Come on in, the water's fine - bloghead considers the merger question from a different perspective

Water

A squally afternoon in late October. A child asks, “is it too cold to go to the splash park?” A seemingly straightforward, neatly contained question, to which the unsurprising answer is “Yes.” Resolution appears to have been achieved. Problem solved, job done. But there is more: “Why is it too cold?”
 
It may be a weekend, but this exchange unconsciously models a distinguishing characteristics of action research, the iterative inquiry. And it echoes a conversation a few days earlier with the Chief Executive of an organisation contemplating merger.
 
Over 90 years old, with a long and proud history, his organisation is being squeezed as their field of activity becomes dominated by larger voluntary organisations and predatory private providers. Its entry point to a possible merger is weak: “we cannot survive on our own”. It is, strategically, on the back foot. The prospect is loss and uncertainty and disappointment. “This is no merger, it’s a takeover.”
 
So the questions begin and the inquiry unfolds. “To what question is merger the answer?” “Is this in the interests of beneficiaries?” “What might you achieve together that would not be possible on your own?” Each iteration tests assumptions and reveals a little more – in so doing, the two organisations begin to find and use a different language. The talk is of vision, change, improvement, and, most significantly, exchange: “we each have something the other needs to achieve our vision, to create something better.”
 
It may not, after all, be too cold to go the splash park.