honouring each other

Tue Nov 24 00:53:35 PST 2009

Peggy,

What a lovely message. I very much appreciate your respect for the past and willingness to look 
forward without being precious about the form.

Lately, as I have been reading the OSLIST, I have been realizing that I believe OS is fundamentally 
an observation of how people tend to get together in general. I also realize that I believe that the 
participants bring their passion, interpretations, and values to that space. So I see a space and I 
see the people as separate elements.

I don't know how much OS need to change as an observation per se (I don't think we should worry 
to much about it), but do I think it is useful to discuss of how folks interpret the act of getting 
together and what values inform that interpretation. If there are imbalances in power or the values 
are disagreeable then I agree they should be challenged.

When I hear folks talk about OS, think it is remarkable how many different perspectives get 
funneled through the OS "form". I hear fewer arguments about the principles/rules/design of OS 
as a format than I hear debates about what is the correct values to place on the outcome...people 
have argued for openness, feeling relaxed, greater understanding, truthfulness, etc. at some 
point.

I agree with the idea that using jargon can be a power play as much as yell and name calling. It 
seems reasonable to investigate "open spacisms" to see how they impact the group, though I 
imagine we will separate based on our different values regardless.

I am undecided if change is somehow inherent in OS and whether OS groups are particularly 
resistant to change...and if resistance is a negative.

Currently, I find the values that attract me to possibility of participating in a rather rigorously 
traditional open space event is the potential for relative freedom, the thrill of the new, and an 
appreciation for having a voice in an event. But, I also feel I am curious to see OS work in some 
kind of "pure" form so I can understand how to tweek it pragmatically.

To your shallow/deep issue: I think a bug in the pure OS system that has to be facilitated around 
is that when you remove familiar structures folks 1) might have to be brave and 2) will have to find 
some other structure to organize their actions. I believe OS will always be easier for creative, self-
motivated types who have internal structures for navigating relatively free spaces like an OS event.

I don't want to be too sloppy with the word free. I think of OS as a benevolent dictatorship. I don't 
think we can escape structure or should try. I just hope structures we choose support our goals 
and are aligned with our values.

So finally to your question about how OS will evolve...I don't think we need to worry about it in any 
absolute way, I trust it will evolve. I think pragmatic agreements around how it is marketed (I see 
the technology debate of late as part a larger marketing question), where we discuss it online and 
offline, and how OS sits as a tool belt for this or that as more fruitful areas to focus. 

I also wonder if there are not some larger generational/cultural shifts in values being reflected in 
the debates around OS lately. 

Cheers,
Erik

On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:19:21 -0800, Peggy Holman <peggy at opencirclecompany.com> wrote:

>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. Youï¿½re never too old to learn.  /  You canï¿½t 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
>> ------------------------------
>> 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