Page 408 - Mike Ratner CC - WISR Complete Dissertation - v6

and sometimes enlightened environment where response is carefully calibrated to accurate

measure of observing what is in actuality vs how preconceptions cause my reactions. It’s a delicate

dance to evaluate group responses to individual contributions and analyze those responses fairly.

As long as I am aware of my interpretations and contributions within the dialogue, I am part of the

process that considers deeply the content (subject) at hand with a disinvestment of my ego or need

to defend some aspect of my persona that sparks cause for separation of the community connection.

I-awareness as it was taught to me, implies really being present to the IWILL aspect of observation.

Planning for inclusion provides participants of a Community Conversation with the fullest

opportunity to achieve equal results, regardless of their respective circumstances. Diversity

acknowledges that better results are achieved when all a society’s communities interact with each

other. Different perspectives can help us arrive at fairer and better-informed decisions while

respecting racial, linguistic, cultural, religious, regional and other differences. The principle of

community embodies the co-existence of diversity and equity. Each person in principal ideally

values and assumes their individual and collective responsibility contributing to a CC dialogue.

An exercise carried out by facilitators at each dialogue group to create safety among the

participants prior to launching the discussion is an example of collaborative effort, as each dialogue

group member defined their vision of safety within the dialogue environment. Raelin (2004)

included a fourth characteristic of leaderfulness and leaderful practice, compassion, and described

it as a “commitment to preserving the dignity of every member of the group” (p. 2). In the process

of confronting race and racism in civic dialogue, the expectation that all participants would display

compassion towards each other was desired, but certainly not a goal of the gathering. Compassion

for some dissenting participants of the dialogue developed as a byproduct of interaction with other

members of the dialogue group, was forged through episodes of tension and disagreement.

389