My theory, Three Net Theory (3nt; www.3nt.se; 3ntwiki [3ntwiki]), is based on the concepts of tacet knowledge (Polanyi), reflective practitioner (Schön); system (von Bertalanffy); on Gregory Bateson’s definition “(a bit) of information is a difference that makes a difference” and on chaos researchers’ description of chaos: it’s about unpredictability.
A meeting is a situation and can be described with the 3nt concepts “possibility room” and “leading factor”. A leading factor is something that CAN make a difference. Examples of leading factors are time and place; ideas, dreams, visions and goals; questions; emotions, perceptions, knowledge and misconceptions; words and concepts; things etc.
The wall of a possibility room is a system of leading factors, of “leading elements”. Inside the room there are “internal elements” that also are leading factors - they can make a difference. Outside the possibility room there are outer elements which can not make a difference for what is happening inside the room.
The leading elements in the wall of opportunity constitute order and predictability, inside the possibility room there is chaos and unpredictability. Arrangements, solutions, answers can arise from chaos through self-organization - emergence emerges. What can happen during a meeting, i.e. what can emerge in a possibility room depends partly on the leading elements that create the order, partly on how internal elements interact, self-organize themselves.
Well - what do you think about leading factor and possibility room as tools in a discussion about meettings?