Democracy and Open Space (in work) - long, sorry

Elena A. Marchuk marco at mail.nsk.ru
Wed Sep 4 20:40:19 PDT 2002


Dear All, you are a wise community which I can ask any question.

I don't have a question, or it is too much the same: How to...

Yesterday (your today for some Western US coasters) we had a 'repetiotion'
to Non-profit organizations on Novosibirsk (NPOs) in preparation of Civil
Forum in our region.

For more then a month we were arguing - whether to do a Conference as a
Civil Forum, and how.
Seeing our quarrel the representative of the Novosibirsk Administration
said: I see, you don't have a common ground, so I will report to our
Governour of the NSK Region (who wrote his resolution to support the
initiative - as the problem is sponsors and facilitiess, as usual, but also
we are looking for partnership - it is good, we need to use the
situation!)...., that you don't need a conference yet....

My oppinion that we need it just because we don't have any common ground,
and we need to discuss how can we develop our region together - the local
governments and population (NPOs, business, administrations)

He also said, that we have... a nice woking coordinating commettees and some
great programs with some NPOs... is not it enough?

So yesterday we gathered 40 organizations, and the topic the organizers come
with was: "Interaction of NPOs and local governments in building Civil
Society"

How do you think such a topic - a very general one - could be 'discussed' in
the OST.
Though I tryed while oppening to ask the question like: So, now we need to
find out why do we need to interact and what is Civil Society then...

so people gathered on this mini-conference, who were intrigued by seeing
what is OST, but still they are interested in providing Civil Forum - there
was a lot of passion - came up with those questions:

1. What kind of arrangements should be make for development of social
defence of population?
2. Civil Forum as the instrument for more succesful colaboration with local
governments and business people with the goal of solving citizens' problems
in our region.
3. The role of nonprofit organizations as the specific centers of
sustainable development of territories. Mechanisms of interaction of
nonprofit organizations and local governments and personal oppinion about
role and place of Civil Counsil and Civil Forum.
4. The participation of nonprofit organizations in the future elections of
2003. Are we ready to change the Quality of our participation? The candidate
from pupulation.
5. The participation of NPOs in preventing drugs-using, homelessness and
carelessness in schools, orphanages and permanent housings of the city.
6. The concrete help to desadaptivated groups of population with education
and seach for harmony (Social technologies).
7. Ecological safety: the rights of people and the rights of nature.
8. The prevention of conflicts through development of Centers of sustainable
development of territories.
9. The federal reforms of house service and the citizens' freedom on the
territories.
10. Development of Novosibirsk - the general (common) concern of all
citizens. Mechanisms of taking people's oppininion in cosideration.
11. Development of the conditions for the encreasing of economical activity
of the population.
12. Including eldery people into the active life of society as people with
experience and wiseness.
13. The situation of drugs-using in the city and the region: medical,
juridical, social aspects. The regional program for struggling with
drugs-using.
14. The realization of the international youth ecological peacemaking
project "The peace trees - Siberia-2003"
15. Information about women-leaders, the women's movement: the achievements,
participation in social and political life of the city and the region on the
Web-site.

You see, they are most general, and very 'Russian' - not concrete - though
GREAT! (I'm not saying even that there are no budgets in any discussed
projects, or some more real program (who, what, and so on)... - it would be
really HIGHEST level if somebody will think about it), but still this is the
starting point for work (for me)
Most people were very excited, but there were some, who said that they were
waiting for more concrete planning...

and it will be the same on the Civil Forum. My idea, to have all this
spectrum, not to be afraid, but then to go to the next session with more
detailization (may be without prioritization?). so to start working on
programs....

So, now if we still manage to persuade our administration, or will find
other sponsors for organizing this Forum, how could we bring people to real
'doing', to programs, not only talking?

I know the answer - nohow.
But could topic move them closer, if we name is somehow like "Development of
the NSK region in partnership of NPOs and Local governments"

It sounds funny even for me, though I'm not sure I put it OK in English,
what I mean is that we never came to the gooed 'planning' session. it is
always 2-3 hours we have and I do remember Harrison Owen oppinion (I have a
video with his West... something opening) where he said: the first day
people are concerned with trying to be on as many group discussions as
possible, but on the other day they come to planning sessions, HERE it
seems, that people need to be pushed at least by question to come to this.

So for now we do plan (if it happens and happens in OST way) the whole day
of OS and planning session in partnership, but I'm not sure how to do it,
and whether we can use the topic as a 'moving' stimul?

Best wishes to all

Elena Marchuk
Novosibirs. Scientific Center of Siberia.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Corrigan" <chris at chriscorrigan.com>
To: <OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 7:04 AM
Subject: Re: Democracy and Open Space


> We had a conversation earlier in the year about forms of convergence and
> action planning that did not require voting.  In February I tried out
> the 4N method that Michael Herman and I hammered out (Michael named
> it...he gets the credit for News Now Next Nuts - and he can have it!).
> It worked really well.  The record of the conversation and the story are
> on The Meta Network at
> http://community.tmn.com/tmn/swebsock/0007715/0679001/CS41/viewitem.cml?
> 22+6+54+23+0+0+1+x#here
>
> Not voting is empowering.  People see what work needs to be done and
> pick up the tasks.  People move by choice to the work that holds the
> most meaning for them, and new structures emerge.  I think voting places
> predetermined boundaries about what needs to happen.  As much as we can
> say that "every issues is still important" voting implies that some
> issues are more important than others, even if things are ranked
> strictly according to where people's energies are at.  The only time I
> have found voting appropriate was at the end of a one day meeting, when
> my sponsor wanted things prioritized.  At that time, we gave each person
> five dots and asked them to rank the most important issues for the
> group.  That was all.  There was no follow up within the OST meeting on
> these issues, they simply ranked them and left them at that.  With a
> clear understanding of what we were doing, no one felt slighted.  But in
> contexts where the voting then leads to groups to work out those issues,
> I have found people generally miffed at the way that whole thing goes.
>
> Maybe it's me (Harrison might think so...he once described the aversion
> to voting as "Canadian.")
>
> Another thing that bugs me about voting is that it says "wasn't that
> Open Space thing interesting?  Okay, let's get back to reality..."  In
> other words, it doesn't model the new reality, but reinforces the old
> one.  I have had people express exactly this disappointment to me.  They
> have said "Oh rats...we were really starting to get somewhere..."
>
> And this "getting somewhere..."  Doesn't that echo John's notion of
> democracy as a journey?  I don't think that democracy IS voting, nor do
> I think that voting in and of itself is democracy.  To reduce one to the
> other removes the role and responsibilities of the citizen to act and
> improve the system.  Perhaps real democracy invites this action.  Voting
> is just a way to see what's popular.
>
> So OST is "democratic" if it invites folks to be citizens, encourages
> them to use their feet, and provides a way for outcomes to unfold
> without domination from powerful interests.
>
> Enough musing for now.
>
> Chris
>
>
> ---
> CHRIS CORRIGAN
> Consultation - Facilitation
> Open Space Technology
>
> Bowen Island, BC, Canada
> http://www.chriscorrigan.com
> chris at chriscorrigan.com
>
> *
> *
> ==========================================================
> OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
> ------------------------------
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
> view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu,
> Visit:
>
> http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
>

*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu,
Visit:

http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html



More information about the OSList mailing list