Help for David
birgitt at worldchat.com
Mon Sep 7 08:10:02 PDT 1998
Hi Ralph and John,
And thank you for this discussion on mandatory or invitation. I think invitation is the ideal. It is how I conduct my life--I wouldn't want someone showing up in it under duress. And it is how I think we respectfully conduct organizational life. It is good role modeling---about where the energy is, where it is not, and how to work from there. I would rather a situation where over a period of time, more and more individuals accepted the invitation.
I agree that an Open Space works even if mandatory attendance. I know my goal is always using the Open Space to move toward the Open Space Organization, an open learning organization. Sometimes I am only in the organization for one event. So maybe this shouldn't matter to me, but it always does. And because I wear this lens, the idea of mandatory doesn't fit.
Any more comments?
From: ralphsc [SMTP:ralphsc at EARTHLINK.NET]
Sent: September 7, 1998 9:07 AM
To: OSLIST at LISTSERV.IDBSU.EDU
Subject: Re: Help for David
I have conducted many open space events where attendance was mandatory.
In my experience, they all worked just fine. Personally I only have a
problem with "mandatory"unless the system is in some kind of conflict or
turmoil. Employees get called to meetings all the time and attend with
no more than a usual amount of behaviorus interruptus. If the very act
of calling the meeting is widely and clearly perceived as advancing or
exacerbating the conflict, then it's worth a good close look.
Academics do seem to be somewhat more contrary about these things than
most, but I wouldn't let that stop me before I start.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 3830 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the OSList