Future of OST (was: Re: [OSLIST] honouring each other)

Harrison Owen hhowen at verizon.net
Mon Dec 14 13:25:25 PST 2009


Good stuff -- as usual. I can think of some things to say -- but I will do
that on OSLIST now that I have my head and computer in more or less working
order.

 

ho

 

 

 

From: OSLIST [mailto:OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU] On Behalf Of Suzanne
Daigle
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2009 1:23 PM
To: OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
Subject: Re: Future of OST (was: Re: [OSLIST] honouring each other)

 

Thank you Arthur for creating this post under the new heading of "Future of
OST" ; thank you also for connecting it to what Peggy had written before and
tying it to what Harrison speaks of now, partially in jest, asking whether
the time has come to eliminate OST. 

 

Why, I ask myself, are we having this conversation now?  Is the conversation
really about the future of OST or about what's happening in the world right
now?  

 

My public line in the sand right here,right now is that I believe beyond the
shadow of a doubt that these times are viral and fertile for all that OST
offers and invites!  As I watch so many leaders and others still gripping
the levers of control, working harder and faster with so much seeming to
hang by a thread, I feel myself on the edge of a precipice knowing that the
time for me to jump is right now. 

 

I agree with Arthur and Peggy on pre-work and also with Harrison in Wave
Rider who talks about doing your homework (Chapter 10)-- a lot of this is my
own pre-work (homework). Where do I want to go with this? What do I really
care about? Why? and What might happen along the way? Do I trust the
process? Do I trust myself? Do I trust others? and finally Do I have any
choice? 

 

What Brett Barndt described in his December 13th post (Topic: Open
Government Workshop Series) talking about a recent conference related to the
telecommunications industry and the FCC is a story that plays out in so many
places.  All the ingredients for opening space are there: real serious
issues, complexity,diversity, urgency, passion and need.  And as I stand on
the edge of my own precipice fearing this jump without a safety net, what I
know for sure, is that Space will Open...if not by me, then surely by others
with others. 

 

It took me awhile to get it, to know that I should "just do it" which is
more than the dabbling that I've been doing so far. Perhaps that's what this
new conversation about the future of OST is all about. It's about courage
and that courage needs to come from inside of me. Inspiration is what I get
from all of you!  Thank you so much for that this past year. 

 

Time now to get to work. I've got some serious urgent homework to do.  I
know that 2010 will be a busy year. I know I'll bump my head a lot; my ego
will get bruised and I'll feel plenty insecure worrying as I always do that
I may not be good enough or know enough but in the end, I'll always know I'm
not alone thinking as I do because of you.  

 

 

Suzanne 

 

Suzanne Daigle

s.daigle at nufocusgroup.com

NuFocus Strategic Group

7159 Victoria Circle

University Park, FL  34201

Tel:  941-359-8877

Cell: 203-722-2009

 

 


 

On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Artur Silva <arturfsilva at yahoo.com> wrote:


Dear Peggy:

 

Thank you for articulating this an inviting us to think about the “open
spacism”, the future of OST practice and how can we maintain “Open Space”
open, hence, evolving and transforming over time. 

  

The first thing that came to my mind, when reading your post, was a note
that Harrison made many times in the past about the future of OST being to
stop talking about OST - when every meeting will be an Open Space one, there
is no need to talk about OST. 

  

Unfortunately – or not – IMHO, that time is far from happening. So, we must
discuss what will be the future of OST before that time will come or,
putting in a different way, what future do we want to construct for OST (*)
in the next (few) years. 

  

That is where your post invites us to think about. There are so many
different ideas in your post that I will not be able to discuss them all. I
will not event try. But I would like to add to some of your comments some
other (probably even more heterodox) views.   

  

[The previous part of this mail was already written (and saved), before the
post Harrison sent yesterday to some friends about “Wave Riders in the Sky”.
What follows is written after that, but I will try to maintain the points I
wanted to add, and not be influenced – if that is possible – by his post] 

  

1.     Some time ago, I have tried to discuss (twice) about the “Foundations
of OST”. Let me recall those discussions: The first, on doing
self-organization - OST "foundations”, began here:
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0705
<http://listserv.boisestate.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0705&L=oslist&P=R55873&I=-3
&X=016DDA0C8CAC43541F&Y=arturfsilva%40yahoo.com>
&L=oslist&P=R55873&I=-3&X=016DDA0C8CAC43541F&Y=arturfsilva%40yahoo.com.
(May/2007). And the main post of the second one, on Anti Laws of OST -
Foundations of OST?, is here:
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0906
<http://listserv.boisestate.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0906&L=oslist&P=R65903&I=-3
&X=016DDA0C8CAC43541F&Y=arturfsilva%40yahoo.com>
&L=oslist&P=R65903&I=-3&X=016DDA0C8CAC43541F&Y=arturfsilva%40yahoo.com
(May-June/2009). 

2.     I will not repeat here what I wrote there but the main point of the
“Foundations of OST” are, IMHO, to give the major attention to the
“Pre-work” (theme, invitation, diversity, etc) and then sit in a circle,
clarify the rule of two feet, create a Bulletin Board, a market Place and go
on with the Business. 

3.     From here I concluded that the Principles (the main basis for
“open-spacism”) are one more thing not to do/state/refer. Harrison himself
suggested that more than once. (What about that as a major paradigm shift
for OST?) 

4.     So I don’t even understand how someone can say that the
invitation/preparation is one less thing to do – on the contrary, I think it
is the most important and the most difficult part of OST! 

5.     In what relates to your concern, Peggy, with people that are not
prepared for the openness of OST, I don’t think that the solution is to
combine methods (say, add some AI in the beginning, or clarify the so called
– and IMHO useless – “givens”), but to decide - in the preparation phase -
that OST is not (yet) the adequate method for that situation. Some other
less open methods (like The World Café or Future Search, to refer only two,
may be what is needed in the situation. (If I conclude that the most useful
method is TWC I can even facilitate that, as a preliminary approach to
arrive later to OST, as I think that TWC is less frightening and opens some
space, which can be later enlarged. If I conclude that what is needed in the
situation is Future Search – which btw never happened  – I will have to ask
the client to search for a different facilitator, as I think that FS is not
compatible with OST, because the facilitator is always in a central position
that disempowers the client – later they will never be prepared to OST, and
will be more and more away from it. 

6.     There are so many other things I would like to comment to your post,
Peggy, but this is more than enough for a first take 

  

Warm regards 

  

Artur 

 

  

(*) There is a difference about saying “what will be the future of OST” or
“what is the future that we want to construct for OST”. People that prefer
the second, probably don’t even agree that “whatever happens is the only
thing that could”. What will happen to OST is what we will care (and will be
able) to create. Not “the only thing that could” ;-)



--- On Mon, 11/23/09, Peggy Holman <peggy at opencirclecompany.com> wrote:


From: Peggy Holman <peggy at opencirclecompany.com>
Subject: Re: [OSLIST] honouring each other
To: OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
Date: Monday, November 23, 2009, 4:19 PM

I've been following this exchange wondering what, if anything, I have to
contribute.

I want to tease out a thread that has to do with what Kaliya called "open
spacisms".  It also relates to something Holger said: 

> in my experience, the OS folks are among the most
> change resistant people that I have met in my life. 

Before I expand on this thread, just a few words about the exchange itself:

Thank you Karen, Wendy, Lisa, Artur, and Holger for your leadership.  In
particular, Karen, I appreciated the distinction you gave in your messages:

> I welcome direct and frank conversations.  What I do not welcome is
blaming, name-calling, and yelling.

Kaliya, thank you for being a voice for change.  And, when faced with some
very direct feedback, for moderating your tone in your last several posts. I
value your brilliance and passion and am glad to see you step in on behalf
of this community.  

Michael, thank you for the years of service and being there on behalf of
Open Space's online presence.  I hope your dedication to this community
continues.  I also thank you for facing a challenging onslaught with, what I
thought was doing your best to be squeaky clean in your communication
through the last several days.  

It is a challenge to be a lightening rod and I honor the work both of you
are doing, Michael and Kaliya, for staying with the deeper purpose I see you
both carrying on behalf of us all.

****

So, here's the thread that I want to pursue: how the Open Space principles
help us both support and resist change and what that means for the evolution
of OST and opening space.

The OS principles are wise and wily (clever).  They are at their best when
they remind people to take responsibility for what they love; when, for
example, people discover that they really can moderate their own conflicts
without a facilitator.  

I think the principles are at their worst when they replace co-creativity
with resistance.  For example, someone comes to me when preparing for an OS
gathering and says, Open Space goes broad, not deep.  I can turn that back
to them quite simply by telling them that they create their own experience.
And that's true.  It also shuts off an exchange about what it means to go
deep and how we can create the space so that people come together with
greater depth.  

Too often, I have taken the "turn it back" route rather than engaging.  And
I don't think I'm alone.  This may sound heretical, but I believe the cues
for making this choice are embedded in the Open Space community's culture
and to our detriment, that has made us change resistance.   I offer a bit of
my personal journey on this and then how I see it relating to this
community.


MY STORY

When I began working with OS, I fiercely defended the space from all comers.
I worked to keep any pre-work to a bare minimum, sure that people would
understand the brilliant freedom of Open Space the moment they stepped in.
Since then, I've found compassion for those who experience the
disorientation of freedom shock when they first experience Open Space.

When I began working more in community settings, with greater diversity and
where there aren't the implicit "rules of engagement", I found that
cultivating a sense of connection and clarity of purpose is part of creating
a welcome, nutrient space.  And contrary to the myth that talks don't work
in Open Space, even Harrison has successfully given them in the morning of
the second and third day of an Open Space gathering.  

In other words, as my practice has grown, I treat quite differently "givens"
that I used to take as gospel and defend.  Examples:

* Pre-work (clarifying the intention and calling question, identifying and
inviting stakeholders) is trivial.  If you spend a lot of time on it, you're
working too hard.

*  Open Space doesn't mix well with other practices.  In fact, I have found
creative, flowing ways in which different practices work together to meet
the needs of the specific situation and culture.  It requires getting
creative with design colleagues and sponsors to meet the needs of a group.  

* Once you're in an Open Space event, stay in Open Space. While this is
still my preference, there are circumstances where integrating other
activities, like a morning talk, serves the needs of the group just fine.

I want to be clear that I am still there to ensure the space is as open as
possible.  I have just come to believe that what keeps the space open is
more nuanced than I understood when I started working with Open Space
Technology in 1993.  I no longer defend the space.  I co-creatively ensure
it stays open.


THIS COMMUNITY

So what does this have to do with this community being resistant to change?


The OS principles contain deep truths.  I think most deep truths contain
contradictions.  On a light note, here are a few examples of such
contradictions:

1. Look before you leap.  /  He who hesitates is lost.

2. Absence makes the heart grow fonder.  / Out of sight, out of mind.

3. The pen is mightier than the sword.  /  Actions speak louder than words.

4. Better safe than sorry.  /  Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

5. Birds of a feather flock together.  / Opposites attract.

6. You’re never too old to learn.  /  You can’t teach an old dog new tricks.

Wisdom involves discerning how to navigate the contradictions. 

Yes, whatever happens is the only thing that could have.  This is empowering
when used to awaken someone to their own capacity to meet their needs.  When
it is used consciously or unconsciously to maintain the status quo, it
becomes destructive.  It becomes a way to do nothing.  

Rather than just saying "who ever comes..." or "whatever happens...", when
someone raises an issue, I now treat it as a potential learning moment for
either or both of us; an opening to understand something more fully  Most
often, exploring the issue leads to them discovering their own power to act.
But through the conversation, they feel heard, respected, met.  And I learn
something about their culture.  

With this change in my practice, I have become more fluid in how I open
space, sometimes using other processes as a doorway in, sometimes hosting a
speaker because it serves the needs of the session.  I am less glib than I
used to be about the principles, recognizing both their power and their
shadow.  And I am more wiling to experiment with form, knowing that the real
work is opening space within and among us.

What does this sort of experimentation which many of us are doing mean for
how Open Space Technology itself evolves?  

Is OST's form perfection as is? It is definitely elegant.  As Harrison often
says, a system that isn't changing is dead.   Isn't this an interesting
paradox?

I think that the last OST innovation that has been widely embraced was when
several of us began opening space for convergence following a conversation
at the Toronto OSonOS in 1997!

So with all the people experimenting with how we use OST, what might we
learn about the nature and form of our work?  I suspect there's more
fluidity to the nature of opening space than most of us consider.

For example, I sometimes hear from colleagues who use other conversational
practices that Open Space doesn't surface the collective intelligence of a
group in easily shared ways.  I can hear the "open spacisms" raised in
objection to this statement.  Indeed, I have seen groups come away with a
deep sense of how they fit together as a system.  Yet, through their words
or the notes, communicating that collective intelligence to those who
weren't there is often a mystery.  

How might we approach this as a design challenge while staying true to the
ethics of "one less thing to do" and trusting the people of the system to
find their own answers?  

I've become more willing to experiment, to seek simple, natural forms that
meet these sorts of objections.  For example, I have come to appreciate the
intimacy of reflecting in small groups.  Since people don't all return to
the large group at the same time, there's a natural rhythm to starting small
then moving to one circle.

I don't pretend to have "the" answer of how OST and our understanding of
Open Space evolves.  Perhaps the evolution isn't in the form but in our
deeper thinking.  It could be that the simple elegance of internalizing the
practice of opening space frees us to experiment more with the form.  After
16 years, I still feel like a novice, learning about the nature of opening
space.

I think it is an important, creative question for the evolution of our work
and our community to consider how we evolve rather than dismissing
criticisms and objections by naming a principle.  Is anyone else interested
in such conversations?


Kaliya, thanks for calling out open spacisms.  It gave me a doorway to speak
to something that I haven't been able to figure out how to say.

from cold, cloudy Seattle,
Peggy


______________________________
Peggy Holman
The Open Circle Company
15347 SE 49th Place
Bellevue, WA  98006
425-746-6274
www.opencirclecompany.com <http://www.opencirclecompany.com/> 
www.journalismthatmatters.org <http://www.journalismthatmatters.org/> 

For the new edition of The Change Handbook, go to: 
www.bkconnection.com/ChangeHandbook 

"An angel told me that the only way to step into the fire and not get burnt,
is to become 
the fire".
  -- Drew Dellinger




On Nov 22, 2009, at 9:20 PM, Raffi Aftandelian wrote:

> friends,
> 
> as someone who has made both positive and hurtful contributions to the ost
community, two more 
> things come to mind:
> 
> i notice myself asking myself what are the ways in which i have showed up
at my best in this circle, 
> and also at less than best in this unexpected and wondrous time on OSlist.
> 
> also, i wonder what else seeks to be expressed right now, what remains
unfinished?
> 
> thank you all!
> 
> warmly,
> raffi
> 
> p.s. and yes, jon, absolutely vegetarian chicken, my omission
> 
> p.p.s. thank you alan re: good things happen!
> 
> *
> *
> ==========================================================
> OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
<http://us.mc546.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=OSLIST@LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
> 
> ------------------------------
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
> view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu
<http://us.mc546.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=oslist@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
<http://us.mc546.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=OSLIST@LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
> 
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu
<http://us.mc546.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=oslist@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




-- 
Suzanne Daigle
NuFocus Strategic Group
7159 Victoria Circle
University Park, FL 34201
FL 941-359-8877;  CT 203-722-2009
www.nufocusgroup.com <http://www.nufocusgroup.com/> 
s.daigle at nufocusgroup.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/20091214/1fdc22fc/attachment-0016.htm>


More information about the OSList mailing list