Open Space a la carte (long)

[Birgitt Williams]

Alan,
Thank you for writing this up and providing us with good detail and the
suggestion to think of using "to converse". You have given me more to ponder
and explore. My intention with this is to look for a way that assists a
large group of people identify the theme and givens for the Open Space
Technology meeting. To date, I have always had these preliminary meetings
with "the sponsor" and "the sponsor" has been identified as the CEO,
management team, or a team assigned to "plan the meeting".  However, if "the
sponsor" is really the whole group that is to be involved in the OST event,
it would be important to include them all in the selection of the theme and
givens. Because I am attached to getting the outcome of having the theme and
givens, it is not appropriate to hold this pre-meeting in OST, the way I see
it. So...I am looking for something else and will pursue exploration of the
World Cafe processes.

And Ingrid, thank you also for your response. And alerting us all to a key
question that is provocative.

Blessings,
Birgitt
  -----Original Message-----
  From: OSLIST [mailto:OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU]On Behalf Of Alan
Stewart
  Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2000 5:44 PM
  To: OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
  Subject: Re: Open Space a la carte (long)


  Hello to Birgitt, Ingrid and All

  Your request for clarification and elaboration of my interest in World
Cafe processes is just what I need to
  put these on 'paper.' For I have long had the thought to do this, since
the time of Birgitt and I conversed about these matters
  while on a walk on which she had her first experiencing of kangaroos and
of an echidna (spiny anteater) in the wild during her first
  visit to Australia, last year.

  I did a fair amount of composing of what to put out when seeing people's
experiencing at the Berlin gathering, among which were
  expressions of disquiet at having 'Dialogue' imposed on small group
gatherings.

  Then a gift arrived in the form of an opportunity to facilitate a
different kind of meeting process (Passion Cafe) in the boardroom of one
  of the world's best known consulting companies, Ernst and Young, in
Sydney; what I referred to as 'the big end
  of town.' This was for a KMLF (Knowledge Management Leaders Forum).
Entitled 'Is Conversing Working?' this Cafe was a remarkably
  successful gathering in that people commented:

  'I am so hungry for this kind of communication.'

  'At these forums we usually sit in rows looking at a speaker. This is the
first time that we turned around to look at each other.'

  'This is an idea whose time has come.'

  Following this there was another extraordinary happening, in the form of
driving with a close friend (Lloyd Fell, who writes songs)
  from Sydney to a conference held near to Melbourne called 'Spirituality,
Leadership and Management' (www.slam.net.au).
  There I facilitated a 'Passion Cafe' with the theme 'Time to Converse:
it's time to talk about, create and sustain a culture
  of conversing in workplaces'. Participants noted that their experiencing
of the process was highly congruent with the
  theme and pervading spirit of the conference.

  Lloyd and I then came on to Adelaide along the coast (Great Ocean Road),
arriving here late last week. Last Friday we gave a
  joint offering on 'No singing or cafe tables allowed in this boardroom' in
which we used the Cafe format to introduce ideas - in a light
  touch way - about stages of human knowing that contribute to 'wholeness of
being.' Participants reportedly liked this very much.

  And so I have been 'in communicado' to the outside world for the past
couple of weeks and yet in very close communication
  with Lloyd during our wonderful travels. I will foreshadow that his work
will come to your attention in the not too distant future
  and that it could resonate deeply in you. To say more here could be a
distraction; nonetheless you at least have an inkling
  that something profound is in the wind. Some idea of what this could be
can be found be found at www.autopoiesis.net.au.

  Birgitt's request has a number of questions imbedded in it. Perhaps a good
way of commenting on my use of Cafe processes
  in relation to OST is to address these questions in turn.

  > I wonder if you could please elaborate a little on the difference
  >between how you perceive conversational processes in relation to what is
  >known as "Dialogue" Process.

  I have come to appreciate that there is value in using the verb 'converse'
rather than conversation. For those interested references on this are
  available. For practical purposes I sometimes describe OST and World Cafe
as 'conversational processes.'

  Perhaps what is salient here is that, when I facilitate either of those
this is what I say, _in addition to_ the principles of OST:

  . We are here to treat each other well

  . 'We're in this together.'

  . This gathering will only happen once; never again will this group of
people be together to experience the learning that could only
  happen with those who are here.

  I feel that these are important to set the context in which people
converse, talk openly and freely with each other. This is what
  a participant commented last year when I facilitated a 3 day residential
for graduate students in Social Ecology:

  "The 'keeper' for me was the wonderful notion that every time we talk
openly with another human being, a third -joint-level of consciousness
  is created, from the best of both of us. When we argue or debate, we
actually seek to block the other's contribution and limit potential
solutions
  or suggestions, limiting world consciousness."

  And so I sense that _conversing_ is what happens at gatherings underpinned
by the principles of OST. This is not Dialogue, as I understand the term,
  which is a formal process which requires certain conditions in which to
operate and specific instructions.

  Conversing 'just happens' when the conditions are right. And when it does
people:
  . collaborate in an open, friendly format

  . build ideas together, with enthusiasm

  . 'talk up' issues, rather than try to 'score points' or to persuade

  . harness the collective intelligence of the group

  . arrive at surprising solutions to complex questions

  . notice and honor the emotional underpinnings of other's and of own
responses

  . recognise that right and wrong, winning and losing are irrelevant

  . welcome diversity of opinion as a wellspring of creativity

  . sustain openness to creativity

  . appreciate the value of alliances based on interdependency

  . enlarge their vision

  . recognise and acknowledge 'blind spots' in their own perspectives,
without losing face.



  >....[I] would very much like you to elaborate on the difference of what
happens in the world cafe
  > to what happens in an OST meeting.

  Among the differences I note are:

  PHYSICAL ARRANGEMENTS

  . people sit at small tables, maximum of 6. At least to begin with. As the
meeting proceeds participants set their own arrangements!

  . participants are in the same room continuously - apart from when they
use the L2F to wander where they please.

  . what emerges from the conversing is recorded on paper table cloths.
These recordings can be transcribed or photographed later.

  . decor and music are used to create the ambience of a Cafe. It is amazing
how a few drapes, candles, vases of flowers can transform a room.

  On my recent travels I used Jennifer Lopez' "Lets get loud" to set toes
tapping at the start of the Cafe. Nancy Margulies notes that 'You can also
end by dancing.'

  FACILITATION

  The main point is that the facilitator has no role in providing direction
to the content of the conversing.

  The extent to which the facilitator 'intervenes' in asking people to move
depends ing on the purpose of the exercise.

  When it is 'the real thing' ie for real business purposes facilitation is
very much like 'true blue' ie pure 'holding the space' OST practice,
although there can be benefit in suggesting that people move around.

  When it is for 'demonstration purposes ie to introduce people to the
process then the facilitator does invite people to move to other tables
every now and then.

  CHOICE OF TOPICS TO ADDRESS

  I have used OST to 'bring forward' topics that have been 'fleshed out' in
subsequent Cafe gatherings. Other members of this listserve have done the
opposite.

  OST can be used to address very complex and conflicted issues and that
this takes time ie 2-3 days. As I have used Cafe processes these have
focused on quite specific questions and have been conducted over periods
ranging from 1 to 4 hours.

  An important point to note, which the founders of Cafe processes (Juanita
Brown, David Isaacs and Nancy Margulies) emphasise, is that Cafe is used
primarily to go deeper into questions. It is Nancy who coined the term 'Open
Space a la carte', in my understanding.


  > One of my current explorations follows from the premise that it is the
  >Sponsor who opens the space and the facilitator who then can proceed with
  >facilitating the Open Space Technology meeting. I am convinced of the
  >importance that the Sponsor should have the opportunity prior to the Open
  >Space Technology meeting to make "informed consent" about saying "yes" to
  >having an Open Space Technology meeting in the organization.

  I will speculate here, without having had direct experience of this belum
(lovely Indonesian word meaning
  'Not yet'), that a Cafe process could be a useful way to introduce a
sponsor to the conversing that happens
  in an OST gathering. And it could be used pragmatically, as Ingrid
suggests, to clarify and formulate the
  theme for the Open Space.



  This is not a comprehensive analysis of correspondence and differences
between Cafe and OST processes. It is an
  expression of some of my lived experiencing that the two can, in
particular contexts, complement each other nicely.


  In the near future these ideas will be located on the World Cafe website
www.theworldcafe.com.

  I share these ideas in a spirit of 'here is a contribution that members of
the list may find of value.' Whether you do is not my business.

  For this is what Meg Wheatley (whose name pops up periodically on this
list) pointed out to me through her writings:

    There is only the fight to recover what has been lost
    And found and lost again and again: and now, under
    conditions
    That seem unpropitious.
    But perhaps neither gain nor loss.
    For us, there is only the trying. The rest is not our business.

TS Eliot        East Coker V

  My 'trying' may provoke new questions about the conduct of our wonderful
practice - which is about recovering what has been lost!

  Some of you may have a different 'take' on these matters, perhaps
specifically on what you understand by 'Dialogue', and would wish to
contribute your perspective
  to this conversation. Please do.

  Whatever, please accept whatever you notice as significant here as having
come via a channel from the land downunder, whose residents are reputed to
stand on their heads all day. (I do a lot, but that's a family secret!).

  Good to converse, with love

  Alan

  Alan Stewart
  Multimind Solutions
  Adelaide



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20001211/59faff12/attachment-0017.htm>