？”是什么帮助它进行得很顺利？让我们在你的表演中多做这些！她鼓励、教导和挑战所有人同时：“你们每个人很快就会一起表演，我们有工作要做。高风险。我们做这些练习，磨练这些技能是为了一些真实的，而不是抽象的东西。我们有一个项目要做，那就是你的节目。顺便说一下，我们在一起将会大获成功。”
Participants are consistently far more successful than they thought they would be. As Jess reminds us, “It’s not possible to simply tell people that this improv way of relating is doable and that they can all be great—they must experience it. When they do, it’s a game changer.”
参与者一直比他们想象的要成功得多。正如杰西提醒我们的那样，“不可能简单地告诉人们这种即兴的联系方式是可行的，他们都可以很伟大——他们必须体验到它。”当他们这样做的时候，它就会改变游戏规则。”
3. Translating Integral Elements of Improv to Day-to-Day Organizational Life
We are exploring how to translate one discipline that does collaborative leadership culture exceedingly well, theatrical improvisation, to one that does not yet, organizational life. Again, we believe we can best help organizations by focusing on the multiple parts of this complex dance: the behaviors, certainly, but also the beliefs and structures. We believe it is their interplay that results in an agile, responsive, continuously evolving organization.
我们正在探索如何将一种非常擅长合作领导文化的学科，戏剧即兴创作，转化为一种尚未组织的生活。同样，我们相信我们可以最好地通过关注这个复杂的舞蹈的多个部分来帮助组织：当然，行为，还有信仰和结构。我们相信，正是他们的相互作用导致了一个敏捷、响应迅速、不断发展的组织。
For us, the linchpin of translation was illuminating the structural elements, or rules of the games, that invite and reinforce collaborative behaviors: liberating structures from Lipmanowicz and McCandless. What we recognized in liberating structures were the same rigorous structural design elements built into basic improv theatre games: articulation of a clearly shared purpose, every person encouraged to participate, turn-taking, working rapidly within a constrained timeframe, and no single person seen as more important than any other person. (For a step-by-step example of a liberating structure, see Workbook 9.2.) Of course, liberating structures from Lipmanowicz and McCandless. For example, many of Sivasailam Thiagarajan’s (TheThiagiGroup) energizing frame games include them. There are multiple, existing toolkits that use similar structural design elements to invite collaboration during real work tasks such as giving feedback, sharing responsibility, and strategizing.
对我们来说，翻译的关键是照亮了游戏的结构元素或规则，它们邀请和加强协作行为：将结构从利普马诺维奇和Mc无蜡烛中解放出来。我们认识到的解放结构是同样严格的结构设计元素建立在基本的即兴戏剧游戏：明确一个明确共享的目的，每个人都被鼓励参与，转换，在有限的时间框架内快速工作，没有一个人被认为比任何人都更重要。（有关解放结构的逐步示例，请参阅工作簿9.2。）当然，将结构从利普马诺维奇和无蜡烛手中解放出来。例如，许多SivasailamThiagarajan（田组）的能量框架游戏都包括它们。有多个现有的工具包使用类似的结构设计元素在实际工作任务中邀请协作，如提供反馈、共享责任和制定策略。
The aim is to unleash the collective capacity of a group to co-create. When these structural elements are present, the interpersonal challenges of hierarchy, style, lack of skill or self-awareness so common in organizations (and wherever there are human beings) are less likely to get in the way of integrating diverse perspectives into shared solutions.
其目的是释放一个团体共同创造的集体能力。当这些结构元素存在时，层次结构、风格、组织（以及哪里有人类）中常见的缺乏技能或自我意识的人际挑战不太可能妨碍将不同的观点整合到共享的解决方案中。
So, this third component of our core workshop is experience with toolkits that invite improv practices every day at work. By giving these a spin on their work challenges, participants see that improvisational ways of working help them get better results on their real stuff. With a little practice and courage, these toolkits also provide scaffolding for taking this way of working back to real projects and colleagues. This is making a bigger difference than our work ever has. A client put it like this: “Working this way is like having a whole new superpower.”
因此，我们核心研讨会的第三个部分是每天邀请即兴演示实践的工具包。通过介绍他们的工作挑战，参与者看到即兴的工作方式帮助他们在真正的东西上获得更好的结果。通过一点练习和勇气，这些工具包也为将这种方式工作回真正的项目和同事提供了脚手架。这比我们的工作有了更大的不同。一个客户这样说：“这样工作就像拥有一个全新的超级大国。”
Conclusion
There’s no doubt that teaching improv practices with a fabulous debrief gives people a new sense of what’s possible. It stretches and frees them, and begins mind-set changes for some. What we are suggesting is that if sustained change in a group’s way of working is the goal, this is not enough. Organizational culture also includes structures and mind-sets. Structures can be particularly helpful— especially simple, fast-paced structures—for translating collaborative leadership culture from improvisation to the change challenges of day-to-day work.
毫无疑问，用一个精彩的演示文稿来教授即兴演示实践会给人们一种新的感觉。它伸展和释放他们，并开始对一些人的心态的改变。我们的建议是，如果一个团队的工作方式的持续改变是目标，那么这是不够的。组织文化还包括结构和心态。结构对将协作领导文化从即兴创作转化为日常创作的变化挑战特别有帮助，尤其是简单、快节奏的结构。
In our core one-day workshop, we make visible three aspects of leadership culture: mind-sets, behaviors, and structures. We use improvisational theatre to give people a visceral experience of what it’s like to engage in a leadership culture where the mind-sets, behaviors, and structures support and enable radical collaboration. Finally, we help people translate collaborative leadership culture to their day-to-day work, at a scale appropriate to their circle of influence.
在我们为期一天的核心研讨会上，我们展示了领导文化的三个方面：心态、行为和结构。我们使用即兴戏剧给人们一个发自内心的体验，参与领导文化的心态、行为、结构支持和实现激进的合作。最后，我们帮助人们将合作领导文化转化为他们的日常工作，以适应他们的影响范围。
Is this approach a slam-dunk? Of course not. Does it still take courage on the part of participants? Yes! Is it for everyone? The mysterious algorithm of readiness for developing a collaborative leadership culture is a topic more suitable for a long conversation over a good glass of wine than for the end of this chapter.
这种方法是一个扣篮篮吗？当然不是。参与者们是否还需要勇气吗？是它适合每个人吗？准备发展协作领导文化的神秘算法是一个更适合用一杯好葡萄酒进行长期交谈的话题，而不是在这一章的结尾。
Moving forward, we have three big questions on our minds. One question is connected to the open enrollment nature of the workshop in which Jenelle participated. How might we help participants see that the change they long for requires deliberate collaboration with the people actually creating change with them? We want them leaving feeling both hopeful and challenged. We know that their new learning has a high evaporation rate unless they can invite their colleagues back at work to engage with them in this new kind of fishbowl. Another question we’re excited to explore is how to help intact teams or cross- functional groups from within an organization use this kind of one-day experience to self-assess where they are as a group of collaborators. By identifying their strengths and weaknesses, we’d like to learn how to help them determine what needs to come next to develop their capacity to unleash collaborative intelligence in response to an organizational priority. Our third big question revolves around how much openness, readiness, and explicit support is needed from senior organizational leaders for this new kind of collaborative fishbowl to flourish in an existing organization.
接下来，我们心里有三个大问题。有一个问题与杰妮尔参加的研讨会的公开招生性质有关。我们如何帮助参与者看到他们渴望的改变需要与实际创造改变的人蓄意合作？我们希望他们离开时感到既有希望又有挑战。我们知道，他们的新学习有很高的蒸发率，除非他们可以邀请他们的同事回来工作，与他们参与这种新的鱼缸。我们很高兴要探讨的另一个问题是如何帮助组织内部完整的团队或跨职能团队使用这种一天的经验来自我评估他们作为一群合作者的位置。通过确定他们的优势和劣势，我们希望了解如何帮助他们确定接下来需要做些什么，以发展他们发布协作智能以响应组织优先事项的能力。我们的第三个大问题是，为了在现有组织中繁荣发展，这种新的协作鱼缸，需要多少开放、准备和高级组织领导人得到明确的支持。
We know that it makes a difference when big shots with money and mojo are on board. We also believe, and we’ve even got some proof, that profound organizational change can start anywhere—it does not need to begin at the top. So, we will leave you with this: how do we debunk the myth that the person who is large and in charge must lead co-creative change? We know that change can start anywhere. We believe that our world needs collaborative leadership cultures, now more than ever。
我们知道，当有钱和魔力的大镜头在船上时，它会有所不同。我们还相信，我们甚至有一些证据表明，深刻的组织变革可以从任何地方开始——它不需要从顶端开始。所以，我们将留给你这个：我们如何揭穿一个神话，即庞大的人必须领导共同创造的变革？我们知道，改变可以从任何地方开始。我们相信，我们的世界现在比以往任何时候都更需要协作的领导文化。
With this approach, we think we are onto something. Our story is still unfolding. We are learning our way forward with our clients—people like Jenelle—and we invite you to be wildly curious with us. Our hope is that you will connect these stories and our strategies with your own questions and observations. It will be at this junction we all learn the most.
有了这种方法，我们认为我们正在做一些事情。我们的故事仍在展开。我们正在向客户学习像Jenelle这样的人，我们邀请您对我们非常好奇。我们希望你能把这些故事和我们的策略与你自己的问题和观察联系起来。它将是在这个十字路口，我们都学习的最多。