Hosting Leadership Development

Juan A. Kanapi, Jr., Ph.D. (2020)

The Art of Hosting (AoH), is the description of worldwide practitioners of new social
technologies, directed towards tapping the wisdom of collective intelligence, in the
face of complex problems. Complex situations are marked by constant changes,
whose pattern and reason can only be understood in hindsight. Handling it requires
new ways of thinking and doing. A new way of leading is necessary if we expect to
survive and thrive in a world that has been described as V.U.C.A. 1 The AoH is a
system that invite co-ownership of issues, through non-judgmental interaction
among members of a diverse group, to define shared purpose, emerge new ways of
understanding and acting, in co-creating positive, inclusive, sustainable realities. It
is way of developing leadership among members of a learning community.

Conversation Circle

A Circle is the most basic structure in the practice of the AoH. It becomes Council
Space when conversation participants willingly “shift from informal socializing or
opinionated discussion, into a receptive attitude of thoughtful speaking and deep
listening.” 2 The circle structure is utilized in plenary as well as in small group
conversations. The design of a conversation circle is illustrated in Figure 1.

Entry Point Entry Point

Figure 1: Basic Structure of a Conversation Circle

1 V.U.C.A. is an acronym to describe a reality that is volatile, uncertain, complex and

ambiguous. It is the “new reality” that demands new ways of living and working.
2 _________________. 2002. “Art of Hosting: Leadership for Sustainability Workbook.”

Art of Hosting Workshop sponsored by the Sequoia Group. Singapore.

1
Participants sitting in a circle enable each one to see every member of the group. An
object at the center of the circle serves as a midpoint that makes everyone
equidistant from each other. The object can be anything that embodies the theme of
the conversation. This symbolizes equality among participants. Every participant’s
perspective is treated with respect and considered as valuable. The centerpiece can
be a simple plant, a collection of art materials, an arrangement of colorful objects, or
whatever piece is meaningful to the participants.

Entry points are provided in the structure of a big conversation circle. These
openings allow people to join the council space or move out, for whatever reason.
Small group circles are ideally composed of no more than 6 participants, to make it
easier for “shy” members to speak their mind and heart. They may be seated about a
round table or may choose to arrange themselves into a circle without the benefit of
a table or even chairs.

Roles in an AoH engagement

There are several leadership roles in the practice of the AoH.

Role General Function

• Caller Invites participants to join a Conversation Circle. He
may participate or not in the actual exchange.
• Host Designs the structure(s) that will motivate participants
to freely share their thoughts & feelings about a shared
meaningful topic. He makes sure that every participant
is able to share thoughts and feelings about the Calling
Question.
• Harvester Publishes the key ideas, culled from the exchanges, in a
way that all participants can view these during Council
Space. Ideally, he remains neutral and does not
participate in the conversation so he can focus on
culling the key points from a conversation.
• Guardian Monitors the psychological state of the group to
determine whether or not they are still open to new
learning. A distinct individual can take on this role or it
can be a role shared by all participants.
• Resource 3 Shares expert information with the group. He can be an
invited specialist or a collective role taken on by the
participants.

3 There were only four roles in a basic Circle, when I learned the Art of Hosting in
2012 – Caller, Host, Harvester and Guardian. Future By Design Pilipinas, based on
its field experiences in the Philippines, added a fifth role - Resource.

2
 Table 1: Roles in the Art of Hosting.

Principles of a Council Space

• Leadership rotates among all circle members. Any group member can take on
any of the roles when in Council mode. Revolving leadership in a group is a
natural way of developing the leadership capacities of its members.
• Responsibility is shared for the quality of the group experience. Every member
of the group is accountable for the quality of the exchange. Council space is
opportunity to cultivate active listening and empathy among participants.
• Reliance is on the shared interest of the whole rather than on any personal
agenda. The shared interest is grounded on the chosen Calling Question.
Exchanges are dedicated to surfacing multiple perspectives in response to
this question, before they go about making a choice. The AoH enables
participants to develop their capacity for systems thinking.

Practices in a Council Space

• Speaking with intention. Every group member is encouraged to share within

a defined period of time, which is no less than 20 minutes per conversation.
Thus, it is important that members share their thoughts in succinct but clear
terms. This can be done through the practice of the following formula (a)
What is the idea; (b) Why this is important; and (c) How this idea can be
implemented.
• Listening with attention. Effective conversations demand awareness of
“filters to communication” from the speaker, listener and / or external
environment. Active listening is required in order to fully understand the
point of view of each speaker and to remember the essence of each message.
Speakers are also motivated to share more when they perceive others to be
listening rather than just hearing out what is being said.
• Tending to the well being of the whole circle. The role of “guardian” of the
process must be taken on by every member to ensure effective, meaningful
interaction within the group. People can only effectively absorb so much
information in any given period of time. It is in the interest of the whole
group that a suggestion to stop the conversation is made when it is clear that
people are no longer capable of meaningful exchange.

Overarching Intention

An Overarching Intention (OI) refers to the long-term purpose of a conversation that

is carried out in the present. It is important to define this in a group that is getting
together for a series of conversations over time, as a response to a shared complex
challenge or opportunity. The OI is a description of a desired future that the group

3
expects to realize, starting with a conversation in the here-and-now. Its wording
must be such that it “pulls” the group to find innovative ways to move towards it.

Calling Question

The quality of a conversation circle is rooted in the design of its Calling Question
(CQ). It is a CQ that initiates the exchange about any topic in a hosted conversation.
The design of the CQ must be powerful enough to engage the minds and hearts of
the participants in a Council Space. It must be defined and co-owned by the
participants, at the start of a series of conversations, along with the OI.

Powerful Question

The real power of a question can only be known during and after the exchange it
generates. A truly powerful question makes conversation participants do the
following:

• Consider the question’s “purpose.” Why is this question being asked? What
is the point? What is my personal purpose for participating in this
conversation?
• Respond based on verifiable reality. Measurable, observable data supports
expressed opinion.
• Open their minds to multiple possibilities, beyond one’s original position in
relation to the question.
• Think more deeply about one’s initial position or about new possibilities
raised in the conversation.
• Recognize opportunity to what was initially presented as a “problem.”
• Discover a new perspective.
• Act on or apply new realizations leading to new behaviors and social
arrangements.

Designing a Powerful Question

Designing a powerful CQ can begin with a Caller or Host of a Conversation Circle,

based on what was discovered about the interest and concerns of targeted
participants. However, this CQ must preferably be presented to the participants for
consideration and improvement, at the start of a conversation, until the way it is
crafted is meaningful to all participants. It is only when the CQ is co-owned by
participants that the Host can choose to be less active but expect a vigorous
exchange within the group. What are some considerations in choosing words that
will make a question powerful?

4
 • The question is expressed in the vernacular that the participants normally
use. A question easily touches the hearts of people when phrased in a
language they use daily.

Paano makakatulong ang kabataan sa pagdisenyo ng mga bago at positibong

katotohanan sa lipunan?

• It touches an issue that is pressing. Participants are more likely to

contribute actively in a conversation when it is about a shared “felt need.”

What is the role of royalty in the modern world?

• It avoids technical questions that can be appreciated only by the “head,” of

those who are technically trained. Words used in the question must touch
the “heart” of the participants, so that they will engage with passion.

How can our unique talents and passions inform and propel a new vision for
our organization?

• It grounds the conversation by compelling the participants to provide

concrete, verifiable data to support assertions.

How do we know when real change has happened in our community?

• The question is brief but expansive enough to elicit alternative perspectives.

It is a question that is focused on one, clear topic, but crafted in a way that
draws multiple perspectives. In their article, “The Art of Powerful
Questions,” Eric Vogt, Juanita Brown and David Isaac (2003) proposed that
questions will more likely elicit diverse perspectives if these begin with
“what, how or why.” 4

What does it take to be a leader when the future cannot be predicted?

How can grade school children learn citizenship?
Why must soldiers learn the art of peace?

What follows are two cases on how a CQ was initiated, presented, discussed and
accepted by participants in a conversation group.

Case 1: Designing a Powerful Question for an Art of Hosting class

4Vogt, Eric E., Brown, Juanita and Isaacs, David. 2003. “The Art of Powerful
Questions: Catalyzing Insight, Innovation, and Action.” Whole Systems Associates.
Mill Valley, CA, USA.

5
The Zuellig Family Foundation (ZFF) sponsored a training program on the Art of
Hosting in March 6-8, 2018. Participants were field personnel of ZFF and their
counterparts from the Department of Health (DOH). Future By Design Pilipinas
(FBDP), with the proposed Calling Question below, hosted this training program. It
was a question crafted and proposed based on interviews with ZFF personnel,
before the program.

How do we host meaningful conversations among our divergent stakeholders who are
disturbed by complex community health issues?

Most of the first part of the proposed question was easily accepted because this was
an Art of Hosting training program. However, participants felt the need to establish
the uniqueness of the learning process, given the realities they face in the field.

The first proposal was to add the word “effective,” before the word “host” to
emphasize that just the act of hosting was not enough. They wanted to learn a
variety of ways to enable effective hosting processes.

A second conversation revolved around a description of their divergent

stakeholders. The stakeholders they wanted to host were those who were “affected
and troubled” and not just “disturbed.” It was not enough to be disturbed in order
to take action about an issue. One needs to be “troubled” to have enough passion to
act on an issue.

Finally, they agreed that hosted conversations in the field had to do with felt
concerns beyond health issues.

Thus, the validated final version of the Calling Question for the class was

How can we effectively host meaningful conversations, among our divergent

stakeholders, who are affected and troubled by complex community health and other
social challenges?

Case 2: Designing a Powerful Question for a Human Interaction Laboratory

In October 12-14, 2018, Ms. Josephine Perez decided to experiment with enabling
her Group Process class to learn the difference between facilitating structured
learning experiences and hosting unstructured learning processes. The experiment
was to be done during a 3-day human interaction laboratory (HIL), when students
who have learned the art of facilitating structured learning processes, are given a
chance to learn how to manage an unstructured group process. Ms. Perez wanted to
find out if the HIL was a viable platform for her students to learn how to handle a
group process whose direction and final output cannot be predicted.

6
A Calling Question was proposed at the beginning of the Human Interaction
Laboratory. It is a question that would be the basis of all the conversations in the 3
days they will be together. The proposed question was

How can each of us contribute to achieve our respective goals?

Participants were asked if the design of the question touched their hearts. Most had
no feeling for this question. They were then invited to propose changes to this
initial question or propose other questions until they can come up with a question
whose design all participants can resonate with. What follows were the different
proposals at crafting the group’s Calling Question.

• How much do I know myself?

• How do I become a better group facilitator?
• How can I share my energies with the group?
• What kind of energy do we exude when we are in a group?
• How can awareness of my energy and the group’s energy help in becoming a
better facilitator?

The exchange of proposals and comments on these lasted for around 30 minutes
before they agreed on the final design of their Calling Question.

How do we sharpen our self-awareness towards building a better group?

Check-in and Checkout

It is best to assume that people who join a hosted conversation circle are busy
individuals. As such, their full attention may not be present when they first come
together. A Check-in process is the signal that Council Space has begun. It is a way
to ensure that the mind, heart and will of participants are in the conversation venue.
The check-in process can take on many forms, such as a 5-minute focused silence, a
shared prayer, group singing / dancing or sharing an interesting but relatively safe
information about the self. The Checkout activity is the indication that Council Space
is over and social space can resume. Samples of a checkout process are a few
minutes of silence, reflection on a “key takeaway” from the conversation(s), verbally
expressing gratefulness to each other for the exchanges or clapping together in
many different ways.

Process of Emergence

The AoH was developed as a response to the dynamics of complex problems.

Complex scenarios are realities that can be bothersome, immediate understanding
of what is happening is not possible because it is constantly changing and known

7
ways of responding are proving to be ineffective. Such scenarios call for emergent
ways of understanding and working.

The Process of Emergence (Figure 1) begins with bringing together a diverse group of
people to engage each other in meaningful conversation about a Calling Question
directed towards an Overarching Intention (Clear Purpose). Different perspectives
must be allowed to surface in the Divergent Phase. The variety of points of view can
eventually lead to “confusion” and “discomfort” as participants grapple with
different possibilities, without clarity of where everything is leading (Groan Zone). A
Host must find ways to get the group to “trust the process” and keep the
conversations going until a new perspective acceptable to all emerges (Emergent
Phase). Only when a new point of view is clear that conversation can focus on how
to experiment with this new idea, to learn by doing (Convergent Phase), until the
“new arrangement” is understood enough to institutionalize.

Figure 1: Process of Emergence

Lessons from the Field

8
Future By Design Pilipinas (FBDP) was the main proponent of the Art of Hosting in
the Philippines. 5 FBDP Partners have been practicing and sharing the AoH since late
2013. Key lessons learned, on what works among groups in the Philippines are
expounded below.

Being a Caller

It is of utmost importance that a Caller is credible in the eyes of the targeted

participants in a conversation circle. This is especially true in a situation where the
process to be applied is “alien” to the participants, just like the AoH. Their trust in
the person of the Caller is “transferred” to the AoH team, allowing participants to be
open to the unknown content and process that will be proposed by the team.

A Caller invites a Hosting team to manage a conversation circle. The team must
make sure that the Caller is amenable to basic principles of the AoH before accepting
the request. Otherwise, the participants, and even the Caller, will eventually resist
the novel approach of the AoH. A FBDP team will always consider the following
principles as basis for deciding whether or not to take on a Hosting invitation. 6

Principle 1: The Caller must be open to new ways of doing things. He must
agree to the use of innovative processes whose results are not predictable. It
entails trusting the Host team to ensure that answers to the CQ will be
attained, aligned with the desired OI.

Principle 2: All conversations are based on a question, starting with the Calling
Question. A Caller had a reason for inviting a Hosting team to work with his
group. It is the job of the potential Hosting team to ferret out and clarify his
reasons. Thus, a Caller is encouraged to engage the Hosting team in the
design of the engagement content and process, starting with the definition of
the initial OI and CQ.

Principle 3: There is great value in tapping collective Wisdom within a diverse

group. It is from diversity that new ideas can be expected to emerge. Ideally,
conversation participants must originate from diverse backgrounds,
representing different roles / jobs, coming from multiple age brackets and
genders. The team does its work with the participants and not for them.
During the actual engagement, the Hosting team flows with the unfolding

5 Ms. Margarita C. Sanchez founded FBDP in October 2013 when Ms. Valmae Rose
gave her permission to use the name Future By Design, which is the name of her
group in Australia. Ms. Sanchez added the word “Pilipinas” to differentiate the
Philippine group that was not connected in any way to the organization of Ms. Rose.
6 Kanapi, Juan and Sanchez, Margarita. 2015. “Experiments in the Art of Hosting in

the Philippines: First Year Lessons from the Field.” FBDP website.

9
 process of the participants and accepts whatever they produce, as opposed to
facilitating their achievement of predetermined outcomes.

Principle 3: Appreciative Inquiry is the foundation of the AoH. The FBDP

Hosting style is based on the belief that every individual is born with natural
gifts, whose power is made available to a group where everyone is made to
feel safe to be their natural self. Thus, conversations are focused on strengths
and opportunities rather than on weakness that must be corrected or threats
that must be fought.

How an invitation is articulated plays a major role in motivating the right people to
join a conversation circle. Often, Callers are limited by their usual ways of
communicating, which may call the attention of the minds of the participants but fail
to touch their heart. A Caller can request help from the Hosting Team, who may be
more conscious of and possibly have better skills in crafting an invitation that will
grab the minds and hearts of critical participants.

Being a Host

The Host has the primary responsibility of coming up with a preliminary

engagement design after meeting with a Caller. This initial design must be
presented to the Caller and revised until both Caller and Host can agree on the OI,
CQ and session flow.

Two frameworks guide the creation of an engagement design 7: Cooperrider’s

Appreciative Inquiry (Ai) and Scharmer’s Theory U (ThU). The Ai-inspired design
content flow focuses on surfacing the internal strengths / resources of a group so
that these may be used to take advantage of opportunities in the external
environment. Theory U shows the process flow for defining their desired future
reality and designing innovative strategies to achieve their shared vision.

The design of the conversation space is just as important as the design of the
content and flow of the engagement. Conditions in the conversation venue can
make participants feel safe and excited to share or dampen their enthusiasm to
engage each other honestly. The following are “nice to have” in the choice of and
arrangement of an AoH venue.

• Place is surrounded by nature accessible to participants or at least has

windows that allow a view of natural surroundings, which makes it
conducive for creative thinking.

7These frameworks are major design guides in all of the Hosting work of Future By
Design Pilipinas.

10
 • Conversation room is square in shape, with enough walking room in-
between tables for small groups and a place in front where a computer and
projector may be stationed for use in plenary.
• Round tables for small groups with a maximum of 6 members. Conversations
may also be done without the tables for as long as the participants are
organized to face each other in a circle.
• Table tops are covered by Manila paper so that participants can draw,
doodle, write short notes on these during the conversations. Doing any of
these can help in opening the mind to allow new ideas to be considered.
• Art materials, like pencils, crayons, felt-tipped pens, clay, can be positioned in
the middle of the table for easy access. Together, these materials can serve
as a centerpiece that makes participants equidistant from each other,
symbolizing equality among them.
• A talking piece may also be included among the materials in the middle of the
table. This object can be any piece that one can be grasped and held in one
hand. Anyone holding the talking piece is the only one who has the right to
speak. A speaker returns the talking piece to the center of the table or passes
it on to another speaker, after he is done with his sharing. This tool can be
helpful in managing the exchanges in a group whose participants are so
excited to talk that several individuals tend to share their thoughts / feelings
at the same time, making it difficult to effectively understand and remember
what each is communicating.
• Walls or boards for posting of harvests, especially if the engagement involves
a series of related conversations.

There are hosting strategies that work very well in bringing down “emotional walls”
among Filipino participants in a conversation circle, allowing them to be more open
to diverse mental models, even those that seem to “oppose” each other.

First, encourage participants to bring a snack from where they are based,
enough to share with the rest of the group.

This food can be utilized to introduce the self, among participants who are
strangers to each other, at the beginning of a conversation engagement.
After, the snacks are gathered into one table at the side or back of the room,
and anyone can get any item, at any time. Each item is a potential
conversation piece, among participants, during breaks in the formal
conversations. It is an effective means for getting participants to get to know
each other better, sooner. Conversation participants tend to be more open to
people whom they have come to know better, through direct interaction.

Second, make available clay dough to subtly activate the creative brain.

The clay can be utilized as a reflection tool and a concrete way of sharing
what was discovered. It is a material that can “awaken the child within”

11
 when played with, over and over again. Our “inner child” is our creative force
that is good to stimulate long before sessions requiring innovation.
Continuous stimulation is done by making clay available to the participants,
during Council space, to play with, even as they go about engaging in
meaningful conversation.

Third, the use of metacards is helpful in stimulating brainstorming processes.

“List, do not debate” is a key feature of effective brainstorming, which is often

forgotten by those who use this tool. The desired “deluge of ideas” is
hampered when participants start criticizing ideas long before the
brainstorming period is over. Getting participants to write down their
spontaneous thoughts on metacard – one idea, one card - is a way of
hindering them from arguing during the brainstorming period. After,
participants can take turns in showing and explaining what each thought
means, to their group. Thoughts published in metacards also make it easier
to physically group into “themes” similar ideas expressed in different words.

Being a Harvester

A Harvester is in-charge of designing and implementing the procedures for

collecting and posting the key ideas emerging from conversations. He is a non-
participant in all conversations with a neutral stance towards the content and
decisions that may emanate from the exchanges.

Key competencies are active listening, observation and ensuring the gathering of
key outputs using tools like felt-tipped pens, metacards, art materials, still photos,
video and voice recorders.

Data collected can be arranged according to S.O.A.R. – strengths, opportunities,

aspirations and results 8 – instead of the traditional management framework of
S.W.O.T, which stands for strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats. The
S.O.A.R. framework is based on Appreciative Inquiry, which is the foundation AoH
practice.

A.S.P.I.R.E. is an alternative framework for organizing harvested data, designed by

Ms. Ana Margarita Sanchez in 2017 (Table 2).

Aspirations Shared Dreams, within a specific period of time, expressed with

standards
Strengths Innate goodness, skills, resources, talents, gifts in a group
Possibilities What is happening outside a group that can be built on to

8Stavros, Jacqueline M. 2013. “The Generative Nature of SOAR: Applications,

Results and the new SOAR Profile. International Journal of Appreciative Inquiry,
August Edition. www.aipractitioner.com.

12
 realize shared dreams
Ideation Innovating processes for tapping selected possibilities
Results Concrete measures showing extent by which aspirations and
their standards have been achieved
Engagement Purposive engagement among stakeholders towardsachieving
shared aspirations.
Table 2: A.S.P.I.R.E. Harvesting Framework

Being a Guardian

Skill in process observation and analysis is the main capacity required of a Guardian.
It is a competence naturally available among “bystanders. 9” A Guardian positions
himself at the back where he can observe participant behavior from a distance.
Being a distance away from the main group allows him to have a detached
perspective of the unfolding dynamics of the whole system in the room. It is his job
to give feedback to the Host on the group’s capacity to continue sharing and
absorbing new information. Feedback must contain (a) concrete, observed
behaviors; (b) its pattern; and (c) what these could be indicating about the quality of
the group’s interactions and energy.

Being a Resource

A Resource Person is usually someone outside the regular conversation group, who
is invited to share unique information, experience or expertise relevant to the
Calling Question being fleshed out by the group. His responsibility is to share,
entertain and answer questions related to his topic and then leave. It is up to the
main group to decide what to do about what they learned from the Resource Person.
Good presentation skill, aside from “rare knowledge, experience and technical
expertise,” is needed to be an effective Resource Person.

It is not always that a group needs an “expert” from the outside. Members can be
resources to each other. That is why it is important to ensure that there is diversity
in a conversation group. It is from this diversity that unique information,
experience and expertise is already available to the group from the very start. An
external Resource Person may be invited only after exhausting what is available
among the members of a conversation group.

Becoming a Team

A conversation group that got together, to deal with a complex issue, will have to
collaborate over a long period of time. The fact that they are getting together does
not automatically make them a team. Thus, it is good to consider what it means to
operate as a “real team,” and even what it takes to work together without an

9 The meaning of this role is based on David Kantor’s Four Player Model.

13
“authority” telling them what to do. Katzenbach and Smith describe three different
kinds of teams that groups can aspire for. 10

A Real Team is “a small group of people, with complementary skills, who are
committed to a common purpose, performance goals and approach, for which they
hold themselves mutually accountable.”

To become a High Performing Team, “a group must meet all the conditions of a real
team and whose members are deeply committed to one another’s personal growth
and success.”

Beyond a high performing team, a group can still develop into a Self-Directed Work
Team, “whose members have day-to-day responsibility for managing themselves
and the work with minimum direct supervision.

Developing from a newly formed group into a real team, and more, can be hastened
by the group’s discussion of and agreement on the Group Norms that will guide their
working together. Different groups will have different team norms. What is
important is that these norms are co-created so that everyone feels mutually
accountable for their implementation.

10Katzenbach, Jon and Smith, Douglas. 2015. The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the
High Performance Organization. Harvard Business Review Press. MA.

14