I came to the LDD training with an intrigue about how the philosophy and tools could be used to manage conflict within teams.

I left with a different way of seeing group dynamics and a different way of understanding and observing what’s happening in groups I’m in, and with a sharper understanding of how to use the LDD Debate. That tool alone feels radically transformative. It’s so simple, and yet so powerful. I’ve already used the debate as a coaching technique, and the people I’ve used it with have found it really powerful for their thinking.

LDD is a set of tools for understanding tension and conflict as it emerges within groups and for working with it constructively to make better decisions. It offers a different path than either getting stuck in endless debate or making top-down decisions that shut out voices.

Over 20 years (as a practitioner), I’ve often experienced two models of inclusion and decision making that sit at the ends of a binary:

• At one end: consensus-style decision making where everyone gets as much space as they want, harmony can become more important than making a decision, and as groups scale it becomes incredibly frustrating, as you never move to decision or action.

• At the other end: top-down decision making: elect a committee, or a visionary executive director where momentum is prioritised and dissent or other voices don’t have much space. There’s a fear that if you open participation up, you’ll get stuck in endless debate.

LDD by contrast creates a framework for hearing everyone’s voice (every voice is valued) while also providing structure and scaffolding so the group can make decisions without needing unanimity.

Additionally, understanding of group dynamics elevated this training substantially above any other facilitation training I’ve done.

I went in because my biggest weakness as a facilitator is not feeling confident enough managing conflict. I’d done a different one-day training hoping to address that and really didn’t take anything from it.

In contrast, I came out of LDD thinking: I now have a new way of seeing group dynamics and a concrete tool for managing tension, disharmony and conflict, and that very concretely boosts my confidence as a facilitator.

The strength of the trainers made the course stand out, including the ability to answer deep questions, the pace and clarity of explaining concepts, and the overall mastery of the method.

In fact, what convinced me to come was attending taster sessions where the concept of the Waterline was presented with such clarity and pace that I came away thinking: “that’s one of the best trainers I’ve ever seen.”

A particularly extraordinary part as a participant was the relationship between the two trainers (Francesca and Payam). There were moments where they paused and had a discussion between themselves about how they were reading what was going on in the room and what decision they were going to make next. I felt like I learned as much from observing those discussions (the way they read the room and made decisions) as I did from anything else. It felt very special and unusual, to be allowed to see even a small part of that internal dialogue.

Another standout was how the training was held. It was much less structured than other trainings. The order of content was decided by the group, using the tools in real time. There was little upfront contracting about how we would learn, and it wasn’t overly didactic.

That emergent structure really held my interest. It made our use of tools feel more real than it would have in a highly structured environment because it brought up uncertainty and friction and that uncertainty is what made the examples of using the tools feel rich rather than flat.

If more people had access to this training, tension could become celebrated rather than debilitating or explosive.

I have taken so much from the LDD training and recommend it wholeheartedly!