Convening holding environments that enable collective learning in organizations

Current literature in adult and organizational learning includes references to holding environments as temporal and physical spaces that foster learning and development. Origins of this terminology can be traced to pediatric psychoanalyst Donald Winnicott who coined the term to describe the relational space between mother and infant. Current learning and human development literature both suggest we continue to grow in relationship to the dilemmas and complexity of our adult lives. At the same time, complexity-related literature has influenced some organizational learning literature to focus on our inherently connected natures. This includes attention to Kurt Lewin's social field theory which states that groups include underlying forces that shape group-level experience and behavior. Given these trends, this research argues that collective holding and holding environments enable both the form and direction of adult development and learning necessary in organizations today. Prevalent organizational examples of holding environments include team buildings, leadership development, critical-cross functional conversations, and some training.;Previous literature focuses almost exclusively on holdee experiences. This research explores the holder role in creating and maintaining collective holding environments in organizations. Findings show that collective holding is not focused on individuals or group related issues; holders focus on the space between those being held. By influencing the form and force of the social field, holders work to enable opportunities for collective shifts in thinking and perception. Research findings include a dynamic model that captures the emergent, relational nature of holding environments. The model builds on holder use of improvisational dance and music metaphors to marry five experiential hallmarks holders attend to in the learning space with eight practices they use to shape it. In this way, the model presents new language that illustrates the holder's dance with the social field. Additional findings explore holder use of power and equity in holding environments and conceptions of their responsibility to the larger organizational context.