#7 Inviting Conversation Through Powerful Questions (Bonus Episode)

It's a new year - time for a new episode! We've put together this shorter bonus episode to ease you into the new year. In this episode, Matt delves into the role of questions - specifically 'powerful questions' and their ability to create a space for different types of conversations.

Matt talks about three types of powerful question:

• Diagnostic
• Reframing
• Generative

Hear Matt describe these applied to the hypothetical area of Meadowview and its food system. Whether you're a seasoned Sandbox enthusiast or just curious, this episode invites you to consider whether you're asking the right questions to invite the right conversations.

Don't forget to subscribe to our podcast and leave a review! Your feedback helps us bring you more amazing content. 

For more about us and what we do check out our LinkedIn page.

Transcript

Much of what we do when we're thinking and working in systems is about asking questions. Well, in today's episode of the system sandbox, I'm going to pose to you a question. Well, more accurately, I want to prompt you to pose your own questions and not just any questions, powerful questions. 

Now that might sound a bit self help y, and maybe it is, but there's a specific context for this, so bear with me.

Up to this point, we've been covering a range of topics related to this space known as systems thinking. And as I progressed in my own journey, I think the key ideas that I've settled on are that we really need to have a solid handle on some of the core practices or sort of techniques. Uh, and if you can get those right, then the rest will typically follow.

Some of those are the ideas that we've introduced previously, things like identifying the structure and nature of a system through naming the boundary or limits to it, um, the components that make it up, their relationships, the use of metaphors to help describe systems concepts, the role of mental models and how understanding the models that are at play in different contexts influence the systems that we see or that we're viewing, uh, and the components that help us diagnose if something is complex or not.

That is the diversity and makeup of the system, the interdependence between the system components, broader interconnections with other systems or wider networks, and of course the adaptations that occur within a system in response to particular changes, , that are, that are occurring, , between individual components 

so coming back to the purpose of this episode today, powerful questions, you're probably immediately wondering. What makes a question powerful? So upfront, I will say that this is a label that I'm applying to the use of questions in a particular context or for a particular purpose, which in this instance is working in complex systems or in spaces that are complex.

it's not that I'm saying that this is a sort of capitalized powerful questions. It's not a particular thing that I've come across. it's just a label that I'm applying to a question that has a particular purpose. So just to keep that in mind. 

So at its simplest, when we're saying that a question is powerful, it's a question that is specifically intended to open or, or invite a conversation, um, centered around some form of complex system issue or, or topic.

Um, it does this really by, Uh, intentionally creating a space for exploration or reflection or possibility. 

Another way to think about this is by describing what it isn't. That is, what is a question that is not powerful? I'd suggest that a question that's not a powerful question is one that's really about foreclosing possibilities or closing down a conversation rather than opening it up.

So that might be a question that is moral. Uh, closed ended. So inviting sort of binary yes, no responses or, or single word responses, um, is a leading question or is very much a question of, um, responsibility apportionment or, or blame orientation, you know, really steering the conversation towards fault finding rather than possibility seeking. 

In short, the opposite of a powerful question is one that narrows the field of inquiry instead of expanding it. So, I mean, that said, we do have to acknowledge that there will be times when you need a healthy degree of pragmatism.

You can't be stuck in that kind of conversation space, uh, forever, but really I think it then comes down to, can we continue exploring or do we have to make decisions, um, on what comes next? And if so, what's the best ways in which to do that? And I think there are some good techniques or, or parts to that process on how you kind of move through to the next stage around making decisions.

And I think. The key part in that is the inclusion and involvement of people with a different range of perspectives, but in particular, those that are kind of in the system or have that lived experience of the particular systemic issue that we're talking about so that they can bring their experiences of that complexity, both into the conversation but then also helping to collectively work towards those decisions and resolutions, including whether that exploration of that space, whether that powerful question has kind of been answered sufficiently for the, for the intended purpose, um, or for the intended purpose in which it's been asked. 

So if a powerful question is one that invites conversation, What are the ways in which we can nuance those questions to inform or help us have better conversations around those systems of focus? So to my mind, there's three ways in which we can frame or focus our line of powerful questioning, and they tie into a particular kind of almost objective.

 The first is a diagnostic purpose. So they are powerful questions that we're asking to help us understand how a system functions or works, really to fill in knowledge gaps. Second, they're there to reframe, which is, really about helping us challenge our assumptions or our mental models or the things that have informed our construction or abstracted view of that system.

third, they're generative. And this is where I think, there's a lot of genuine benefit, which is that they're really allowing us to,, formulate possibility. Or a vision for the future. So we have this current situation that is not what we want. What is the future system that we want?

So those are very high level kind of views, or descriptions on. What powerful questions might look like for the purposes of this. I think, a bit of a practical application would be beneficial. So, let's apply these to a sort of hypothetical scenario. in previous episodes, we've spoken about the benefits of kind of naming a system.

Um, and so for this, I'm going to. Create for you a bit of a narrative. Um, so let's, let's introduce a fictional geographic area. 

I'm going to call it meadow view. 

Um, and in particular, my interest here is meadow views food system. So what I've done is I pulled together a short narrative. Um, it's basically got a whole bunch of different concepts or parts of a system, that have been,, pulled together into this narrative so that we can understand all of the different factors that are at play influencing the way This, particular food system in this hypothetical area of Meadowview.

I'm not going to kind of go into some of the specifics on how you construct a sort of systems map out of some of this stuff, but if you want a refresher. By all means go back to the previous episode, where we kind of delve into some of the specifics around creating systems maps. Um, I think I would acknowledge, like if you're doing this as a sort of genuine practical exercise, you would kind of pair this narrative with a systems map of some sort.

Um, so this is kind of demonstrative only for, for the purposes of our powerful questions. So with that, uh, let's go to meta view.

 Meadowview is a moderately sized, peri urban area nestled between farmland and a growing urban township. On one hand, its proximity to local agriculture remains a core strength, Vibrant farmers markets, local sourcing by restaurants all provide a genuine farm to table feel. On the other hand, the increasing cost of living, poor transport options and inequitable food access means that lower income households can't easily take advantage of these local offerings.

While Meadowview's farmers are proud to supply fresh produce, they also rely heavily on imported goods, in particular grains and dairy supplements. When the COVID 19 supply chain disruptions hit, it exposed the fragility of these dependencies. Farmers often had excess harvests while simultaneously struggling to secure key imports and make ends meet.

 Housing affordability further complicates the picture. A surge of new residents seeking a quieter lifestyle or a retirement haven have driven property values up, making it harder for younger people and families to stay in the area.

As a result, local businesses, especially farms, are starting to see employment gaps. Meanwhile, some of the newer arrivals don't share the same enthusiasm for local farming, restaurants, or community events, increasing the risk of social disconnection. 

Climate change is weighing heavily on decision makers in council. There are concerns over the appropriateness of currently zoned land for farming, leading to uncertainty over, The future proofing of land use planning decisions. Environmental considerations such as managing water resources for irrigation versus urban consumption have added yet another layer of complexity.

Across all these dynamics, Meadowview itself seems to be grappling with how to maintain its links to its agricultural heritage while supporting vulnerable residents and promoting ultimately a cohesive community identity in the face of demographic, economic, and environmental shifts.

Now, thinking back on that, all I can say is wow. That feels complex for me. Um, I would consider myself a bit of a visual thinker. If I try to visualize the links between all those components, it kind of just feels like a big tangle, almost like a big bowl of spaghetti, , or a ball of wool. but as I said, like, if you're going to do this as an end to end exercise, What I would be likely to do is to actually sit down and try to map out all of these components.

It kind of feels as though there's multiple different intersecting systems or, or networks at play there. 

Let's get into some specifics now and apply the three types of powerful questions to this hypothetical. Diagnostic, reframing, generative. You could pick and choose how to apply these. Um, you could use them to kind of one after the other. Um, it all depends on your particular context. And, you know, for the sake of this example, I'm going to sort of work through them in turn.

So that basically we're kind of starting with that diagnostic view and then finishing with that exploration of the future, um, you could potentially kind of, um, set up a workshop design like that. Um, again, these are all just hypotheticals. And I think really what I want to come back to and reinforce is that we're trying to ask questions that are inviting conversations around a system or within a system or for a system.

Okay. So let's start with diagnostic. So diagnostic questions are really, to my mind, all about uncovering how the system is functioning. Um, so this is getting into the sort of structures, the patterns, the interrelationships. Um, I think it's really important to recognize that the answer to these is not necessarily objective.

It's going to be really driven by the voices and perspectives in the room. And so I think that in and of itself is an important part of the puzzle. Who do you have in the room? Uh, what are their kind of individual mental models or takes on the system? What are their levels of understanding of the, of the question or topic that you're trying to engage with?

These are all contextual factors that we need to be cognizant of. And it's not like there's a kind of magic number in terms of the number of people that you would have in the room. , I think it's more about, do you have enough coverage of the topic in terms of the different perspectives? Um, that's, again, there's no right answer,

but ultimately it's just about who you can access or engage to be a part of this process. , but it's always important to remember and come back to This sort of foundational question of who, who's involved in this process and what, what are they bringing to it? What stuff have they brought to the process?

These questions are intended to help with understanding the nature of what the system we are viewing is producing. Um, so I've got a few examples here for you. So for instance, um, you know, what specific factors, uh, seem to be limiting Meadowview low income households from accessing fresh, affordable produce?

It sounds like it's got a kind of Definitive answer in some ways, but I think actually depending on who you have in the room, the factors that we are talking about. So whether that's, you know, distributional logistics or transportation or cost of living or whatever, like there will be things within this that are perhaps, um, going to be more or less prominent depending on who it is that you have in the room.

But also this is really about Uh, as I said, trying to highlight maybe where we don't have information as well. Um, are there questions that, you know, someone might pose as a part of this conversation that actually requires to go away and, you know, Seek out further answers or further information. Um, there was a particular instance in that narrative that I mentioned about how, um, some of the farms were producing surplus goods.

Um, and I think for instance, there's a question for me there around like, why, what, what is it that's preventing that surplus produce from farms being sold or obtained by those who need it? Is it a case that, you know, for instance, the supply chain, Challenges or transportation processes that are challenging.

Um, or is there something else to play? Are they even growing the right produce? It's a fair question. Um, the other example that I mentioned around, um, changing demographics. So this is often something that can come up. I think post COVID we saw a lot of this sort of tree changing and, and, um, shifts away from, of people moving away from the city to regional areas and things like that.

You know, even just this idea of changing demographics, like how does that alter the sort of social fabric? Um, At play, and in this example, it was kind of framed around people moving from the city into a hypothetical regional area. How is that shaping local employment, uh, sort of opportunities and food preferences and things like that?

 Are there people working remotely and they don't need local employment opportunities, for instance. And so that's potentially leading to a gap in the labor market.

Again, these are questions where maybe we don't have the answer, but it's kind of actually signposting that maybe we need to go figure it out. Um, and that's a good question to ask, like a question that doesn't have an obvious answer or an answer immediately to hand might be the best type of question to be asking in that context.

So moving on now to sort of reframing questions. So these are questions where I really, what you're trying to do is you're trying to challenge assumptions or the kind of model that someone has brought to the conversation. Um, and really it's about, you know, kind of getting to the core of, I don't want to say shifting mindsets, but it's trying to get people to understand that potentially their point of view or their, their perspective is based either on an assumption or is built on a, uh, a sort of.

Perspective or mental model that's not necessarily as useful as it could be. And I think one of the most common, um, one of the most common mental models that we often bring when we're talking about systemic problems or systemic challenges is a very strong deficit view of a situation. So we start with a view that something is a systemic problem.

Sorry. The food system is not working as we would hope that it is. Uh, and we kind of get stuck in this worldview that everything, um, that everything is deficit based, that all of these problems are all interconnected. And we really struggle to shift our thinking from a deficit view to a more strengths based approach.

Anyone listening who comes from a sort of community development and things like that, um, or sort of assets based approaches or strengths based approaches. You know, this is what I'm kind of getting at here, and it might seem very obvious to, to some of you that that is a good thing to be doing in particular contexts.

But when you start this conversation around systemic challenges or systemic issues, it can be a big issue for some to kind of shift their, their mindset out of that. So within that narrative, if you go back and listen to it again, I did include some particular assumptions. 

You know, maybe merit further consideration. So, for example, um, I would have said that the way in which I described those demographic shifts was presumed to be pretty negative, to be honest, it was talked about as though, , or implied as though that these people moving in were a driving up housing prices and then be almost not contributing back to the local social capital.

And so potentially what one of the questions we need to be asking ourselves is how can we actually reframe the arrival of new residents as an opportunity to build fresh community ties and invest in that city? Social fabric, maybe there are interests or desires from those that have moved to the area to connect locally, but actually the infrastructure or the opportunities, are actually not there to allow them to do so, maybe it's felt that some, on the surface opportunities are actually a bit I don't want to say clicky, but, you know, maybe some opportunities that are presented actually feel a bit inaccessible, for some reason.

So again, the narrative did presume, or did imply that those new to Meadowview were not interested in connecting locally, but actually I feel like that's kind of true. Kind of a very big assumption that needs to be tested, rather than kind of left at that, you know, Oh, we can make this throwaway comment and leave it at that.

The next question is really one that I want to focus in on as it relates to something that I think is really pertinent, which is the role of farming, climate change and markets. Uh, and the narrative, I don't want to say like implied that there were particular barriers to, um, farmers selling their produce, but it kind of did, uh, is that, you know, The surplus that the farmers are, producing may not actually be the result of supply chain challenges.

Potentially, and I've again framed this as an assumption, but potentially are the farmers actually growing the right produce? So are they growing what they've always grown? Uh, or are they still, or are they still in a sort of generational trend of what they've produced? You know, my family has grown X for, however many generations, but is that the right produce or item to be growing given the climatic changes that are being experienced or other environmental shifts, or other market shifts?

You know, is the food being grown still the right food or is it actually a case of, well, yes it is, but actually there are distribution challenges or bottlenecking occurring at other parts of this, this process. at the end of the day, Do we know that farmers are actually being supported in the ways that they need to adapt to changing conditions, whether they be market and climate to grow the right produce for the right time?

is it a case as in our narrative that the farmers are producing too much stuff, or is it actually that farmers are just not being supported in the ways that they actually need? And to what extent have they been included in any of these processes? Again, that's almost getting back into that diagnostic stage, but I think we need to be really clear on, is it a supply chain issue and that it's, from when it leaves the farm or is it actually, starting with the farmer and whether they're getting what they need from the rest of the system.

And finally, the last one that I want to touch on Which was only sort of dropped very briefly in the introduction of the narrative, um, was references to transport access. And I think that's, um, a really common one that's pointed to in regional areas where people talk about poor transport access as a barrier to food access.

Because if people can't access the right sort of transport in order to get them to places to buy fresh food, that's kind of that upstream view of what is driving the issue. What do people who actually experience that feel the problem is. Like, is it actually a transport issue?

 or is it, you know, a question of well, who, whose access is actually the issue? It's very easy to sometimes say that things like transport access, because it's such a well known factor is probably a factor, but again, we need to very much localize that and say, well, Yes, that is true in some contexts, but is it the same in this context?

Whose access are we talking about and for what forms of transport and to which destinations, we shouldn't be assuming that transport access is a sort of perennial challenge in all contexts. It's going to look different in different places. and who's not accessing transport or able to access transport might surprise us as well.

The last one is generative questions. And these are very much in that sort of future facing view where we're really trying to elicit or envisage different possible futures. I think the, maybe the thing I would, I don't want to say that I would, , avoid trying to do, but we're really not trying to develop or articulate these like pinned down roadmaps or, or kind of, you know, vision statements as such.

So you want to hold this aspirational future. I don't want to say loosely, but. you want to hold it in such a way that it can evolve or shift over time. So, you know, when we're exploring a future system, not a future program and a system is dynamic and evolving and shifting. And so if we're exploring that, we have to embrace the fact that it's going to be constantly changing, and almost, like trying to reach the end of the rainbow, like we're never going to get there.

But we can keep working or walking towards it. I would say that when you're thinking about a sort of generative question, you could almost think of it as like, well, let's take a particular part of that narrative and propose, you know, effectively a redesign. So if we took this piece or this part and changed it from A to B or from A to T.

What if we did that? What would it look like? What would change? What would it result in? in the short term, medium term, longer term. So, for example, let's say, for instance, that the council at the moment is, grappling with land use planning. , decision making around, housing developments and agriculture and things like that.

What if the council was prioritizing transport access in Meadowview instead of housing developments? Um, so what if what we talked about here wasn't a transport issue? Um, specifically or an agricultural issue or even a food issue. What if we actually talked about this as a planning issue? So what would it look like if we altered our planning strategy such that we were then focusing on transport access as the sort of priority, instead of say housing, what would that do?

And we're not suggesting that is what's going to happen because again, remember the point of these powerful questions is we're inviting conversation. So that means we're not. focused on producing the right answer, we're focused on having the conversation and seeing what comes about because of that.

So if we then zoom out a step further, , we could then look at this more broadly and say, well, Okay. We've, we've talked about, , farming produce, uh, you know, having too much of some products and not enough of something else, what would we need to change? , so that all, all the produce that's, , grown locally was kept or used in Meadowview.

, what would be required for that to occur? , and what would the flow and effects of that be? So for instance, that might be that we have to, find new ways to use some of the surplus produce for other purposes or shift farming practices or. Something else, again, not quite sure, but that's the purpose of the conversation.

We're trying to generate these new futures. And what we're doing here is rather than taking a particular sort of slice of the, the narrative, which I did in the previous question is I've focused more generally on actually a broader topic, which was that food surplus issue. Uh, and then, you know, you could even go a step further back again.

We've got this demographic shift and maybe this view around community connectedness or social capital, you know, what, what would Meadowview require so that all that live in Meadowview can connect through the food system? There's a lot of ambiguity in that question.

But again, I think there's a lot of conversation that could happen around that. I mean, those questions are all intentionally broad. , but also the approach with this, , is that we want to be thinking about different perspectives. , and so again, the broadness allows for that different perspective, , that each person might bring to be, , considered , and discussed equally, , rather than, focusing in on particular perspectives or individual views.

the. Core of a generative question is the conversation on potential. , and really what we're trying to do through a generative question or a generative powerful question is really giving people a space to participate in that process of potential or potential setting or potential, , seeing, you could think of these as like co creation type processes.

, but really it's all around using these sorts of powerful questions to frame a variety of possible futures. To help you maybe just think about what it is that you're grappling with a bit differently. So I think really at the end of the day, your objective with the use of powerful questions isn't the output, um, or at least not solely, it's not about getting an answer to that question as such.

It's about creating a space for people to come together. Um, it's about, Using that space to form connections, build relationships, foster understanding of different perspectives, , consider different attitudes, and seeing what can be influenced by the space that you've created the thing that I didn't get into, necessarily, but that you should always be thinking about is whose involvement.

, are we seeking in that space and are there opportunities to potentially shift views on the nature of the problem or or the thing that we're looking at, , by involving certain people? Can we be quite strategic in that? Something that I think will gain more traction? And I know people that work in the sort of co design space think about this, but, , involving people that are from radically different perspectives or ends of a, of a spectrum, , who maybe do have quite vested interests, , or have very, , particular perspectives, um, Due to organizational remits, including people like that in these processes, um, even if they are counter to sort of the broader view that, um, that everyone else has could actually be beneficial.

And if managed in the right way, because you can , have those conversations and have this space to, to explore. And really that's what powerful questions are all about. It's about inviting that conversation, um, between different views. 

The whole purpose of this episode, uh, today has been really just to introduce some different language, some different ideas so that you can start thinking about the questions that you're asking.

There's not really any hard boundaries to these processes. Um, but you can start your thinking about this sort of use of questions using those different categories that, um, I suggested before. So diagnostic questions, you know, they're the ones that are really going to help us understand how a system functions or works, uh, reframing questions.

So they're there to help. Challenge our assumptions and mental models, generative questions. They're there to help us formulate or envisage possibilities for the future. Even sort of labeling something as a powerful question, um, really can just help frame the conversation. It's a bit of a way of saying , this is a question we're posing to the room.

To foster conversation. And that is its objective. We're not necessarily seeking to answer it. It's a question that opens, not closes the conversation. So if you've taken away anything from this, , I think the, the key thing here is that, the asking the right question is an incredibly powerful tool in systems thinking.

 they determine. What we see, , what we ignore and the futures that we might be able to see. So next time you're grappling with a systems problem or a complex problem, , ask yourself, , are we posing the right questions? Are they sufficiently powerful? And are we inviting the right conversations?