|
GOING DEEPER: Elicitation
Previous Essay Next Essay
Array Elicitation: A Platonic Presentation
Elicitation is a process of interacting with the exemplar through questions and observation in order to formulate a useful and faithful description of his experience and behavior. We will begin with an ideal approach and ideal questions, but in fact the process of elicitation is anything but neat and straightforward in actual practice. This means that eventually we must be familiar enough with the distinctions we are using that we no longer depend upon the ideal questions to do all the work of revealing the information. Becoming familiar with those distinctions, however, is best done by encountering them first in uncluttered and straightforward examples.
The purpose of elicitation is to identify the underlying and generative elements of experience. And our job, as modelers, is to ask questions that orient the exemplar's attention and awareness in ways that, though possibly unfamiliar, nevertheless allow them to access the information we need. The situation is much like being faced with a safe containing something valuable. The door has a combination lock. The safe is not trying to keep you out. It has no objection to being opened, and is only waiting for you to turn the tumblers in the right way. However, suppose you don't have the combination. Instead, what you have is an understanding of how tumblers work, a stethoscope for listening, and sensitive fingers to turn the dial for tell-tale clicks that indicate when a tumbler has fallen. It may take a few tries - you can get misled by errant clicks - but once you have the pattern of turns and numbers, you can go into that safe any time you wish. Now, of course, that combination will not allow you to open any other safe. But the skills of listening and feeling will allow you to discover their combinations as well.
As we discussed in Essay 4, the questions we ask are the first and most direct way we have to gain access to elements of the exemplar's internal experience. Before plunging into our questions, however, we want to remind you that elicitation is not something you do to your exemplar, but something you are doing with your exemplar. Your exemplar is a person to relate to and understand; a safe to open with a sensitive touch (rather than a stick of dynamite). Together, you and your exemplar create a description of his experience and behavior. That description needs to be, in the first instance, something with which your exemplar resonates. That is, it mirrors his experience sufficiently that his response to it is, "Yes, that's what I do." In addition, the description needs to be usable by you. The purpose of elicitation questions is to help you and your exemplar gain access to features of his experience, organizing them in a way that makes them both recognizable by the exemplar and usable by you.
The "Ideal" Sequence
There is no right or wrong sequence for eliciting the elements of the Experiential Array. Nevertheless, there is a sequence we generally try to follow: Criterion, Definition, Evidence, Enabling Cause-Effect, Motivating Cause-Effect, Primary Operation, Secondary Operations, Sustaining Emotion and, finally, External Behavior.
This sequence suggests itself from our experiences in elicitation, which generally shows this flow to be "natural" and "logical": the Definition is a refinement of the Criterion, and Evidence a refinement of both of them. And obviously it is easier to correctly identify Enabling and Motivating Cause-Effects once you have identified the Criterion that is being enabled and motivated. The Primary Operation of the Strategy operates in relation to the Test, which is given by the Criterion and its Evidence, and the Secondary Operations engage when the Primary Operation is not sufficient to satisfy the Test. The Sustaining Emotion is often quite subtle (which, as we have said, casts no aspersion on its impact) and, so, may not have been as much in the exemplar's awareness as the other elements. Eliciting the Beliefs and Strategies first creates a rich and recent re-experiencing of the ability to help the exemplar discern the Sustaining Emotion. External Behavior is saved for last precisely because it is where people who have not been trained in modeling generally go first (and, often, the only place they go). Since we want to identify only those behaviors that are unique to the ability and are not likely to emerge naturally from the Beliefs, Strategies and Emotions, specifying these other Elements first helps narrow the field within which to look for External Behaviors.
Planting the Flag
The richness of human experience and language being what they are, there is a high potential for ending up neck deep in a plate of information spaghetti. What comes to our aid here is bearing in mind that the elements of an Array - and of an ability - have a special relationship with each other: they all "fit" with each other. Beliefs, Strategies, Emotions and External Behaviors are, in a sense, different languages that are being used to describe the same "thing." And so there will be both some overlap and some differences in those descriptions. But whatever those differences are, they will fit with - make sense with - the other elements of the Array. Something that does not fit with the other elements belongs to another aspect of this person's world (that is, another Array).
The coherency of the Array helps us avoid getting caught in the spaghetti of information by providing an ongoing check: Does this fit with what else is operating in the Array or not? Anything that does not fit does not belong in this Array. (Though of course it may be worth noting because it belongs in another Array that you are interested in, or may simply be a potentially valuable bit of information that is worth pursuing later.)
Array coherency also frees us from being overly concerned about following the "ideal sequence" of elicitation. Regardless of where we enter the Array or how we carom through it, bouncing from one element to another, we have our ongoing test: Does this fit with what else is operating in the Array or not? This test helps keep us focused on what is relevant and what, though interesting, is nevertheless outside of the Array in focus. And so, we suggest "planting the flag" somewhere in the Array. By this we mean, begin by finding something about the structure of the exemplar's experience that you are confident does belong to the ability your are modeling, and from there expand your subsequent information gathering.
For reasons we explained above, we try to plant our flag in the Criterion, and explore from there. But in fact we can plant the flag anywhere in the Array and set off from that point, as long as we continue to test our subsequent discoveries against the coherency of the growing Array. If your sense during elicitation is to begin with External Behavior (because it is easier, or it is what the exemplar wants to talk about, or something about it has come out that captures your interest), then by all means plant your flag there. Using the architect of previous Essays as an example, you could plant your flag in her behavior of walking around the property. With that as your point of reference, you can then move on to the Criterion by asking something like, "As you are walking around the property, what are you evaluating?" You are, in effect, asking your exemplar, "What Criterion relates to that External Behavior?" As long as you make sure that the Array grows into a coherent whole, you can plant your flag anywhere in it. And of course, if you discover that you have planted your flag in an Array that is not really the one you want to model, you can always pull up your flag and plant it again in the Array you do want to model.
Array Elicitation Questions
Just as there is no ideal sequence for elicitation, there are no ideal elicitation questions. This fact has not stopped us from trying to find them. Our many years on the quest has convinced us that if such questions exist at all, they will be found sitting on a shelf beside the Grail. In the meantime, we can offer you questions that generally work quite well to orient the exemplar's experience in a way likely to take them to the particular kind of information you want to elicit. In fact, for most of the elements we will offer you two questions. Both versions seek the same information, but use different phrasing. Usually, if one question does not help your exemplar access the information, switching to the other question will often be effective.
It is also essential to bear in mind the points we made in Essay 4 about the necessity of understanding the kind of information you are wanting to elicit. Knowing a question to ask is not a substitute for knowing what kind of information you are wanting to get through asking that question. Being familiar with the kind of information you are after (that is, the distinctions) allows you to recognize whether or not it is "there" in the exemplar's response to your question. Ultimately, familiarity with the distinctions will free you to generate questions in response to the changing needs of the elicitation, and allow you to free yourself from reliance on the "standard" forms we are starting with here.
Nevertheless, we do suggest that, for awhile, you use the standard forms of questions we are offering to you in this section. Words do matter, as we have seen. For instance, a question that is often used to elicit the Criterion is, "What is important when you are...?" Is that much different than asking, say, "What is important about...?" It turns out that it is very different. Compare where the following two questions take your experience:
"What is important when you are reading?"
"What is important about reading?"
Probably they take you to two different aspects of your experience. The "when you are" of the first version tends to put you inside the experience, where you can simply report on what is going on in your experience as you read. The "about" in the second version tends to put you outside of the experience, making judgements on your experience of reading.
The wording of the following elicitation questions, though not ideal, has been annealed and refined in the crucible of work with countless exemplars. As we already admitted, the result is not perfect questions. There are no perfect questions. But these are good ones. We will point out some of their individual merits as we go along to better help you understand why they are the way they are. Once you understand what you are going for in asking these questions, you will be free to generate questions of your own that take into account those same concerns.
We will begin with Platonic elicitation examples. In other words, all of the examples in this essay are made up. This is an heuristic for the purposes of illustrative clarity; the messiness of real elicitation will follow soon enough in the next essay. Before wading into those deeper waters, however, we can use these "clean" examples to get a clearer impression of what the elicitation questions are aiming for and, therefore, have a clearer idea of what to look for in real-life elicitations. (You will find the completed Arrays for each of the following examples here, at the end of this essay.)
Beliefs
One would think that there would be no need for instruction on eliciting beliefs. People express them freely and often. Why not simply write them down as they flow out? The reason, (as we discussed previously) is that the exemplar's flood of beliefs is largely made up of a lot of the same structural droplets. Rather than try to get our arms around the exemplar's often enormous and constantly shifting sea of beliefs, we look for the underlying structures that generate that sea. For this purpose, we have made the general distinctions of equivalence and causal relationships, and have made the finer distinctions of Criterion, Definition, Evidence, Enabling and Motivating Cause-Effects. These distinctions are portrayed in dynamic relationship to one another in the Belief Template.
Criterion
Depending upon the inherent complexity of the ability and the subjective world of your exemplar, there can be anywhere from a few to hundreds of criteria operating in their experience. This cornucopia of criteria is initially made more manageable by specifying what particular aspect of their ability you want to model. (We may be modeling several aspects of an ability, of course, but each is modeled separately - or at least kept separate from the others as we gather information. See Essay 2: The Process of Modeling.) Modeling is made still easier by recognizing that, although many criteria are contributing to this particular aspect of the ability, you are primarily interested in identifying the "criterion in focus," or, more simply, the Criterion.
When eliciting the Criterion, you are asking for that primary and essential standard the exemplar wants to satisfy or fulfill when in the context of the ability. It is as if the exemplar is asking himself, "What standard do I most want or need to satisfy in this situation?"
ELICITATION QUESTIONS:
"When you are [ability], what is important to you?"
"When you are [ability], what are you evaluating?"
(In presenting elicitation questions, we will use the convention of putting in [brackets] a description of the type of content you need to insert into the question. For example, if the ability is "Running a brainstorming session" and you want to elicit the Criterion, you would ask, "When you are running a brainstorming session, what is important to you?" If the ability was "Appreciating abstract art," you would ask, "When you are appreciating abstract art, what is important to you?" Naturally, you may need to adjust the question to fit the form of the exemplar's content so that the question makes grammatical sense.)
EXAMPLES
Q: "When you are planning a celebration, what is important to you?"
Adam: "What I really want is that everyone is included in whatever is going on."
Q: "When you are being patient with a child as she is learning something, what are you evaluating?"
Bridgit: "Is there movement. I don't care about the end point, really, only that she is moving in that direction."
Q: "When you are designing the user interface for a program, what is important to you?"
Claire: "I want it to be elegant. An interface that has elegance is just... well, it's just so great when they are."
One of the most common pitfalls that folks fall into when going after the Criterion is that of eliciting one of the many criteria that are relevant to the context of the ability, but not the Criterion that is primary to the ability itself. The introductory phrase, "When you are..." is intended to help address this by taking your exemplar's attention to when he is in the process of manifesting his ability, rather than outside it (where there are, of course, any number of criteria).
Definition
When eliciting the Definition, keep in mind that you are after a description of a kind of experience (or, if you prefer, a class of experience). The Definition is much like a dictionary definition, which is an abstraction or description that presents the general nature or essential qualities of something (in the case of modeling this is the Criterion).
ELICITATION QUESTIONS:
"What is [Criterion]?"
"What do you mean by [Criterion]?"
EXAMPLES
Q: "What do you mean by 'everyone is included'?"
Adam: "That whatever is going on, each person has a role in it, or is somehow directly involved."
Q: "What do you mean by 'movement'?"
Bridgit: "Well, I mean that she can do something she couldn't do before, or understand something she didn't understand before. Even the tiniest of things is enough."
Q: "What is 'elegance'?"
Claire: "A web site where the things just flow easily from one point to another, that's elegance."
It is often the case that when exemplars are asked to define a Criterion, they respond with examples of what the Criterion is, rather than the abstracted description of the kinds of experiences that Criterion covers for them. For instance, Adam in the example above could have instead answered with, "If there is a presentation to make - of an award or something - I try to make sure that everyone gets a chance to touch it or hold it, and is present when it is given. Even kitchen staff." This is a very interesting example of what Adam does. Obviously, some celebrations don't include awards, so the example does not define what it means for everyone to be included.
To get the Definition, you can ask for additional examples. Then look for the pattern that ties all the examples together, and offer your version of the Definition to your exemplar. He will know right away if it fits his experience or not. "Does not fit" is almost as useful as "does fits," because it will give your exemplar what his experience is not, which will almost always help him bring into focus what it is. Alternatively, you can direct your exemplar to "chunk up" from his examples by asking some version of, "What kind of experience are those examples all examples of?"
Evidence
Evidence specifies what the exemplar sees, hears and/or feels that indicates his Criterion is being satisfied or not. When eliciting Evidence, keep in mind that it is intended to capture the exemplar's sensory experiences.
This does not mean we must slavishly adhere to describing things in minute, sensory detail. We could say, "The corners of her lips are turned up at a 30 degree angle and her mouth is spread wider, thinning her lips - which are slightly parted - her head tilted slightly back, there are crinkly lines at the corners of her eyes, which have been drawn wider" etc. Or we could simply say, "She's smiling." Both are sensory experiences; the first is more specific. The question is, is it unnecessarily specific? Evidence needs to be described at a level of specificity that allows you to see, hear and feel the same things the exemplar does in relation to his Criterion. If the statement, "She's smiling," is enough then there is no need to chunk it down. A statement such as, "She looks at me with a certain expression," however, is not specific enough to allow you to perceive what the exemplar perceives. There are a lot of facial expressions, so this second statement needs to be chunked down further until it becomes specific enough for you to share the exemplar's perceptions.
ELICITATION QUESTION:
"What do you see, hear and/or feel that lets you know there is* [Criterion]?"*(or "you are" "it is" "you have" etc.)
EXAMPLES
Q: "What do you see, hear and/or feel that lets you know that 'everyone is included'?"
Adam: "Well, no one is by themselves, and the groups of people are always changing. People feel free to ask for what they want, or even complain, and when there are group things, there is kind of one sound in the room, not quiet over here, laughing there, talking there, and so on."
Q: "What do you see, hear and/or feel that lets you know that there is 'movement'?"
Bridgit: "You can see it in the child's face, really. She's intent on what she's doing, and looks proud. Sometimes smiling."
Q: "What do you see, hear and/or feel that lets you know that an interface has 'elegance'?"
Claire: "You're not even thinking about how to find something; you just go to it. In fact, the best is when you aren't even aware that you are jumping from one place to another."
Like Definition, asking for the Evidence often elicits specific examples, rather than a description of the type of experience that constitutes the Evidence. And, as with the Definition, you can abstract the Evidence from the examples or make the distinction clear enough to your exemplar that he can pull the description together himself.
Enabling Cause-Effect
The Enabling Cause-Effect and the Strategy are related, so it is important to recognize how they are different. The Strategy lays out what the exemplar does, that is, the specifics of his internal and external behaviors. Beliefs, however, are generalizations about how the world works or is organized. The Enabling Cause-Effect is the exemplar's generalization about what conditions help make it possible for the Criterion to be fulfilled. But since our doing is usually so readily apparent and accessible to us, exemplars may start describing elements of their Strategy to you, rather than going to the level of generalization that informs and guides that Strategy. This means that you need to step into the context of the ability with your exemplar's answer and ask yourself, "Is this a generalization about how the world works in relation to the Criterion, or is this what the exemplar does to satisfy the Criterion?"
ELICITATION QUESTIONS:
"What leads to or makes possible [Criterion]?"
"What is necessary for there to be [Criterion]?"
EXAMPLES
Q: "What is necessary for 'everyone to be included'?"
Adam: "You have to know the group. Without that, you can't really know what they will naturally enjoy and respond to."
Q: "What leads to or makes possible 'movement'?"
Bridgit: "Trust. If you trust the child to know how much she can handle at any one time, you will be able to help her move. And whenever there is movement, I always praise her."
Q: "What leads to or makes possible 'elegance'?"
Claire: "If we are talking elegance, it has to be easy and smooth to navigate. And if you're going to get that, you have to care more about the experience of the end user than about being clever, getting lost in your own cleverness."
One way to determine what is Enabling Cause-Effect and what is Strategy is to consider, Does the exemplar's answer tell me what specifically to do? (Strategy) Or is it more of a goal or intention that could be pursued in many different ways? (Enabling cause-Effect) For instance, Adam says, "You have to know the group." It is easy to imagine that there are numerous ways of coming to know the group: sending out a questionnaire, doing a combined astrological chart, meeting each person privately for a talk, getting a supervisor's assessment of them, gathering information about their cultural and social backgrounds, and so on. These are all Strategy elements. And of course, all of the elements of a Strategy are in service of satisfying the Criterion. (Perhaps Adam uses all of these tactics as ways of fostering "inclusion.")
The Enabling Cause-Effect, however, describes what conditions must exist for the Criterion to be satisfied; not what specific actions bring about those conditions. Adam's belief, "You have to know the group," tells us what he believes must happen so that people are included, but not the actions that will make that come true. That is the province of the Strategy.
Remember that the exemplar's answer to your question may include information that is not an answer to that question. Both Bridgit and Claire's answers provide examples of this. Bridgit added, "And whenever there is movement, I always praise her," which is part of her Strategy sneaking into the Enabling Cause-Effect. Claire began her answer with, "If we are talking elegance, it has to be easy and smooth to navigate," which is part of the description of what "elegance" is, rather than a condition that brings about "elegance."
Motivating Cause-Effect
It is often the case that fulfilling the Criterion is motivated by the exemplar's belief that this will have a significant impact on something which is of even greater importance to him. Of course, fulfilling the Criterion is causally linked to attaining the goal of the ability itself. For instance, Adam's ability to ensure that "everyone is included," helps make it possible for him to plan successful celebrations. However, even though it is important to Adam to plan successful celebrations, it is probably the case that what is fueling his efforts is something even "higher" (or "deeper," if you prefer) than the Criterion and the goal of the ability. We work competently at our jobs to take care of our families, for instance, or to be a successful person, or to be proud of ourselves. The Motivating Cause-Effect identifies this higher (deeper) goal that is served by the Criterion (and perhaps the ability itself, as well).
ELICITATION QUESTIONS:
"Why is [Criterion] important?"
"What does [Criterion] lead to or make possible?"
EXAMPLES
Q: "Why is it important that 'everyone is included'?"
Adam: "If they are included they will sort of all feed their excitement and joy into each other, and the celebration becomes an opportunity to become a real community."
Q: "What does 'movement' lead to or make possible?"
Bridgit: "Freedom, actually. As long as you're moving, you have the possibility of going anywhere."
Q: "Why is 'elegance' important?"
Claire: "A site that allows you to flow through it is one that you will want to stay at, and return to. You may not even know why, but you will just love that site."
Motivating Cause-Effects usually address what one perceives as the truly "big" concerns, the truly important concerns in one's life, or in life in general. This is the sense of both "real community" and "freedom." Motivating Cause-effects need not always be so lofty, however. Claire's "users will want to stay at, and return to, the web site," is an example. Even so, like all Motivating Cause-Effects, it is something of importance to the exemplar outside of, or bigger than, the context in which the ability is operating. Claire is bringing "elegance" to a web site before it is on the screens of the users; Bridgit helps engender movement in children so that they have more "freedom" in their futures; and Adam creates inclusion in a group so that they can forge a "real community."
A variation that you will find in some exemplars is that their Criterion and Motivator are the same. That is, the criterion in focus in the context of their ability is also something that is inherently important to them, and so is not in service of anything "higher" or "deeper." For instance, it could be that for Adam, "inclusion" is a very highly valued Criterion, inherently important and satisfying. Indications that your exemplar's Criterion and Motivator are the same (that there is no Motivating Cause-Effect) are (1) when you ask why the Criterion is important, and he answers with that same Criterion/Definition (even if phrased differently); (2) he can't come up with anything that the Criterion is in service of; (3) he says things like, "Well, it just is," "What else is there?" "That's what life's about," and so on.
Supporting Beliefs
The exemplar will be operating within a web of beliefs, of course. The ones we want to avoid are those that are irrelevant to the ability itself, or are relevant but not necessary to be able to manifest the ability. Most of the necessary beliefs will be variations on a few underlying themes, which we capture in the Belief Template. By capturing that belief structure, we avoid having to take in possibly endless versions of the same, underlying equivalence and causal relationships. Still, there may be some beliefs in that "web" that are very helpful in manifesting the ability. These Supporting Beliefs are not part of the Belief Template, but they do support the Array.
Supporting Beliefs are not elicited. Instead, they appear fortuitously, and elicitation involves noticing you have been "grabbed" by a statement from your exemplar. Usually you are "grabbed" because the belief is expressed in a punchy, evocative or epigrammatic form. If, when you try on that belief, it also significantly facilitates manifesting the ability, it is worth noting as a Supporting Belief.
EXAMPLES
Adam:"No one wants to be left out - they just want to be asked in the right way."
Bridgit: "Think like a child and you will know what to do."
Claire: "When it comes to the Internet, what annoys you probably annoys everyone else, too."
Strategies
Strategies are sequences or sets of internal and external behaviors intended to fulfill a Criterion. In other words, a Strategy is whatever your exemplar typically does to get what he wants in a particular situation. Depending upon the ability and the exemplar, a Strategy can involve numerous behaviors, some of which may be complex, and will operate either sequentially, simultaneously, or on an as needed basis, or any combination of those forms. The best way to get our arms around this variety and complexity is through eliciting a narrative of the Strategy.
Primary Operation
The Primary Operation is a description of what the exemplar typically does to satisfy his Criterion. And these doings can cover a lot of behavioral territory. Usually there will be both internal processes and external behaviors in a blend, the ratios of which will depend upon the particular ability. Probably the most difficult issue to deal with when eliciting the Primary Operation is that of specificity. An Operation step that is "too big" does not give enough direction as to what to do. An Operation step that is "too small" gives superfluous detail.
As an absolute, there is no right amount or level of specificity, of course. The right level of specificity is that which allows you to manifest the Strategy yourself. So, the goal in eliciting the Primary (and Secondary) Operations is to chunk them down to your level of competence. (Ask yourself the question, "Do I know how to do this [step] from her description of it?") For instance, if a step in the exemplar's Strategy is to "imagine the future I want," and you already know how to do that, there is probably no need to chunk it down any further. If instead you do not know how to "imagine the future I want," then that step in the Strategy does need to be chunked down further, until it is described as a set of internal processes and external behaviors at which you are (or know how to become) competent. (There may also be situations when you know how to manifest a particular aspect of the exemplar's strategy, but wonder whether she has something interesting to say on the subject. For instance, she says she "strikes up a rapport with her client." You know how to do that yourself. Still, you are interested in how she does it because there might be something to learn there. Curiosity is legitimate.)
ELICITATION QUESTIONS:
"What are you usually doing to [satisfy Criterion]?"
"How do you usually go about making sure that [Criterion is satisfied]?"
EXAMPLES
Q: "When planning a celebration, how do you usually go about making sure that 'everyone will be included'?"
Adam: "If I don't already know the people who will be coming - I mean their sub-culture; age range, where from, social and work background, their relationships with each other, and so on - I find out. And, of course, I find out what the agenda is for the celebration. Then, for each of the events on the agenda, I imagine I'm one of the people attending - not as me, but as them - and ask myself, 'What do I wish would be happening here now?' And then I imagine whoever is coming who is likely not to feel comfortable and part of the group, and ask myself, 'What would draw me into this?' I take those two answers and figure out how to make sure both happen."
Q: "What are you usually doing to help bring about 'movement' with a child who is learning?"
Bridgit: "Several things. I'm always noticing what the child can do already. I consider what would be a small step from there toward where she eventually needs to be in her learning. And we take just that step. If she's pleased with that, it goes smoothly, we can take the next step. I'm always paying close attention to her attention level and comfort. As long as these are okay, we can keep going. And when she moves forward in any way, I make sure to let her know that, so she can be proud of herself, which, of course, she has every right to be."
Q: "What do you usually do to ensure that an interface is 'elegant'?"
Claire: "I just blank myself out, set Claire aside for awhile. I come to this web site like it's my very first visit, and as someone who is fairly new to the web. And I notice, where do my eyes go? Do I have to search for what I want?, which is a problem. Is there stuff I would never use, or at least not here? Also a problem. I also ask myself, how can this whatever-it-is be misunderstood? If it's a search problem, I move things around until it is right where my blank person can find it easily. If it's something superfluous, I put it either on another page or (if at all possible) in the trash can. And stuff that can be misunderstoodÉwell, if it's a graphic, I work with the graphics people to clean it up, and if it's text, the writers."
Notice that in some of these Primary Operations there are sequential steps, such as with Adam's for planning a celebration:
1. Find out "who" is coming, and the event agenda.
2. For each event, imagine I am an attendee and ask myself, "What do I wish would be happening here now?"
3. Imagine I am an uncomfortable attendee and ask myself, "What would draw me into this?"
4. Take those two answers and figure out how to make sure both happen.
Other Primary Operations, such as Bridgit's, include behaviors that are more simultaneous:
+ I'm always noticing what the child can do already.
+ I'm always paying close attention to her level of attention and comfort. As long as these are okay, we can keep going.
And finally, Claire's Primary Operations provides examples of steps that are taken only when the situation calls for them:
* If it's a search problem, I move things around until it is right where my blank person can find it easily.
* If it's something superfluous, I put it either on another page or (if at all possible) in the trash can.
* Stuff that can be misunderstood...well, if it's a graphic, I work with the graphics people to clean it up, and if it's text, the writers."
(It is important to note in these examples that they do not include the back and forth questioning that would probably be necessary to elicit the full extent of the Primary Operation, or to elicit from some of the Operation steps the details that we might need to competently manifest that particular step.)
Secondary Operations
Being an exemplar of an ability means that person consistently has good (excellent, desirable, successful...) results in a particular context. It does not mean that it is always easy, or that it is always smooth sailing, or even that good results are always attained. But an exemplar is not thrown by difficulties that are not handled by his Primary Operation. Instead, he has useful and effective ways to deal with difficult situations, and these are the Secondary Operations.
There are three classes of Secondary Operations that we explore directly: the exemplar's response when his Criterion is not sufficiently satisfied, when it is not at all satisfied, and when it cannot be satisfied. You may not find all three of these types of Secondary Operations represented in your exemplar. An exemplar may simply not have one of these Secondary Operations, or may respond with the same Operation to different situations (for instance, responding with the same behavior both when his Criterion is "not satisfied" and when it "cannot be satisfied").
ELICITATION QUESTIONS:
"What do you do when [Criterion not sufficiently satisfied]?"
"What do you do when [Criterion not at all satisfied]?"
"What do you do when [Criterion cannot be satisfied]?"
EXAMPLES
Q: "What do you do when you are not sure if what you have come up with will allow everyone to be included as much as you would like?"
Adam: "I start again, with the imagining and so on, but this time I first think of some different aspect of who these attendees are; I bring out something that I was not considering before about who they are. Often that will give me some new ideas."
Q: "What do you do when you aren't at all able to come up with a way for 'everyone to be included'?"
Adam: "Well, then obviously I am missing something about these people, so I will gather some more information; actually talk with a couple of them to find out what they like, hate, and so on."
Q: "What do you do when you determine that you will not be able to plan the event so that 'everyone will be included'?"
Adam: "I do the best I can, go for the most people I can. I hate doing that, though."
Q: "What do you do when the child is having difficulty in moving in relation to her learning?"
Bridgit: "That is a clear signal that I need to reduce the size of the steps."
Q: "What do you do when the child is not moving at all?"
Bridgit: "Well, then probably something is going on in her life that is more important at that time, something is occupying most of her attention. So I will drop the lesson and try to find out what is going on and, if I can, help her deal with it."
Q: "What do you do when you realize that the child is not going to be able to move?"
Bridgit: "THAT does not happen."
Q: "What do you do when you are having difficulty making a web site elegant?"
Claire: "They're always pretty difficult, I find. I just keep working at moving things around, looking for possible misunderstandings, and so on until it's flowing."
Q: "What do you do when you are not at all able to make a web site elegant?"
Claire: "I try to think of other sites I have worked on or seen that were similar in content, in what they were trying to do. I look at some of those to see how I or someone else organized them. And that usually gives me some clues I can take to the site that's giving me trouble."
Q: "What do you do when you realize that it will not be possible to make a web site elegant?"
Claire: "This does happen once in awhile, and it is because there is something very flawed in the fundamental concept of the site. In those cases, we have to go back to square one and look at what we want the site to do and be, and rebuild it from first principles. That's the only way."
For Adam, the situations in which his Criterion is either not sufficiently satisfied, not at all satisfied, or cannot be satisfied are three, distinct possibilities, and he has different Secondary Operations for handling each one. But just because we ask for each of these three possibilities does not mean that they exist for the exemplar. Bridgit, for instance, does not have a Secondary Operation for "Criterion cannot be satisfied." For her, that is not a possibility; it is always possible to take even smaller steps and, as she says, "I trust that the little steps will add up to getting somewhere eventually." And Claire does not have a distinct Secondary Operation for "Criterion is not sufficiently satisfied." For her there is only continuing to engage in her Primary Operation, unless she hits the wall of being completely unable to bring elegance to the web site.
Emotions
Exemplars (like most of us) are usually ready and willing to talk about what they are feeling, and often there are a lot of feelings to talk about. The quantity of emotions that emerge, the ease with which they are identified, and perhaps the intensity of affect that accompanies them, can mislead us into assuming that all of them are significant, and must be captured in the model. With respect to eliciting our exemplar's emotions, then, our attention needs to be on distinguishing the function an emotion serves in the exemplar's ability, and then determining whether or not that function is essential to the model.
Sustaining Emotion
The ongoing, background nature of Sustaining Emotions means that they often go unnoticed by the exemplar. When it comes to elicitation, this also means that they may not be as readily accessible, or as easily languaged as the other elements of experience. Again, stepping-in provides a way to test whether an emotion is likely to be the Sustaining Emotion for your exemplar. If you find that the emotion needs to be repeatedly triggered for it to stay in experience, then it is probably not a Sustaining Emotion (it is more likely a Signal Emotion). Also, a Sustaining Emotion can be held or maintained in experience regardless of whether the Criterion is satisfied, not satisfied, violated or exceeded. (For example, in Essay 10 we told you about the acquaintance who feels challenged when doing crossword puzzles. He continues to feel challenged even as he is feeling surprised by an answer, frustrated with a clue, elated over figuring out a difficult clue, and so on.)
ELICITATION QUESTION:
"What is the background feeling that keeps you pursuing [Criterion]?"
EXAMPLES
Q: "What is the background feeling that keeps you pursuing 'everyone is included' in celebrations?"
Adam: "Well, through the entire process it's almost as though it is already happening. I see how great it will be, and I'm feeling this sense of excitement about what the celebration can be."
Q: "What is the background feeling that keeps you pursuing 'movement' with children when they are learning?"
Bridgit: "Love. I'm just loving that child the whole time."
Q: "What is the background feeling that keeps you pursuing 'elegance' when designing web sites?"
Claire: "It's a feeling of 'I'm just going to do it somehow,' you know? It's a challenge, I feel challenged."
The description surrounding the exemplar's report of his emotion is worth attending to. Often that description will include explanation and examples that will help you better grasp the specific qualities the Supporting Emotion has for the exemplar. In Adam's description, for instance, he is offering us some of the cognitive facets of his experience of excitement. By adding "it is already happening" and "I see how great it will be" to our own experience of excitement, we bring our emotional state into closer alignment with Adam's experience.
Using the same word to denote an emotion as your exemplar does not guarantee that the two of you are having the same emotional experience. So in some cases, as with Claire and her Sustaining Emotion of challenged, the surrounding description can be necessary to properly grasp the correct "form" of the emotion. Her form of "challenged" - "I'm just going to do it somehow" - feels different than a form expressed by "Nothing can stop me," or by "What can I come up with that could work?" to take just two possible examples.
In addition, the form of the word(s) used to denote an emotion can itself be significant in accurately conveying the exemplar's experience. Bridgit answers, "Love. I'm just loving that child the whole time." If you take a moment to feel love and then to feel loving, you may notice that they take your experience in somewhat different directions. (For us, love has more of a sense of "openness or receptivity to"; loving has more of a sense of "extending to.") Of course, having two ways of describing her emotion may not mean that there is any difference between them for Bridgit. But if they are different to you, then it is worth asking her, "For you, is there a difference between 'love' and 'loving'?"
Signal Emotions
Because Signal Emotions are transient emotional responses to moment-to-moment changes regarding the satisfaction of criteria, there can be a lot of them. And because these emotional responses tend to be similar for everyone using the same Criterion, it is not necessary to identify and catalogue them for a model. Of course, there are exceptions; there may be a particular Signal Emotion that is somehow unusual or, if usual, so significant to the ability that it is important to note it. In either case, there is no elicitation question for the Signal Emotion. The exemplar will certainly offer them in his descriptions. When you step into his experience, if any of those Signal Emotions strike you as particularly worth noting, then note them.
EXAMPLES
Adam: "Okay, here I am, imagining I'm the new hire in the company, and while they're presenting the awards and making all of these inside jokes, I feel very uncomfortable, isolated."
Bridgit: "I was working with a 7-year-old yesterday, and finally she was able to do subtraction for the first time and I was thrilled!"
Claire: "Sometimes I realize I am feeling deeply concerned - like you would feel for someone in possible danger - and when I do I know I am looking at a site that is fundamentally flawed."
We have examples of Signal Emotions from both Adam and from Bridgit, but neither of them is probably worth noting. Most anyone operating out of the Criterion, "people are included" would naturally feel isolated as they imagined being in that "new hire" position at the awards ceremony. And as for Bridgit feeling thrilled, again, that is something any of us is likely to feel if we have the Criterion of "movement" and have been working with a child who has "finally moved"! (And, even if you did not feel those same emotions, you would probably have a response from the same "family" of emotions: instead of isolated, perhaps lonely or distant; instead of thrilled, perhaps delighted or deeply pleased.)
In contrast, Claire's Signal Emotion may be worth including in her model. Feeling deeply concerned is somewhat unconventional and not what we might expect - or naturally experience - from using her Criterion of "elegance." What is more, it serves as a signal to her of something very important in terms of her ability, which is that she is dealing with a web site that may well need more drastic measures than she had expected (perhaps taking her to her 3rd Secondary Operation).
External Behavior
When eliciting External Behaviors, you are not after everything the exemplar does and says. Because much of External Behavior is the natural result of internal processes, it is not necessary to catalogue all of the Behaviors in order to ensure that they will be "there" when you use the exemplar's model; the Beliefs, Strategies and Emotions give rise to most of the External Behaviors.
But "most" is not "all." There may be External Behaviors that are important to the ability, but cannot be counted on to emerge automatically, or are not captured in the Strategy. External Behaviors such as these need to be singled out for the model. A woodworker who exhales as he glides his chisel forward, a teacher who spreads her arms wide and inclines her head as she asks her student to settle down, and a negotiator whose voice tonality becomes deep and smooth when speaking of the grievances of the "other side," are all examples of distinctive External Behaviors that we might not automatically reproduce in ourselves unless they were explicitly brought to our attention in the Array.
Of course, although we have an elicitation question for External Behavior, the best way of identifying significant External Behaviors comes from observing the exemplar in action, when he is manifesting his ability. In this way, you can directly see the behaviors, hear the words and hear the voice tonalities that he takes for granted and, so, may not think to mention during elicitation.
ELICITATION QUESTION:
"What are you doing on the outside - in your behavior - that is essential to manifesting [Ability]?"
EXAMPLES
Q: "What are you doing on the outside - in your behavior - that is essential to planning a successful celebration?"
Adam: "Nothing I can think of." (Observing him make such a plan, though, we see that before each time he imagines being an attendee, he takes a deep breath and settles his shoulders.)
Q: "What are you doing on the outside - in your behavior - that is essential to being patient with a child who is learning?"
Bridgit: "I never sit above or below the child; always on the same level. And I speak to her directly, like she was another, intelligent adult, even if I am using a simpler vocabulary."
Q: "What are you doing on the outside - in your behavior - that is essential to designing an easy-to-use web site?"
Claire: "Well, I look at the screen, move the mouse around and try buttons and links. I growl with disgust sometimes, too."
Bridgit is quite aware of some of her significant behavior and can describe it directly. Claire is also aware of her behavior, and can describe it, but we do not note it as External Behavior because "looking at the screen, moving the mouse around, etc." are behaviors that anyone engaged in that context would naturally do. "Growling with disgust" may not be something anyone would automatically do in that context, but is it relevant to manifesting the ability? If not, then we do not want to note it.
Unlike Bridgit and Claire, Adam is not aware that any of his External Behavior is essential to his ability. But when we observe him in action, we notice that he does have some distinctive External Behaviors, behaviors that turn out to be essential for helping him "clear himself" out of the way so he can more accurately experience the imagined attendee. (We would discover this by stepping in and trying on the External Behavior for ourselves and/or by asking Adam what effect that piece of External Behavior has on him.) If this External Behavior does not automatically emerge from the Beliefs, Strategies and Emotions, we will want to include it in the model.
Contributing Factors
Contributing Factors capture anything that operates outside of the Array itself, but nevertheless makes a significant difference in our effectiveness in manifesting the ability. Of course, "outside the Array" is everything but the Array, making for quite a large playing field. There will be many, many "things" in that field that relate to, and bear on, the ability. In Contributing Factors, however, we want to capture only those that seem essential to a truly effective ability. There is not an elicitation question for Contributing Factors. (Such a question would invite being swamped by the sea of possibilities.) Instead - like Supporting Beliefs and Signal Emotions - we note them when they arise.
EXAMPLES
Adam: "It's true that I do a lot of reading - magazine articles, books, newspaper articles - about what is going on in society, about the different generations, what they are into, thinking, dealing with, the different industries, and so on. You have to be tuned in."
Bridgit: "I have a special room set aside for working with the children. And in there, everything is on their scale - not childish - just on their scale."
Claire: "I do spend a lot of time just surfing around on the web, to see what's out there. Mostly it is annoying, but once in awhile you find some little piece that's brilliant, that's worth, well, stealing the idea. You have to stay up on what is out there."
In each of these cases, we could operate out of the exemplar's Array without adopting these Contributing Factors. But it is easy to imagine that our effectiveness might suffer as a result: If we do not keep current on what is going on in the various segments of society, our ability to imagine celebration attendees will be trapped in the era and scope of whatever knowledge we already have; Having a room like the one Bridgit uses may ameliorate some barriers to comfort and trust, making the work with the children go easier; And Claire's surfing ensures that the elegant solutions she brings to her web site work is also always contemporary, something probably essential in the fast-changing world of the Internet.
* * *
This essay has familiarized us with the "ideal" elicitation questions, and along with those came the ideal responses. This, of course, never happens in a real elicitation. While the particular question we use for elicitation matters, there is no guarantee that the question will elicit the information we are after. The questions we presented in this elicitation example are often effective, but ultimately they must be augmented by your growing ability to recognize the distinctions whenever and however they come as the exemplar describes his or her experience. In the next essay we will use a transcript of an actual elicitation to broaden and deepen our grasp of elicitation as it usually occurs in "real life."
Previous Essay Next Essay
Adam, Bridgit, and Claire's Arrays
Previous Essay Next Essay
|
