2 hour OS

Sat Mar 18 09:18:23 PST 2000

I think I'm stating the obvious, but it seems important to me to state!

To me, the main question on whether a given amount of time is sufficient,
whether 2 hours or 2 days, relates directly to the purpose of the gathering.
For example, looking at the future of an organization in 2 hours and
expecting clarity to emerge out the other end is silly.  On the other hand,
having a great conversation about xyz with no expectation beyond that
(although great things could happen) is entirely possible.

>From  Sat Mar 18 14:58:31 2000
Message-Id: <SAT.18.MAR.2000.145831.0700.>
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 14:58:31 -0700
Reply-To: bjpeters at amug.org
To: OSLIST <OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU>
From: BJ Peters <bjpeters at amug.org>
Subject: Re: convergence
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------3FB484456F0B414C949AAACC"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------3FB484456F0B414C949AAACC
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Ingrid Olausson wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>Michelle, Diane
and others.I had 5 regional
Open Space Conferences in a row in the same organization last fall. And
I did a convergence process like the ones you have described, but a little
more simple and also more selforganized (thanks to several ideas on this
list).I am sorry but this
has to be detailed (by the way it is often from the most detailed ideas
I get the most help). So here it goes:We
had almost two days (until 3 pm the second day). All reports were handwritten
on A3-sheets and put on the wall and read successivly during the conference
(we had no printing service).The
second day before lunch we did the voting process with 5 dots (the smallest
size). We voted on the issues on the bulletin board ( I think that is the
best and easiest to overlook). I had put them in a row and taped a piece
of crossruled paper below each one of them.The
participants were instructed to put the dots in the squares (one on each
of the most important issues or several at one or more of them, just as
you do). The squared paper with the dots in rows makes it really easy for
everyone to count the dots quickly. The voting was made during a coffebreak
and it really creates a lot of fun and talking.After
the voting I did instruct the conveners (the ones that own their issues)
to group the issues so that issues (perhaps with fewer dots) could go together
with other of their kind. Once I let them do it in silence, but I found
it be more dynamic when they could discuss their choices under way. This
can be a very quick process, at the most ten minutes.Then
I called out the issues that were clustered together and asked for an initiator
for each cluster (there were 5-6 in each conference with 40-50 participants).
This was my only interaction during the whole process. Diane, I also use
the term initiator (there is a very good Swedish word for this that means
someone who moves things forward). I told them that the initiatior didn't
have to pursue the actions decided on but were responsible to convene the
group work during the last session.Then
the participants could sign up for the issues and actions they wanted to
be a part of. They had to write their name on the issue (or cluster) they
wanted to plan for during the last session. And if they wanted to participate
in one or two other groups later on they could sign up with a (2) after
their name. Then I gave them a paper where they could fill in the issue
(perhaps a new wording), participants, prioritized actions, when to meet
next time etc. After a one hour session the initiators were asked to give
a three minute report on actions decided on.</blockquote>

To Ingrid and All Other Contributors to this Stream-- Thanks for
all the sharing about ways to do this part of OST. There has been a wonderful
plethora of approaches described.
Ingrid, my approach is mainly like yours, with a few notable differences.
During the topic discussions, I rewrite the topics onto newsprint chart
paper with graph lines (usually two topics per page, the first at the top,
the second halfway down). I learned about using fewer dots and instructing
them to put the dots in rows after my first large OS event where I ended
up cross-eyed and hungry after spending the entire lunch hour counting
over 1000 dots that were placed randomly on each page.
After the voting, I have always been prepared to ask the total group
(rather than limiting this process to initiators) if any natural groupings
have emerged for them. Participants have always begun that discussion and
made the decisions with no intervention from me. I then invite individuals
to commit to being Champion (the person who will move the priority forward
to completion) for a priority by writing their name, with the word "Champion",
their phone number and email address on the priority page. The Champion
can be one of the Initiators or not - it's whoever has passion and will
take responsibility. Sometimes there is more than one Champion who self-identifies
for a particular priority. In that case, they decide to co-champion or
however they want to work the leadership. Other participants are encouraged
to volunteer as members of the Action Team for one or more of the priorities
by signing their names, the words "Action Team Member", phone numbers and
email addresses on the priority page (sometimes I suggest they use post-it
notes for this). Everyone is given a suggested approach sheet (desired
outcome, next steps, milestones, next meeting date, names and pertinent
data for each Action Team member, etc) for the Action Team meeting. The
Champions are then responsible for making sure the meeting is facilitated,
notes are taken, a brief report prepared and delivered to the large group
after the meeting.
I then close the space.
In harmony --BJ
</body>
</html>

--------------3FB484456F0B414C949AAACC
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
 name="bjpeters.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for BJ Peters
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="bjpeters.vcf"

begin:vcard
n:Peters;BJ
tel;fax:602 279 4806
tel;work:602 279 4805
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
adr:;;;;;;
version:2.1
email;internet:bjpeters at amug.org
title:Consultant, Facilitator, Coach, Trainer
note;quoted-printable:=BC=3D=BB=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=0D=0A=0D=0A"We must be the change we wish to see in the world."  - Gandhi=0D=0A=0D=0A=BC=3D=BB=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC=3D=BC
x-mozilla-cpt:;1
fn:BJ Peters
end:vcard

--------------3FB484456F0B414C949AAACC--

>From  Sun Mar 19 14:40:50 2000
Message-Id: <SUN.19.MAR.2000.144050.0500.>
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 14:40:50 -0500
Reply-To: lpasoc at inforamp.net
To: OSLIST <OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU>
From: Larry Peterson <lpasoc at inforamp.net>
Subject: OS Story
In-Reply-To: <l03130300b4f8f2587454@[167.160.201.188]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I recently talked about a brief story of an Open Space in Baker Lake,
Nunavut, Canada.  It prompted me to finish the story and put it up, with a
couple pictures.

The event was focused on Community Justice Committees and their work. It was
in two languages and included a number of Inuit Elders.  For those
interested, you can read the story at the following address:

http://home.inforamp.net/~lpasoc/BakerLake.htm

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