when a client hires Open Space Technology, is this what she gets?

[Harrison Owen]

At 10:28 PM 9/2/00 -0400, Birgitt wrote:

  This caused the manager to go onto the internet to find out a little
more, came upon my website, and wanted to know if she had hired a
consultant who would do a good job and deliver Open Space Technology as she
now understood it to be.
>
>The name of the consultant was unfamiliar to me. I have no idea what the
>consultant does that he calls Open Space Technology. I do know he charged
>a lot. I said I did not know the consultant, couldn't speak for his work,
>and then I e-mailed the manager a list of what key ingredients would be in
>an Open Space Technology meeting and suggested questions that she ask of
>the consultant. She phoned me back and wanted to know about standards of
>performance. She said that she had hired Open Space Technology, in good
>faith, because she was convinced it was the right thing to do. She assumed
>that this is what she would get from someone who provided Open Space
>Technology.
>
>I believe strongly that situations such as this are going to cause a
>backlash against Open Space Technology. I stand even more firmly in my
>belief that each facilitator of Open Space Technology will facilitate in
>accordance with his/her uniqueness as well as with his/her interpretation
>and perception of what Open Space Technology is AND that certain key
>ingredients must be attended to.
>
>Years ago, when I worked in social services, the various agencies were
>working hard, doing good works, and were filled with pride but not
>necessarily focused on meeting the needs of the clients, working with the
>clients on what the clients wanted. I feel the same at this moment about
>the way we are offering Open Space Technology. Are we the ones
>interpreting the needs of the clients in the same way social services did?
>Or are we listening to what the clients want and meeting their needs? What
>if one of their needs is assurance that if they hire Open Space
>Technology, that this is what they will actually get? To date, in my
>experience, we do not offer this. The client gets whatever the consultant
>chooses to deliver and calls Open Space or Open Space Technology.

**********************************

No doubt about it. There are consultants out there who haven't got the
whole picture -- and/or fail to present it for whatever reason. There are
also clients out there who fail to do their homework and end up with an
inferior product. There are even clients out there who
intentionally  purchase something that they know won't work -- just so they
can say, ""It didn't work -- I tried" -- and then go back to doing just
what they were doing before. All sorts of folks, indeed.

And when Open Space is involved in these situations, it is problematic,
sad, and angry-making. All true. But I am not sure that any potential
"cure" would not be worse than the disease -- or something like that.
Certainly, those who write about Open Space should make best effort to
provide the "whole" picture. And those who offer training programs in Open
Space (and Birgitt does some wonderful work here) should do the same. But
at the end of the day there will be consultants who play with less than a
full deck, and clients who fail to do their "due diligence" search. So what
about poor old Open Space?

I think it will survive.

First off, there are also clients that do their due diligence -- and
Birgitt's conversation is a case in point. Secondly, even when Open Space
is done "poorly" it is usually better than what might have been done. And
if it is done wretchedly, doubtless there are disappointed folks, but in my
experience, there are more than a few participants who say to themselves --
This can't be all there is -- and make the effort to find the Real McCoy.
Personally, I love to run into there sorts of people. They are really
receptive, quickly get the picture, and more to the point, usually turn out
to be great advocates. And the "nasty" side of me also indulges in a in a
few chuckles, 'cause I know THAT consultant has just blown their
credibility...to say nothing of future employment.

Then we get to the interesting question of What is REAL Open
Space?????  Having devoted more than a few pages to the subject, to say
nothing of some hours and years, I can honestly say -- I am still finding
out. To be sure, there are certain fundamentals, but how about the details?
Like "convergence." Certainly useful, and sometimes close to mandatory --
but not always. For example, for 19 years we have been convening The
International Symposium on Organization Transformation. And never once have
we had a convergence session. And to the best of my knowledge nobody missed
it. Certainly not me. The several thousand folks who have gathered over the
years were not there to move to "concerted action" -- they came to
participate in an ongoing, always evolving, conversation about
transformation in organization. Certainly there have been definite
outcomes, including what might now be termed the field or practice of
Organization Transformation, a whole mess of books and articles -- and even
Open Space Technology. And never once did we do "convergence" -- a closing
circle for sure which was at once an ending and also a beginning for next
year's conversation -- but no convergence. Looking back, I rather suspect
that the power and accomplishments of the many "OTs" have not be
compromised by this lack, indeed the "lack" may well have been contributory
to what I have felt to be some very positive and useful outcomes.

So am I anti-convergence? Absolutely not -- but I find that the useful
criteria are "context and need." And both change with circumstances. So
what's right? It all depends.

Of course, one solution to the whole dilemma is that "we" (whoever "we" is)
offer some sort of formal certification in OST. But then we would have to
enforce it -- and spend a lot of time bringing the perpetrators of
malignant Open Space to the bar of justice. Actually, I would choose to
spend my time opening good space, and let the folks make their choice. At
the end of the day I suspect that Open Space (Technology) needs lots of
Open Space -- and it will survive -- or not.


Harrison

Harrison Owen
7808 River Falls Drive
Potomac, MD 20854 USA
phone 301-469-9269
fax 301-983-9314
Summer Phone 207-763-3261
Summer Address
189 Beaucaire Ave.
Camden, ME 04843
website www.mindspring.com/~owenhh
Open Space Institute website www.openspaceworld.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20000903/6a5ae3d2/attachment-0017.htm>