[OSList] OST Foundations again (Was:...)

[Artur Silva]

Thanks for coming back to this question about the OST foundations, MMP and HO.



Some comments inline.


________________________________
From: Harrison Owen <hhowen at verizon.net>

To: 'World wide Open Space Technology email list' <oslist at lists.openspacetech.org> 
Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2012 8:56 PM

Subject: Re: [OSList] OST Foundations again (Was: Re: Dealing with conflicts)

Michael P. raised some interesting points  (...)


I strongly suspect that the vast majority of people who have encountered OST
in one way or another (facilitator, participant, or just hearsay) think of
it as one amongst many -- maybe very good, even the best, but one among many
other methods. As such it is a process to be learned, a skill set to be
developed from "pre-work to follow-up." What the facilitator does is
critically important and there are better, even "right" ways to "do" it --
with "essential elements" -- which are subject  to debate, modification, or
removal. 

That is probably a true statement, but is also probably a wrong understanding from those that come in contact of OST... For me, OST is not something we can combine with other (more directive) methods, that quite often destroy the self-organizing nature of OST, and give a central role to the facilitator at the expense of making the participants feel controlled, childish and disempowered.
 
If the pre-conditions are right (and we all know what those are) then OST is the method. If those pre-conditions are not met, OST shall not be used. And what to do with those customers, as a consultant or facilitator? Probably simply say "there are a lot of other facilitators out there that use other methods - talk to one of them, but please be conscious that some of them will probably propose to you something they think - or say  - it's Open Space, even if it is not.
 
In what concerns the pre-work, of course, it is essential, for the OST facilitator to assure that/if all the pre-conditions are met and give some advice on the theme, who to invite, how to word the invitation, etc. But there is no need to have always a certain number of meeting (say 3, for instance) or to create a "meeting committee" that is a "cross section of the stakeholders", or anything like that. If 1 pre work meeting is enough, 2 are too much. If 2 meetings are needed, 3 is one too much. Etc.
 
The same with the follow up. Even if this needs a further comment, below...

I can certainly understand why people might think this way, after all it
fits into the standard paradigm of what has now become a full blown
profession: Facilitation. The Master Facilitator has multiple tools, using
each as appropriate, with finesse. We have whole catalogues which describe,
in varying detail, the richness of the Facilitator's Tool Box. People get
certified, licensed, franchised -- you can probably even get a degree! And
at some level it all seems to work.

Personally I would (or at least should) be delighted if all of this were
correct. And if Open Space is anywhere near as good as we seem to think, my
cup would run over, to be sure. As the originator of this miraculous process
I might reasonably claim genius, and had I taken the time to patent or
trademark my invention, lucrative franchises could have been mine to enjoy.
But it didn't quite work out that way.

I think your choice was simple generosity. Or you have understood that, like Newton with the apple, you have stumbled upon a "general law of the Universe" (or of facilitation methods - appropriate for Organizational Transformation and not so much for Organizational Development btw), that doesn't belong to you - neither to anyone else - with that name or with any alias(es).
 
That is no longer a matter of your choice. You have chosen once and for ever not to trademark or franchise OST and decided it was a part of human heritage. For me, the fact that OST is nor certified or trademarked, neither certifiable or trademarkable by anyone comes with the territory. And I would not have joined the OST Community if there was not that simple message "anyone with a good head and a good heart can do it"... and then spend a life time to perfect it...
 
So for me it is unacceptable that anyone assumes the right to certify or trademak OST, or a part of OST, or OST in combination of any other (mostly directive) "facilitation methods". I, for one, have not given anyone the right to do that and people that do that have (and must have) their own lists and sites, but have putted themselves out the OST community, except when it concerns only with the use of OST. 
 



The truth of the matter is that building a business has never been an
interest of mine, or at least any sort of business with all the standard
accoutrements. But that is only a small part of the story. The real story is
that the more I experienced and thought about Open Space, the less sense it
made. Based on the literature, my training, and the experience of most of my
colleagues Open Space should not work. It could not work, if only because it
violated every single practice and principle of group management, indeed
management itself. But it did work -- and as I thought about it became clear
that my contribution, either in design or implementation, was vanishingly
small. Embarrassingly -- Open Space seemed to work all by itself.

Sooner or later some pieces came together and seemed to fit. It was all
about self organization. You have heard me ad nauseam on the subject, but
suffice it to say that when viewed as an example of self organization it all
makes sense -- indeed it is quite predictable. When viewed through the lens
of "standard theory and practice" OS is odd to say the least, verging on
weird, counter-intuitive, and wrong. Making the connection with self
organization was, for me, a passing through a portal -- and it sure wasn't
Kansas anymore (a reference to the magical journey of Dorothy and Toto into
the Land of OZ). Wherever I got to wasn't what I expected, and it only got
worse.

My realizations didn't happen all at once and doubtless not in the order I
describe them -- but over time several things came to clarity -- at least I
thought so. First there was the sneaking suspicion changing to strong
conviction that Open Space was not some weird apparition, a break with
reality. It WAS reality. All this began at the conclusion of wonderful
events when the enthusiastic participants became a little wistful... with
words something like, "This was wonderful. Too bad we have to get back to
reality!" My joking response was, "Maybe this is reality?" It then became
clear that was no joke.

Self organization, as I have come to understand it, is not something we can
choose to do (or not do) -- it is what we essentially are. Self organizing.
To the extent that Open Space is an intense and intentional "outbreak" of
self organization it is not strange to, or apart from life as a whole -- it
is all of a piece. We could say -- All the world is Open Space and not be
far from the truth.

To the extent that this realization is not just gross egotism, hysteria, or
worse, there are some interesting corollaries. First, if self organization
is fundamental to life, it is not something we have to learn. It comes with
the territory -- our life. Secondly, self organization (by definition)
happens all by itself. No help needed.

QED: If Open Space is self organization at work, we don't have to learn it,
nor do we "do" it. If anything, it does us. And paradoxically, the more we
seek to do the longer it takes for self organization to "Kick in."
Practically this means if you do a whole series of "warm-up" exercises it is
basically a waste of time unless the exercises have some intrinsic merit of
their own. In like manner, the more we seek to learn or teach the process
itself to the participants (or sponsors) the longer it will take to get to
the business. And there is no need: Everybody already knows. 


Maybe everybody already knows, but they don’t know that they know, and need to see it happen to recognize that they already "knew"… Hence the surprise many participants feel when they first encounter a (real) OST event; and that probably they would not “see” if their first encounter is with an "OST training" of some sort...

Bottom line for me in this strange new world -- Just Do it! Make sure the
initial conditions are present and then at the first opportunity -- Sit in a
circle... well you know the rest. 

And what about all those other methods? Well, if all the world is Open Space
and Open Space isn't a method, it is just a funny name for living with
passion and responsibility... 

And Pre-Work, Lisa's favorite? To be sure there is lots of "pre-work" to be
done on you -- bringing yourself to that quiet, centered place where there
is nothing to do, for nothing can be done. No judgment, no fear, no rules --
just quiet presence from which to invite others for the creation of new
life. Welcome to Open Space!

As for the group... there really isn't any way that I know of to get them
ready. I think lisa mentioned that it took more than a year of hard effort
to get everything together with the 50 Palestinians and Israelis. I am sure
that is true, and actually a gross underestimate. Pulling that gathering
together was part of the lifelong struggles of some marvelous and sensate
people -- it was also just life in The Middle East. But when it came to my
pre-work with that group, that might be measured in minus quantities. The
group arrived in Rome in the middle of a blinding rain storm -- they had a
late chaotic meal and went to bed. The next morning at 9 am there were 50
tired, hopeful, fearful, angry, frustrated, anxious people sitting in a
circle when a gentleman most of them did not know stood and said, "Welcome
to Open Space." Two days later that same group was standing the same circle
hugging, and in some cases kissing. I did nothing. I think that is what we
all do...

So it isn't Kansas, for sure. And definitely not what we might expect. And I
think we are just beginning to figure out what's going on.

Harrison

PS -- For the story of Rome go to:
http://openspaceworld.com/opening_space_for_peace.htm    

I completely agree with everything else, Harrison. But I still have some doubts about one thing.
 
It is true that everything self-organize. But there are known phenomena (like crystals, for instance) where past self-organization created a "closed system". In what concerns organizations, if they cease to have enough diversity or of being open to the environment they can also get trapped in an "almost closed organization". 

In what concerns an OST event that doesn't matter much - just see if the pre-conditions are there, and if they are, just do it! But from the point of the view of the organization/community that is not enough: they have a concern (that I share) about what comes next. How can we (they) profit from that "magic" in the medium/long term? And that is, for me, a different question - a different animal, would you probably say.
 
How do you see this short term (event) versus medium/long term issue? 
 
Regards
 
Artur
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20120915/6bcdff36/attachment-0007.htm>