Jennifer Dobson

Listen

March 4, 2013

Successful moderation, if I may say so, is a challenge for most people, for we live in a world where we expect and want our opinions to be heard. Seeking recognition, we often impulsively shout out ideas without deep consideration of the potential response. How many times a day do you get interrupted or do you interrupt someone? As we carry out everyday conversations, our primary focus seems to involve the promotion of our own thoughts over the extraction of others ideas. For this reason, I have to admit it has been a hard transition for me to embody the role of a moderator or deliberator. In recent trials, I have uncovered the importance of humble moderation for successful deliberation. Although I will be the first to admit this is something I have not yet achieved, reflecting on my failures has moved me one step closer, revealing three main components to successful humble moderation: 1) suppressing my ego 2) actively listening and 3) promoting others ideas. The suppression of my ego is arguably the hardest, and most important component of this moderating style because I think it directly connects to the success of other critical moderating techniques. Suppressing my ego involves being conscious of the fact that I am not expected to have or provide all the answers. Going into deliberation, I must expect to learn from the other deliberative members. Most importantly, I need to remember the success of other moderators I have watched and try to mimic their acceptance of silence. I can recall my failures of this practice, filling reflective silences with excess jargon, or yelling out my ideas in excitement without respectfully waiting my turn. Reflecting on these moments provided me with a necessary wake-up calls warning me that my moderating and deliberative skills need some fine-tuning, leading to my admiration to the humble moderating philosophy. After many trials and errors, I now push the sacrifice of my ego; even if the topic being deliberated is within my expertise, I tame the desire to express my ideas because active and equal participation of deliberative members should be my primary goal. If I have a strong opinion, which I admit I often do, I attempt to find ways to transform it into a question, preferably one with multiple valid responses. For example, in the recent sustainability deliberation, I saw so many possible solutions surrounding us, but I am happy to say that instead of blurting out what I thought would be the best solution, I posed a question to spark others thoughts. I now never underestimate the power of something as simple as, What do you think?. Questions in themself are a good means of remaining humble for it gives others the chance to actively participate. Questions allow me to guide the conversation but give others the opportunity to be heard. Overall, I think the suppression of a moderators ego can act as a symbol for the entire deliberative process, promoting a collaborative and interdependent atmosphere. It is something I am working towards achieving. A humble mindset serves as the foundation for active listening. Decreasing the amount of time speaking or preaching should never be confused with eliminating a moderators participation. As a moderator, I should cherish others ideas and try to show them this in any way possible. One way Ive tried is with my body language: eye contact, head nod, a smile. While I continuously digest members thoughts, I try my best to remain mindful of the possible solutions presented. During the recent sustainability forum, I took note of each speakers key points and suggestions in order to track the direction of our conversation. This is a skill that requires successful multi-tasking that I will admit does not come naturally to me. I hope I will only become better with practice. There were inevitably some points I missed, but I try to tell myself it is better to make mistakes while actively listening than not to do it at all. Active listening sets the groundwork for the final component of successful moderation: promoting others ideas by enhancing overall clarity. If there seems to be a gap in understanding between participants, I should do my best to interpret and fill the void. For example, in my most recent deliberative practice, participants A and B had very similar perspectives but were nearly arguing, unaware of their overlap. I pointed out their similarities initiating progress of the conversation. On the other side, I noticed deliberator C had not spoken and therefore people were completely unaware of his ideas. I asked him a question to promote his participation and was

Jennifer Dobson

Listen

March 4, 2013

pleased to find that he had many opinions but was just a quiet thinker. These simple acts promote dynamic collaboration of all members and I think lead to the progression of deliberation. Remaining considerate and aware of the other members is a huge part of humble moderation for it leads to the successful interpretations of others thoughts. Overall, and if nothing else, I believe effective and successful moderation depends upon catalyzing others ideas, rather than promoting my own, and I am working towards learning ways to successfully do this.