Page 405 - Mike Ratner CC - WISR Complete Dissertation - v6

to post and share a wide array of thoughts and comments. The Albany NY dialogues on implicit

bias and race highlight several leadership lessons that distinguish face-to-face civic dialogue

carried out in the public sphere from technology dependent forms of communication discourse.

Using face-to-face dialogue format (modeled according to the NIF guidance and

procedures for gathering), the conveners at the second CC prepared participants for the dialogue

experience by grounding them in the procedures of civic dialogue. Part of this process included

orienting the attendees to a form of participatory engagement that was based on removing

emphasis on a singular expert-focus. While traditional leader-centered models concentrate

authority in the hands of one or a few people, distributed leadership seeks to diffuse leadership

throughout (Fusarelli, Kowalski, & Petersen, 2011) the collective, with no one person viewed as

responsible for guiding the work and the outcome of the dialogue group. Rather, the form of

participation used in the dialogues on race stressed a model of multiple experts, the attendees and

the facilitators would determine the direction the dialogue conversation with the broad subject area

of bias and racism. Using a framework of distributive leadership, whereby the gifts and insights of

the collective are greater than that of any one individual, contributed to the creation of a public

(dialogue) space and laid the foundation for shifts in perspectives (from tension to healing).

Each voice and perspective was encouraged and during moments of tension and

disagreement about divergent perspectives of race and privilege facilitators and participants

worked in an environment of safety and a commitment to remain authentic and open to exploring

differences. As participants, with assistance from group facilitators, the group navigated the

dynamic terrain of race and racism in a dialogue container (Isaacs, 1999) in which they worked

individually and as a group to hear and understand differently. The dialogue circle became a space

for sharing deeply, feelings, and emotions that ranged from confusion and anger to discovery, pain,

386