Disposition Mapping
If we encounter persistent friction or value-laden tensions and map the dispositions (e.g. beliefs, values, and intentions) across affected perspectives, we tend to reveal deeper logic, reduce blame, and enable more coherent yet plural action.
When teams experience recurring tensions, they often sense something deeper is at play, beyond policy, process, or personality. These tensions are usually rooted in different dispositions: lived beliefs, value commitments, and patterned responses to uncertainty. Disposition Mapping helps surface the constellation of these stances so that people can engage them reflectively rather than defensively.
How to use this pattern
A practice for mapping the value-laden field behind surface conflict:
Start with a Named Tension
Invite a team member to voice a tension they feel caught in—preferably one that’s been recurring or emotionally charged.
Identify Key Voices
Ask: Who else is entangled in this? Name not just people, but stances—roles, logics, traditions, assumptions.
Surface Beliefs
For each voice: What must this actor believe for their position or action to make sense?
Write these in lived, specific language.
Name Underlying Values
Ask: What is this belief trying to protect, promote, or safeguard? Values might include safety, clarity, equity, speed, trust, etc.
Map the Disposition Field
Visually arrange beliefs and values into a constellation, not as a cluster to harmonise, but as coexisting forces. Show tensions, dependencies, and reinforcing loops.
Frame the Shared Aspiration
Ask: What is everyone trying to care for in their own way? Find a shared hope that can anchor future coherence.
Name the Reflective Tension(s)
Articulate the stretch using “pull” language:
“A pull between relational care and institutional consistency”
“A tension between local empowerment and strategic clarity”
Affordances
Turns hidden beliefs into discussable patterns
Surfaces emotional and philosophical roots of conflict
Mistaking surface behaviour for intent or treating tensions as errors to fix
Stances
Inquirer. This stance drives the initial framing of the mapping exercise, asking "what are the underlying forces or inclinations shaping this situation?" or "what are the potential pathways this system could take?" It guides the exploration of emergent possibilities.
Challenger. This stance is crucial when interpreting the map, pushing participants to question their biases about certain outcomes or to confront uncomfortable truths about the system's inherent leanings. It helps to expose wishful thinking or blind spots.
Synthesiser. This stance helps to connect the various elements of the map, identifying patterns in the dispositions and understanding how different forces might interact to create emergent system behaviours. It's about finding coherence in the complex interplay of influences.
Noticer. This stance is vital throughout the mapping process, particularly for sensing the subtle emotional and relational responses of participants as they articulate dispositions, and for observing the implicit signals within the system itself.
Facilitator. This stance guides the group through the visual mapping process, ensuring that the diverse perspectives on dispositions are surfaced, represented, and discussed effectively, maintaining a safe and productive space for exploration.
Steward. This stance holds the intention for using the disposition map to inform ongoing strategic inquiry, ensuring that the insights gained are integrated into the community's evolving understanding and help to anchor future actions.
Shaper. If the disposition map reveals a particular pathway that needs to be explored or nudged, this stance helps in designing small, targeted probes or interventions to test those dispositions in the real world.
Craftsperson. This stance ensures that the disposition map is created with clarity, integrity, and a commitment to representing the complexity honestly. It also applies to the careful consideration of any actions proposed based on the map's insights.