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

Suzanne Daigle sdaigle4 at gmail.com
Mon Dec 14 13:52:43 PST 2009


hugs to you!  :-}

On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Harrison Owen <hhowen at verizon.net> wrote:

>  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&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&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
> 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
> 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
>



-- 
Suzanne Daigle
NuFocus Strategic Group
7159 Victoria Circle
University Park, FL 34201
FL 941-359-8877;  CT 203-722-2009
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20091214/f250822b/attachment-0016.htm>


More information about the OSList mailing list