Developing expertise in managing dialogue in the ‘third space’: Lessons from a responsive participatory evaluation

Abstract

Where two or more persons from different professions meet to discuss a shared project, a dialogic ‘third space’ is opened up. Such dialogues (or multilogues) can be problematic for reasons which are well attested to in the literature. Third spaces can be sites of hostility and defensiveness, or of creativity and learning. This article explores the nature and management of the third space, noting that existing advice and guidance for evaluators – while important – is of necessity abstract. Interaction, on the other hand, is always embedded, shaped by unique contextual contingencies. Operating successfully in the third space therefore requires expertise which is difficult to codify. However, the authors argue that some sorts of dialogue (the Socratic, and audit) are generally inappropriate to the establishment of good relationships, that expertise in paying attention to contextual aspects of a situation is of the essence, and that learning how to improvise in an appropriate manner has to be learnt in order to bring about productive and ethically sound dialogue. The first part of the article presents a theoretical discussion of these issues; the second part analyses two episodes where the interaction had become unproductive. These are drawn from a recent responsive evaluation project conducted by the authors.