[OSList] Is it true that Open Space does not really work when there are many internal conflict?

[Lisa Heft]

Harrison my friend, that is the beauty of it.
We see things in different ways at times, at other times we see /  
feel / do exactly what the other would do - always rich for co-learning.

I do not see it as 'nasty details' - I see it as wonderful stuff rich  
with learning - as people telling the stories to inform what may  
help.  Also the stories help me know how to work with the client on  
clarifying the task / focusing question / objective for the Open Space  
day. It also draws out who else to invite perhaps, rather than the  
original small circle the client or community may first have been  
thinking about. Or a way to adjust the form of documentation to match  
how they might wish to use the information, ideas and relationships  
post-event. Things like that.

And I do not see actions / systems / conversations / meetings that  
might be useful to groups as 'interventions'. I see them more as  
nutrition. I see myself more as a body worker, helping the system  
breathe and access its greatest resources: its human resources.  I  
like to ask about the whole chain of things because there are some  
things the organism has capacity to do for itself (exercise,  
nutrition, reflection) and some things I can help with (acupuncture,  
massage, if you will). I feel there is value in telling the story and  
being witness to the story, as well.

Just some thoughts playing off your thoughts...

Thanks for sparking my thinking,
Lisa


On Dec 19, 2012, at 12:48 PM, Harrison Owen wrote:

> Good one, Kari! ("Is Open Space not working when there are many  
> internal
> conflicts?")
>
> For me the place to begin is with a clear understanding of  
> "working," and I
> find that there are at least three questions (meanings) here. You  
> have to
> make sure you which one you are asking and answering. Specifically,  
> do you
> mean, Does Open Space work in formal terms? -- i.e. people sat in a  
> circle,
> opened a market place, etc -- The answer in my experience is, Yes at  
> the
> 100% level. If you mean Does Open Space work as a productive  
> activity? --
> were critical issues/opportunities raised, clarified, and usefully  
> dealt
> with? Again the answer in my experience is Yes and pretty close to  
> the 100%
> level. However, if you mean "works" as in "solves all problems  
> forever and
> ever..." it gets a little more complicated, and depends greatly on the
> situation and context.
>
> There are multiple examples of Open Spaces involving large groups of  
> very
> angry and/or confused people resolving major complex issues by the  
> end of
> the closing circle. I wrote up one of the earliest in the opening  
> chapter of
> the User's Guide. In that situation 240 people consisting of  
> Federal, State
> and Local officials along with a equal number of Native Americans  
> had the
> task of writing guidelines for the expenditure of $1.5 billion for  
> Highways
> on Tribal lands. This group had been fighting for 2 years, and  
> absolutely
> nothing had been accomplished. When the meeting began the group had  
> only 2
> months additional time before the whole $1.5b would disappear back  
> into the
> US Treasury. In the course of the gathering the discussion was  
> indeed hot
> and heavy, putting it mildly. However, by the closing circle, the  
> task had
> been accomplished, the guidelines had been created. To be sure, those
> guidelines had to be put in formal, legal language -- But by any  
> reasonable
> standard it can be said that Open Space worked in and through intense
> conflict.
>
> In a different situation and context the question becomes more  
> nuanced and
> complicated -- but the answer, simply put, is the same. Open Space  
> works.
> For example, I am currently working with a relatively large  
> organization
> (2000+ employees) which was described to me by several of the senior  
> folks
> as "dysfunctional." When I asked what that meant they said something  
> to the
> effect that the anger, low morale, missed communication, games  
> playing, etc.
> was so severe that nobody really even knew what the problems were,  
> and for
> sure the productive output of the organization was seriously  
> compromised.
> They wanted to do an Open Space for their Washington people and did  
> I think
> it would work?
>
> I had no problem saying, Yes. At least it always had worked so long  
> as the
> participants fell somewhere within the genetic pool of Homo sapiens.
> HOWEVER, that is only the beginning of the story. The truth, it is  
> really
> quite easy to enable any group of people, who share some common  
> concern,
> albeit in highly diverse and conflicted ways -- to reach a point of  
> intense,
> meaningful, and productive interaction and solutions. But that is  
> just a
> start, albeit a good one -- and never to be confused with eternal  
> salvation.
> What next?
>
> The simple fact of the matter is that if a group of people, having
> experienced deep, meaningful and productive joint activity (in the  
> Open
> Space) are simply thrown back into the situation which caused all the
> dysfunction in the first place -- they are twice damned. They have  
> seen the
> lights of Paris, and are definitely back on the farm. Now they know,  
> as
> perhaps they never did before, just how really miserable they are,  
> and worse
> yet -- they know it could be better. In an odd way, this is real  
> progress,
> but very painful and not conducive to a long term, positive outcome.
>
> Right here we run head on into all the "nasty details" so well  
> described by
> my friend Lisa H. ("...without looking at the whole ecology of
> communication, history, context, resources, differences, internal and
> external reasons for issues that feel like conflict, communication  
> styles,
> what happens before and after the event, how the event fits into the  
> ongoing
> work of the community or organization, and so on....").
>
> But when it comes to finding the way forward, I have to take a  
> different
> path than friend Lisa seems to be suggesting. If I understand her  
> correctly,
> the critical next steps involve careful analysis of all the "nasty  
> details"
> (I think we call it Systems Thinking) combined with strategic  
> interventions
> (re-organizations, etc) to achieve the fix.
>
> This is a great idea and Grand Theory -- but frankly it gives me a  
> massive
> headache. I simply can't think all that and I seriously doubt that  
> anybody
> else can either. It is simply too massive, too complex, too  
> interconnected,
> too fast moving. Mind boggling -- and I really don't think I am  
> stupid, just
> finite human. And when it comes to designing useful solutions, the  
> stakes
> have just simply gone off the charts. I don't think we can do that!  
> But more
> to the point, my experience tell me, we do not have to.
>
> If we have learned nothing else in the 27 year Natural Experiment  
> Called
> Open Space it is that Self Organization is powerful and effective.  
> Left to
> its own devises, the organization (any group of people gathered  
> together to
> do something) will in short order manifest orderly patterns that  
> enable
> their efforts. Those patterns (structures) may be minimal, but they  
> work.
> And if we provide some minimal initial focus (sit in a circle, create
> bulletin board...), what happens naturally appears to happen with even
> greater dispatch. All we have to do is stay out of the way. This is  
> not a
> process we do, as in run, create, even facilitate. It is what we  
> are, and it
> happens all by itself.
>
> Perhaps it is an unjustifiable leap -- but I absolutely believe that  
> the
> only difference between the Organization of a group of people in  
> Open Space
> and Organization of any other sort is a matter of size and duration.  
> It is
> all self organizing. And in all cases it remains true: Organizing a  
> self
> organizing system is not only an oxymoron, but stupid, a waste of  
> time, and
> ineffective. Truth is the organization (organism) can and will do a  
> much
> better job -- and virtually every effort on our part slows things  
> down and
> effectively thrown a "spanner" in the works. Putting it in the  
> baldest of
> terms, our efforts to organize the system and create the "fix"  
> actually
> create most of the pain and dysfunction we seek to resolve. Self  
> inflicted
> wounds.
>
> So when we follow the path that Lisa suggests, which of course is  
> also the
> path that most all of contemporary management theory and practice  
> supports,
> we are essentially adding fuel to the fire and creating new levels of
> potential dysfunction. Our "fixes" may seem to work for the moment,  
> but in
> all too short a time we hear the magic words - Re-Organize! Re- 
> Organize! The
> good news is that it does keep all managers, consultants, and I'm  
> sorry to
> say, facilitators employed. But it is an odd situation: Seems we  
> create the
> very problems we are then paid to resolve.
>
> Total heresy I know, but on the off chance that some grain of truth  
> may
> reside therein -- what is the alternative? My experience says that the
> alternative is a simple one, and one we already know: Open Space.
>
> This might mean "doing an Open Space"--but more usually it would mean
> applying the lessons learned from our Natural Experiment in our  
> everyday
> world of life and work. The lessons have been multiple, but we might  
> start
> with the simple ones. For example, when starting a project INVITE
> participation -- DON'T Order it. And guess what, the right people  
> will turn
> up. And when they do show up, get rid of the tables and work in a  
> circle.
> And forget about the Program Plan; elicit the passions and  
> responsibilities
> of those who cared to come. Well you get the idea.
>
> All of this is really the heart and soul of the 5th Principle  
> "Wherever it
> happens is the right place." And we will learn, I think, that it can  
> and
> does happen anywhere and everywhere.
>
> Goodness me, I have gone on. And indeed there is a lot more to go.  
> If you
> are interested in my best shots to date, check out my last two  
> books, "The
> Practice of Peace," and "Wave Rider." But better yet just start with  
> your
> own experience and let it grow. It could really get exciting.
>
> So Kari -- Does Open Space work in conflicted spaces? You bet! And
> everywhere else as well.
>
> Harrison
>