European AI Network Meeting | The Hague, Netherlands | 12-14 September 2018 w e d n e s d a y a f t e r n o o n

First guests present in meeting room Students Hotel

Olivier Hendriks welcomes us on behalf of the ambassadors team of The Hague Resilient Cities

Flemish-Dutch scholar Stijn Sieckelinck explains Re-radicalisation, an AI alternative to de-radicalisation

t h u r s d a y m o r n i n g

Annette Pinck teaches mindfulness for children

Dutch youth organizations present themselves

t h u r s d a y a f t e r n o o n

Compact AI Conversations about resilient youth

Dinner served by students of The Hague hospitality school

f r i d a y m o r n i n g

Crash Course Beatboxing by ‘Barba Roja’ and ‘Core’

Creative feedback from the Compact AI Conversations

f r i d a y a f t e r n o o n

View forward in afterparty, formerly known as Jedi council

Our Program around Youth Resilience

Wednesday September 12 Venue: Student Hotel, Hoefkade 9, 2526 BN Den Haag https://www.thestudenthotel.com/the-hague/ 15.00-16.00 -Welcome 16.00-16.45 -Introduction -The city council of The Hague welcome speech; Olivier Hendriks Resilient Cities 16.45-17.30 -Connection of participants: getting to know each other 17.30-19.00 -A scientific expert tells us about a relevant youth theme; Stijn Sieckelinck: “Reradicalisation as a philosophy and strategy against extremism”

“Just think a moment about the relationship between Resilience and

Appreciative Inquiry...¨ Thursday September 13 Venue: Buurthuis de Kronkel, Westeinde 425. Tram 2,3,4 stop HMC Westeinde 9.30-10.15 -Reconnection. Mindfulness for youth (physical and mental age) by Anette Pinck 10.15-12.00 -Stakeholders present questions and challenges of their organisations. -EU AI participants form groups and prepare their Compact AI Conversations with the stakeholders of their preference. 12.30 - 14.00 Lunch at the venue. 14.00-17.00 -AI teams travel by bike to the stakeholder organisations and have their Compact AI Conversation about Resilient Youth. ( 2 hours) -Preparation of the feedback to the participants the next morning Friday September 14 Venue: City Hall, Spui, room A 4.30 9.30-11.30 -Valuation: feedback from the conversations in a creative way 10.00-12.00 Cultural intermezzo: beatboxing by Jim 12.00-13.00 -Valuation: feedback from the conversations in a creative way/part 2 Lunch together in the venue 14.00-16.00 -Open Space -Goodbye ceremony

ALL PHOTOS CAN BE FOUND (AND ADDED) THROUGH OUR SHARED PHOTO ALBUM CLICK HERE

Background information per item

First of all our warmest appreciations to the people of the city council, who have been so kind to host, co-facilitate and enrich our conference,

amongst others Rudmer de Vries, Liesbeth Remmers and Thijs Jansen.

The Hague Resilient City Click here to enter the website of the 100 resilient cities and especially The Hague.

In his welcome speech Olivier Hendriks, ambassador The Hague Resilient City, showed us this slide presentation. Reframing Radicalisation Stijn Sieckelinck made us look and think differently about youth radicalisation and how to approach this. He pointed out that de-radicalisation fails to use the core energy of the youth, and that we should re-radicalise: re-direct the energy to a better purpose. See his book cover below.

Compact AI Conversations Four youth organizations presented themselves in plenary before being visited by small groups of AI participants. Below their names and main questions:

● Adeline Brendel - Childrens Rights Shop: “How do we reach more youngsters with our services?” and “How do we manage organizational growth?”

● Joy Falkens - Street Consulate: “How do we make known our co-created video with practical tips for what to do if you get homeless?”

● Willem Heemskerk XtraPlus: “How do we ensure the quality of youth care in primary schools, given the constant organizational pressure caused by the necessity to purchase youth care by big tenders?”

● Somar and Catia - CC4U Cultural Clash 4 You: “How to cope with the fact that we constantly are referred to different locations?”

(Compact Conversation Reports in appendices.) Beatboxing “Just” press air through your lips, shaped for a P, or a T or an F… and follow the scheme. Special thanks to Jim van Lier a.k.a. Barba Roja and Cornee Scholtz a.k.a Core. And watch Youtube for SwissBeatBox and BeatBoxBattleTV.

List of Participants

MORE BEAUTIFUL PHOTOS TO BE FOUND (AND ADDED) IN OUR SHARED PHOTO ALBUM CLICK HERE 1. Marieke Hommels Nederland, wednesday Gemeente den Haag

2. Aart Brezet Nederland | wednesday

diner en thursday

Drives@work Drives@school

3. Markos Perrakis Greece FRactality

4. Anne Radford UK, all the time but not

on Thurday afternoon

One of the founders of the EU AI

network

5. Miriam Subirana Spain Instituto Ideia for dialogue and

appreciative inquiry

6. Yvonne Bonner Italy Private practice, psychotherapy

7. Aulje Warners Belgium AUWA limitless

8. Elephteria Egel Germany Independent Leadership Scholar

and Management Consultant

9. Hans Broeks Nederland Cap Gemini

10. Joep de Jong Nederland Field Practitioner at David L.

Cooperrider Center for

Appreciative Inquiry

11. Alice Bijker Nederland Alice Bijker ont-wikkelt

12. Cora Reijerse Nederland All About Change

13. Cees Hoogendijk Nederland Orgpanoptics

14. Liesbeth Remmers Nederland Gemeente den Haag

15. Rudmer de Vries Nederland Gemeente den Haag

16. Vera Hofmann Germany

wednesday and friday.

Member of the Advisory Board at

the World Appreciative Inquiry

Conference

17. Yvonne van Dongen Nederland, Friday Gemeente Den Haag

18. Cynthia Cham Nederland Gemeente Den Haag

Jedi Council meeting in The Hague, Friday 14th, September 2018

14 people participated in the Jedi council meeting, facilitated by Miriam. We started with the question:

What is the conversation we need or we should have?

These were the ideas/questions on the first round: * Do we want to continue and move on? * Have the last meetings in 2015, 2016, which were with more local participants and few international, have they been worthwhile? What has been the value? Is it interesting to continue even if they are mostly with locals? * If meetings are to continue, does it help to have more flexibility? * what would be the generative next step? * Do we need a conversation about purpose? Second round and more. * the network meetings have been enriching. I see great opportunities. * who wants to organize next year. Should we do only once a year. It was felt it is best only once a year. There was consensus on this decision. * Yes the meetings have been worthwhile and we should move on. So lets have a conversation in Nice, WAIC 2019, inviting all European practitioners who want to engage in the conversation. Miriam and Joep agreed on presenting a call in a workshop format with this title: AI in Europe – generating new practices, co-constructing our next legacy To invite all European practitioners into a conversation. And it will not be a workshop but a dialogue.

* It has been good to build the AI network meeting around a topic that is already being explored in the city. Resilient cities in this case. Yvonne and Cees take the responsibility to prepare a suggestion for the person in charge of Resilient cities programmes in Den Hague to put us in connection with other cities and explore possibilities. They will organize a meeting with the chief resilient officer, who could put our question to their network. * Let us see different formats, ideas and possibilities to continue. * I love what we do and what we are. * What is AI developing into? What is beyond the 4 Ds? Where will the AI network take further AI practice? Do we know the positive equation that David came up with? What are we doing to move forward? * We are immensely able. We can co-create. If we put our learnings together. Where is the going above and beyond? * What are the personal qualities you need as a practitioner? Which internal conditions of the practitioner are necessary? What qualities do we need to have to be an AI practitioner? * There has been great energy in this meeting. I would love to continue. * Can we move on and leave behind whatever needs to be left behind?

Appendix - Compact AI Conversations FIND ALL FLIPS IN OUR PHOTO ALBUM CLICK HERE CC4U visited by Miriam and Hans

What was the situation? Culture Clash 4 You (CC4U) is an organization that is about celebrating differences with creative action. They want to enhance civic responsibility of youth. How to make them engage and feel more included. They also include youth in decision making of the organization. We spoke with Catia and Somar. What was the question? They are located in a building ‘anti-squat’. Which means they can be asked to move out on short notice. This makes their situation uncertain. How to solve this unstable situation? How did you appreciate? We wanted to know about the organization itself, its nature. How do they fulfill their purpose? What do they bring and deliver every time? We wanted to appreciate together what was strong and stable. How did you inquire? By asking: What is the nature of your organization?; Can you share a highlight example of what it is that CC4U does? What was your role in this story? What do you wish for the future? So, what is it you need? How was the conversation like? We were given a tour through the building. They explained about the place and the other organizations that are also there. There was tea, grapes, cookies and a big flip-over with markers and stickies. Ready to brainstorm. The first 2 questions started a pleasant conversation. But when we spoke about their future wishes the conversation took an interesting turn. Their different answers brought the necessary tension to the conversation. We decided to put all that

was being said on the flip-over and see what would emerge… What did they get out of it? ‘A kick I the but’, as they said. By seeing their strengths and wishes in relation to each other. By being asked to prioritize and understand what’s most important. By being prodded to take the logical next steps. That thinking about CC4U in relation to possible network partners is important. In NL they sometimes have the feeling of competition between different NGO’s. But their network-dream is associated with ‘backup’ and ‘family’. When we added Purpose as a separate item, the relations became more clear. They need to: connect the core of what they’re doing to a purpose that is shared by a larger network; they need to make that visible in order to connect to the right partners and establish the right quality of relation, that is ‘backup’ and ‘family’; this will bring possibilities for more stability; establishing a network also means increasing possibilities for outreach and thus for more projects, so more sustainability. And that thinking about what they’re asking of participants and possible partners is important. To get good quality agreements that match the desired relations, they need to be clear not only about what they offer, but also about what they ask. What did you learn from it? Keep it simple and focused. Putting key elements of the conversation on paper helped us to think through and capture the new elements and relations that were emerging in the conversation. Bring the best of yourself and use it. There were 4 people now to think this through instead of two. We all participated as if the issue was our own. Trust your co-facilitator - and dance together. Inquire! Don’t assume.

ChildrensRightsShop visited by Alice and Cees

Cees and I had a very pleasant conversation in a beautiful sun-drenched garden with Aline Brendel and her two employees Marlot and Benji from the Children's and Youth Law Shop in The Hague. The Children's and Young People's Law Shop answers legal questions from children and young people and informs them about their rights. The strength of the service is making it easy for children to understand the legal situation in which they find themselves. An organization with a few paid employees and many volunteers who are growing fast. The municipality of The Hague is the client. The client asks for accountability about the number of children reached and asks for more awareness and a greater reach of the target group. The question was how can we translate our growth into a new, different structure so that we remain a flat organization and how can we reach even more children. On the one hand to inform them about their rights, on the other hand to assist them in difficult legal situations. We have tried to get clarity in an interview about what really matters to them. Is it about the structure or about reaching more children. In the end it turned out that the client's request to reach more children was an important goal for them. It corresponds to their own ambitions; all children and young people in The Hague know

the Children's and Young People's Law Shop and know their rights. The client has, coupled with this question, that they have to use more social media. In an inspiring conversation we looked for the strength of the organization and the people who work there and who are customers there. Can we use that to create a greater reach. Soon we had a list of our dreams that we could use to achieve their ambition: - Satisfied young people who can tell the story

of the Children's and Youth Law Shop through their own channels

- Satisfied parents who have their own channels the story of the Children and Young People's Law Shop can tell

- Employees who can write beautiful letters with which they can use others to speak to their network

- A very good (business) network where they could generate money for marketing campaigns.

- Strengthening contacts with colleague institutions that also work with young people and transferring the information to the target group.

We have noticed that by asking a lot, we can also dream about what we could do in a relatively short time a few practical leads what could be worked with. In addition, we have exchanged reading tips on how to make your customer the best seller and how you could finance initiatives that benefit society. (Written by Alice, translated by Google)

Ai flash-encounter with the association ‘Straatconsulaat’ 13.09.2018 (from 2 to 5 pm) Guideline. Describe the situation. What was the question? How did you appreciate and inquire? What was the conversation like? What did the group get out of the experience? What did you learn?

The group : Straatconsulaat The group works for the rights of homeless youth (18 -25 years of age). The group has recently produced a short film to inform young homeless people on their rights and give them practical information to answer their current needs. Straatconsulaat collected information and suggestions from various stakeholders that offer services to homeless youth (i.e. shelters, food, money, job opportunities, etc). The question The question they put to us was : How should we proceed so that our film reaches as many young people as possible and inform them on their rights and on what to do or where to go if in need? The group We worked with Joy and three young adults (two girls and a boy, all ex homeless young youths, Dutch but of three different ethnic origins) Ai Euro consultants Yvonne D. B. Bonner (from Italy), Eleftheria Egel (from Greece/Germany), A paradox and our Ai 4 D proposal We decided to put aside the paradox of trying to catch the interest of non-concerned youth (i.e. non homeless youth) for the film and hence proposed to focus, our brief encounter, on their ‘best experience working for Straatconsulaat ‘ using the Ai 4 D methodology.

Key sentences and five key aspects of their work During the discovery phase the interviews highlighted the following a) key sentences and b) key aspects: a) Key sentences (goals) - Voicing the homeless youth’s needs - Being heard by the government officials - Presenting to the local authorities their plan

of action - Offering support to peers and families - Building a life purpose for the young

homeless - Promoting personal development and

learning - Guaranteeing emotional stability and balance - Living up to all these goals with pride b) Key aspects of their work (policy) 1. Homeless youth are between 18 and 23

years old 2. Schools should teach budget and money

management (the absence of knowledge on how to manage a budget is a serious handicap for young homeless people)

3. Each homeless youth should have the right to choose its mentor - a person it trusts - from its own personal network (in other words, one should not impose a mentor).

4. When the homeless youth leaves child support centres, it should have the guarantee of sleeping ‘under a roof’.

5. Schools should bridge studying with the workplace.

Vision statement A vision statement highlights: “who is the group; what it is doing and what it is looking for”. Eleftheria hence asked the group to create a ‘vision statement’. Her intention was to bring the group to connect it’s goals to a ‘larger picture’: i.e. create alliances to achieve its goals. The group’s vision statement then became: “Straatconsulaat enables homeless youth’s voices to be heard through collaboration with all government officials”. The Dream The group somehow skipped the dream stage presenting the Design on: 1. how to distribute their film,

2. build more contacts, 3. disseminate their ideas on youth protection. The Design The design phase became the Delivery plan. Over a period of six months, the group intends to get the local authorities and media informed on the existence of their film and on the importance of the five key aspects of their work (listed above). The group had already a precise idea where and when to go and whom to meet (i.e. how to develop a policy on prevention of youth exclusion). What did they get out of the Ai experience They really enjoyed the interviewing of the Discovery phase. They then learnt how to write a vision statement and had the opportunity of becoming aware of their capacity of policy building. It gave them the necessary enthusiasm to jump rapidly and easily over to the Delivery phase What we learnt a. Very interesting information on homeless

youth and how to work with them. We also discovered the group’s clear-cut political approach on how to contain social exclusion of homeless youth.

b. On Ai methodology. When a group has already a Design (in our case the film and its distribution), during the Dream phase the group remained concentrated on their existing Design and hereafter immediately stepped over to the Delivery phase.

Final agreement We would contact them after 6 months to know what had happened. (By Yvonne and Eleftheria) Compact AI Conversation with Xtra Welzijn What was the situation? Xtra Welzijn is the organisation for social work for children and families in all schools in Den Haag. What was the question? How do we deal with all the insecurities that come with the rules of ‘aanbesteding’? This is a system that obliges municipalities to reconsider

the main providers in social work every four years. This means that this organisation has to prove, every four years, that they do a good job for a good price, and ‘apply’ for another four years. The fact that the contract could also end after these four years, troubles the people we spoke because workers might leave the organisation for more secure workplaces and most important; the continuity of care for the children and families is at stake. That was really where there problems were felt strongest. How did you appreciate? Instead of focussing on the limitations and difficulties of the aanbesteding-procedure, we started focussing on what was great about being a social worker. We wanted to appreciate the core motivations and strengths of delivering social work. How did you inquire? We asked about what is great about being a social worker. Where and when the most valuable moments take place. What makes these moments this valuable? What contributes to these moments? What contributes to being a good social worker? Later on we projected these strengths on the original question. At last we asked one of the participants to choose 4 images that represent the strengths of Xtra Welzijn social work. What was the conversation like? We were seated in an office and met with two coordinating social workers and the manager. Around a small table next to the busy desks of the coordinators. Soon after the first questions some beautiful and personal reflections emerged on the qualities of their work, and what makes it so valuable. The deeply personal motivation of the workers and manager, the social support among each other in the teams, being able to be witness and contributor in kids and families lives were ingredients that emerged. As the manager and one of the coordinators had to leave early, we finished the conversation with the other coordinator. One week later I met with the manager to finish the conversation properly. What did they get out of it? They got more convinced of their specific and unique role in providing help and continuity for

children and families. Their trust in the fact gained ‘no matter what, we will do anything to make sure the care for the children will be continued’. And we also discovered that social workers enjoy working for Xtra Welzijn and do not want to leave. In stead, they always receive many applications for vacancies. From the perspective of strengths, motivation and practical ideas emerged to look for possibilities in the procedure to convey their specific strengths. What did you learn from it? I learned (again) that focussing on strengths gives space, a broader vision, to deal with situations that are perceived as problems. Also the teamwork with the co-facilitator was good, each with own accents, together a good team.

And also using images to reflect certain meanings/thought/ideas was very powerful.

(written by Liesbeth)