The Question(s)

Sat May 28 18:06:28 PDT 2005

Masud -- the word "manipulative" is a curious one. In the circles that you and I usually move in -- it is a "bad word." But if I go to a chiropractor or a therapeutic massage person -- and am not "manipulated" I should be very unhappy. I think the significant issue is  not to manipulate or not to manipulate -- but rather to what end and to what purpose. Hopefully, my ends and purposes are in line with the client. If not, they should fire me. If so, I expect to be fully compensated. But manipulaton comes with the territory, I think.

Harrison

Harrison Owen
7808 River Falls Dr.
Potomac, MD  20854
USA
301-365-2093
207-763-3261 (summer)
website www.openspaceworld.com

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Masud Sheikh 
  To: OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU 
  Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2005 8:35 PM
  Subject: Re: The Question(s)

  Thank you Harrison,
  I understand and accept what you are saying - that your client is the
  organization, and that some people may need to move on. I am glad that you
  did not use the word "caring" in this note. In the example you gave, I
  suppose the facilitators and sponsors did not know the reasons why some
  did not accept the invitations within the 48-hour notice period.

  Labelling those who do not participate to be "non-caring" seems
  judgmental, and perhaps manipulative - to me, at least.
  Take care
  Masud

  Harrison Owen <hhowen at comcast.net> wrote:

  >Masud --The issue you raise is of course a real one. But for some reason,
  in my experience, it is mostly a theoretical one. This may be due in large
  part to the fact that in the early conversations with a client I am a
  great pains to insure the broadest possible representation. I Insist that
  the invitation be as broadly extended as possible. There may be some
  limitations because of physical space available, in which case my practice
  has been to make the guest list expansive and then set in motion an
  acceptance system based on "first come, first served." In one large Open
  Space that I did with Peggy Holman in a large US corporation (which was
  very troubled/conflicted) -- we actually issued the invitations in defined
  blocks according to the proportional representation of the
  skill/professional/geographic groups involved. Folks were given something
  like 48 hours to respond and invitations that were not accepted were
  returned to "the pool" and available to anybody who cared to come. It
  wasn't perfect, and it seemed to work. At least I never heard any
  complaints -- although maybe Peggy did. (Peggy ??). But more to the point,
  if there was a significant issue in the minds/hearts/soul of anybody
  anywhere in that company that did not show its head (ugly or beautiful) --
  I never heard anybody say what it was. Which brings to mind another point.
  I am sure that there have been somewhere, some time, some individuals --
  who felt excluded for some reason or another. Truthfully I feel sorry
  about that, but in terms of the end result, I am not really sure it makes
  that much difference. The reason is a simple one. If the issue felt by the
  one apparently excluded by faulty invitation or personal choice is a real,
  hot, juicy one -- you better believe that somebody will raise it. There
  are endless numbers of situations where the gossip said that if THAT issue
  were ever raised -- Heads would roll. Ordinarily that contraband issue is
  an "early appearer" -- despite all predictions to the contrary.
  >
  >I suppose it is now time to reveal my personal bias -- focus, or
  whatever. As much as I appreciate and support the rights, needs, and
  feelings of the individuals involved -- my focus is always on the group or
  organization. In another time and place I have confided to those who asked
  that in my opinion, Open Space was not to be confused with individual
  therapy -- although it is certainly true that may people have found it to
  be of enormous therapeutic value. But that is another story. Once I start
  working with a group or organization, I make it very clear that my
  personal concern is that the group or organization reach its highest
  possible level of effectiveness (however that may  be defined). At some
  level this requires profound respect for all the individuals involved. But
  there are also cases where some of the individuals involved probably need
  to seek alternate employment, or whatever. And for them the most useful
  outcome may well be to clearly understand that their current organization
  is simply not their cup of tea -- and it is time to move on.
  >
  >Harrison
  >
  >
  >Harrison Owen
  >7808 River Falls Dr.
  >Potomac, MD  20854
  >USA
  >301-365-2093
  >207-763-3261 (summer)
  >website www.openspaceworld.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

*
*
==========================================================
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/20050528/4c4068ba/attachment-0016.htm>