Communicative Spaces for Societal and Organisational Challenges: Comparison
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Satu Kalliola and Version 1 by Satu Kalliola.

The current turbulent societies produce new society and organisation level challenges continuously. Communicative Spaces are concrete or virtual spaces where people conduct dialogues about significant large scope issues affecting their lives and make plans to overcome the constraints together. In the following definitions and practical applications are given. 

  • communicative spaces
  • organisational learning
  • dialogue
  • action research
  • societal and organisational challenges

Introduction

A communicative space is created when societal or organisational issues are opened up for discussion and participants experience their interaction as fostering equal expressions of diverse views and a mutual understanding of what to do. [1] Among the prerequisites of a communicative space along the lines of its definition are the broad participation of all concerned and a structured discussion that is facilitated towards a joint agreement of concrete action steps by combining the different voices, coming from all power or other status positions. The process of combining different voices involves not only expressing one’s perspectives but hearing the others and learning from them in a dialogical manner. [2]

Applications

Dialogue Conferences and other participatory action research (PAR) based methods have been used to apply communicative spaces in meeting concrete societal and organisational challenges. The entry presented here is based on experiences of applying these methods in public sector work organisations adjusting to recession economy by new modes of operation [3]  https://www.mdpi.com/2078-1547/12/2/25/htm 

Often a vision based collaborative process allows the participants to gain new resources and create concrete action plans by pondering how the obstacles hindering the vision can be overcome [4]. Formal authority is needed to carry out action plans, but otherwise authority is used in a manner that does not disrupt the safety of a communicative space. When communicative space is experienced as a safe, also the participants who are not used to exercise their voice publicly will participate in dialogues and may in this way learn to enhance their agency. [3] Although mainly community based, dialogical methods can be combined with individual based methods, like specific agency and identity work, if found relevant [5] [5]. All the outcomes, creating action plans together, gaining new resources through learning from others and enhancing agency, contribute to the overall quality of working life.

Dialogical methods have turned out to be malleable enough to be modified according to varying circumstances, provided that the dialogue starts from scratch, without any fixed preliminary solutions or change designs. Communicative spaces are most often face-to face meetings and seminars, where dialogues are conducted. Also, on-line dialogues are possible, which broadens their applicability to issues crossing organisational and other borders. For example, sustainability issues offer a huge challenge for both face-to-face and on-line communicative spaces.

Dialogue Conferences and other participatory action research (PAR) based methods have been used to apply communicative spaces in meeting concrete societal and organisational challenges. The entry presented here is based on experiences of applying these methods in public sector work organisations adjusting to recession economy by new modes of operation [3]  https://www.mdpi.com/2078-1547/12/2/25 .

Often a vision based collaborative process allows the participants to gain new resources and create concrete action plans by pondering how the obstacles hindering the vision can be overcome  [4]. Formal authority is needed to carry out action plans, but otherwise authority is used in a manner that does not disrupt the safety of a communicative space. When communicative space is experienced as a safe, also the participants who are not used to exercise their voice publicly will participate in dialogues and may in this way learn to enhance their agency. [3] Although mainly community based, dialogical methods can be combined with individual based methods, like specific agency and identity work, if found relevant [5]. All the outcomes, creating action plans together, gaining new resources through learning from others and enhancing agency, contribute to the overall quality of working life.

Dialogical methods have turned out to be malleable enough to be modified according to varying circumstances, provided that the dialogue starts from scratch, without any fixed preliminary solutions or change designs. Communicative spaces are most often face-to face meetings and seminars, where dialogues are conducted. Also, on-line dialogues are possible, which broadens their applicability to issues crossing organisational and other borders. For example, sustainability issues offer a huge challenge for both face-to-face and on-line communicative spaces.

 

References

  1. Stephen Kemmis. Exploring the relevance of critical theory for action research in the footsteps of Jurgen Habermas in Handbook of Action Research. Participatory Inquiry and Practice; Reason, Peter & Bradbury, Hilary, Eds.; Sage: London, UK, 2001; pp. 91-102.
  2. Olav Eikeland; Action research and organisational learning: a Norwegian approach to doing action research in complex organisations. Educational Action Research 2012, 20, 267-290, 10.1080/09650792.2012.676303.
  3. Satu Kalliola; Tuula Heiskanen; Experiences of Opening Up Communicative Spaces for Large-Scope Issues. Challenges 2021, 12, 25, 10.3390/challe12020025.
  4. Satu Kalliola; Tuula Heiskanen; Riikka Kivimäki; What Works in Democratic Dialogue?. Social Sciences 2019, 8 (3), 101, 103390/socsci8030101.
  5. Satu Kalliola; Salme Mahlakaarto; Methods of Promoting Professional Agency at Work. Challenges 2020, 11, 30, 10.3390/challe11020030.
More
Video Production Service