Mixing action planning and

Mon Feb 26 08:45:09 PST 2007

Diane wrote: - “Priorities for action were that of individuals or a few,
often the more extraverted people, not necessarily representative of where
the leadership or the majority of people may want to go.. The organization
preferred investing its resources and energy on priorities based on a clear
indication from all members present. They wanted to know what collectively
was considered the priorities to act on and then to identify who had passion
and leadership to act on those priorities.”

I have run into the same concern, which is why I still think some form of
formal prioritization can work well. Granted this often looks like voting,
but I am not sure that voting is such a bad thing. The actual mechanism for
doing this can be as simple as pasting sticky-dots – or as complex as a
ballot with weighted scores. We used to have a nice software package that
recorded and tallied the votes and reported the results as bar graphs.
Somehow it developed a bug – but maybe some techie sort could fix it? Or
make a new one?? Anyhow, with large groups (over 100) I always found it
worked very well, and for sure it made the engineers and other “numbers”
people happy. At a practical level, counting sticky-dots can be an
eye-popping affair when the group size hits 500+. In those cases, having the
computer do all the work is a wonderful thing.

Harrison

Harrison Owen

7808 River Falls Drive

Potomac, Maryland   20854

Phone 301-365-2093

Skype hhowen

Open Space Training  <http://www.openspaceworld.com/> www.openspaceworld.com

Open Space Institute  <http://www.openspaceworld.org/>
www.openspaceworld.org

Personal website  <http://www.ho-image.com/> www.ho-image.com 

OSLIST: To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives
Visit:  <http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html>
www.listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html

-----Original Message-----
From: OSLIST [mailto:OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU] On Behalf Of Diane
Gibeault
Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 6:45 PM
To: OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
Subject: FW: Mixing action planning and

Hi Beverly and all,

Reopening space for action: I also use that approachy but I do it only in
certain conditions. 

- When dealing with a group that does not constitute an intact (existing)
organization. For example in many conferences neither the sponsor
organization nor other participating organizations intend to take
responsibility for fthe overall follow-ups.  

- Where the theme is centered on learning and individual development. 

- When I am sure the leadership is open to the particular outcomes of this
approach (opening space for action) which is very different then first
surveying what the group feels are the priorities for the organization. (see
the desciption * of that process below.) Some sponsors/leaders feel that
organizational resources, time and money can only be committed to a limited
number of initiatives. Or, they want some sequencing of initiatives,
beginning with those topics that require attention first according to the
group as a whole. 

Disadvantages of opening the space again for action that intact
organizations have pointed to:

- Priorities for action were that of individuals or a few, often the more
extraverted people, not necessarily representative of where the leadership
or the majority of people may want to go.. The organization preferred
investing its resources and energy on priorities based on a clear indication
from all members present. They wanted to know what collectively was
considered the priorities to act on and then to identify who had passion and
leadership to act on those priorities. 

- Some felt there was a lack of focus, actions going in every direction - no
organizational vision.

- Concern that limited resources may not be available for everything
individuals may have passion for.

- Where trust is an issue, it may be more of a challenge for participants to
propose topics for action. Posting a topic is not just for discussion, it’s
for action so the method demands more of a stand. It's greater risk taking,
not knowing what the leadership or the group considers to be priorities. 

To reopen space for action: 

- If the organization is willing to let participants pursue their own
personal passion on any of the topics discussed or anything as a result of
the experience they are now inspired to work on, the question I often use
is: What do I now have energy and passion to work on? 

- People who want to take action on someting of interest to them post a
topic for action. 

- An action planning guide similar to what others have described is given to
every participant to help them focus on plannning for action, individually
or in small groups. Then there is a reporting to the larger group that takes
different forms depending on the circumstances and needs.

* Surveying first what the group feels are the priorities for the
organization (summary of the process I use):

- Participants read reports with this question in mind: What are the top
(three or more) priority topics you feel, we as an organization should act
on now?

- Answers create a collective survey. After a quick compilation of results
of this survey is announced, leaders meet (15 minutes at the most) to
consult and see if they feel the proposed priorities fit with the
organizational vision, are doable and resource wise and confirm that they
will support them. 

- During that time participants identify other related reports to the
priorities and note the report numbers on a sheet attached to each priority
flip chart page.

- Leaders give feedback on priorities and answer questions of clarification
if any.

- Then, people choose which of the collective priorities they have passion
to work on - they are action planning knowing clearly they have the full
support of the leadership. 

- The option of action planning on other areas is still offered in
recognition that all the work done so far is important and that someone may
not have passion for the collective priorities still may make positive
contributions. 

In my experience, both methods of identifying priorities for action work
best when the method chosen is the right one to meet the group's needs and
preferences. 

Diane

Diane Gibeault & Associé.es-Associates

Ottawa, Canada Tel. (613) 744-2638

www.dianegibeault.com <http://www.dianegibeault.com/> 

Coming up - À noter

Open Space (OST) English Training: April 25-27, Toronto Canada

Forum ouvert (OST) & WC Formation-français : 27-28, 29-30, Suisse

* * ==========================================================
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/20070226/a9b37d68/attachment-0007.htm>