Advice needed for third day

[Sharon Quarrington]

We do an affinity convergence on day 3 - grouping similar action plans
together - and then ask people to dot vote on those (sometimes people
will dot a cluster of actions rather than a single action).

You might find it interesting to give staff and community different
colour dots and see what different patterns emerge.  That way the
president (and the group) will get to see if the staff priorities are
similar to the community priorities.

After the dot voting we dialogue with the group about what they want
to do next - and the right plan for the group generally emerges.  The
dot voting is used as data but not a decision.  Most often the group
will decide that whatever actions get championed can move forward.  We
will finish with a "vote with your feet" where ongoing action teams
are formed.

We have had interesting results where actions that got lots of "dot
votes" did not get any "feet votes" and ended up being put "on hold"
until someone had passion for them.

I'd love to see a copy of your proposal.

Sharon
sharonq at pdesigns.com

>From  Wed May 31 08:30:04 2000
Message-Id: <WED.31.MAY.2000.083004.0400.>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 08:30:04 -0400
Reply-To: maureen.pomroy at hrdc-drhc.gc.ca
To: OSLIST <OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU>
From: Maureen Pomroy <maureen.pomroy at hrdc-drhc.gc.ca>
Subject: Re: OS in Asia
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

I have found, over and over, after voting takes place that the group does not
want to see any topic left out, and they proceed with combining issues.  Over
and over, I've also found that -- after action planning starts with these
last-minute combined topics, that the original convenors will come back and
say the topics should not have been combined.  So, what I've done in forming
action groups, is to list all topics and ask for names of those who are
passionate about each, starting in order of priority vote, and going down the
list.  This seems to have worked well, but has resulted sometimes in one of
the top five priorities, having no action group formed.  In this case I've
asked the group if they want to leave the issue for now, with the
understanding that anyone from the group can take responsibility for it at
any time in the future.  With this suggestion, sometimes they leave it,
sometimes people step forward rather than see it left open.

I, too, am open to suggestions on... to vote, or not to vote...


Maureen Pomroy
St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada
---------- Original Text ----------

From: "Jim Clark" <jimbo at wfc.com.tw>, on 5/28/00 9:10 AM:

Greetings from Formosa,

I've been using OS for a number of meetings in the company I work for
(operations in Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Japan) and thought I would share a
story with you all.

Last week we had a two and a half day meeting with half a day of follow up
presentations from previous meetings and about 2 days of OS.  The
presentation day went pretty well.  We had had a meeting with our top sales
managers and the people who deliver the services they sell to come up with
some ways of improving the service we deliver to our customers (we are in
the English language learning business).  They came up with about 24 ideas,
and we used the "hot dot" convergence to boil those down to about 9 key
arenas.  The service people then had about 2 months to follow up on those
ideas, checking for feasibility, etc. and they gave their reports on the
afternoon of the first day.

Very well done and well received.  Many things were agreed to by the end of
the first day, and some hot topics were pushed to the next day "to talk
about in Open Space."

That night after dinner we sang Karoke songs till the wee hours.  Energy
was going well.

Saturday morning, we were getting the room ready for the opening circle
when I got a call from the President of our company, who suggested that we
take an hour break from 11:00 to 12:00 to listen to Taiwan's new president
Chen Shui Bien's, inaugural address.  We weren't going to start the opening
session until 10:00 and I thought it better not break up the flow, so we
did some discussions about all the infomation that had been presented the
day before, watched the speech, and had an early lunch.

I surprised myself with how calmly I made the switch in the flow.

We ended up with evening news about 7:15 that night.  This group was very
diverse, with about 35 people from all three areas (HK, Japan, and Taiwan)
and some customers.  The customers were only invited for the first day of
OS, but were not invited for the convergence.  I tried to encourage our
company to let them stay, but they were concerned about them being there
when we were talking abou how to spend money....

We spent the early evening getting the Book together and I went to bed at
10:00 p.m. (which in Taiwan is like going to bed at 7:30 for people in N.
America as we all stay up pretty late here).

The next morning we did morning news, and it sounded like there might be a
few more topics that people either hadn't thought of, or were uncomfortable
of bringing up with the customers around.  I gave a minute or so for people
to post any new topics, and nobody did.  We passed out the books, and
started doing the convergence when two topics did get added, which was
cool.

Something interesting happened, and if you've read this far,
congratulations.  The group started putting topics together so that those
that weren't top vote getters would be connected to a TVGer.  I let it go
for a while until it hit me that they were trying to make sure that "nobody
lost."  I reemphasized that those that weren't TVGers would still be in the
document, and people could still follow their passion to make those things
come true, but we were looking for those areas where the group has passion
and energy and urgency to get things planned this afternoon.  They were
reassured, and the combining fury slowed down.

The groups did fine in the planning and we had a wonderful closing circle,
in which a number of people shared their feelings of uncertainty leading up
to the meeting, and how happy they had come anyway.

We have been asked to use OS for three more major meetings in our company
in the next four months, and I'm quite certain there will be more.  It does
give me great pleasure that people in the company are asking for OS, rather
than it being me that suggests it.

So the two questions I have are:
1.  Have any of you come accross groups that want to combine all of the
topics after voting?

2.  In coming up with topics, I've found that the Chinese participants
(particularly first timers) will have a number of names on the topic,
sometimes up to 7 people.  I now ask that if more than one person proposes
the topic, that one person takes the responsibility to be the point person,
and that the circle that person's name.  Have others come accross a similar
situation, and if so, any other responses.

With respect from Afar,

Jimbo

>From  Wed May 31 15:10:32 2000
Message-Id: <WED.31.MAY.2000.151032.0100.>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 15:10:32 +0100
Reply-To: martinleith at theinnovationagency.com
To: OSLIST <OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU>
From: Martin Leith <martinleith at theinnovationagency.com>
Subject: To Craig LaFargue, from Martin Leith
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20000531081646.00b23960 at mail.gil.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Craig.

During the 12 years that I've been working with Open Space I've never had
the luxury of a third day, so I've developed a short action planning process
that can be run at the end of the first or second day. I recently used it as
part of a three hour (sic) Open Space in Ireland with 220 healthcare
managers. Yes, from briefing to project teams and action plans in three
hours, with two periods of Open Space along the way. Sound crazy, but we did
it. If you'd like to check out the process, go to
http://www.theinnovationagency.com/openspace/actionteams.html for full
details. The key to successful implementation is, I believe, the
co-ordination team. If you know Stafford Beer's viable system model then the
co-ordination team provides what Beer calls 'System two' - the connectivity
between the different action teams, and between the action teams and the
formal management system. This ensures that the projects are part of the
mainstream management agenda, receive management attention and are part of
the budget allocation process. It also makes sure that the teams aren't
unknowingly competing for resources.

Hoe this is useful.

Wishing you well in your adventures,

Martin Leith
The Innovation Agency Limited
Brighton, United Kingdom
http://www.theinnovationagency.com