When stakeholders from diverse backgrounds collaborate, value conflicts often remain hidden beneath polite agreement. These tensions, shaped by cultural, institutional, or ideological differences, can hinder joint understanding and meaningful dialogue. This research explores how facilitation design can intentionally embody the concept of Brave Space, which reframes discomfort and constructive conflict as necessary conditions for transformation.

To investigate this, I adopted a design-oriented, iterative methodology combining Research through Design and Action Research, structured through a spiral process. The process began with a literature review, followed by observations of multi-stakeholder workshops to frame the problem and opportunity space, and the development of a liminality-based Brave Space framework. This informed three micro-experiments, serving as Minimum Viable Prototypes (MVPs) that tested facilitation strategies for helping participants surface value tensions and navigate them constructively. 

Building on these insights, the micro-experiment was then embedded into a longer Climate Fresk workshop as a viability test for contextual adaptation. The findings showed that embodying Brave Space is not about imposing a dramatic leap on participants; engaging in Brave Space is a gradual process, cultivated through deliberate, well-designed moments of gentle provocations, emotional invitations, and the gradual building of familiarity and trust. 

Rather than proposing Brave Space as a fixed method, this study presents it as a tangible, designable lens for facilitating value-centered discussion. It clarifies the conceptual relationship between Safe Space and Brave Space, consistent with the psychological safety theory. This research offers both theoretical grounding and practical strategies for designers, facilitators, and researchers aiming to create deeper, more courageous group dialogue.
... Read more