It has been truly a great experience. So obviously simple and yet rare nowadays. Through this process, I had the opportunity to realise how great freedom of expression is, as well as the necessity to hear the purity in another person’s speech without interference, impositions, “polish”, “correction,” and, of course, without the power of authoritarian enforcement which could make anyone of us think and say “Let me talk as I know best.” Especially, in the case of the wine villages, I feel that there was a unique originality with regard to this process. Perhaps for the first time since the foundation of the Republic, 27 different fronts sat around the table. For the first time, a pilot project entered the debate in the presence of officers of all government departments that play a direct role in the region. Even more important is the fact that local bodies of various and different disciplines sat at the same table. For the first time, every participant in the discussion realised that what she/he had in mind as the problem, was one-dimensional. And the solution she/he had in her/his mind was insufficient. Perhaps for the first time, a state officer listened to another state officer as well as local stakeholders and acquired a more comprehensive approach to the outline plan for the region. The treasure word we discovered was SYNERGY.  

The use of the Structured Democratic Dialogue methodology was a new experience that has proven very effective in finding and classifying the causes that create operational problems and effective administration to the local authorities in Cyprus. This methodology provided an opportunity for all participants to express their ideas and opinions and then, with the help of specialized electronic tools, to extract conclusions on the problems and needs that exist at the local government organizations in matters of Administration and Leadership. This innovative method has facilitated the collection of ideas from people with different opinions and perceptions from different environments, who face problems and situations that others are not aware of because of the nature of their work, through a collaborative, structured, and comprehensive process. The expression of views by all stakeholders revealed different difficulties and problems from different angles. Thus, achieving a solution for these problems which will be done at a later stage covers not specific, individual aspects of the problem but all of them.  The classification of ideas that follows in the methodology undoubtedly facilitated the understanding of the participants’ ideas since these ideas are further elaborated and categorized with others who have similar content and features in common. By categorizing ideas, participants vote for the five ideas they consider as the most important. Then, with the help of a special software, participants examine the associations between the ideas and whether one idea can affect another. In this way the “Tree of Influence” is created which depicts the relationship of different concepts, but also which ones are considered primary and fundamental and placed at the base of the tree and which are considered cause by the primary ideas and placed at the top. 

An interesting part of the dialogue was that one person’s statement could influence another person’s vote.  I appreciated this dialogue procedure.  It’s not easy to go through.  It’s thought-provoking and, a lot of self-analysis, and introspective thinking has to happen for this to be a successful process.  We came to the table with diverse philosophies and thought processes in general and opinions and this dialogue was a successful process.  And if you look at the 6 days and the way that the work maps out, we are talking about funding and philosophies and student outcomes as a priority.  The days here together – we know that we want the school to succeed and that’s a common goal and thread that we all have here.

At the beginning of this meeting I thought oh, this is not going to work.  Because of past experiences.  And I thought MSD is going to close because nobody is going to want it to do well!  Or be successful.  But now, after 6 days, I’m thinking wow, this is hard and it’s my school and this is so interesting how this is becoming a successful process.  And I think it will be, we can achieve what we want to do.  And I appreciate all of you coming for this whole 6 days and taking our school seriously.  I want to thank all of you for everything – your philosophies and opinions and, just everything.  I also want to say I forgot to add that the first day of our meeting I had a fear to speak up.  I was afraid to say my opinion about my school.  I just thought, I don’t know, I think it’s different because I have a Deaf perspective.  But I really notice I was wrong.  I was not the only one.  You were all here to collaborate and that really shocked me and hit me hard.  You were really open to dialogue and open to the Deaf perspective.

7 Letters facilitated 100% virtual structured dialogues (due to the COVID-19 pandemic), delivered over 6 weeks, with participants from around the country. The process created a deeply meaningful experience for all, bringing us important insights to serve a traditionally underserved population. Working with Jeff utilizing the Logosofia process is like having a coach and mentor all in one person. His knowledge of the dynamics of the process, and the educational cultures, helped me keep focused on the prize: insight into the deep drivers of a wicked problem discovered collectively by the group of stakeholders. While our Dialogue work was over 3 years ago, the information learned is still gold and continues to inform our work daily.