Conversation for action
Bob Haugen
Public
Seen by 259
This is the human-level protocol for coming to an agreement to do something between independent agents and then doing it. Here is an example of part of the possible conversation between a customer and a supplier:
http://conversationsforaction.com/cfa-playground
Conversations for action can apply to a lot more than customer-supplier conversations.
Helene Finidori's version
Another overview
This discussion spun off a request from @ahdinosaur here. I'll start with some references about CfA for customer-supplier-type situations in a comment below.
The goal of this discussion is to satisfy Mikey's request, 'would it be possible for you to document the CfA protocol through descriptions of message-passing (e.g. “at this stage of the conversation, here are the possible messages to send and the respective next stages”)?'
Mikey Wed 12 Nov 2014 8:55PM
@bobhaugen @lynnfoster these CfA diagrams are incredible. :) i thought the first one was good, but then the second one was even better. i like the reduced scope of focusing on negotiation and actualization, i like describing it as a finite-state machine. the only feedback that immediately comes to mind is considering how this would extend to any number of parties, but more than happy with whatever direction y'all want to take this.
Bob Haugen Wed 12 Nov 2014 8:58PM
@theodoretaptiklis - if you can take a stab at a do-it-together pattern, in any form whatsoever (don't get hung up on formalisms), I think it would be hugely useful right now.
@ahdinosaur - what can we do to encourage Theodore here?
Theodore, where do you live? We'll come to your house and do dishes.
Theodore Taptiklis Wed 12 Nov 2014 9:14PM
I'll have a crack at an overview shortly. The new version is still in my head. I live near Wellington & the brilliant Loomio crowd. We could maybe do a Skype or Hangout...
Gotta rush
Mikey Wed 12 Nov 2014 9:24PM
i second a Skype or Hangout on this topic for everyone interested, as i don't have any specific ideas for encouragement, so a good default is high-bandwidth discussions to cross-pollinate our minds.
OrsanS Wed 12 Nov 2014 10:12PM
:) I would love to join in Large Ideas Collator experiment with you guys, on cybernetics, or better dialectics of conversation-action-conversation or (abstraction-praxis-abstraction), especially being informed by quantum like cognition theory- if Theodore you and others are interested.
Orsan
Theodore Taptiklis Wed 12 Nov 2014 10:38PM
Very much in tune with my thinking, except that the experiment I am hoping to form is asking to be called the Large Human Collider. And it has four experimental sites that seem to match those of Cern's LHC. It needs a team of the quality of Cern's as well...
Bob Haugen Wed 12 Nov 2014 10:56PM
Well, if we mash your slogan up with Orsan's, we get the Large Human Ideas Collider. Let's do it!
Theodore Taptiklis Wed 12 Nov 2014 11:02PM
I'll come back on this later. But a strictly quantum view is that it's the collision of actions (trajectories) rather than ideas that produce observable results. But mashups are good...😝
Bob Haugen Wed 12 Nov 2014 11:15PM
@theodoretaptiklis - well, yeah, you're right, but I had this image of those large humans colliding and I could not unsee it...;-)
Theodore Taptiklis · Wed 12 Nov 2014 8:53PM
Hi Bob, Mikey and everyone,
I've been trying to follow this conversation in between a whole lot of other things going on. But just to say that I'm working on the first draft on a new book on the quantum physics of human encountering. This addresses the collaborating, do-it-together question that Bob raised as well as the simpler pattern in the diagram above.
I believe that this thinking may be quite helpful to Open App, especially in the context of conversation for action. It's all about conversation as a template for the effects we have on one another in our everyday lives.
Anyway, I'm deep in this work, but if you wish I'm happy to share it with you. No finished or polished documents yet, though.
And I'd say the elephant is going to feel pretty good...