Folks, I am sorry I have been out of the loop for so long! It is good to see you are moving on…
I have begun to use the IF process in an upper-level class this term. The group is small (9) and pretty homogeneous: all are anthropology majors. This is an applied (hands-on) research class and students will be using IF to discuss/decide how to approach specific research issues/questions.
I modeled the process last week when we tried to identify the general research problem/question. The approach proved very helpful. We started with (a) what are our main concerns? Moved to (b) what approaches can we use to explore them? And finally (c) what might be the implications of these choices?
Real-life constraints facilitated narrowing down the options. Most students work and commute, so we must focus on college/academic-life issues. Students don’t have too much time to conduct the research project. (We have lost 3 classes due to snow days!) Students seek to “make a difference” given the applied dimension. The discussion of approaches and implications helped us distinguish feasible/non-feasible projects.
From now on, student pairs will lead & coordinate weekly research activities exploring particular aspects. Students will be expected to use the IF approach to brainstorm/identify research strategies, perceived consequences and implications. After the group examines possibilities & decides which route to follow, the leaders will design data collection forms and coordinate the group effort. These are my plans, of course. We will find out how it goes!
3 Comments
Hi Maria: Do you see any lessons in your approach for the notions of “strategic planning” or “organizational development”?I’m currently working with an environmental consulting firm on adaptive use of IF process for planning purposes. The issue they are hung up on is whether the process of developing the possibilities is too determinative if the actual decision makers ae involved. They feel that a more disinterested group of consultants should perform the pre-work of possibility development as a foundation for deliberation by the decision makers.I was just wondering how that thinking might play out in a series of courses that built on each other.Another group is wondering how to use the process in contingency planning in military and emergency relief planning.warm regards Dennis
Hi Dennis!Good question. I would think that a consulting body is better to generate a broad range possibilities. Since “outsiders” are less aware of the real (material & organizational) constraints, they should be able to think “out of the box” more easily than decision-makers. Their ideas could then be used as springboard for decision-makers. Although as an anthropologist I would prefer this approach, it adds time (and cost) to the process! The experience with my class this term suggests that a “consulting body” should be somewhat familiar with the problem area, however. My students are learning methods for the first time and their imagination seems limited! We are spending lots of time clarifying the boundaries — fundamental constraints — that will limit possibilities.
Thanks, those are helpful observations. I’m still working on the ideas about application to strategic planning and organizational development and will be for some time.Even in our projects the initial meetings are spent in exploring boundaries and process. That is why I like to use “repeat” participants for part of my panels: there is productivity gain from familiarity. DB