convergence with "stickie dots"

Fri Mar 7 01:53:45 PST 2003

Dear Dotty Stickers!

My approach up to now has been to allocate five dots irrespective of the
group size.  However I must give serious consideration to Peggy's
'formula'.  It appears more sophisticated than the five-dot approach but
I am unsure if we can possibly sophisticate OST.

My appreciation of the results of OST, in my experience, is that I would
not move away from using sticky dots.  My appreciation is not simply
personal, it is also the feedback I receive from participants.  I value
that feedback.

Any other opinions.

Regards,

Mick

-----Original Message-----
From: OSLIST [mailto:OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU] On Behalf Of Peggy
Holman
Sent: Friday, 7 March 2003 12:02 PM
To: OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
Subject: Re: convergence with "stickie dots"

I feel compelled to add my 2 cents worth on this question of
convergence, because it is a question that's been near and dear to me
since my earliest exposure to OS.  Voting just never felt right to me.
I also have a comment on the mathematics of dots just because.

I've used Open Space for convergence for several years now and love it!
As both Michaels have already said, it is a clear reminder that action
comes from people taking responsibility for what they care about.

I think a seminal conversation on convergence took place at OSonOS in
Toronto in 1997.  I just pulled the paper copy of the proceedings to
look at a session called "'Day 3' of Open Space".  (Day 3 was a short
hand for convergence.)  Michael Herman, myself, Diane Gibeault, Jay
Vogt, Winston Kinch are some of the folks who were there that are on the
list.  Here's a quote from the notes:

>The Aha
>The amazing realization we had was that synthesis [rather than voting
and prioritizing] can be acheived by doing an open space within the open
>space; with a little different theme.  The Day 3 question is about
opening the space for action: what is possible now?  It is bounded by
what is >real for us now.
>
>The Day 3 open space benefits from the time spent in divergence in
which truths were spoken, mooses are put on the table and perspectives
>shift.  It reminds everyone that open space goes beyond the event and
is iterative (cyclic?) in nature.  Day 3 done this way both grounds
people >in "what's next" and reminds them that the space is always
open."

So, 6 years later, I think the seeds of this conversation have firmly
taken root.

And for no other reason than my own need to share silly data, I knew
that there was a way of calculating the number of dots that I learned in
my Total Quality days.  It takes 2 steps, but here it is:

Round 1:  everyone votes as many times as they want.

Round 2:  You keep only the items that receive half or more of the
votes.  You take the items left and divide by 2.  That's the number of
dots.

As you can see, it's based on the number of items to be voted upon not
the number of participants.  I wish I could remember the rationale.  It
has something to do with adequate weight amongst multiple items so that
something that constitutes a consensus emerges.

So, history and trivia...my gifts for the day!

Peggy

P.S.  To Michael Pannwitz's invitation to Berlin.  Go if you can!  I
went to the future search workshop in Berlin several years ago that
Michael hosted and Marv and Sandra conducted. Silly for an American to
go so far to attend a workshop with Americans?  I had the privilege of
getting a glimpse into another culture during the workshop as we used
the future of Berlin (slimly disguised as B-A-City) as our topic.  With
East and West Germans, indeed, Eastern and Western Europeans there, it
was powerful.  The workshop was also right before the Jewish holidays.
There was something about being there at that time of year for me that
was quite poignant.   One evening, one of the other participants asked
me why I came. Three of us, a German, an Austrian and an American Jew
had a conversation about the Holocaust and speaking and being silent
that will be with me always.  It is an experience well worth the travel.
Not to mention Michael is a WONDERFUL host!

----- Original Message -----
From: Lisa Heft <mailto:lisaheft at PACBELL.NET>
To: OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 4:41 PM
Subject: convergence with "stickie dots"

Hello, all -

When prioritization of key issues is part of the design in an Open Space
event, sometimes people post the original topic/issues signs (the ones
from the agenda wall) around the room.  Participants either read the
hand-written notes placed under each topic (if a book of proceedings has
not been printed) or read in their books for an hour or so.  Then they
place a colored adhesive dot on the "x" number of key issues (these
defined according to the design the facilitator creates with the client
-five things we can do on Monday, things we can do with no money, things
we want to move forward as hot issues to the so-and-so committee).  Or
they can make a mark on the items they feel should be moved forward.  Of
course there are other ways to see how the group feels about key issues,
such as reopening the space, creating affinity groups by standing by the
one issue they wish to champion, using voting software, etc.

For the method using dots or marks, does anyone have a mathematical
formula for deciding how many dots each participant should be given for
a certain number of key issues as an outcome?  For example - if you want
the group to highlight the 5 top issues for this group right now, how
many dots do you give each participant if you have 20 people, if you
have 200, etc.  And maybe you don't need to show the 5 top issues, maybe
you need to show the whatever-rises-to-the-top issues - you won't limit
the number but will call anything that is clearly a majority of votes a
key issue.  Does the math change?

I'm writing a paper on convergence.ideally you'll see it on my future
website if I ever can sculpt it (the paper - the website's coming
closer) into a manageable shape.

Thank you, dear colleagues,

Lisa

L i s a   H e f t
Consultant, facilitator, educator
O p e n i n g  S p a c e
2325 Oregon
Berkeley, California
94705-1106   USA
(+01) 510 548-8449
lisaheft at pacbell.net
(coming soon: www.openingspace.net)

* * ==========================================================
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

*
*
==========================================================
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20030307/ab3df3a2/attachment-0017.htm>