Open Space being badly defined

Mon Jun 15 12:35:12 PDT 2009

Chris, thanks for sharing your experience, perspectives and for being provocative… I have enjoyed and appreciated the posts that have followed yours so much as well

I clearly did not express myself clearly, fully or thoughtfully enough this morning when sending along my example. (or perhaps I did?) At any rate, I simply was enjoying and sharing the synchronicity that this one example of how Open Space is ‘modified’ landed in my in box along with the specific comment from my colleague in the middle of this discussion thread! Probably would not have shared it otherwise.  

And since I’m writing again I’ll just add that regardless of what is right for this groups summit at this time and with no judgment intended about their choice and full acknowledgment that they do say ‘modified’ etc…   I do believe that something will be missed from not engaging non-modified, fully self-organizing Open Space – specifically the ‘it/magic’ that appears in full on, full let-go, one less thing to do self organizing HO wrote about earlier today.  And that’s ok too… since, what happens is indeed the only that could have!

Thoughtfully with a smile and heading out to have coffee with Uncle Fester in North Beach,

Heidi

From: OSLIST [mailto:OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU] On Behalf Of Chris Corrigan
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 8:43 AM
To: OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
Subject: Re: Open Space being badly defined

Heidi...and others...

Y'know, my basic take on this is to say "who really knows what's right for these people?"  Clearly whatever happens is the only thing that could have, and at least they are up front about saying that it's modified from the Open Space we all know and love so well.  I find it worth remembering that people plan events to get their own work done in their own way, and not to please those of us who love the pure unbridled unleashing of Spirit that comes from a well executed OST meeting

And on the note of OST done badly all over the place, all I can say is that it will always be such, and folks will always do strange things and call them Open Space, but in the 15 years that I have been doing this, I have noticed more and more that people are calling me asking for the textbook version.  When I probe a little and see if they really know what they are asking for, they tell me that they do know and they want the real deal.  I'm always impressed by that, because it means that there is a huge group of facilitators out there that most of us don't know about that are doing Open Space not only by the book, but doing it well, and in this expanded and ever learning community of practice the process itself is faring pretty well and folks are more and more experiencing it done beautifully.

Here's my proof of that: the next time you run an OST meeting ask folks at the beginning who has been in an OST meeting before.  It has been at least five years since I worked with a group for whom OST was entirely new.

In the world of self-organizing systems and evolutionary processes what matters is variety and diversity.  Things only get better when millions of experiments are underway.  From those experiments come the mutations and modifications that help create the next level.  It's how Open Space emerged, and it's how it will disappear in good time too.

My favourite way to train people in OST is to have them stand by the wall as people are posting their topics and do nothing.  Literally.  All they need to do is be present at the wall and turn over responsibility to anyone that asks a question.  In doing that you discover the essence of holding space.  After that, I always sit down with the one I am mentoring and we talk about what is hard to let go of and where they need to work on their own points of control.

It seems to me that whenever we see OST being done "badly" or done in some egregiously modified form we have a lovely opportunity to ask ourselves the question "What else do I need to let go of?"

Provocatively yours,

Chris

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 8:22 AM, Heidi Nobantu Saul <heidi at nobantu.com> wrote:

Greetings OST colleagues -   

Below is an excellent example of one of the ways that Open Space is being miss-represented/modified in a way that truly does ‘miss the mark’ that the two martini’s helped bring forth J  What makes it especially interesting to me is that a good friend and colleague who has heard me enthusiastically speak of, describe and tell of my experiences with Open Space but has yet to experience it, excitedly emailed me the link because the conference was going to use Open Space.

http://www.localcapitalsummit.com/schedule

Convening August 31, 2009 in Denver to build capital for local business in spite of a faltering economy

The Local Capital Summit is structured using a modified Open Space format. It's our experience that most conferences miss the mark: Speakers are determined by committee, politics and budget. This one is different: You say what you need and want to learn, and help determine the topics of each session.

You can suggest topics, sessions and presenters, and once you register, you can “sign-up” for 5 sessions that you want. The sessions with enough interest are the ones which make the cut and get the rooms with appropriate capacity.  There will even be additional rooms for ad-hoc sessions convened on the day of the conference.

We expect most sessions will be interactive groups, not boring speakers with marginal relevance. We can guarantee value because each person is responsible for providing it. You vote. You speak. You choose.

I imagine they don’t know what they will be missing due to the ‘modifications’…

Cheers,

Heidi

h e i d i  n o b a n t u  s a u l

 Facilitation Coaching Process-Design

San Francisco, CA & Santa Fe, NM

Mobile: 505.470.5131

Skype: heidi.nobantu.saul

EMail: heidi at nobantu.com

Web: www.nobantu.com 

Twitter: http://twitter.com/nobantu

P Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.

From: OSLIST [mailto:OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU] On Behalf Of Kaliya *
Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 11:24 PM

To: OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU

Subject: Re: Open Space being badly defined

Sticking to the Original THREAD.....

On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Erik Fabian <erik at doublehappinessnyc.com> wrote:

Hi Kaliya,

I have visited your sites in the past and appreciate all the information you share. I also appreciate you advocacy for getting this community more engaged with the unconference zeitgeist.

thanks. 

Leaving the wiki articles aside for a moment, I hear you saying a few things:

1) OS needs to update its marketing and repostion its brand if it is not to be confused with things like barcamps.

yes.  I think it is interesting to see Harrison simply describe open space ....

Quoting from Harrison the thread that is ""off" this thread but should be part of this thread" 

Probably the largest issue is that OS is just too simple. If we
could just make it more complicated, we might get more respect. But at the
end of the day, and on everyday for the past 25 years OST requires only that
you sit in a circle, create a bulletin board, open a market place, and go to
work. I guess there must be values in there somewhere, probably having
something to do with going to work. But even that one doesn't work too well,
because OS usually turns out to be fun. And everybody knows that work is not
fun, and if you are having fun, clearly you are not working. So I am not too
sure about this rebranding stuff. Actually, I think we might want to keep it
all secret. After all if you can do serious work and have fun doing it --
that is obviously illegal, immoral and fattening. You wouldn't want it to
get around.

SO, just to be clear what is happening. The Tech GUYS. are taking the one thing they can SEE. .... the "agenda wall" (which when I do open space is often a grid with times and spaces not just a wall with postits and  THAT IS ALL....and then saying it is derrived and very close 'just like" open space technology when it is quiet far from it...

They are not simply "rebranding" they are doing something qualitatively different that is quite a bit less inclusive and less powerful...

they are pointing people at THE RULES OF BAR CAMP.... http://www.barcamp.org/TheRulesOfBarCamp

Basically insisting in loud letters on the wiki THAT EVERYONE WHO ATTEND PRESENT (if not in actuality) - completely missing the role of invitation, inquiry, exploration in getting people there.  It makes people afraid to come.  

They make no mention of the principles or the law.... They quite frequently have opening circle where the agenda is made together (writing one's session on a paper, announcing it and posting it) there is often NO (even minimal) facilitation of agenda making. At its worse it is LITERALLY 300 alpah males running at an 'agenda wall' with shapries to create an agenda.  At best it is sort of "there" when people walk in and they can if they feel like post somethign... Another bad version is the "pre made agenda" which is like an unjuried conference - so whoever gets to teh wiki ahead of time can "sign up" to do a session......

2) There is confusion among the folks who create "participatory" events about the tools OS offers and the values behind those tools. (The problem of definition)

3) People who care about OS, such as the people on this list, should be taking care to steward the OS information that is in the public like on the wiki's. They should act.

Here is my two-cents:

I think OS is a beautiful form but is one of many approaches to structuring participation. The
problem I see is that OS is presented as a set of values more so than a tool. A minority shares the values that are expressed by OS and not everyone is in the position to take the risk necessary to participate in OS if they don't believe that the outcomes are superior to a traditional event. Only a minority of folks are ever going to want to join the church of OS.

I like that OS is a "technology", and like "open source", it is a technology that can be used to buildvarious applications. In that sense the openness is important and it also affirms that OS is an insight into something fundamental about getting together in a participatory way. I think this is the best move they could have made.

I am not too worried about definition. There isn't a ton of info on OS available but there is plenty.
It is in both book form and online. I would note however that the language and marketing of OS
could use some updating for younger generations.

Perhaps Barcamps fail as an app, but they are winning as a marketing campaign. 

Yep. 

Like any event, I find that many folks are not going to Barcamps because they are participatory but because they are trendy and hosting by folks who are cool. 

Y. I am hoping I can get some of the cool folks to get the role of minimal yet good space creation and facilitation. 

Same thing is happening with Pecha Kuchas.

I support you in pointing out that the Wiki is an important front for controlling perception of OS,
especially in the minds of the IT community. If there are folks on this board who are invested in
this fight, I second Kaliya advocacy to start editing the entry.

But in the end I would rather just see more hip OS events, with updated language, more marketing savvy, and that reach into more industry sectors.

Yes - I tried to do my best with the brand 'unconference' and get good information out there re: open space.

 If Barcamps fail as an app, then I say so be it...it is creating an opportunity for other events. At least that is were I am focusing my efforts.

Yes.

I think it would be interesting for Heidi to chime in about her experience of the subtle difference between just "open space" as applied in a more "closed" or "cohearent" communtiy event and an "unconfernece" that is a bit more open and slightly less cohernet.  While both use OST there are subtle differences in the energy and also the ability to gather notes for the conference. 

Thanks for the ideas. I hope we will have the chance to chat further sometime.

me too. 

Cheers,
Erik

On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 09:29:31 -0700, Kaliya * <identitywoman at gmail.com> wrote:

>On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 11:51 PM, Holger Nauheimer (Change Facilitation) <
>holger at change-facilitation.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Kaliya,
>>
>> although I don't want to interfere with this particular Wikipedia article,
>
>
>Why not?
>
>
>> Iam not very happy with your edition. Let me explain, and let us try to
>> find
>> some common ground:
>>
>> 1. Bar Camps are derived from Open Space Technology. They are a crude
>> adaptation of the principles and leave out a couple of essential elements
>> of
>> OST. But they are still self-organized meetings (with less of magic, I
>> agree)
>>
>> 2. I have never attended a Bar Camp where somebody claimed that this was ON
>> OST. People say, "this is a Bar Camp."
>
>
>I agree AND BarCamp's are lame...most people have negative experiences and
>it gives the whole field of participant driven events a bad name.
>
>
>>
>>
>> 3. I believe that it is good that principles of self-organization
>> ("un-conference") have entered into other areas of life and society,
>> whether

>> one calls it OST, Bar Camp, World Caf� etc. I don't care much for the

>> names,
>> as long a meeting is about passion and responsibility. In this sense,
>> Harrison, and all we followers have contributed to a better world, or at
>> least, to better meetings.
>>
>> 4. The way you phrased it in your revision ("FooCamp derived some of its
>> process from Open Space Technology but left out key elements like having
>> the
>> agenda making process facilitated and leaving out sharing the 4 principles
>> of Open Space and Law of Two feet that help frame how people act throughout
>> the day. Closing wrap-up the "evening news" of how the day went was also
>> left out. Since BarCamp is a "replication" of FooCamp it also changed -
>> making yet farther removed from the original method.") focuses on the
>> differences and leaves a kind of negative imprint.
>
>
>YES! THAT WAS THE POINT.
>I have been to both (FooCamp - twice [in my other life in the technical
>world focused on online digital identity I "rate" high enough to be invited
>to them] - the original BarCamp and several camps since organized by techie
>geeks who wave their arms and sort of hope for it to happen).  I have had
>and watch others have negative experiences (and less then fully realized
>potential of these gatherings) cause they left out key important parts and
>"think" they are doing it well and as if those key elements don't matter.
>
>
>> But it is great that
>> people do Bar Camps, isn't it? We, as an OST movement shouldn't try to
>> distinguish us from the Bar Camp movement but rather looking more at the
>> common ground.
>
>
>I completely disagree.
> I think we need to be clear our method has key things that are good,
>essential and not to be forgotten and encourage ADOPTION OF THESE things.
>
>
>> That will give OST also a greater exposure. Many young people
>> know Bar Camps but they don't know OST. So here is a chance to be a
>> "missionary" and tell them - you can do even more with some simple
>> procedures.
>>
>> 5. I propose (but leave it up to you) to rephrase this particular article
>> in
>> the following way: "FooCamps and BarCamps are based on a simplified
>> variation of Open Space Technology (OST), leaving out some key elements
>> like
>> the 4 principles and the Law of the Two Feet but maintaining the
>> self-organizing character of OST. Other than in classical conference
>> formats, BarCamps and OST rely on the passion and the responsibility of the
>> participants, putting them into the driver's seat."
>
>
>Sure - make the edit then.
>
>
>>
>>
>> 6. I agree with your remarks on the article on Open-space meetings and have
>> just entered the following comment into the discussion:
>> "I believe this article is redundant and confusing and should be either
>> deleted or merged with [[Open Space Technology]]. What would be reason to
>> keep this one? Open Space meetings don't exist. There is Open Space
>> Technology, and there are meetings that are done in an Open Space like
>> style. But this is too fuzzy for a single article."
>>
>
>Great.
>

>*
>*
>==========================================================

>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

* * ========================================================== 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 

-- 
CHRIS CORRIGAN
Facilitation - Training - Process Design
Open Space Technology

Weblog: http://www.chriscorrigan.com/parkinglot
Site: http://www.chriscorrigan.com

Principal, Harvest Moon Consultants, Ltd.
http://www.harvestmoonconsultants.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/20090615/d59039bc/attachment-0016.htm>