Value of Circle - Interview with Nancy Johnson
July 7, 2004
Nancy J. Johnson, CFP®,
is a member of the Board of Directors of the Financial Planning Association.
When Nancy joined the FPA Board in 2002, it was just learning how to use Circle
process. Nancy initially described herself as a “black and white” thinker, and
was leery of Circle process and what the FPA Board was trying to accomplish with
it. I was FPA’s CEO and executive director until January 2004. In June
2003, FPA’s president-elect and I attended a Circle Practicum to enhance our
Circle skills. I recently interviewed Nancy on her experience with Circle
What was your first experience of Circle process? How did
you feel about it?
My first experience
was a Board meeting where I wasn’t really a board member yet, I was there to
observe and learn. It [Circle process] was still new to the Board, and it was
very new to me. It seemed weird, because there wasn’t a table. That bothered
me more in thinking about it ahead of time than it did when I got there. It
was the Board’s first meeting since being together on September 11th
and there were lots of emotions in the group. The Circle seemed to help
promote the closeness of the group as we shared our feelings – probably more
so than would have happened in a typical Board environment.
Tell me more about your experience and what you learned.
What I got to that
first meeting… when I came in, I didn’t know what to expect. What I had heard
about how the Board met seemed touchy-feely for a Board meeting. And the
Board was just learning about Circle. People weren’t real sure how to… it was
still confused. We didn’t have someone to get us started. When it turned
around to me – started to feel like it was really working - was when we had
Christina [Baldwin, author of Calling the Circle,
facilitate]. That’s when it started to flow. Before, people weren’t really
sure what to do next. When to go to the next topic, when a topic was closed,
since we didn’t really have many motions or votes. Christina helped us learn
to name consensus, even to use “thumb votes” to make sure how everyone feels.
We learned not to go
off and have bitch sessions after the meeting; if something bothers you, say
it in the group. Don’t try to push your agenda with buddies when you leave
the room.
Using small groups
occasionally helped pick up the pace. Also, we started using Open Space
Technology at the end of the meeting every time, so that if you had something
to talk about you had the opportunity. And those items become agenda items,
and the board is in control of it. It felt more like an open agenda, which
tied back into the Circle.
How do you feel about Circle process now?
I think it’s
phenomenal. We get to the heart of an issue more quickly than a traditional
board. We hear from more people than we would around a table. People are
willing to share their feelings more quickly, because of the check-in and
check-out. People are more willing to be open and honest. The tone we
establish during check-in, of fully showing up as whole people, just carries
through. We say things we might not have said otherwise. The group has the
benefit of more perspectives, more honesty, than it would otherwise, and that
helps us make better decisions.
It still can be
frustrating – but for shorter periods of time than it was originally. I saw
it break down badly once for an hour, and that helped me realize how well it
works when it’s working properly.
Why do you feel Circle process is valuable to a Board like
FPA’s?
Because we’re not a
doing board, we’re a board that focuses on strategic thinking and visionary
thinking. The Circle allows us to get to that quicker than in a board room
setting. It gives people the comfort level to lay it out, whatever they’re
thinking, even if they’re not sure that it’s the right thing to say. We have
a much greater comfort level than I have seen in a regular board setting.
When we are sitting in our circle and discussing a difficult or emotional
topic, we get to the heart of the topic, and at the end of the discussion,
however long that takes, I always feel like we made the right decision. One
person didn’t sway or control it. We got to the heart of the matter. I never
feel like a decision has been pushed down my throat, by the leaders or anyone
else. It makes a difference in how we leave the meeting and talk about it,
how we support the decisions we make.
You rarely walk out
of the meeting with a lot of smaller groups complaining about what happened.
You reached a consensus, and most people in the room feel comfortable and are
okay with moving forward. Sometimes you walk out of there, and you know you
didn’t reach a decision. At the beginning that was frustrating for us,
especially for me. And the topic simmers in the time between meetings, and
the next time you come back to that topic, it becomes easier to get to a
consensus. You get there quicker. The previous conversation wasn’t wasted.
I have faith in that now.
I feel less
personally attached to the outcome. When I leave the board room, after we’re
done reaching a decision that I was hesitant about or adamantly opposed to,
I’m not opposed to it anymore, or I feel better about it. I feel like I have
the right and freedom to say what’s on my mind; I get to state my opinions and
my feelings. Some times it’s pure feelings. That’s really important. For
visioning, especially, feelings can be very important, more important than
facts. I feel more like I was involved in the decision, even if I didn’t want
it originally. I don’t walk out angry and frustrated. I feel heard – listened
to. That’s huge.
If you could share a message with folks who are skeptical
about whether their group should use Circle process, what would it be?
Be open. Be open to
the process and be willing to give it time. You won’t be in the perfect place
immediately. You have to work at it. You’ll have days where you think it
doesn’t work. In the long run, it will make you such a stronger group,
because all your members will feel heard, will have expressed their thoughts,
and you’ll arrive at better decisions as a group than if a few people are
pushing or leading a decision. It can be hard for leaders, because their
agenda can be taken away from them. They have less position power in a Circle
than a traditional Board. The entire group is exercising leadership in a
Circle.
Let’s imagine I’m a task-oriented person on a Board which
has decided to try Circle. What is your advice to me?
If their board isn’t
task oriented, that person would be frustrated anyway. They need to learn to
believe they’re moving forward as a board, even if they don’t feel they’re
accomplishing X # of tasks. Not having a true agenda in front of a
task‑oriented person blows your mind. Two days with no formal agenda? Oh,
God! I learned to not expect certain things – to go in open. To not put my
expectations on the group. I got more relaxed, and I was more comfortable
with the process, because I wasn’t sitting there with my agenda, waiting for
them to get through it. And what we accomplish is phenomenal.
What do you most appreciate about Circle process?
Honesty. Safety.
There’s safety there. Because we have gotten our Circle to the point where
it’s a very safe environment. You can say something that might be contrary,
or off the wall, or personal, but the group will not hold it against you or
look at you funny. It opens the whole group up, not just one or two people,
to say whatever is on their minds. Circle is a big reason why I have the
comfort level to consider running for President. Because the circle will hold
the responsibility, and all I have to do is help create the safe container for
the group to be in the conversation. In Circle, the entire group is
exercising leadership.
