[OSList] A tale of two companies

[Peggy Holman]

Hi Doug,

I think you are correct that the managers and field people were more focused on different issues than we'd anticipated.  Still, Open Space generally creates a large enough space to handle that.

I do think the inside/outside dynamic was very present.  No acquisition in this situation, though an interesting guess.

Peggy


On Jul 7, 2011, at 6:28 PM, doug wrote:

> Peggy and all friends--
> 
> Question 1: It was 1975 when I last lived inside a Fortune 200
> corporation, so take this with a grain of salt. What came through my
> sixth sense on reading this was that somehow it was not a good mix to
> have both managers and field people in this particular OS. They had
> different issues to be worked by.
> 
> Question 2: speaks of the same dynamic to me: a very highly controlled
> group, where the inside circle did not want interlopers, or were so
> perceived.
> 
> Had one company just recently acquired another in this tech company? It
> feels we/they to me.
> 
> Hopefully this gives a bit of a different echo from the hills across the
> way.
> 
> 			:- Doug.
> 
> 
> On Sat, 2011-07-02 at 16:29 -0700, Peggy Holman wrote:
>> In the last few months, I opened space at a tech company and a biotech
>> company. On one level, they looked similar: one functional area,
>> international participation, a mix of managers and individual
>> contributors.
>> 
>> Yet the experiences and the outcomes couldn't have been more
>> different!  I'll describe the two events and my reflections on what
>> made the difference between them.
>> 
>> Note: I wrote the story about the tech immediately following the Open
>> Space but didn't have a chance to edit and send it before the second
>> experience. You'll see a couple of questions that the experience
>> raised for me embedded in the story.  They took on a little different
>> light following the second experience.
>> 
>> Corporate dynamics at play in a technology company...
>> 
>> This OS was with an international sales and marketing meeting for the
>> launch of a new year. Day 1 was not in Open Space.  It was a manager’s
>> only session, using a mix of conversational forms (a huge stretch for
>> the power point, info-out culture). It went well. People appreciated
>> talking rather than just listening.  Many of the field people
>> acknowledged the quality of listening from headquarters people who
>> usually do most of the talking.
>> 
>> On the first afternoon, the larger meeting – 100 people – began with a
>> conversation between execs and the people in the room. A great, candid
>> conversation.
>> 
>> On day 2, we opened the space. During the Open Space, I ran into a
>> several issues that I haven't experienced before and wondered if
>> others have.
>> 
>> Overall, it was a terrific day. And one of the unexpected dynamics
>> surfaced: the managers didn't feel complete with the conversations
>> that they wanted just amongst themselves. And they didn't feel they
>> had the space for their private conversation in the Open Space. My
>> client caught wind of the situation as they planned to organize a
>> session during day 3's action planning/next step breakout session
>> time. That meant the management layer wouldn't be part of action
>> planning/next step conversations.
>> 
>> We negotiated having the manager session posted in the context of
>> action planning/next steps so that it would be visible even if not
>> open to everyone. In practice, it was announced but not posted.
>> 
>> We added a second action oriented round of breakout sessions in the
>> afternoon following a short briefing of what came out of the morning
>> group to fit the timing of the manager’s session,  It made room for
>> managers or others to host more action/next step sessions. 
>> 
>> So question 1: have others run into the managers-only dynamic?  If so,
>> how have you dealt with it?  Are there questions you use in your
>> pre-work for the OS to surface the issue and deal with it in advance?
>> We thought we had handled the need with the pre-meeting among
>> managers. What signs might have tipped us off to the need for more?
>> 
>> The second dynamic completely blindsided me. Normally the second
>> morning of an OS just buzzes!  Perhaps it was the party the night
>> before but the group was really subdued. When I opened the space for
>> action, no one came forward. Given the energy in the room, I had the
>> sense that an elephant was sitting there untouched. I asked if anyone
>> would speak to what was up. Someone said they didn't want to step on
>> headquarter people's toes by proposing action sessions that were
>> really HQ responsibilities. The exec in the room encouraged people to
>> do so, saying that HQ was there to serve the field's needs.
>> Ultimately, five sessions on topics of importance were posted.
>> 
>> After the meeting, my client said she thought the reluctance came from
>> a pattern of headquarters taking field input and having the
>> suggestions disappear without any feedback on what happened to the
>> ideas or why. So why should field people offer anything?
>> 
>> I got the impression that the field saw it as the responsibility of
>> headquarters people to take the lead. And the HQ people already felt
>> full up so they weren't stepping in. Plus, people didn't see a need
>> for action sessions since they felt they’d been identifying actions
>> throughout the Open Space.
>> 
>> Question 2: Given that tension between field and headquarters is
>> common, have others run into this sort of reluctance to post action
>> sessions? Might we have anticipated this perception before it put a
>> damper on things? 
>> 
>> It was one of the only Open Space gatherings I've ever done in which
>> people didn't come away saying, "Wow! Best meeting I've ever
>> attended."  Instead, we heard from many that the meeting was too open
>> and confusing. People wanted to hear more from the senior managers
>> about what was on their minds.  I left the experience pondering the
>> dynamics that led to that outcome.  The contrast with this second
>> meeting helped me identify some possibilities.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> High times in a biotech...
>> 
>> The work was part of a company-wide change initiative. The senior
>> manager was its host.  He was actively involved. For example, he
>> opened the meeting by speaking of his aspirations for the department.
>> He also said a few words at morning announcements and evening news on
>> each of the two days.
>> 
>> Like the tech company, this session was basically one function --
>> human resources -- with a few others invited for spice. Also similar
>> to the tech meeting, people came from around the world.
>> 
>> The meeting was a hit!  People instantly leaped out to post sessions.
>> With about 100 participants, more than 50% posted something. I don't
>> think I've ever had a group that size post in that ratio. The
>> conversations were rich and useful. Along with the variety of topics,
>> people worked through issues around organizational levels as well as
>> field/headquarters dynamics.  At least three Open Space meetings
>> resulted, to be hosted by different attendees over the coming
>> weeks. In fact, I was invited to help with one of them.
>> 
>> One other aspect of this session: I ran a workshop before and after
>> the OS for about a half a dozen internal people to support them in
>> opening space in the organization. We also met to reflect on the
>> experience before morning announcements and after evening news during
>> the Open Space.  In other words, they had already adopted Open Space
>> as a key element of how they wanted to work. The organization is
>> investing in a group of people to support creating a conversational
>> culture. 
>> 
>> At a second OS I did with them a few weeks later, we brought most of
>> the new practitioners together to continue to learn together. It's
>> wonderful because they now have an internal community of practice to
>> support each other.
>> 
>> I was grateful to have the biotech meeting on the heels of the
>> technology meeting! I went from questioning what I thought I knew to
>> having some ideas of what created the differences in the experiences.
>> 
>> 
>> Reflections on the differences that made a difference
>> 
>> The biotech was committed to changing their culture and open to new
>> ways of working. The OS was focused on the group envisioning how it
>> can best perform its role in the company in light of those changes.
>> The tech company meeting was more of a “stealth action” by a mid-level
>> individual contributor familiar with Open Space. She was seeding the
>> idea of a conversational culture.  In other words, the biotech event
>> occurred in fertile soil, the tech company event was breaking up the
>> hardpan.
>> 
>> At the biotech, the sponsor was a senior manager who was explicit
>> about using the event to spark culture change.  His whole team
>> participated throughout the event so there was no issue around hearing
>> what senior people were thinking. They were in the room. In contrast,
>> the tech company host was a mid-level individual contributor. She is
>> highly trusted and used her influence to bring Open Space in.  Her
>> goal was to take steps towards creating a more conversational
>> culture. Both intentions are valid. They just created different
>> experiences. 
>> 
>> At the biotech, the sponsor had used Open Space at a previous
>> organization as part of a successful culture change initiative. He
>> "got" the simplicity of Open Space, not even feeling a need for an
>> action round.  Instead, as part of session notes, we asked people to
>> include both a discussion and a "next steps/commitments" section. That
>> dealt with one of the disconnects in the tech company meeting.  They
>> were confused when I re-opened the space for action, saying they had
>> been naming actions throughout. The biotech meeting helped me see that
>> re-opening the space for action turned out to be an unnecessary thing
>> to do.
>> 
>> The biotech meeting was offsite, so even those who were stretched by
>> the Open Space stuck around because it was a big effort to leave.
>> That gave them time to warm to the experience over the two days.  The
>> tech company meeting was onsite, making it easy for the senior
>> managers and others to show up briefly and leave. 
>> 
>> Finally, the biotech is thriving and growing while the tech company is
>> really struggling to rediscover its identity. This external factor
>> strikes me as a key difference in the environments.
>> 
>> So what does it all mean?  I would still Open Space in the tech
>> company.  There were plenty of people who found the experience
>> worthwhile, even if their feedback was quieter than those who were
>> frustrated or confused. I believe we prepared the soil for a few seeds
>> to take root.
>> 
>> For the tech company to take further steps, it strikes me that the
>> person who hosted the Open Space would benefit from finding informal
>> partners, other inside change agents.  I like to believe that even
>> without strong leadership support, she can make a dent.  As the
>> biotech company shows, management involvement can be an accelerator.
>> Still, as I think about what someone sitting in the middle of an
>> organization can do, enlisting partners who share interest in creating
>> a conversational culture could be a way to continue to move forward.
>> By forming an informal community of learners, she can create a system
>> of support.
>> 
>> Could we have done better?  No doubt.  I look forward to any thoughts
>> you have.
>> 
>> Appreciatively,
>> 
>> Peggy
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _________________________________
>> Peggy Holman
>> peggy at peggyholman.com
>> 
>> 
>> 15347 SE 49th Place
>> Bellevue, WA  98006
>> 425-746-6274
>> www.peggyholman.com
>> www.journalismthatmatters.org
>> 
>> 
>> Enjoy the award winning Engaging Emergence: Turning Upheaval into
>> Opportunity
>> 
>> "An angel told me that the only way to step into the fire and not get
>> burnt, is to become 
>> the fire".
>>  -- Drew Dellinger
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> OSList mailing list
>> To post send emails to OSList at lists.openspacetech.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to OSList-leave at lists.openspacetech.org
>> To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
>> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OSList mailing list
> To post send emails to OSList at lists.openspacetech.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to OSList-leave at lists.openspacetech.org
> To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org