[OSList] Open Space and boundaries

Wed Apr 9 23:50:08 PDT 2014

Thank you Chris, 

You say what I was thinking. I would maybe go even one step further - I
think I would not call it a container. Maybe it is more like a hotspot, or a
focal point, or a center of passion. A fire pit that people gather around,
or a (temporary) sacred spot that people are drawn to. I very much like the
idea of the center being much more important than the boundary, if such a
thing can (or should) exist at all. There is a difference between the place
where the emergence / order creation takes place and all the other places.
Maybe it is something like where land and water meet - there is a
transition, but it is not created as a boundary, it is where two different
environments happen to meet. Of course, my needy ego likes to think that I,
as a facilitator, create a safe container for these folks to do their
important work. But I agree with Harrison that that is a very questionable
idea.

Koos

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org
[mailto:oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org] Namens
chris.corrigan at gmail.com
Verzonden: donderdag 10 april 2014 04:41
Aan: World wide Open Space Technology email list
Onderwerp: Re: [OSList] Open Space and boundaries

I'm a little late to this and see that other threads have spun out but I
have a thought or two.

Containers - social containers - are absolutely essential to any level of
order.  Without something to contain the chaos you simply have chaos.  Order
arises when there is coherence.  The coherence inside a container is
different from the coherence or the chaos outside a container.  The place
where this transition happens is the boundary.  The boundary may be
permeable to various degrees but it is certainly real.  

As to how the boundary is created, I think my experience says that it is
socially constructed.  It can be influenced by many actions - including
intention, invitation, the nature of the shared culture within the
container, and the action that is undertaken.  Open Space facilitators
become helpful when we can work with this container.  

How do you do that?  In my experience, the most powerful and generative
containers are those that gather around a centre, rather that those that are
contained by a boundary.  

In practical terms what this looks like is simple: drop a powerful
invitation into the centre of a group (passion and urgency) and a group will
coalesce around that and "fall in together."  Your other option is to create
a fence and gather people up and put them inside it.  This is much more work
and rarely effective.  You have a container, but you also have a prison. 

When life gathers around a powerful centre you are invoking a pattern that
is replicated at many scales all through the natural world from galaxies to
atoms. The Milky Way is not a THING by virtue of someone maintaining a fence
around it; it is a thing by virtue of proximity to it's centre.  Same with
an atom.  Same with social containers formed around invitation.

the Open Space facilitator's job I think is to pay deep attention to the the
centre of the work and to support a co-holding of thet centre with the
calling team for whom the work is really important. When you start making
rules about who is in and who is out, you are really getting lost in
container making.  When you create just the right invitation, you feed the
hunger for togetherness, work and creativity that is essential for Open
Space - and any other generative, complex and self-organizing process - to
thrive.  

Chris

On Apr 3, 2014, at 9:01 AM, Harrison Owen <hhowen at verizon.net> wrote:

> It has been common for us to speak of Containers and Boundaries as 
> somehow essential to Open Space. I can't quite find the place, but I 
> do remember saying something like that myself, as in, "The role of the 
> facilitator is to create the container..." It certainly made sense at 
> the time, but I always felt a little uncomfortable with the image. Too 
> mechanical, coercive... too something. And Michael has brought the 
> subject up again. "So...here we have a situation where the 
> 'boundaries' are actually in a state of complex flux and uncertainty. The
financial 'givens' are ambiguous; there is no 'locum'
> pastor in place because of legal uncertainties with the existing 
> pastor...etc." You might call it "messy boundaries" -- and he raises 
> the question whether one should press ahead with Open Space, or wait 
> until the "mess" is settled down. On the one hand, Michael "hunches" 
> that one should press on -- Open Space. But his hesitation comes, I 
> suspect, from the prior notion that fixed boundaries/containers are 
> necessary for an effective Open Space. What to do?
> 
> Some thoughts (new ones for me): Containers are great for cooking 
> soup, but are unneeded and maybe even problematical in Open Space. It 
> is all about holding things together. In Open Space groups of people 
> come together to deal with their issues. At the very least that would 
> mean gathering in some common time/space, be that physical or 
> electronic. It would seem that this co-location could be facilitated 
> were some suitable "container" provided, presumably by the 
> sponsor/facilitator. This certainly makes sense, and as a rough way of 
> speaking, it seems to describe what is going on. But as I think about 
> it, I think we may be missing a most important point. Coming together 
> in Open Space happens because people care to come. And they continue 
> their connection as long as they care to do so. (Law of two feet)
> 
> From the "outside" it might look as if they were held in place by a 
> container, but that is illusory. The actual dynamics are centripetal, 
> the force is mutual attraction... people are "there" because they care 
> to be there and not because they are contained by some external 
> structure. In a word, we as facilitators really don't do a thing, and 
> creating a container is the least of what we DON'T do. The people, from
the beginning, do it all.
> 
> 
> Of course, there are situations where groups come together under 
> orders, mandates, whatever. And they are definitely "contained." It is 
> also true that the tighter that container, the less likely self 
> organization will take place. If true, providing a container is not 
> only unnecessary but also destructive. In the name of Opening space, 
> we effectively close it. Or so I suspect it might be. Just thinking...
> 
> Anyhow Michael, should my mental peregrinations lead anywhere useful, 
> it would seem that your "hunch" was spot on. Forget the
boundaries/container.
> Just invite the space to open.
> 
> Harrison
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harrison Owen
> 7808 River Falls Dr.
> Potomac, MD 20854
> USA
> 
> 189 Beaucaire Ave. (summer)
> Camden, Maine 04843
> 
> 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.or
> g
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org
> [mailto:oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org] On Behalf Of Michael 
> Wood
> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 9:59 PM
> To: 'oslist at lists.openspacetech.org'
> Subject: [OSList] Open Space and boundaries
> 
> A Case Study....
> One of the principles that I have generally worked with in Open Space 
> is helping the client get clear on the 'boundaries' of the space 
> that's being opened. For example, helping people who come into the 
> space to know 'what up for grabs here and what isn't? What decisions have
already been made?'
> 
> So picture this (purely hypothetical of course)....a church community 
> in which the pastor has (in many peoples' opinion) run off the rails 
> and the main church body is in the process of trying to dismiss him; 
> the church is in compete disarray and completely conflict ridden, many 
> people have left; the pastor who holds all the keys, banking 
> passwords; church telephone connections etc etc, has taken legal 
> advice and had hunkered down in the church owned house where he 
> continues to hold the reigns of power (via some of his 'allies' in the 
> church) despite not formally being the Pastor of the church anymore....
> 
> So...here we have a situation where the 'boundaries' are actually in a 
> state of complex flux and uncertainty. The financial 'givens' are 
> ambiguous; there is no 'locum' pastor in place because of legal 
> uncertainties with the existing pastor...etc etc.
> 
> So in terms of 'Opening Space', do we wait a bit longer until some of 
> the legal boundaries are clarified, OR open space right away in the 
> midst of the mess....my hunch is the latter, but any thoughts from anyone?
> 
> Cheers
> Michael
> _______________________________________________
> 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

_______________________________________________
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