Non-convergence, action planning and strategy

[Chris Corrigan]

Sorry I hit send too soon...


On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 14:30:12 -0800, Chris Corrigan
<chris.corrigan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 13:55:20 -0500, Harrison Owen <hhowen at comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > FS will certainly work – but it is also a lot of work to prepare for. I
> > think you would get the same results (better? J) with the process of simply
> > opening space once again around the dominant issues. Chris Corrigan has some
> > material on how to do that.
>
OK...I'll bite...but I'm changing the name of the thread because I
have a practice question that goes along with this, the answers to
which will probably be useful in this context.

The basic non-convergence process is this:

1. Participants receive a copy of  the proceedings with the
instructions to review them and note pieces of action which stand out,
things that must be done, projects and patterns that seems to want to
emerge from all this work.

2. Participants are asked to reflect on which of those pieces of
emergent action grabs their attention and passion to the extent that
they feel like they could take responsibility for moving it forward.

3. Open Space, as per usual, and with comments about how this is a
space for action planning, and that anything that happens in this
space wants to find a way out of the room.  So invite maximum
responsibility.  The resulting bulletin board represents an agenda for
action.

4. The recording form for the discussions should have spaces for
things like "Next steps"  "Who/when"  "resources needed"  "Other
people we need to bring into this project."

5. The results are posted or added to the proceedings.  In the closing
circle people are invited to share their next steps as well as their
reflection on the process.

The theory behind this is straightforward:

* Divergent OST represents passion, convergence represents responsibility.

* Moving from OST to voting feels to participants like we are going
from something amazing to "business as usual."  Not always a bad
thing, but my experience says that once people taste OST they want
more of it.  Creating categories of action based on proceedings from
the previous day (the traditional convergence process) limits the
patterns that might emerge as people step up to take leadership.  Also
it often happens that things become so converged that there is no real
target for responsibility.  It seems like there is often a group or
two which everyone agrees is important but not important enough to
champion.  That never happens with non-convergence.

* Non-convergence therefore IS convergence, except that instead of the
convergence process happening outside of individuals, it happens
within individuals, as people each perceive patterns and feel the pull
to realize them collectively.

* Voting doesn't always tell us where the action commitments will
actually lie.  But using your two feet to move to the groups that are
creating next steps is a very concrete and personal statement of
commitment.

There's lots more theory, but that's the basic take on it.

Now for my question to practitioners.  Whether you have used
convergence or non-convergence, in OST you end up with lots of people
wanting to do lots of things.  In organizations where there is a
vision or a leadership that wants to be sure that all of these pieces
of action are somewhat aligned, there is often a time when the
leadership needs to examine what has been committed to and make
decisions about, for example, assigning resources to these action
groups.

My question is, what follow-up practices have you used to help leaders
support the emergent leadership and energy and spirit that comes from
OST, while remaining good stewards of their organization's resources
and vision?  I'm obviously looking for approaches that are open, and
that continue to work with the dynamics of OST.

Any answers are much appreciated, and might find their way into a
paper on "Life after OST" in which it may be gently suggested that the
genie cannot be put back into the bottle, and so organizations may do
well to pay attention to strategy and process in the spirit of what
has just happened.  Anyone wishing to collaborate on a paper like this
should let me know too.

Chris


--
-------------------------
CHRIS CORRIGAN
Consultation - Facilitation
Open Space Technology

Weblog: http://www.chriscorrigan.com/parkinglot
Site: http://www.chriscorrigan.com

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