Working Title: A comparative analysis of Social Constructionist Theory and Theory U

The focus of the research and resultant writing is a comparative analysis of social constructionism as a meta- theory of human interaction/relation and Theory U as a proposed meta-theory of a social change technology (similar in some ways to Appreciative Inquiry being a social technology) all under the rubric of how do we do collective transformation.  Currently eight chapters are outlined and in various stages of being written and researched.  They are:

1. Put the issue on the stage.  Maybe the most important question of the 21st century is “How do we do collective transformation?” Place this question in the context of major global shifts that require collective action to address.
2. Summarize how we got to this question (not an economic or political story) but a human interaction/social/cultural story in three main eras.  1-Crown & cross as the source of how we acted in the world. 2- emergence of science and individualism, the Enlightenment, modernism. 3-emergence of evolutionary biology, quantum physics, post-modernism, social construction theory. And ask the questions “Do we have the capability to do collective change?” “Do we have a meta-theory for collective change?”
3. The answer is yes we do.  It is social constructionist theory.  Provide a summary overview of social constructionism. And ask, “Do we have a meta-social technology to do collective transformational change?”
4. The answer is yes as offered by Dr. Otto Scharmer in Theory U. Provide an overview of Theory U. State that the next four chapters will deconstruct Theory U, but also include some questions or critique of social constructionist thought.
5. Field Structures of Attention. Scharmer suggests we have four way of attending: I-in-me; I-in-it; I-in-thou/you; I-in-now.  The first two are perceived as mechanistic in nature and subject to strong deconstruction. The third centers on dialogue and connects directly with the relational. The fourth talks of connecting to some larger knowing – to source.  This is an area that Scharmer would say that social construction misses and that this is the weakness in constructionist thinking.
6. Co-sensing. This is the movement down the left-hand side of the U.  This is the place of deep exploration and understanding of how we are co-constructing our current realities.  The tools of co-sensing are dialogic tools and this work has a strong basis in social constructionism.
7. Co-presencing.  We are at the bottom of the U. Here is where Scharmer suggests we let go to allow the future that wants to be to let come/emerge.  The metaphor is the sculpture in the stone waiting to be released. This is the place where by connecting to something greater than ourselves we are able to release the future.  This has strong basis in research on how innovation takes place. The approach to this area and whether it can be critiqued from a constructionist perspective or whether here is where social constructionist theory is critiqued as limited and missing something bigger is still being developed.
8. Co-realizing.  We now head up the right-hand side of the U.  This where we take the beginnings of an idea and prototype and pilot it into reality.  It remains to be developed how to deconstruct this part of the U.