[OSList] Open Space with some off-limits -- Individual Sessions

Thu Jul 14 14:01:06 PDT 2011

Harold wrote: "It's interesting that Open Space gives very minimal advice
for convening sessions - but I can tell that some are much better at it than
others. Both in the choice of topics that are relevant and in the actual
facilitation of the group conversation. I continue to be curious about what
works and what doesn't work for the convening of individual sessions in an
Open Space."

It is a curiosity, for sure. And you are not the first, nor doubtless the
last to wonder. Over the years, people have tried just about everything,
ranging from "Providing Guidelines for discussion" - to recruiting a corps
of wandering facilitators, available upon request. Some even tried "assigned
facilitators." Or a "designated process - e.g. "Dialogue."

I can't say that I have seen it all, but what I have seen brought me to the
conclusion that any intervention was, at the very least, more trouble than
it was worth. And in worse case scenarios, actually counter-productive.
Nobody ever followed the "Guidelines." The "wandering facilitators" were
inevitably in the wrong place and either sat on their hands or were totally
overwhelmed. Attempts to manage the process with "assigned facilitators"
drove the "managers" crazy as the natural dynamics of Open Space refused to
follow any process they envisioned, and if they attempted to control the
dynamics of OS - well good luck! Mandating some formal process like Dialogue
really gummed up the works. It was just too slow and out of sync with the
ebb and flow of discussion. And it often seemed that people were more
concerned to "manage the process" than to talk to each other. Even worse,
stupid discussions (my judgment) were continued because people assumed that
if they got the process right, the discussion would improve.  From where I
sat the problem was that the topic was a mindless matter of minimal concern,
and yet the moribund horse continued to be beaten. Or something.

Perhaps it is the eternal optimist in me - or something about half full
glasses. My wonderment was that the sessions were as good as they were, and
generally speaking - better than any facilitated session I had ever
attended. Could it possibly be that the whole business of "facilitation" was
vastly overrated? Heresy!!!

But as I concentrated on what was clearly working very well "all by itself"
I began to notice that even in those situations where the discussion was
less than outstanding (by whatever standards), nevertheless useful things
were happening. For example, was the stated topic never addressed? Yes, but
what came up was infinitely better and more interesting, I thought. I think
I learned something: People really don't know what they are talking about
UNTIL they create to talk. Which is why tightly built agendas never seem to
work. Yes you cover the agenda, but did you do anything useful, productive,
creative? By definition, NO! You ended up in precisely the position you said
you were going to reach - so why take the trip in the first place? You were
already there. Just write the minutes in advance and cancel the meeting.

Then there were those situations where the whole thing was just stupid and
snarky. People argued endlessly about nothing of importance - just for the
sake of arguing, it seems. But even that painful experience turned out (more
often than not) to be a positive. Folks learned to use the Law of Two Feet.
Or at the very least, they learned that they COULD use the Law next time -
unless they honestly enjoyed being miserable and non-productive. Which does
happen. 

Anyhow, Harold, your wonderment is a shared one. But after some years
considering the emergent situation, I have come to the conclusion that any
fix I might propose will create more problems than it solves. That could
just be lazy, and doubtless younger and more subtle minds may find a way.
But I ain't holding my breath.

Harrison  

Harrison Owen

7808 River Falls Dr.

Potomac, MD 20854

USA

189 Beaucaire Ave. (summer)

Camden, Maine 20854

Phone 301-365-2093

(summer)  207-763-3261

www.openspaceworld.com

www.ho-image.com (Personal Website)

To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of OSLIST
Go to:
<http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org>
http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org

From: oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org
[mailto:oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org] On Behalf Of Harold Shinsato
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 11:38 AM
To: World wide Open Space Technology email list
Subject: Re: [OSList] Intro and inquiry: Open Space with some off-limits
topics

Hi Dan - fellow Agilista!

Fascinating question. It does seem to be something o.k. to do in polite
conversation - "let's not go there". But there's no guarantee it will work
in a conversation between equals. "There" might be exactly where the
conversation needs to go. Getting consensus about taboos at the beginning of
an Open Space doesn't sound like a good time investment. Setting up the
taboos without consensus declares that the organizers are the high priests.
Big problem! Like Harrison said - the invitation sets the focus and that's
the best way to keep things on track rather than declaring all the places
the conversation should not go. But maybe there's an exception - do you have
a specific situation?

Departing from the "givens" question for the entire Open Space, I continue
to wonder about how to successfully convene a single session within an Open
Space event. In each convened sessions, you might actually have the "let's
not go there" conversation and it will work. The group is small enough to do
so. And if the session convener starts with the taboos and people don't like
it, they can use their two feet or they can just ignore the convener and
have the conversation anyway. Mostly I think the "let's not go there"
admonition works when someone brings up a "dead horse" topic that no one
else in the circle really wants to hear, rather than declaring all the
taboos in the beginning of a session.

It's interesting that Open Space gives very minimal advice for convening
sessions - but I can tell that some are much better at it than others. Both
in the choice of topics that are relevant and in the actual facilitation of
the group conversation. I continue to be curious about what works and what
doesn't work for the convening of individual sessions in an Open Space.

    Harold

On 7/12/11 9:30 AM, Dan Mezick wrote:

Hi, 

I am a respectful lurker who now has an inquiry, so it is time to introduce
myself. 

Hi! I am Dan Mezick, coach to Agile teams, their sponsors, and executive
management. I live in CT. I am friendly, curious and playful. I enjoy
conducting frequent experiments. I like to be surprised and learn.  I have a
history of software development. I receive a software patent in 1999.  In
2003, I run an elaborate search engine optimization experiment that results
in over 120,000 unsolicited, incoming web links from all around the world,
in 20 days. Those 120,00++ links-in result in a #1 Google rank for over 7
years. 

Now I am curious about Open Space. I play with it. I read all the books from
Harrison. I experience many surprises as I read these books.  I convene five
OST events in Boston since 2009. The largest is the Agile Boston Open Space
in Sept 2010 where 275 people participate. I have experience directly
facilitating some smaller OST meetings for clients recently. 

I am currently quite fascinated with Open Space and OST dynamics. 

This list is very awesome and awe-inspiring. I am very happy to be here. 

If you like to be surprised, you may enjoy this: 
http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/pickover/esp.html 

Here is my inquiry: 

My Inquiry 
========= 

"Let' s not go there." 

This is a common utterance used in conversation, one that clearly signals
that the space is closed to that topic. 

Open Space, limited by only a broad Theme, is not very limiting. Authority
often is concerned with this wide-ranging freedom to explore "just about
anything" when considering OST, and what might result from that afterward. 

I wonder if any of us have experience with doing OST with some sections in
the discussion-space explicitly closed. 

I wonder how these limits are expressed-in-fact; for example inside the
Invite or in the composition of the Theme. 

I wonder how the "explicitly stated as closed" space is then successfully
maintained in an OST setting. I then wonder how much fun the event is, when
some space is closed. 

I wonder also, if this is an oxymoron, that just does not work very well,
ever. 

I think have read here somewhere here, in a passing comment, that sometimes,
certain topics are closed in OS meeting. 

I wonder if anyone has experience trying this, and if any specific knowledge
about this is documented explicitly anywhere. 

Thank you for your help ! I am preparing to be surprised. 
_______________________________________________

-- 
Harold Shinsato
harold at shinsato.com
http://shinsato.com
twitter: @hajush <http://twitter.com/hajush> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20110714/503079ef/attachment-0008.htm>