What conversations to regenerate our organizations today?

This article is the full version of the one published in abbreviated form in Les Echos on 7 December last. Written by François Cadet, coach of leaders and organizations, member of our Strategic Committee, and Jean Pagès, coach of leaders and founder of the French Institute of "Appreciative Inquiry", it reminds us how vital today for the development and sustainability of organizations are the benefits linked to the development of exchanges and open relationships based on a spirit of co-construction. It draws, among other things, on the references shared with All Leaders Initiative from the work of two great thinkers of contemporary philosophy, Hartmut Rosa and François Jullien. We, our loved ones, live or work in organizations; we interact with them in multiple ways and we are familiar with these named and visible entities that meet our needs with products or services, commercial or non-commercial. For organizations are at the heart of our economic and social life and, if they function, it is because of individuals who exchange with each other, both on their professional matters and on their own relationships. These exchanges take up a large part of our time and attention, their nature and the social bonds that result from them are therefore crucial, in a context that is constantly evolving to which they are inextricably linked. Thus, the complexity of the world in which we live, the generalisation of remote work, uncertainties about the future, and the ever-increasing acceleration of changes are having a strong impact on organizations and the conversations taking place within them. New questions therefore arise not only about the characteristics of our exchanges, but also about these major issues linked to them. What conversations might seem desirable and useful to address them? In what frame of mind, how should they be implemented, with what practices, for what results? Before attempting to answer these questions, let us set the scene!

1. Conversing today… • So close, so far: distancing

and digitalisation** The idea of distancing is familiar to us from measures related to the covid 19 pandemic. This new relationship with others, more physically distant, will have lasting consequences in our social relationships, particularly with the continuation of high levels of remote work. This growth in remote work, linked to the digitalisation of our lifestyles, is both a beneficial and lasting evolution, while strengthening and perpetuating this social distancing and the modification of our exchanges. It is therefore important to find the right balance. Thus, whilst in many respects remote work facilitates communication, whilst it allows undeniable gains in time and efficiency, it also eliminates informal, "free" times when we bump into colleagues in corridors, when we chat in the shared workspace, at the coffee machine, at lunch together….Yet it is all these moments that allow us to step back, to exchange on "non-essential" subjects but often at the heart of the life of the organization, to better oxygenate ourselves, to feel like members of a collective, to be surprised by ideas we hadn't thought of… Remote work is results-oriented, in a logic of efficiency: the video conference is scheduled for a given objective. We are in instrumental and functional communication. Moreover, the sharing of emotions is more difficult through the screen: distance communication cuts us off from a spontaneous and living part of the relationship itself, although, for example, experienced coaches, attentive and sensitive, succeed in generating deep and learning conversations with their clients and in pursuing constructive support. Finally, if we consider the situation from the angle of consistency and cohesion of organizations, it appears today that overly intensive and systematic use of remote work, in addition to partly dissolving the sense of belonging and bonds within teams, can consequently weaken the capacity to collaborate transversely and creatively across the organization.

• Polarisation There also appears in

our society a tendency towards vindictive polarisation of opinions which reinforces distancing between people, of which it is also the source. This is too often the case with societal or political debates, which generate phenomena on social networks, and more generally in the media, of camp against camp, or "witch hunts" against anyone who doesn't think as expected: this trend which seems to be spreading tends to make the other, who is different from oneself, appear as a threat or an anomaly. In this context, the a priori disqualification of different thoughts and the retreat into one's opinions can overcome the contradictory debate and listening that underpin constructive relationships. We see, underlying this trend, a fear of being different, of being criticised for one's ideas, or even attacked, and of not having a place in the collective. This induces, in certain circumstances, a tendency to bridle, or even stifle, one's singularity and the expression of what we feel or what we think, to follow the current and not "make waves". Difficult under these conditions to be oneself with others! Although this trend is rather visible in society, particularly around societal and political issues, it also seems likely to develop more in business.

**•

Acceleration and alienation** The phenomena of acceleration and alienation seem to us to be also key for thinking about exchanges today. The German philosopher Hartmut Rosa shows that, as our economies are founded on growth, it is necessary each year to accelerate production, which plunges us into an increasingly frenzied pace. "The problem with acceleration (…) is that it urges us, or even forces us, to content ourselves with the appropriation of the world (…) what the world has to offer - in terms of places, cultural goods and treasures of knowledge - becomes for us likely to be bought, knowable, within reach, accessible. But the reverse of all this is alienation"1. Hartmut Rosa thus defines alienation: "To be alienated is to become a stranger to oneself, to no longer feel one's emotions"2, burnout being the most terrible manifestation. It is therefore an inability to appreciate the world and to enter into relationship with others.

**2. Some issues around

social bonds** This context of distancing, polarisation and acceleration risks leading to a weakening of bonds within organizations. Yet relationships, conversations and exchanges constitute the heart, the substrate of organizations. Is not an organization a set of people maintaining living and constantly evolving bonds? In other words, a permanent movement of organization created by all the exchanges between its members? Thus, the place of exchanges and bonds between people is central and the understanding and development of these bonds constitute major issues both for the satisfaction at work of individuals and for the performance of the organization. This is why the sense of belonging to a collective, of having a recognised place within it, and the capacity to freely "resonate" with the world and thus with others are the subject of particular attention, as emphasised by German philosopher Hartmut Rosa in response to the risk of alienation. 3 Collective intelligence, even if this term is perhaps too "coinciding" at the moment not to carry its opposite (which we will not name!), can contribute, if stimulated and organised in a structured way to recognise the singularity of each person, to welcome different or even divergent points of view and to generate genuine constructive and learning dialogues.4 Finally, the capacity to evolve in complexity, to move away from causal and linear logic to bifurcate, to enable the encounter of subjects who recognise, respect and integrate their differences (differing from consensus, agreement or opposition) and "de-coincide" (according to the concept developed by François Jullien) 5 prove necessary to open new possibilities for organizations.

**3. From conversation to

lasting and deep connection** Conversation can be futile as well as profound, one-off as well as recurring. The different levels of conversation respond both to the crossed professional needs of the interlocutors at the moment it takes place and also to the relational and social needs essential to collective functioning and individual balance. There is generally a progression dynamic between people who converse regularly: in openness, confidence and the degree of intimacy that gradually establishes itself to nurture a quality and solid relationship. This dynamic relies in particular on managerial practices that foster a mindset ("mindset") conducive to giving, counter-giving, reciprocal attention 6 and the desire to go towards the other, to share and to weave affinity bonds. The possibility within the organization of having spaces and times conducive to formal and informal exchanges, not only on professional operations and short-term efficiency which privileges what is "useful" and profitable now, but also on the sharing of the meaning of action and human relationships. organizations are increasingly using various approaches fostering collective intelligence such as Appreciative Inquiry, Art of Hosting, Theory U, Processwork, Open Space, … (see further). It therefore seems necessary to us, beyond the resolution of daily problems, to regularly generate "constructive" and "generative" conversations. "Constructive" in the sense that they allow the expression and listening of different points of view on the same subject and "generative" when they result not in weak consensus, but in new solutions for the organization. To do this, the feeling of "exogenous" security allowing a positive answer to the question – can I express myself without risk? – must be cultivated. It is nourished by a framework and protections such as the sharing and clarification of lived values, the interpersonal relationship ("intuitu personae") which is created from the start of the relationship, the exemplarity of leaders, a culture facilitating the acceptance of new ideas, the capacity to question oneself and regulation processes in case of crossing "red lines" which refer to the notions of "institutional security" and "relational security" highlighted by V. Lenhardt 7. It is of course also essential that individuals feel legitimate to express their point of view and this capacity for expression and contribution depends not only on the mastery of their own activity but also on the recognition of their capacities by others. These are the elements which, according to Albert Bandura, contribute, with physiological and emotional state to the feeling of personal efficacy of individuals 8. In the same vein, personal aspects such as the feeling of "psychological safety" and "ontological security" 9, the personal capacity to be open to sharing one's ideas and/or emotions, the desire to share and the wish to weave relationships of trust are necessary factors in creating rich and lasting bonds.10 ### 4. Conversations that matter on subjects that matter The benefits of developing free and numerous exchanges, of open relationships based on listening and a spirit of co-construction, are considerable, even vital for organizations to fully embrace alter-modernity. Indeed, if an organization is an abstraction having neither an individualised existence with drawn contours, nor organic coherence or visibility in its entirety, it nevertheless lives, and this is through multi-channel exchanges between the people who work within it. These people receive and transmit messages internally and to other people working in other organizations. These interactions are always made primarily through language (verbal and non-verbal) and through "conversations" about its purposes, its mode of operation, its activities and about…itself. Within the organization, there is communication and meta-communication. Interactions with other organizations are also an opportunity to qualify and locate an organization. This term, "organization", as we have seen, does not account for the movement that animates each human group: permanent changes take place which show its fluid nature; the organization is always in motion. French does not have a word to designate an entity always in motion, the word "organization" refers to terminology of the object and therefore of being and traps us by its fixity; perhaps the English "organisings" better accounts for this reality. The quantity and nature of the conversations that animate the organization are this fluid, this living, which makes it live and, in this respect, they are of the utmost importance. What exchanges take place within it? Are they numerous? Between whom? In what way are they conducted, with what level of formality or spontaneity? What do conversations focus on? Can one move away from linear, "top-down" logic to enable the "encounter" and "de-coincide" 11 the relationship, preserve alterity, … Do we extend these conversations to the organization's ecosystem of partners, clients, beneficiaries, the public… ? These questions are crucial for the life of organizations, their effectiveness and especially for the people who work there. We know that social connection is both a factor of performance, balance and well-being of people at work. Yet the acceleration inherent to the neo-liberal capitalist system is, as Hartmut Rosa shows (see above), not only conducive to alienation but also to the loss of social connection. Creating conditions for "resonance" between people is therefore essential to create this bond. Indeed, under pressure, driven towards a performance satisfying its shareholders or its political stakeholders, organizations have a strong tendency to try to identify their problems in order to solve them as quickly as possible; they thus focus above all on their deficits. This orientation of attention generates management centred on the identification and resolution of problems, the evaluation of individual performance for potential improvements that only highlight shortcomings. Research in organizational development has shown that this orientation of attention and the managerial behaviours that result from it have the consequence of lower team performance and a dissolution of social bonds. On the other hand, this is all the easier to nurture when formal and informal exchange spaces are created, as mentioned above, ideally in person. These exchanges can be contradictory, perceptions of work and relationships varying from one individual to another and generating emotions that are important to express in a safe setting. Expressed and worked-through conflict, for example using the "Dialogue on Work Quality (DQT)" device developed by CNAM 12 or the "Processwork" approach, allows everyone to find their place, define their role and build collaborations that incorporate potential disagreements. We can also draw on what people experience daily in their work and what determines their performance. Appreciative exchanges, recognising the value of work accomplished and the singularity of each person, allowing their sharing are not only beneficial for the stabilisation of what is working well, the maintenance of mutual respect and social bonds, the feeling of well-being at work, but also for generating the desire to amplify factors of success and imagine new possibilities. Facilitating such conversations opens to what François Jullien calls _"the unheard"_13, that is what has not yet been perceived and expressed within the organization and which can bring it to life. It is through structured conversations with different approaches – Appreciative Inquiry 14, Art of Hosting 15, Theory U, Processwork 16,…- that the organization can develop collective intelligence capacities within itself, find the agility to deal with its issues and build meaning in its action. The importance of conversations in response to economic, social and human challenges leads us to consider that the value and potential of an organization are measured not only by its immediate economic performance, but rather by the quality, intensity and sustainability of the dialogues and bonds that have been woven between individuals. The organization can thus fulfil a dual mission: contribute to the well-being of all by producing useful, desirable and sustainable products or services, but also to social life and rich and living human relationships.

1 Rosa, Hartmut,

Remède à l'accélération, Champs Essais, 2020, p.59-60 2 Rosa, Hartmut, op cit , p.88 3 Rosa, Hartmut, op.cit., p. 60-61 4 Senge, Peter, The Fifth Discipline, Doubleday, 2006 5 Jullien, François, Pratique de la décoïncidence, L'Herne, 2020 6 Mauss, Marcel, Essai sur le don. Forme et raison de l'échange dans les sociétés archaïques, 1923-1924, l'Année Sociologique, see also Alter, Norbert Donner et prendre, La coopération en entreprise, Editions La Découverte/M.A.U.S.S. Paris, December 2009 7 Lenhardt, Vincent: Les responsables porteurs de sens, Insep éditions, 199 8 Lecomte J. (2004). Les applications du sentiment d'efficacité personnelle. Savoirs, Hors-série : Autour de l'oeuvre d'Albert Bandura, 59-90. 9 Lenhardt, Vincent , Op.cit and teaching given in coaching training in the Coach&Team pathway at Transformance 10 The importance of the individual in organizations is thus highlighted by Ludwig von Bertalanffy _"The real values of humanity are_ not those it shares with biological entities, the function of an organism or a community of animals, but those which spring from the individual spirit. Human society is not a community of ants or termites governed by an inherited instinct and controlled by the laws of a super-ordered whole; it is founded on the achievement of the individual and is lost if the individual is only a cog in the social machine. This is, I believe, the ultimate precept that a theory of organization can give: not a manual for dictators of all kinds, effective at dominating human beings by applying scientifically the iron laws, but a warning: the Leviathan of organization cannot swallow the individual without at the same time sealing its inevitable loss. » — Ludwig von Bertalanffy, General Systems Theory (1968) 11 Jullien, François, Dé-coïncidence, Grasset, 2017 12 Bonnefond,Jean-Yves, Agir sur la qualité du travail, Clinique du travail, Eres, 2019 13 Jullien, François, De l'écart à l'inoui, L'Herne, 2019 14 Pagès, Jean, Coacher avec l'Appreciative Inquiry, Eyrolles, 2021 – JC. Barralis et S. Proust (dir), Le grand livre de l 'Appreciative Inquiry, Interéditions, 2021 15 Owen, Harrison (April 21, 2008). Open Space Technology: A User's Guide (Third ed.). Berrett-Koehler. 16 de Bryas, S, Morin. D, Bazin, P, Introduction à la pratique du Processwork, Interéditions, 2021 Photo by Mike Kononov on Unsplash