Moving Open Space without closing it . . .

[Erich Kolenaty]

Artur,

with all respect, you are a amazing guy. I can hardly read what you are writing all day, where the hell do you take the time and the energy from to write this all?

Only some small comments:

1. I don't think it needs a lot agreements about OS at all. You live Open Space or you leave it, it works and you have fun or you don't.  

2. "Whatever happens is the only thing we could have" works unter all conditions. Your responsibility as a professional facilitator is to care for good ones. (Bye the way, that is a point where you need good agreements). This principle helps you to understand not to complain about others, the circumstances, the chances you misses in your life etc. If Open Space would work "like it should" - it would not be OS anymore.

3. "Whenever it starts is the right time". I share your impression that in congresses the schedules are often not respected very well, and at OS-meetings they often are. In my opinion this only shows us the perfect use of the "law of two feet" - if the people know it or not. Sometimes the people are there "in time" bodily, but this does not tell us a lot about the "right time".

4. Some weeks ago I watched a facilitator introducing "rules"!  And I agree with you, if somebody lives the principles as a couple of rules, he is far off from OS. In my opinion they are observations of healthy life and working together and sometimes it helps to be aware of them.

Have a nice weekend Artur, and I am curious of what comes up next.

All the best from lovely Vienna

Erich
 


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Artur F. Silva 
  To: OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU 
  Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 3:34 PM
  Subject: Re: Moving Open Space without closing it . . .


  At 23:18 04-10-2001, Harrison Owen wrote:


    It is certainly quite possible to Open Space and never mention either the 4 Principles or The Two Footed Law -- and it will work quite well. The reason, I think, is that both are simply an acknowledgment of what was going to happen anyhow. Thus, the Principles emerged NOT as prescriptions of expected behavior, but rather as simple observations of what seemed to be going on. The Right people showed up, work was focused in the Now with little regard for what might have been or should have been -- It always started when it was the right time -- and of course, it was definitely over when it was over. The only value in announcing the principles (or perhaps a value) is that doing so takes all the guilt out. And misplaced guilt is a waste of time and energy. As for The Law of Two Feet, I think this is really critical to effectively operating in Open Space (any self-organizing system) --- but again, folks will do it anyhow. Unfortunately they don't use their two feet -- they just let their minds and hearts wander when they are no longer interested. All the Law says if follow your passion (interest) but responsibly.

  I understand your point, Harrison, but I don't agree with you completely. 
  And for me, in this moment, it is important to try to understand the role 
  of the "principles" - if any.

  Please note I don't want to discuss with you - I will have to explain my 
  position, so that you can understand it and comment on it. And with 
  time maybe we can try to reach some sort of agreement.

  So first let me state where we are - as far as I understand - in 
  agreement. And that is in the role of the circle, board, market, 
  theme and law. But also other preconditions that at clearly stated 
  in the "Guide" -- namely, the theme is correctly formulated, and is of 
  real concern; the CORRECT people are invited (but not obliged to 
  came) by the Sponsor WITH THE HELP from the Facilitator,
  etc.

  IN THOSE CONDITIONS, "what happens is what should" . But if the 
  bad theme was selected, or if an incorrect group was invited, than what 
  happens is NOT what should, but what the sponsor managed some 
  people to believe that "should". He or She is manipulating the group 
  so that it seems that the Space is Open - but it was "initially 
  constrained". That can be particularly bad when the sponsor 
  is also the main facilitator, as he or she can honestly believe that 
  the constraints he or she is "opening the space", but be wrong and 
  being closing it.

  So when you write:


    It is certainly quite possible to Open Space and never mention either the 4 Principles or The Two Footed Law -- and it will work quite well. The reason, I think, is that both are simply an acknowledgment of what was going to happen anyhow. Thus, the Principles emerged NOT as prescriptions of expected behavior, but rather as simple observations of what seemed to be going on. The Right people showed up, work was focused (...)


  "What was going to happen anyhow" means "what"? What was going 
  to happen anyhow, within an OST event? Or within ANY type of meeting? 
  Or even within any type of event - and then, and only then, would the 
  principles qualify as "Laws of Spirit" (or Nature, or...).

  I think that in "normal meetings" and "regular organizations" and 
  "normal social-economical-political situations" NO ONE IS IN CHARGE but 
  there are relations and conditions of power, influence, etc that make that 
  those systems ARE NOT self-organizing systems. They have constraints 
  (power constraints, ideological constraints, economical interests, etc) that 
  make them "constrained systems".

  (and some people call those "constraints" the "givens" and include the word as
  part of OST terminology even if don't remember to see the word in any of your 
  books, and I think it is in contradiction with OST).

  Indeed the way I see OST is that, for the duration of the meeting, we try to 
  stop those constraints, OPENING THE SPACE for self-organization. And 
  then, and only then, will happen what "should" happen, according with the 
  self-organization of open complex systems. (Complex means also that the 
  required complexity and diversity was invited to the meeting, in conditions 
  (including economical ones) that make possible to ALL of them to appear 
  if they wanted to).

  Now in what concerns other principles like "when it starts is the right time".
  I think that you honestly think that this is what happens all the time. But you
  and I both have been in many Congresses and know what that mean. And 
  what is astonishing in open space meetings is that (except for butterflies 
  and bumblebees) the scheduled time is quite precisely respected (and much
  more that in any other meetings). So maybe the real consequence of stating 
  that principle (added with the other preconditions) is to obtain an effective
  respect of the schedule ;-)

  That relates with your other point: 


    The only value in announcing the principles (or perhaps a value) is that doing so takes all the guilt out. And misplaced guilt is a waste of time and energy.

  It is not only a waste; guilt inhibits learning and creativity. So the "only 
  value" is probably a very important feature of OST. But he rules on time 
  are, IMHO, sugestions, not principles, much less "immutable principles".

  I will be back Sunday evening. You will have time to think about this ;-)

  Warm regards and a nice week end to all. 

  Artur





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20011005/5585c7de/attachment-0017.htm>