FW: OST becoming mainstream (was: Opening Space at Microsoft PDC)

Mon Jun 16 15:16:17 PDT 2008

OK Folks – I’ve done my part. Now – somebody else take a whack at it! It is
pretty standard “harrison” and probably not up to all the critical
“Wikipedia” standards, but I have done my best for the moment. Apologies for
spelling and syntax, but I just sat down and wrote it. So what you see is
what I did. Now – Surely you can do better!!

Harrison

  _____  

From: OSLIST [mailto:OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU] On Behalf Of Artur
Silva
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 9:39 AM
To: OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
Subject: OST becoming mainstream (was: Opening Space at Microsoft PDC)

Jack, Harrison and all: 

There is strong evidence that OST is becoming mainstream. I am not speaking
only based on the Microsoft event but on some other international
conferences that announced that they are going to use OST. 

But this is also a problem. In some cases, the expression Open Space (or
even Open Space Technology) is used, but there are variants in its
application that may subvert its flavour or event its essence. 

I am not speaking of heterodoxy - that always implies that the heterodox
knows what the orthodoxy is - but about using the label with complete
ignorance of the OST User's Guide.

Some 3 or 4 years ago a CPSquare event was announced as "OS" but the topics
for break out sessions were selected in advance by the organizers.

In the Microsoft event, it happens that the person that apparently is
opening the space for that "OST" is concerned about the fact that
(fortunately) he will not be able to apply what he thinks are two rules of
OST - but they are not. 

In a different event, where a fried of mine will have to assure the
logistics part, a lot of strange material has been asked by the facilitator
for the break out spaces of an "OST event".  

I know that a non proprietary methodology has no way to enforce its
principles. But there are some corrections that can be done easily.

As you all know, more and more the Wikipedia is the standard for definitions
and first information about almost everything. And if one googles "Open
Space Technology" the first entry refers to the Wikipedia
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Space_Technology>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Space_Technology. 

But if one reads the content there are a lot of wrong or misleading
information in it. This goes from small imperfections, like the wording of
principles, to the fact that the Law is completely forgotten. 

The same is true in other languages. If I google "Metodologia de Espaço
Aberto" the first enter refers to the Wikipedia in Portuguese
<http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espa%C3%A7o_aberto>
http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espa%C3%A7o_aberto. Again the definition is
very superficial.

But anyone can correct the wikipedia (
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Contributing_to_Wikipedia>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Contributing_to_Wikipedia)

So, here go my suggestions:

1) Harrison and a small group of friends could correct the English entry of
the Wikipedia.

2) Afterwards all of us could use that version as a guide and translate it
in all of our different languages to include in the Wikipedia version in
each language.

3) Anyhow the Wikipedia has a link to the OST site (
<http://www.openspaceworld.org/> http://www.openspaceworld.org/)  but this
was initially thought, I think, as a resource for practitioners. Now it is
used also by non OST practitioners, that can't find easily (in the main page
of each language) a short, agreed upon, clarification of the principles and
fundamentals of OST. This could complement the Wikipedia entries - or even
simply repeat them. 

What do you think about my suggestions?

Regards

Artur 

--- On Fri, 6/13/08, Jack Martin Leith <jack at jackmartinleith.com> wrote:

From: Jack Martin Leith <jack at jackmartinleith.com>
Subject: Re: [OSLIST] Opening Space at Microsoft PDC
To: OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
Date: Friday, June 13, 2008, 11:24 AM

Hiya Jason.

Delighted to get your email and to see both blog comments.

Please have another look at www.jackmartinleith.com/?p=232 where you'll see
my response to the two numbered points in our second comment (also pasted
below for the benefit of OSListers).

And please accept my apologies for getting hold of the wrong end of the
stick!

Warmest,

Jack

Jack Martin Leith
Creating the new. Enriching the world
Bristol, United Kingdom
Mobile: 07831 840541 (+44 7831 840541)
Skype: jackmartinleith
email: jack at jackmartinleith.com
www.jackmartinleith.com <http://www.jackmartinleith.com/>  

-------------------------

>From www.jackmartinleith.com/?p=232:

Jason Olson writes further:

Also, as I mentioned in an email to you, there are two areas that concern me
regarding Open Space as it currently exists for PDC:

1) Due to the size of the conference (and the fact that Open Space is just
an un-conference within the larger conference), there isn't a current plan
to have attendees vote and prioritize the sessions they want to see talked
about (which, unfortunately, removes some of the agile nature of Open
Space).

2) No current support for an attendees submitting a topic he's interested in
but doesn't want to speak about or moderate himself.

As you can imagine, this has me concerned as both of them are departures
from the Open Space model. I would love to have a chat here with you and
your readers on ways that we can avoid this (or if we should even be
worrying about it). The biggest key is that I don't want to take a great
model like Open Space and butcher it because we didn't actually "grok" the
true purposes behind Open Space.

My response to Jason's two posts:

Jason, thanks very much for clearing up my misunderstanding.

With regard to your two concerns, neither of the practices you describe
forms part of the vanilla Open Space model as described by Harrison Owen in
his book, Open Space Technology: A User's Guide.

In fact most Open Space facilitators don't even suggest that very similar
sessions are merged – this is left to the session leaders (convenors, hosts,
whatever you like to call them) to manage themselves.

Regarding your second point, Open Space is very much about people taking
responsibility for hosting a session. Otherwise Open Space is little more
than a brainstorming meeting: "I think this is an interesting idea, but I
don't care enough to do something about it."

I'm sure other Open Space practitioners will have more to say about both of
these points!

Jack

-------------------------

2008/6/13 Jason Olson (DPE) <Jason.Olson at microsoft.com>:

Thanks for the email Jack! I commented on your blog post directly to make
the conversation more public. My wording may have been a bit unclear. There
is no creating of the agenda ahead of the conference. This is something that
is created onsite, at the conference, by the attendees and for the
attendees. This also enables me to avoid having us (Microsoft) try to
"dictate" what can or can't be discussed. This should be an agile process. 

The part that concerns me right now (and where we currently deviate from a
typical Open Space), is that there is no "attendees vote for the sessions
they would like to see and we use that to determine what is presented."
Because of the potential number of people involved, combined with the fact
that this is merely a smaller unconference within a larger conference, I'm
not convinced that it would work. So, currently, it's largely "first come,
first serve" when people sign up for an Open Space session. Also, there's
really not a supported model for submitting a session you want to hear
about, but have no clue who can moderate/or discuss the session in general.

As you can imagine, these two changes make me a bit uneasy considering the
departure from what makes Open Space great. 

Of course, I would love to hear feedback from you and others if this is a
big deal (and if we should even worry about it), or if we should avoid this
and find a different way for the prioritization and participation to occur. 

Jason Olson

Technical Evangelist | Visual Studio & .NET Framework Evangelism | 

http://www.managed-world.com/

From: jackmartinleith at gmail.com [mailto:jackmartinleith at gmail.com] On Behalf
Of Jack Martin Leith
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 9:11 AM
To: OSLIST
Cc: Jason Olson (DPE)
Subject: Re: Opening Space at Microsoft PDC

Harrison,

Big thanks for the heads up.

I've just blogged it here: http://www.jackmartinleith.com/?p=231

As you'll see, I'm questioning the decision to create the agenda ahead of
the conference.

Best wishes,

Jack

Jack Martin Leith
Creating the new. Enriching the world
Bristol, United Kingdom
Mobile: 07831 840541 (+44 7831 840541)
Skype: jackmartinleith
email: jack at jackmartinleith.com
www.jackmartinleith.com <http://www.jackmartinleith.com/>  

2008/6/13 Harrison Owen <hhowen at verizon.net>:

Seems like the folks at the annual Microsoft Professional Development
Conference are intending to open a little space. Definitely cutting edge,
innovative – Cheers for Microsoft. For the details go to:

http://microsoftpdc.com/View.aspx?post=91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:
8590057  Don't have any idea who is doing it, but I am sure they will have a
grand time.

Harrison 

* * 

* * ==========================================================
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/20080616/e8d3aa61/attachment-0015.htm>