Convergence Design

[BJ Peters]

Peg Holman wrote:

> COMMENTS? REACTIONS?  Your thoughts would be most appreciated!

Peg-- What a wonderful and fun project! I favor the first design as it seems to
have one less step. I'm  unsure what is gained by having the small groups meet
as you have described in your second design. Also, is it your assumption that
however many topics are worked will be taken to completion or not (in true open
space fashion) or do you intend to have them do any prioritization? I like the
"suggestions" you give to the groups as to their process (Step 4) and I would
suggest you use the word "suggestions" rather than "instructions". When I do
convergence, I often add the suggestion that they also set a date for the next
meeting that the focal person (I use the term "champion") and those who have
committed to work on the topic (I use the term "action team") will commit to.

You have a great design, it seems to me. Thanks for sharing and asking for
input.

Warm regards --BJ