Donna Frost

Chapter 4 110 by Weber ( 2008 ), the process of creating, and the result being suitable as a visual metaphor or explanation and as a setting off point for reflection and dialogue, that were important. iv) Dialogue The CCCI process now moved from creative expression into critical and reflective dialogue, step iv in both loops of the lemniscate (Figure 4 . 5 ). This step involved givingwords to and critically reflecting on that which had been expressed creatively during step iii . The goal of this step was to come to deeper or new understandings of the experience in question in relation to the current inquiry focus and, more broadly, the phenomenon of professional artistry in nursing. The methods used are summarised in section D of Table 4 . 1 . The process began with describing the qualities and characteristics of the creative expressions and with paying attention to the response they, or the creative process itself, had elicited in the creator and viewer. The dialogue moved hermeneutically between the creative expression, the response of the co-inquirers and the qualities and characteristics of the practice or group experience from which they sprung. Attention was paid to articulating our ideas and emerging understandings, contestation of developing ideas and conclusions, asking critical questions and searching for alternative explanations. Within practice Dialogue within practice took varied forms. Sometimes this step was limited to ‘dialogue with self’ (cf. Dewing, 2008 ). For example, if the experience responded to in step three was a practice encounter not observed by a co-inquirer. In such cases, capturing the reflection and insights in words remained important. Conversations with a co-inquirer were recorded digitally or via notes in journals or on notepads, or typed directly into a Word document. After leaving the clinical setting, both participants tended to reflect further on the episode. If notes and reflections were added later this was made clear by post-dating them. During the RN inquiry I was the facilitator of the reflective dialogue in practice situations. Within the NP inquiry more than half the data collection in practice occurred without me present. Although some NP inquiry members skipped the creative expression step when first observing each other in practice and facilitating, independently of me, the post-observation reflective dialogue, they soon reintroduced creativity to the process. Without the creative response the dialogue was less rich, often less focused and it took longer to get to the nub of the encounter. It also took more time