New Agora Analysis (8/11)

Merriam-Webster defines dialogue as:

·         A conversation between two or more individuals.

·         An exchange of ideas and opinions.

·         A discussion between representatives of parties to a conflict that is aimed at a resolution.

Bohm, Factor, and Garret (1991) defined dialogue as:

“a collective observation of how hidden values and intentions can control our behavior, and how unnoticed cultural differences can clash without our realizing what is occurring.  It can therefore be seen as an arena in which collective learning takes place out of which a sense of increase harmony, fellowship and creative can arise.”

 

Schreibman and Christakis (2007) created the Structured Design Dialogue Process (SDDP/SDP) to simplify meaningful group dialogue via language and technology to enhance the pursuit of community wisdom and power (Luong, 2012; Schreibman & Christakis, 2007).   This process allows insightful thinkers, researchers, and practitioners to assemble together and contribute to research studies of their expertise through dialogue.  The Six (6) Laws of Dialogue from The New Agora paper is an interesting subject in regards to the SDDP/SDP, where dialogue is conducted amongst various scholars and practitioners concerning research study methods in information systems and technology.  Christakis created a Tree of Meaning (Schreibman & Christakis, 2007) to endorse six (6) principles of the meaning and wisdom in dialogue:

1)      Appreciation of diversity

2)      Disciplined dialogue

3)      Understanding relative importance

4)      Meaning & wisdom

5)      Autonomy & authenticity

6)      Evolutionary learning (Luong, 2012; Schreibman & Christakis, 2007)

The SDDP/SDP method supports planning for innovation and change, for it offers a blueprint to scholars, researchers, and/or practitioners to share information in an efficient and effective manner.  Process innovation and quality enhancement opportunities will be offered in systems/project development, which in turn will cut down excessive expenses via integrating new technology into the existing information system.

 

 

The forces I found for this blog are: social and cultural.  The New Agora Analysis is social involving scholars, researchers, and/or practitioners come assemble to discuss or have a dialogue concerning research study methods in information systems and technology.  The New Agora Analysis is also cultural because it focuses on specific (target) group of people and the subject or career areas they are involved in.

References Cited

Bohm, D., Factor, D., & Garrett, P. (1991). Dialogue:  a proposal. Retrieved from http://www.infed.org/archives/e-texts/bohm_dialogue.htm .

Luong, M. (2012). Structured design dialogue process. Retrieved from http://naturallyming.blogspot.com/2012/02/structured-design-dialog-process-sddp.html .

Merriam-Webster Inc. (2012). Dialogue. Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dialogue .

Schreibman, V. & Christakis, A.N. (2007). New agora:  new geometry of languaging and new technology of democracy: the structured design dialogue process. Retrieved from http://sunsite.utk.edu/FINS/loversofdemocracy/NewAgora.htm .