**Example 4.**

Issue: Communities can learn much from each other, and the center wants to set up an environment in which the communities can effectively learn from each other.

Possible L.S. use: It is true that neighboring local communities do not interact with each other enough to know what other communities are doing. Sadly, though but it is very reasonable as the lack of communication can happen within a much

**Figure 5.** *"Experiential Fishbowl" at the community gathering.*

*Communication Strategy for Organizational Leadership and Relationships: Liberating Structures DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.105806*

#### **Figure 6.** *Ideas shared with a foursome in "1-2-4-ALL".*

organization. However, as the social worker thought, there should be a quality of learning when they interact and communicate with each other.

This example is another real story, and the actual work was done. We invited community leaders from several communities to a community gathering. They share concerns about the aging of members and the lack of supporters of sustainable community initiatives. At the session with a diverse group of participants, using "1-2-4-ALL," we invited them to pull "Ideas to reduce the number of older adults who are isolated in their homes." With these invitations, many described what they were actually doing and provided concrete ideas. Those shared and exchanged ideas and information of actual practices were also taken by many as "souvenirs of innovations." We saw many participants motivated by confirming each other's efforts. Participants from the medical and welfare professions were in the session, and they responded to what they heard, "I admire community members who voluntarily support other older members on daily basis efforts and innovations and what they are doing is innovative with full of wisdom."

I introduced very basic and simple uses of L.S.s here, and there are plenty more. Each of the 33 L.S.s covers a range of purposes, from spreading ideas to developing strategies. Users choose which L.S. they use based on particular purposes. In addition, users *string* them again based on purposes. Strings make L.S.s more powerful and provide alternatives to address any challenge of complex problems that groups tend to neglect by making the challenge workable and possible to be solved in shorter times. It may be difficult to structure strings at the very beginning, but as users get accustomed, the possibility can be clearly seen.

Once starting to use L.S.s, users will see its full of potential. It is possible to include and engage everybody and give everyone the opportunity to contribute. L.S.s will make users surprised to see results emerge at a better level than expected and to feel enthusiasm. Another strength is that implementation follows, which truly makes us possible to work in complex systems. As uses are accumulated in the organization, shared experience produces more possibility and confidence in each other, which leads to more innovation. To that point, going back to conventional microstructures (communicating with each other via "Big 5") will never be an option.

A language is a tool for how communicating. We had known only "Big 5" conventional microstructures as the tools of how to organizationally communicate, but now we have 33 more of that tools that provide us with full of potential. The saying "Use it or lose it" to become a fluent speaker of languages is very applicable to the communication microstructure L.S.s.
