OS and Future Search

[Larry Peterson]

It is fascinating that the OS and Future Search conversation is going on at
the time I was approached by a key Future Search person in Toronto to
explore mutual learning. We are likely going to organize an Open Space about
such things for both networks in TO.

I was using many of the insights embedded in Future Search in participatory
processes and events that I designed and facilitated in the 70's and since
then. I developed national conferences on homelessness that had some of the
same processes elements and impact.  It is nicely packaged in Future Search
and certainly deals well with stakeholder participation. In preparing to
Open Space in some organizations, I will use guided processes to clarify and
share the context,  past story or "theme", Accomplishments and Struggles
(organizationally), prouds & sorries (individually) and what assumptions
have been made and need to made in the future. I find that this does bring
to consciousness some things that then enrich the participation in Open
Space and lead to more breakthroughs. Like future search, it is their data
generated in guided but self-organized conversations. With voluntary groups
who do not meet frequently, this is sometimes a critical component, but it
does not take the full preparation time of a Future Search (it isn't really
the full Future Search package".

I know that many Future Searchers are now using Open Space at the close.

If they are seen as "packages", then they are competing. If they are seen as
part of the journey then they don't.  Some organizations are ready to
intentionally move to ongoing open space and a "Future Search" package will
no longer be needed.

Larry

Larry Peterson
Associates in Transformation
41 Appleton Ave., Toronto, ON,
Canada, M6E 3A4
Tel:/Fax: 416-653-4829

lpasoc at inforamp.net
http://www.inforamp.net/~lpasoc


-----Original Message-----
From:   OSLIST [mailto:OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU] On Behalf Of Harrison
Owen
Sent:   Friday, June 25, 1999 8:23 AM
To:     OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
Subject:        Re: OS and Future Search

Great and useful conversation!  For me the fundamental difference between
Open Space and Future Search is how hard you have to work. Several years
ago, through the kind connecting of Ralph C. -- Marv Weisbord and I (along
with Ralph and Sandra Janov) spent a day together on just the question
posed here. In terms of substantive outcomes, I don't think we identified
any differences. Both can enable the production of action plans for the
future and such like. What was clearly different was how hard you have to
work before and during. With Open Space, given the people, theme and place,
you are ready to go. In my experience, all of that can take 20 min. And
then during the event -- for OST clearly he/she who does least, does best
-- although there certainly has to be a high quality of "being." This may
seem like a bit of an over-statement, but with large gatherings, I have
actually had people come up to me on the 2nd day, and ask me who I was.
Clearly I hadn't made a major impression. Anyhow, my final question to Marv
was -- "Why are you working so hard?

All of the above has given rise to something of a joke -- to the effect
that those who facilitate Open Space have stumbled upon the ultimate scam.
You do absolutely nothing and the client writes the report. But it turns
out that doing nothing with style requires no small amount of preparation
and occasionally some very exhausting work -- particularly when you just
know that it is essential for you to intervene. Holding on to something can
turn the whole occasion into a white knuckle trip.

For me the fundamental difference is all about self-organization. Open
Space works because self-organizing human systems work. All we do is to
determine the presence of the essential pre-conditions and it just goes
from there. Conditions such as High levels of Diversity, High levels of
complexity, High levels of potential or actual conflict, and a decision
time of yesterday. Given all or most of the above -- it is off to the
races. Actually I find myself with the curious  conclusion: There is no
such thing as a non-self-organizing system. There are only a number of
mis-guided souls who think they are in charge. What is crystal clear in
Open Space is that NOBODY is in charge -- and when, as, or if somebody
tries to be -- some very interesting things happen.

I like Ralph's comment about "Open Space Organization" -- and what seems to
be the case that one would NOT contemplate a "Future Search Organization."
Open Space Organization is not something new and different. It is simply
Self-Organizing Systems by a different name. But herein lies the major
impact of OST -- so far as I am concerned. It is a marvelous
re-introduction to our essential nature -- as self organizing systems.
Somewhere along the line we really thought we did it. And it is very
painful to the old ego (collective and individual) to discover that most of
what we had thought we had done would have happened pretty well by itself
-- and indeed it usually turns out that most of our ministrations actually
got in the way. Just like the first Open Space at OT3 when I discovered
that all the really good stuff  at OT 1 happened in the coffee breaks, and
that all the effort I had expended arranging for panels and papers and
speakers was nothing more than an impediment to the main event. Too much
work, especially when it does no good.

So what is special about Open Space? For groups from 5 - 1000+ it is a
marvelous laboratory in which to experience and experiment with what we
have always been -- self-organizing. Anybody with an ounce of common sense
would understand that Open Space simple can't work. It is much too simple,
with facilitators who take naps, and even when present seem to do nothing
at all. So I guess if you really want something complicated, where you
truly get your money's worth of facilitator sweat -- for God's sake don't
use Open Space.


Harrison