Collective wisdom grew through the practice of dialogue. Dialogue refers to a process of intellectual inquiry rather than of advocacy, a search for truth rather than a contest, people feel emotionally committed to the outcome (Charan, 2001). The outcome seems ‘right’ because people have helped shape it (p. 76).”
According to Senge, diaologue is a free flowing of meaning through a group, allowing the group to discover insights not attainable individually (1990, p. 10). It is the essence of creating shared meaning (Bohm).
Paradoxically, Zohar (1997) states that dialogue does not necessarily mean reaching consensus. Dialogue can and does generate complexity as well as contradiction. To underscore this, Zohar relates a famous Sufi story about the Mullah
Nasruddin. Nasruddin was a wise man or a fool, depending on your point of view. In this
particular story, two men have come to the mullah with an argument. The first man puts his
case, and Nasruddin says, “I perceive that you are right.” Then the second man puts his own
contradictory case, and once again Nasruddin says, “I perceive that you are right.” A third man looking on objects. How can Nasruddin say that both men are right when they entirely
disagree? To him Nasruddin says, “I perceive that you also are right.”
The richness of the dialogue under conditions of complexity generated learning that elevated collective wisdom.
For collective wisdom to arise, the decisions and approaches should be informed through a process Harvey (1995) identified as the “Accordion Model.” He characterizes the
accordion process as the closing and opening of bellows on an accordion. A small number of people work to breathe life into a project, then widen the process to gain input (collective wisdom, political/economic insight, content, tone, gaps, faulty assumptions or weak underpinnings, missed opportunities, potential areas of support and resistance). The results are then brought back for more reflection, dialogue, re-conceptualization, analysis and re-write. Like an accordion, the process, once again, expands out to the larger audience for more feedback, insight, etc. The “accordion process” continues until sufficient evidence suggests that there has been effective, broad-based input and dialogue.
Given the profileration of Web 2.0/3.0 and especially the social networking tools, we can make collective wisdom emerge. Ongoing reflection, re-conceptualization can breathe life into new ideas/projects and eventually contribute to 'wise dialogues'. Whether it is online or offline wisdom is what the humanity is in ever-increasing need. As T.S Elliott put forth "What happened to the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?".
