Some questions about an OS event

[Lisa Heft]

Hi Diane -

Congratulations on your Open Space!

I'll share some thoughts about a few of your questions:

An easy one first...The 5 women knew each other well so when they got in
the circle, they moved their chairs together leaving little room in the
center. Though I asked them to allow more space in the middle which they
did, it was a very short walk around the circle and I was very close to
each person as I passed by. I went around twice then stood on the
edge-basically joining the circle instead of standing in the middle on
the paper and markers. Is there anything you might suggest that I could
have done differently as this seemed a bit awkward?

If the room is big enough, you can walk around the outside of the seated
circle if you don't have the room to walk on the inside.  I agree that
walking too small a circle's interior is quite dizzying for the
participants.  And even when facilitating for groups of 3 or 5, I have
the participants make a b-i-g circle with a big center and lots of space
in between each of their chairs.  And I think standing as part of the
circle as you did is perfect.  Some people stand in the center at some
point and some stand just where you did.
(and it was so funny when I walked the outside of the circle once and
some OSers were s-h-o-c-k-e-d that I did so.and others said 'gee, that
makes sense given the size of the group'.  So: as always: use your
intuition.

After four issues appeared on my 2x3 matrix and people signed up for
their sessions, I had to leave the room for they kept looking to me for
permission to do the next thing. They kept reminding themselves that it
was up to them so I did the symbolic act of walking out. When I returned
they had decided that they were all going to stay together and take a
quarter of the time for each issue. Is that still Open Space if the
individuals aren't flowing to other groups?

Your leaving the room sounds perfect.  You can also stay in the room and
keep saying 'what do YOU think you should do?' and 'I know you will
think of a great solution' and things like that until they g-e-t it.
And sometimes in very small groups the participants decide to stay
together and do the agenda together.  It happens (though I personally
love it when even in small groups they go off in ones and twos!).  In my
mind, "It's still Open Space" if you have the opening circle and agenda
co-creation, sessions, principles and law and closing circle.  And if
you just hold space.

The time we had...from 1300-1630 was cut to 1400-1630. However, I've
read it is possible to do open space in an hour so we tried it anyway.
Are there further criteria when doing such short sessions such as:
having done Open Space before, agreement to focus on topic and not on
interpersonal issues, nature of topic area, etc?


I'm so glad you just jumped in and tried!  I have seen a mini-OS act as
a sort of naming of things - but not a lot of time to work on them and
no time to mix and match thoughts via sessions, bumblebeeing, etc.  So I
saw it work once to just say 'what are the issues you members think
should be on the executive committee's radar for the coming year?' and
that's that.  I'd say make no agreements to focus on topic and not on
interpersonal issues etc.: that's intervening and telling folks how and
what to think and say.  My question again: when is the point at which
you say "well, this isn't enough time for Open Space but gee we can
throw some topics on the wall and talk about that" or use another
method?   What can you do to 'fight' for more time?  Personally, I've
seen lots of work get done in 3 hours (open, 2 sessions, close).  And as
I'd mentioned, generating ideas (but not much else) in a one-session OS.
I'm a big believer of always asking 'is this the method for this
time/need' and of fighting for more time.  One way to do this is to note
the deliverables of a short OS versus a longer one versus a longer one.
Sometimes this will make it clear to the host/client as to whether they
need to find more time.

 By the way, I think it's important to emphasize (a client tells this in
their invitation and interchange with potential participants) that in
deciding if they can come, participants need to commit to staying the
entire time.  In respect to the process, the people, the work.  And if
they cannot do that, they can read all the fabulous notes of what
happened.  Of course it sounds like you had a very small group and lots
of challenges with the time.  At what point might you have said, "This
isn't working - let us take another look at whether Open Space will work
given the short amount of time and folks needing to leave." and so on.

There was a clear conflict between two people and they worked up to
being quite accusatory of one another. After a couple of hours I
intervened-talked about respecting each other, "I" statements instead of
"you" statements...just some basics which did serve to stabilize the
situation. Is there something you say at the beginning about being
respectful of one another?  In a larger group the facilitator might not
even be aware that this kind of thing is going on. It seemed that
holding the space open by my presence did not help them resolve the
conflict-do you ever intervene?

I personally would never intervene in this manner. If you explained the
principles and the law, you gave people the respect that they can take
good care of themselves and do their best work.  They always have the
freedom to leave, to engage, to walk away, to return.  If you intervene,
to my mind, you are disrespecting their abilities to take care of / make
it through their own conflicts ('oh, I didn't really mean it').  Plus,
this may be the ONLY time in some peoples experience that they can have
conflict, and get through it to the other side (rather than having
someone else parachute in and 'fix' it for everyone.  I know your
intention was to create safety, but in Open Space, the principles and
the law ARE the guidelines.  I never add anything additional and I've
found I don't have to.  Sure, there are times there is conflict.
So.Open Space takes care of that so well in putting the
solution/experience into participants' own hands.  I venture to say that
holding the space open by your presence WOULD HAVE helped them resolve
the issue.or not.but if you intervene they never have the chance.

Due to earlier commitments, two of the people left at 1630 but the
principle of it being over when it's over applied as the rest talked
till 1930. Those three had peace and a way ahead. I guess reflectively,
the right people stayed-kind of an affirmation of two principles here.

See my earlier comment about asking participants to commit to the whole
thing.  Gee, you only were ASKING for them to stay for such a short
time.  If it's a small group, and if everyone cannot make it, I would
say then that another time that works for everyone has to be chosen.  Or
was this an impossible group to get together?  Seems like if it is
important, people will make the time.And you are right - the right
people stayed, and it wasn't over until it was over.

I had one person get up and leave the room, walk the hall, and
reluctantly return after the group said they would make adjustments. I
seem to recall you said no one had left a session never to return. The
Law of Two Feet would preclude me from throwing myself at the door
barring the way. If there was more than one group I could have directed
them to a second group? Or am I not to engage at all with the
participants?

Agreed - I think you intuit this already.  Yours is not to direct - not
to intervene.  Holding space is a breathing lesson - a conscious
non-intervention.  Breathe, believe in them, keep the faith that they
are capable of taking good care of themselves in Open Space.  Principles
and Law.remember.  So someone leaves.  Who's to say that person is not
taking care of themselves?  So the group communicates it will make some
adjustment.  Sounds like the group is taking care of what they feel they
want to do to offer some inclusion for this person's way of thinking.
Seems like they are doing GREAT.

My last question is about the arrangement of the break out area. After
being in the initial circle for the opening, people went to the wall
which opened up the circle into a U. Then they used the wall for
reference thus were no longer in a circle during the discussion which
might have encouraged the adversarial situation. Do you make any
prescription about break out set up? Do you arranged the break out areas
in circles too?

Even with a very tiny group, I have .say.5 discussion areas in the room
(not at the agenda wall but spread around the edges).  Indicated by
signs ("A", "B" etc.).  In each discussion area there are notes-taker
forms, blank sheets, maybe some pens.  After the big circle breaks up,
sometimes I drag some chairs (or have some stacked nearby) to the
discussion areas.  And we're back to that 'what if they.' part.  If you
come from the position that 'everything they do is good', you have no
reason to fix anything.  Sure, it might not be how you envisioned it.but
if you are practicing Open Space, a great thing is to 'let go attachment
to outcome' and just enjoy everything that is happening.

As I said at the beginning I am very encouraged. Having such a positive
outcome under such difficult circumstances strengthens my conviction
that this would be helpful in many of my primary areas of influence.

You did an incredible job!  Keep Opening Space, keep asking, keep
sharing with us.

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 openingspace.net
www.openingspace.net


*
*
==========================================================
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/20050522/5f7d9761/attachment-0016.htm>