OS and AI

Mon Apr 30 01:18:00 PDT 2001

Dear OSLIST,

Peg Holman and I are being bumblebees.

We're both on the OS and AI listserves (along with BJ Peters and probably
others).  Peg compiled the OS/AI thread messages from our list a couple days
ago and posted them on the AI list.  Here are two responses from Bernard J.
Mohr which I found to be important and illuminating.  Information about
joining the AI list is included at the bottom.

Buzzingly Yours,
Chris Weaver

----------
From: BJMSynapse at aol.com
To: pholman at email.msn.com, AIList at business.utah.edu,
aiconsulting at listbot.com
Subject: Re: [Ailist] OS and AI
Date: Sat, Apr 28, 2001, 2:40 PM

Peggy - thanks for sharing this OS list thread with this AI list.

Having been "trained" in OS in the early days and having had the opportunity
to be with Harrison and you in at least one large OS, (and having run
numerous other ones myself) I fully resonate with many (or perhaps all) of
the positive attributions made to OS in the list comments.

The difficulty I have in adding much beyond that  is because Im aware  that
the understanding of AI underneath many of the OS list comments is quite
diferent from my understanding of AI - so its almost as if we are speaking a
different language - or to use a somwhat hackneyed term - we seem to
standing
within differing paradigms (ie beliefs about the nature of reality, the
world
etc)

For example I hear people talking about AI as if it were a tool or a method
rather than a set of principles which guide practice ( what a significant
difference!)

I hear people talking about AI as if it were the interviews - rather than a
continual process people use to enagage each other in building the kinds of
worlds and communities and organizations they want to live in

I hear people talking about AI as if flexibility, customiztion and
co-creation with our clients were somehow not core and central to AI
practice.

I  hear people talking about AI as the 4 (or 5 ) D cycle - as if they were
one and the same - rather than understanding that this is one of many
articulations of a set of principles( for example Imagine Chicago calls it
Understand-Imagine-Create )

I hear almost no reference to or understanding of the underlying theory and
research base. (Social Constructionism, the Power of Image, and what is
generally termed " the new sciences eg the principal of non locality,
Participative Design, the work of Dee Hock  etc etc etc)

I see little or mention of the all important Design phase in AI - with
respect to the importance of which Cooperider says

"Too often we skirt these "tougher" issues, like the sharing and
distribution
of
resources, or images of ideal power relations" and goes on to say...

<<What is becoming increasingly clear to me is that if people do great work
with Discovery and Dream, then rarely, if ever, do the older command
and control structures of eras past serve the org; the new dreams
always seem to have outgrown the structures and systems. If we, on an
ongoing basis, start sharing propositions emerging in our work we
might begin seeing patterns and connections, and images of post
bureaucratic forms, where the future is brilliantly interwoven into
the texture of the mosaic of all our inquiries. In my experience,
which is curious to me, I have never seen people create propositions
about creating more hierarchy, more command and control, more
inequality, more degradation of the environment, more socially
irresponsible business practices, etc. Indeed the propositions, as
I°¶ve seen them written, have always moved in a direction of more
equality, more self-organization, more social consciousness in terms
of business practices, and the breakdown of arbitrary barriers
between groups and functions.
>>

Peggy - Of course all of this could be dismissed as over complexifying - and
I for one certainly like Harrisons invocation " what is one less thing to do
and have the experience be whole?"  But I think we need be cautious in our
attempt to stream line and not forget the end concept from Harrison ...and
still "have the experience be whole"

What I do know is that there are many practitioners out there who are deeply
committed to

<<building a better world through the creation of organizations that are
healthy and prosperous-- living systems that connect to the best and most
positive in human beings and are in harmony with nature. >> ( the
purpose/raison d'etre of AIC - Appreciative Inquiry Consulting)

...practitioners that use OS and or AI as guiding frameworks. My hope is
that
as a larger community, we begin by seeking to understand each other as fully
as possible ie developing a common language perhaps, a shared set of
meanings. - and perhaps your cross positngs are just the vehicle to help us
do that !

Bernard J Mohr

In a message dated 4/29/01 12:09:09 AM, pholman at email.msn.com writes:

<< Bernard,

Thanks for your very thoughtful reflections.  I really take your point about

"its almost as if we are speaking a different language - or to use a somwhat

hackneyed term - we seem to standing within differing paradigms (ie beliefs

about the nature of reality, the

world etc)"  I must admit I was a little nervous about sending the messages

to this list wondering if some of the perceptions would seem insulting.  As

the discussion shifted to perceptions about role of the facilitator, it

seemed useful to me to broaden the reflection to this list.  Your hope of

aiding greater understanding is certainly one I share.

Peggy >>

====

Peggy - Since the point of departure for AI is dialogical place (ie Social
constructionism and relational theory), how could anyone object to a
conversation that says 'lets explore"!  This of course doesnt mitigate the
difficulty of shared meaning for so many words.

Personally, I am continually impressed by my own inability to create new
shared meanings in workshops of less than a week.  People have no difficulty
in grasping superficially the words associated with the 5 D's - after all
its
just basic action research isnt it. But it is the meaning, the nuance of
choice and the whole world view within which one stands that makes the
significant difference in deeper understanding and then practice. Its that
moment, when people say, "so from this perspective, everything changes" -
which incidentally is an experience I also associate with OS.

None of this is particularly intellectually complex and many of these ideas
are, Im certain shared by the OS community - but the dialogue needed to
tease
out the subtleties, those meaning full little differences that matter so
much, (like the difference between action planning and design)  is a
challenge in general and via email it seems daunting

But perhaps, given so much in the way shared ground between the communities,
we have an opportunity here?

Bernard J Mohr
President/CEO
The Synapse Group, Inc.
"Supporting Positive Organizational Change for More Than 30 Years"

Mailing address:
57 Coyle St.
Portland, ME 04101

Bernard's office direct line and Voicemail 207-874-0118 (24 hrs)
Synapse administrative office (207) 761-4221 (24 hrs)
Fax (207) 874-0456 (24 hrs)
Home (207) 775-6577 (only after office hours and before 9 pm)
Email     <BJMSynapse at AOL.com>

Hope to see you at the First International AI Conference, Sept 30 - Oct 3,
2001, Baltimore, MD
For more info go to < www.pegasuscom.com/ai/ >

_______________________________________________
The Appreciative Inquiry Discussion List is hosted by the David Eccles
School of Business at the University of Utah. Jack Brittain is the list
administrator. For subscription information, go to:
http://lists.business.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/ailist
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20010430/c825fb43/attachment-0017.htm>