Is there a need to hold space for people to ask the question, "what's 1 more thing we need to stop doing?" - long

Zelle Nelson zelle at knowplacelikehome.com
Thu Jul 15 18:01:36 PDT 2004


  Doug,

Maureen says hi back.

Doug wrote:

"The question does, however, seem to assume that we have a bounded supply of
passion and responsibility. Especially given that in OS we work among
groups, I am not sure that such is necessarily the case...."

Let me clear up some assumptions...

Passion - unlimited

Responsibility - In my experience responsibility is a choice. Each
individual determines on their own how much they are willing to take on.
Often we are able to take on more than we first assume we can handle,
but how much and when we take responsibility is ultimately an internal
choice based on our experience of the external world matched with our
experience of the internal world mixed with the callings of our passions.

Time/Energy/Money (in the context of the earth and human beings) i.e.
how we act out our responsibility -

- For individuals, time/energy/money is finite - whether we look at a
day or a lifetime.
- For a group, time/energy/money is as abundant as the group decides by
self-organizing around passions. So even if some individuals in a group
become disinterested or die, the original passions that called the group
in the first place can still call and spark other individuals to
continue the actions. The trick is groups are made up of individuals.

Doug wrote...
"Especially given that in OS we work among groups,"

Yes, in OS we do work with groups, yet each group is made up of
individuals who are passionate enough about an invitation (from the
invitation that gets them there to the topics posted in the Market Place
of Ideas) to choose to take the time and use their two feet (i.e. be
responsible for the passions that call us) and join the conversation.

And that's just in OST. At least in Maureen and my experience, these
individuals (especially from corporate land) once they leave the Open
Space, tend to be pulled back by their lives and responsibilities that
existed before they entered into OST. The struggle they face is feeling
obligation towards what was their lives before the OST, and the passions
that were ignited in the Open Space. Often the companies do not remove
responsibilities, but ask these individuals to add to their
responsibilities.

Too often as individuals (and as organizations) when we take
responsibility for something it is a choice we make once, and stick to
it until we are forced or called (internally or externally) to make a
different choice about where and when to spend our time, energy, and
money. And if there is any way not to let go of a responsibility we
don't, because in our society letting go of a responsibility is like
failing, or going back on your word. When we let go of a responsibility
we let go of a piece of ourselves by which we are defined - he's a great
father; she's a wonderful philanthropist; she's a dedicated business
woman; etc. If we stop taking responsibility for those things we define
ourselves by, our identity is in question.

I believe it is important to give people (and organizations) time and
space to examine what they may have to give up in order to follow their
newest passion. They need time and space to reexamine their identities.
Who are they going to be as they walk away from OST? We've left that
step to be taken privately, or without someone to at the very least hold
space. Without being given the space, the waves of the world can flood
the sparks that were lit in OST. Without being given the space there is
little opportunity to replace or weave together the old foundations/ways
of doing business/living with the new foundations/ways of doing
business/living discovered during OST.

I believe there is an opportunity to model living in Open Space. Where
we choose our responsibility as it matches our passions in each moment,
rather than sticking to a responsibility choice made 10 minutes ago or
10 years ago.

Some examples...
I've experienced it in Open Space so many times...You go to the
Marketplace, it's session 1, you choose to attend topic Q that looks
compelling which will be held in session 3, you tell your friends you'll
definitely be at topic Q, session 3 rolls around and topic Q that was a
passion 3 hours ago is now not as compelling, or something else has
become more compelling, you don't go to topic Q. In Open Space you've
just used your two feet and you feel good about yourself, where you're
going, what you're doing. No one questions your integrity - they praise
you for it.

That same situation outside of OST...It's 10am, you plan to go to a cafe
to meet some friends at 1pm, you tell others that you're so excited
about meeting your friends at the cafe at 1pm and tell them to join you,
1 pm rolls around and you've used your two feet and are in the park
reading a great book, you don't go to the cafe. You're not in "formal"
Open Space and your friends wonder where you are, they question your
ability to be responsible, to keep your word, you've failed to do what
you said you were going to do, you might feel guilty.

Thankfully many of my friends do not question where I was, or why I
didn't let them know I wasn't coming after I said I was. They don't
question my integrity. Still, some of them, sometimes, do.

I usually don't question my identity or my ability to be responsible
when I choose a different passion at a moment when I said I was going to
be somewhere else. But sometimes I do. Sometimes I feel guilty for
following my two feet when I'm not in the bounded realm of OST.
Sometimes I question my identity when I'm not somewhere I planned to be,
even if I never told anyone but myself that I would be somewhere or do
something at a certain time. And that's just in a space of 3 or 4 hours.
And in my experience, I'm not the norm in our society.

What about the person who's done the same thing, held the same kind of
responsibility, for years. Do they have the space to question what
passions they will follow now that they've discovered something new?
Will they stop doing something that has been seen as valuable by
themselves, or their peers, or their organization without the space to
even decide to choose where their passion and responsibility lie?

I believe we have a roll as facilitators to hold that space where people
can answer the questions: "what is our shared vision? what do we need to
stop doing to make space for what we want to start doing? how do we
honor what we will stop doing? and, how do we walk forward and create
our future together?"

What do you think?

With Grace and Love,

Zelle

************
Zelle Nelson
Engaging the Soul at Work/Know Place Like Home/State of Grace Document

www.stateofgracedocument.com

zelle at maureenandzelle.com
office - 828.693.0802
mobile - 847.951.7030

Ravenswood - Isle of Skye
2021 Greenville Hwy
Flat Rock, NC 28731


Douglas D. Germann, Sr. wrote:

>Zelle--
>
>(Please say hi to Maureen for me--it has been a long time. And I am glad to
>see your posts here--even heard your name at the Giving Conference in
>Chicago this weekend--were your ears burning? <grin>)
>
>I sat up in my chair when I saw your invitation to reflect on what we need
>to give up to make room for what we want to have happen in our lives. It is
>a life-giving question. Thank you, Zelle.
>
>The question does, however, seem to assume that we have a bounded supply of
>passion and responsibility. Especially given that in OS we work among
>groups, I am not sure that such is necessarily the case....
>
>                              :-Doug. Germann
>                              Seeking people making change.
>
>*
>*
>==========================================================
>OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
>------------------------------
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
>view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu:
>http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
>
>To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs:
>http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
>
>
>
>
Original thread:

Harrison,

Thoughtful words - thank you.

I've talked too many times to count with my wife, OS partner, business
partner, amazing human being, Maureen McCarthy about: after two
days/rounds of OST (primarily conversation about passions and
responsibilities, then more focus and action around what to do now with
those p's and r's once we leave here; tipping our hat to non-convergence
as it has become to be known - thank you Michael and Chris for starting
that journey)  to holding a third day/round asking the question:

Now that we've talked about what we are passionate about, and how we
plan to/are taking responsibility for our passions - what do we need to
stop doing or do less of in order to make space for the ideas and
passions we've just spent two days identifying and expressing?

In the old adage, "what's one more thing not to do" - thanks again
Harrison - lies a way to open more space outside of the "formally"
opened space.  Maureen and I have struggled for years, often in
corporate land, about holding an Open Space, or facilitating meetings,
or teaching skills which result in more work for the participants not
less. So often when we come into a situation the organization is looking
to improve something, be more productive, and the organization ends up
layering the new foundations/ways of doing business/living we've
opened/held space for them to create on top of all the old things
they've been doing (things that have worked for them) for years. They're
working harder than before. We don't leave time for the organization to
decide an overall plan weaving the past - what we've always done because
in some way shape or form it works, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it.";
present - incredible passion and ideas and actions developed in 1, 2, or
3 short days of being in the moment; and future - now that we have
multiple ideas, some old, some new on the table, what is our shared
vision? how can we create it together?

I understand that the invitation to do what works and stop doing what
doesn't is implicit in the process of opening space, but we think it's
time to start making that invitation, "What's one more thing not to do?"
explicit not only in "formally" opened space but also in the open space
that we are all actually living in, every moment.

Having written all this, maybe the third day/round is started with the
invitation, "what is our shared vision? what do we need to stop doing to
make space for what we want to start doing? how do we honor what we will
stop doing, because it has served us? and, how do we walk forward and
create our future together?

I think this invitation begs the question asked earlier, "is OST simply
a half-way technology?" maybe this third invitation will help us to
break the self-created barrier that is the "formally" opened space that
exists in contrast to the idea that we are always in open space until we
impose our own boundaries and barriers on our lives.

What does everyone think about this?

With Grace and Love,

Zelle

************
Zelle Nelson
Engaging the Soul at Work/Know Place Like Home/State of Grace Document

www.stateofgracedocument.com

zelle at maureenandzelle.com
office - 828.693.0802
mobile - 847.951.7030

Ravenswood - Isle of Skye
2021 Greenville Hwy
Flat Rock, NC 28731
Harrison Owen wrote:

> Zelle -- I think you have hit the nail precisely on the head. We need
> all the help we can get when it come to being fully and productively
> in the moment -- a clear witness to the ongoing power of self
> organization. I think it also becomes clear that the task is also a
> very simple one -- Just be in the moment. No learning, no technique
> will get us there, and while all (AI, Dialogue etc) can be helpful in
> terms of pointing us in the right direction, helping with first steps,
> reminding us of what is important . . . At the end of the day you just
> have to Do it. In my own experience, there comes a point when the
> details and complexities of the techniques (approaches) stand in the
> way of the experience. Case(s) in point were the several instances
> when a colleague suggested doing a Dialogue in the midst of an Open
> Space. Although I deeply respect the process and the thought/research
> that lies behind it -- I also found the experience annoyingly
> restrictive. Doubtless my annoyance arose from my innately prickly
> personality -- but I found myself wondering why we were engaged in
> this elaborate process when dialogue (small "d") was happening all
> around us, all by itself. Don't talk about it, don't think about it,
> don't "process it" -- just do it. I have had the same experience with
> AI. There is absolutely no question that the insights and approach
> embodied in AI can and does bring a group of people to some good
> places they may never have visited before. But again -- when
> difference is appreciated as a matter of course -- as often seems to
> be the case in Open Space (self-organizing system) why not just
> appreciate the appreciation?
>
> My real hope in raising some the issues that I have was/is to open
> some space beyond Open Space Technology, Appreciative Inquiry,
> Dialogue, Community building and the like. If it is true that
> difference is appreciated, deep conversation achieved, community
> enlivened, etc -- all as the natural concomitant of a well functioning
> self-organizing system -- how do we build on that? This is not so much
> a matter of "doing a better Open Space" -- but rather doing better in
> the open space of our lives. In "The Practice of Peace" I attempted to
> use what I perceive to be the learnings from Open Space (start with
> invitation, convene a circle, welcome passion and responsibility) as a
> first approximation. But I think it is only that, a first
> approximation. Where do we go from here?
>
> Harrison
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     From: Zelle Nelson <mailto:zelle at knowplacelikehome.com>
>     To: OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
>     <mailto:OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU>
>     Sent: Monday, July 12, 2004 6:25 PM
>     Subject: Re: the dark side of circle practices -- and related themes
>
>
>     some thoughts on our role as facilitator...
>
>     Harrison Owen wrote:
>
>>...And what about all those other great experiments -- Dialogue, Appreciative
>>Inquiry, Community Building, and I suppose "Circle practices" (although I am
>>not quite sure what they are)? Speaking just for my self -- I must say that
>>each of these have been profound teachers. From the practitioners of
>>Dialogue I have learned what intense and productive communication can be
>>like. From Appreciative Inquiry I have learned the incredible power of a
>>positive, appreciate approach to my fellow human beings. And from Scott Peck
>>and Co. I have learned much about the nature and function of effective human
>>community. Each of these has opened my eyes, sharpened my attention, and
>>raised my expectations in terms of what and how we can function at optimal
>>levels both individually and collectively. But my deepest learning occurs
>>when with open sharpened,  eyes I see exactly the same things happening in
>>Open Space -- all by themselves, and all without the overt intervention of
>>some prescribed, facilitated process. I find my emerging conclusion to be
>>basically mind-blowing -- although some may take it to mean that I have
>>blown (lost) my mind. It seems to me that genuine dialogue, deep
>>appreciation of difference, and the manifestation of real community are all
>>the natural concomitants of any fully functional self-organizing system. If
>>this is true, the real focus should be on enabling/allowing the
>>self-organizing system (which we all are) to do what it alone can do --
>>rather than trying to "fix" apparent and real problems encountered along the
>>way with special interventions and added processes, as fascinating as those
>>processes and interventions might be. As I said, Don't fix it if it ain't
>>broke -- just make sure that "it" (good old self organizing system) has
>>plenty of time and space in which to breath.
>>
>>Harrison
>>
>>
>>
>     Zelle writes:
>
>     I'm oscillating between two prime pillars: 1) Learning and
>     adopting tools (Appreciative Inquiry, Dialog, etc.) to help us
>     interact ultimately in a state of grace*** 2) Living, being,
>     experiencing as our path to learning and as a way of life.
>
>     ***sidebar*** Living in a State of Grace means coming from a place
>     where peace is our ultimate goal in any relationship rather than
>     striving to keep the status quo of a relationship at any cost.
>     When we hold onto our idea of a relationship at any cost we are
>     coming from a place of fear - fear of loss, fear of pain - Living
>     in a State of Grace does not mean we hold the relationship as a
>     sacred cow, but rather we hold the people involved as sacred. I
>     never want to see you walking down the street and feel I need to
>     cross over to the other side to avoid talking to you, whether we
>     agree on certain issues or not. To learn more about how to more
>     fully live in a State of Grace visit www.stateofgracedocument.com***
>
>     The way of being I hold is a paradox. In Open Space I can use the
>     tools I've learned towards better relationships with others and
>     myself. And I can practice being in Open Space, living as the
>     waves and tides of my internal and external world compel me to
>     move, act, speak, listen, and be. I seek to live by the principles
>     of Open Space, since I see the act of formally opening space as an
>     acknowledgment of what is already out there to be lived. I need
>     neither skills nor advanced training to take responsibility for
>     myself and my passions, yet in my experience, I more richly engage
>     in bountiful relationships when I utilize skills and tools which I
>     have been taught or have created to facilitate living the reality
>     of responsibility and passion.
>
>     To address what Harrison wrote:
>
>"It seems to me that genuine dialogue, deep
>appreciation of difference, and the manifestation of real community are all
>the natural concomitants of any fully functional self-organizing system. If
>this is true, the real focus should be on enabling/allowing the
>self-organizing system (which we all are) to do what it alone can do --
>rather than trying to "fix" apparent and real problems encountered along the
>way with special interventions and added processes, as fascinating as those
>processes and interventions might be."
>
>     Having learned many skills and tools which enable me to better
>     know how I wish to be in relationship with others has greatly
>     enhanced my ability to act and move within a "formally" - being in
>     circle, stating the law and principles, creating a marketplace of
>     ideas - opened space. I am more "fully functional" within a
>     "self-organizing system" because of the tools I have learned.
>     Leaving space open for others to learn techniques within the
>     bounds of a "formally" opened space, in my experience, can be
>     beneficial. Our challenge as facilitators of Open Space is to know
>     when to hold um and know when to fold um - know when to offer aid
>     in facilitating dynamically changing relationships and when to
>     simply hold space for each individual to find their own way and
>     their own learning. As I've seen from posts here and heard from
>     discussions with colleagues the ultimate path to knowing when to
>     do what comes full circle back to following our passion and our
>     responsibility on an individual basis as spirit arises.
>
>     When "formally" holding space I like to provide opportunities for
>     topics to be posted relevant to facilitating the resolution of the
>     questions addressed in the invitation, including opportunities for
>     learning tools and processes that foster fruitful relationships.
>     These opportunities must, in my opinion be as voluntary as the
>     other topics which arise. Often these opportunities are offered
>     outside of the "formally" opened space and are not a prerequisite
>     of being involved in an Open Space event.
>
>     In my experience once I "formally" open space I rarely do anything
>     but hold space and try to bounce back any attempts to bring me in
>     to facilitate a discussion, by saying something like, "This part
>     of the meeting is yours. You have the ability and the
>     responsibility to follow your own two feet and solve problems and
>     challenges on your own." Outside of "formally" opened space I tend
>     to still stay out of trying to "teach" something that I "know"
>     unless I am invited to do so.
>
>     In my experience tools and skills which help us to be more fully
>     present in dynamic relationships (Appreciative Inquiry, Dialogue,
>     State of Grace Documents, Byron Katie's Loving What Is) focus on
>
>"enabling/allowing the self-organizing system (which we all are) to do what it alone can do"
>
>     Do we need these tools to be and self-organize into active,
>     responsible, passionate bodies? - No. Do these tools enable and
>     allow self organizing systems to be more fulfilling, fruitful, and
>     rewarding? - In my experience, Yes. As long as these tools and
>     skills are not "required" as a ticket for admission into a
>     seemingly open space.
>
>     With Grace and Love,
>
>     Zelle
>
>     ************
>     Zelle Nelson
>     Engaging the Soul at Work/Know Place Like Home/State of Grace
>     Document
>
>     www.stateofgracedocument.com
>
>     zelle at maureenandzelle.com
>     office - 828.693.0802
>     mobile - 847.951.7030
>
>     Ravenswood - Isle of Skye
>     2021 Greenville Hwy
>     Flat Rock, NC 28731
>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Artur Silva" <arturfsilva at yahoo.com>
>>To: <OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU>
>>Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 1:00 PM
>>Subject: Re: the dark side of circle practices
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>--- chris macrae <wcbn007 at easynet.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>The process starts erring to absolute democracy of
>>>>everyone must have
>>>>equal time contributions to speak at each phase
>>>>
>>>>
>>>(...) In other
>>>
>>>
>>>>word's the circle's communal harmony ... can
>>>>
>>>>
>>>co-create such
>>>
>>>
>>>>deep love of nice
>>>>behaviours to each other that it misses the biggest
>>>>spiral out above our
>>>>communal thinking's common denominator
>>>>
>>>>
>>>That's interesting, Chris.
>>>
>>>I have been, at times, in situations like that one -
>>>circles (or squares) where everyone must "be in
>>>place", must "speak in his turn" and must have a "nice
>>>behavior".
>>>
>>>They call this democratic, but in fact it is a
>>>dictatorship. In a democracy I can stay silent if I
>>>want. When everyone is obliged to speak that is not
>>>democratic. This can be a "rules' dictatorship"
>>>(created by the rules previously defined,) a "leader's
>>>dictatorship" (the leader(s) imposes that everyone
>>>must speak), or even a more interesting type - a
>>>"majority's dictatorship" (where the rule is created
>>>at the moment by the majority).
>>>
>>>Apart from claiming to be democratic, this type of
>>>groups/sessions also claim that they are following
>>>"good principles". The two I have heard more often are
>>>"appreciation" (like in "appreciative inquiry") and
>>>"dialog".
>>>
>>>Democracy (and Open Space) are made of dialogs AND of
>>>discussions. If one suppresses discussion and impose
>>>dialog (as in "everyone must be nice to each other and
>>>hear the other with appreciation") then there is no
>>>democracy and no open space, I think.
>>>
>>>Apart from the fact that there are some people that I
>>>don't want to hear with appreciation (say, Bush, to
>>>give only one example) the point is even more strange.
>>>"Playing the appreciative game" (an expression I have
>>>created just know) is only one form of "playing games"
>>>- and that is the essence of Argyris and Schon's Model
>>>1.
>>>
>>>If, in a meeting or organization, one imposes dialog
>>>and appreciation, then a close session or organization
>>>will come to place.
>>>
>>>Artur
>>>
>>>PS: I never heard to call this "circle" and even less
>>>Open Space. But I would not be too surprised if some
>>>would call that. I have already referred to a
>>>respectable group of practitioners of "Communities of
>>>Practice", USA based, that not long ago claimed that
>>>they had used "Open Space" (OST) in a meeting because:
>>>
>>>- they assembled in a circle
>>>- they gave participants the opportunity to ADD issues
>>>to a large group of issues pre-prepared by the
>>>organizers
>>>- they divided the large group in small groups to
>>>discuss those issues (by choice of the organizers, if
>>>I recall well - but I recall well that there was no
>>>reference to "the law" - people were not expected to
>>>leave their group! That would not be considered
>>>"appreciative" to the other group members, I
>>>suspect...)
>>>
>>>But don't worry about what some people do "in your
>>>name", Harrison. You can always remember what some
>>>have done (and are doing) in His name. And at least
>>>about you I know that you exists - something I am not
>>>prepared to say about the Other...
>>>
>>>

--
ÐÏ à¡± á



--
ÐÏ à¡± á


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

To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs:
http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20040715/16b9e3b8/attachment-0015.htm>


More information about the OSList mailing list