Why Generative Conversations Feel Worse Before They Feel Better
I've been thinking about the word “generative” for years. It’s been on my posts/articles topic list forever. It’s time to take it on!
The term has become synonymous with artificial intelligence, which is a little frustrating and ironic. In organisational life, a generative conversation is one that creates something new. It expands understanding, unlocks fresh possibilities and helps people see beyond the limits of their individual perspectives. The best strategic breakthroughs, innovations and moments of collective insight often emerge from these types of conversation.
Most leadership teams say they want more of them.
The challenge is that very few understand what it takes to get there.
Otto Scharmer's work offers a helpful lens. In Theory U, he describes four levels of conversation and listening. These levels represent fundamentally different ways of engaging with ourselves, each other and the challenges we face.
At the first level, we listen through the lens of what we already know. Scharmer calls this downloading. We hear information that confirms our existing assumptions and fit it neatly into the stories we already tell ourselves. Conversations remain predictable because nothing much is being challenged.
Many teams spend years here without realising it. Meetings are efficient, agendas are covered and decisions are made. Everyone leaves feeling comfortable.
Yet very little changes.
The second level is debate. Different perspectives begin to emerge and people advocate for their views. Assumptions are challenged and competing interpretations become visible. Whilst this often feels uncomfortable, it is usually a sign that the team is beginning to move beyond superficial agreement.
The third level is dialogue. Here, something important shifts. People become less interested in winning and more interested in understanding. Curiosity begins to replace certainty. Team members start asking questions such as:
"What am I missing?"
"What can you see that I can't?"
"What assumptions are we making?"
The final level is generative dialogue. This is where genuinely new thinking emerges. The group begins thinking together rather than exchanging individual opinions. Insights arise that belong to the collective rather than any one individual. This is the territory of innovation, creativity and breakthrough thinking.
It is also relatively rare, in my experience.
Why teams get stuck
The reason many teams never reach generative dialogue is not a lack of will, intelligence or expertise.
It is a lack of tolerance for discomfort.
Every transition between Scharmer's levels asks something difficult of us.
Moving beyond downloading requires us to acknowledge that our current thinking may be incomplete.
Moving beyond debate requires us to loosen our attachment to being right.
Moving beyond dialogue requires us to tolerate uncertainty long enough for something genuinely new to emerge.
At every stage there is a temptation to retreat back to certainty, to familiar narratives. Back to premature agreement.
The irony is that many teams mistake this retreat for effectiveness. Meetings become quicker. Tension disappears. Decisions are made faster.
This is why I often find myself reassuring leadership teams when conversations start feeling harder rather than easier. When challenge increases, tensions surface and people begin questioning assumptions, leaders sometimes worry that the culture is deteriorating.
Very often, the opposite is true.
The team has stopped downloading and started engaging with what is actually there!
What are the markers of progress?
One of the most useful questions leaders can ask is "What are we seeing more of?" because results will flow from that.
Teams moving towards generative dialogue often show surprisingly ordinary signs:
People ask more questions and make fewer statements.
Team members acknowledge what they don't know.
Individuals share half-formed ideas rather than waiting until their thinking is fully polished.
Disagreement becomes less personal.
People build on each other's thinking rather than competing with it.
Conversations become more exploratory and less performative.
The team spends less time assigning blame and more time understanding the wider system.
Most importantly, people leave conversations with new thinking rather than reinforced opinions.
Contracting for generative conversations
Generative dialogue does not happen because a team decides it wants it. It emerges when people develop the inner capacities required to stay engaged when conversations become difficult.
This is another place where I find the 5Cs helpful (surprised?).
Curious teams commit to seeking understanding before persuasion. They ask themselves: What might I be missing? What assumptions am I making? Whis is this topic triggering for me?
Connected teams notice when they become defensive, reactive or withdrawn. They work to stay present with themselves and each other, even when disagreement emerges. They ask: What am I sensing and experiencing? What do I need to feel more connected with my colleagues as fellow humans?
Clear teams are willing to seek clarity where it may be assumed, distinguish facts from interpretations or unspoken expectations (because aren’t they obvious?) and get curious about what is known, what is not known and what is likely. They say: Walk me through x? Explain this to me as if I were a five year old. My understanding is different…
Courageous teams are willing to enter difficult conversations and challenge ideas respectfully as well as acknowledge their blind spots, own mistakes and change their mind. They ask: What conversation are we avoiding? What do I need to own to help us all move forward? What is my role in creating the conditions we say we do not want?
Compassionate teams balance challenge with kindness (not niceness). They remember that disagreement, belonging and connection can coexist. They ask: How can I be both honest and kind in service of my colleagues and the wider team? And when the going gets tough, how can I offer myself compassion?
These are inner world capacities rather than communication techniques. They require awareness, practice, intention and self-acceptance.
The work between meetings
One of the biggest misconceptions in team development is that progress happens in the room.
Most leadership teams spend a few hours together each month and hope those conversations alone will transform how they work. In reality, the quality of dialogue inside meetings depends heavily on what happens outside them.
Generative conversations require individuals to develop their own self-awareness. To notice defensiveness when it arises. To become curious about their reactions. To recognise when certainty, control, rescuing or blaming is acting as a form of protection.
They also require relationships. Trust is built in the spaces between formal meetings. Understanding grows through repeated interactions. The quality of a team's dialogue is often a reflection of the quality of its relationships. And no, that doesn’t need that we need more team building escape rooms!
This means that teams seeking more generative conversations need to invest beyond meeting time. Reflection, peer conversations, feedback, experimentation and ongoing curiosity all help create the conditions for deeper dialogue when the team comes back together. Action Learning Sets is a good way to achieve this.
A thought for coaches and professionals working with teams
What I appreciate most about Scharmer's model is that it helps me recognise movement when it feels scary to everyone, myself included.
When I see frustration, challenge and tension in a team, I no longer assume something has gone wrong. More often than not, it tells me that something is shifting. The team is grappling with complexity rather than avoiding it.
The times I worry most are when everyone is perfectly comfortable, nobody seems challenged and every conversation ends in neat agreement.
Comfort can sometimes be a sign that people are staying safely within the boundaries of what they already know (downloading).
Generative conversations ask us to venture beyond those boundaries. The journey is rarely linear and it is seldom comfortable but it is where the most interesting work happens.
If you are interested in exploring team coaching as a way of supporting your team to make this shift, reach out for a chat. We’d love to hear from you.
To receive regular Inside Out Leadership News and Nuggets, sign up here.