[OSList] Open Space and Boundaries

Tue Apr 22 06:08:23 PDT 2014

Harrison,

Thanks for your response to this. I was serious.....as this seemed to be
the obvious question to me. Your answer as always brings up deep complex
issues in a rather straight forward manner.

My experience beyond OS is that people (myself included) get stuck in
patterns where they do not embrace their full power. I love the purpose you
describe: *"**My purpose is to create an environment in which the people
can experience their own power to the maximum and do things they never
thought possible."  *or your

Outside of open space I find myself constantly at this boundary of doing
some to bring people to the edge of leaping into the space of their own
power and capability. Sometimes they leap, other times they don't. Your
message here has been a helpful reminder and a clearer frame of the
boundary.

There is also another subtlety buried in your reply. Your described doing
the above by "*being totally present yet absolutely invisible". * I'm
curious about your hunch about why being totally present makes a difference.

Many thanks,

David

On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Harrison Owen <hhowen at verizon.net> wrote:

> David said -- "So I should do nothing.......right?  or is my passion and
> caring to do a little bit ok?"
>
>
>
> David, I suspect something of a joke, but I think your question is
> important. At least it has always been important to me. Some long time ago,
> I recognized that if I empower you, you are in my power. And by the same
> token, whatever I do for you, you cannot, or do not need to do for
> yourself. It is true that some of us (most of us?) like to do things for
> each other, and I think that is wonderful. When somebody puts on a
> specially elegant party with close attention to every detail of guest
> comfort - that can be a thing of beauty. And if the martinis live up to the
> standards of everything else, I am all in! J
>
>
>
> But it remains true, I think, that if I empower you, you are in my power.
> And whatever I do for you, you will not do for yourself.  There are clearly
> times and situations where our "doing" is needed, important, even critical.
> But there are equally other times - it all depends on the purpose or goals
> or situation.
>
>
>
> So in the peculiar situation of facilitating an Open Space: Why do we do
> it? Doubtless each person will have to answer that one for themselves, but
> I am very clear why I take on the role of facilitator. My purpose is to
> create an environment in which the people can experience their own power to
> the maximum and do things they never thought possible. To achieve this
> objective, the people will need the most time/space available - which means
> that I need to fill up as little space/time as possible. Something about
> being totally present and absolutely invisible.
>
>
>
> Sometimes I know that my fellows may have felt that I was being uncaring,
> particularly when I left people to struggle with an inability to express
> themselves fully, a difficulty with language, or even physical barriers.
> But what I discovered over and over, and over again is that people have a
> marvelous capacity to help each other, and further - that when they learn
> to help, or maybe even more importantly, ask for help... Everybody is
> stronger.
>
>
>
> So what do I do? As little as possible. And the reward has been to witness
> amazing growth.
>
>
>
> Yes there are times when an emergent situation seemed to require a hand.
> But even in those situations I have found it useful to wait just a little
> bit longer than I felt comfortable, and more often than not a way was
> found, not of my doing.
>
>
>
> And on other occasions, where I did sort of jump in, I was taught a
> lesson. I remember particularly an Open Space I did with the North West
> Regional Advisory Council of the AARP. Average age: well past 80. There was
> something like 150 in the group, and the discussions were fast, furious and
> definitely passionate. One particular lady, obviously well past 80, just
> happened to have posted THE ISSUE. I don't remember what it was, but I
> caught up with her at the computers as she was writing her report. She had
> pages of flip chart paper, and clearly didn't see too well. I think it may
> have been the first time she had confronted a computer, up close and
> personal and her typing skills were of the One Finger variety.  Truly I
> felt sorry for her.
>
>
>
> I sat down beside her and offered to help. She stopped her work, sat
> silently for a moment, and then suddenly turned to face me saying, "Young
> man, I will type my own report!" She did, and I learned something: One more
> thing not to do.
>
>
>
> 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 <http://www.openspaceworld.com%20>
>
> www.ho-image.com <http://www.ho-image.com%20> (Personal Website)
>
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of
> OSLIST Go to:
> 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 *David Osborne
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 16, 2014 3:25 PM
> *To:* World wide Open Space Technology email list
> *Subject:* Re: [OSList] Open Space and Boundaries
>
>
>
> Harrison,
>
>
>
> So I should do nothing.......right?   or is my passion and caring to do a
> little bit ok?
>
>
>
> How do I decide?
>
>
>
> David  :)
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Harrison Owen <hhowen at verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
> David - good to hear from you. And yes I too believe that the invitation
> is most important. And we can even help, a little bit. But generally
> speaking I suspect folks tend to work much too hard in this area as well.
> When there is a clear issue that people really care about (perhaps THE
> essential precondition for opening space / self organization), I find that
> the people involved usually have a word for it, maybe one or two. Those
> words may make absolutely no sense to us and/or even turn us off... but we
> aren't the people who count. Actually I find that when folks take a lot of
> time and effort defining their issue, there is a high likelihood that they
> really don't have one (issue) - or at least one that they really care
> about.  I guess this is another area where the conventional wisdom is
> rather turned on its head. Conventionally we might think of an invitation
> as an effort to convince people to come. This may be too strong, but I
> rather think that one sign of a good invitation for an Open Space is that
> it drives people away. Or more precisely, it quickly separates those who
> truly care from the "merely curious." At the end of the day the critical
> thing for me is not how many people come, but rather how much they cared.
> Five people who care a whole bunch are infinitely more effective that 50
> people who just show up. I think.
>
>
>
> 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 <http://www.openspaceworld.com%20>
>
> www.ho-image.com <http://www.ho-image.com%20> (Personal Website)
>
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of
> OSLIST Go to:
> 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 *David Osborne
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 16, 2014 11:54 AM
> *To:* World wide Open Space Technology email list
> *Subject:* Re: [OSList] Open Space and Boundaries
>
>
>
> Harrison,
>
>
>
> I'm catching up on my email and finally have had time to read your
> response here re containers. I agree with your perspective above fully. I
> see the topic of what people care about as the focus or container for the
> conversation. It is self-emergent and we can't force it...we are bystanders
> or midwives. I do believe we can influence the forming process though. For
> example; a clear invitation to discuss what's urgent and important,
> providing a time, place, and safe space to have the conversation all seem
> to coalesce the energy and support it either mobilizing or dissipating as
> the case may be. I do believe as actors that care we are co-creators in the
> process.....although we can't control it. Maybe this is an attractor from
> complexity language ...or perhaps as I refer to it....it is the container
> of the conversation.....and we're describing the same thing.
>
>
>
> Best as always,
>
>
>
> David
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Harrison Owen <hhowen at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> David - I have known Glenda for some years, and have always found her to
> be bright, fun and contributory. She has some wonderful insights about self
> organization, and she works very hard. As a good academic, she certainly
> does her detail, sometimes a bit more than I feel I want or need, but good
> for all of that. However, when it comes to enhancing our function in a self
> organizing world (or Open Space), I suspect she is working a bit too hard.
> She and her fellows have developed a whole series of approaches and
> exercises which enable you to do what I find pretty much happens all by
> itself. But that is probably just me. And for those of you who want to know
> more about Glenda, I suggest her latest book --
>
>
>
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Adaptive-Action-Leveraging-Uncertainty-Organization-ebook/dp/B00C3WSKV4/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1396971594&sr=1-1&keywords=glenda+eoyang
>
>
>
> And now back to containers and boundaries. The issue (our differences) may
> be purely semantic  - but maybe not. As I think back over lots of Open
> Spaces, and more particularly what I might call the natural appearance of
> Open Space (Tahrir Square, for example, or the coffee pot) I fully agree
> that from the outside they all look like bounded/contained experiences.
> There seems to be an inside and an outside, a container of some sort. But
> the question for me: - Is that boundary/container externally imposed, and
> therefore prior to the process of self organization as a precondition - or
> is the boundary/container a PRODUCT of the process of self organization?
> As I read Glenda, she would opt for the former: Container as precondition.
> I find myself coming down on the other side - The apparent container is
> actually a product of the process. In a word, what starts out unbounded and
> disassociated (random people and things) coalesces into a meaningful form,
> or better, organism/organization - which is what self organization is all
> about, I think.
>
>
>
> I grant you that in an Open Space the "room" would seem to be a
> pre-existing container, but I don't see it as essential. In fact I've
> "done" a number of Open Space in the middle of an open field. And when you
> look at natural occurrences, I think it becomes quite clear that
> pre-existing boundaries/containers don't really have much to do with what
> is happening. They may be convenient or inconvenient, but not
> determinative. The other things you mention (time slots, bulletin board,
> etc.) don't fit for me either. Helpful to be sure, but you can get along
> quite well without any of it, or so I've found.
>
>
>
> So what is going on? My sense is that self organization with humans (in
> Open Space and/or everyday) commences when some sort of a vector of caring
> shows up which draws people together. Someone, somewhere, sometime says, or
> just thinks, "I care about... Not just a little bit, but I really care and
> am prepared to take responsibility for what I care about. " If this
> care/concern is shared - and others care for the same thing, but maybe in
> very different ways... the ball starts rolling.
>
>
>
> In Open Space, this caring is made concrete and specific with the
> invitation. Of course, when the invite is sent out nobody has a clue
> whether anybody will come... but if they care, they will come, and given a
> date/place, electronic or physical they will all show up in one time/space.
> The vector of caring will draw them in...
>
>
>
> If the story I am telling roughly reflects the facts on the ground, I
> think there are some interesting and serious implications for the role of
> the facilitator and the function of the container. EVERYTHING is well on
> the way before there is a facilitator in sight or container at hand. In a
> word, the system, from the first moment of its emergence does it all by
> itself. We are bystanders, midwives at best. And the container (whatever
> that might be) is the product of the process ... and not the precondition
> or cause.
>
>
>
> 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 <http://www.openspaceworld.com%20>
>
> www.ho-image.com <http://www.ho-image.com%20> (Personal Website)
>
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of
> OSLIST Go to:
> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
>
>
>
> *From:* oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org [
> mailto:oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org<oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org>]
> *On Behalf Of *David Osborne
> *Sent:* Monday, April 07, 2014 12:26 PM
> *To:* World wide Open Space Technology email list
> *Subject:* Re: [OSList] Open Space and Boundaries
>
>
>
> Harrison,
>
>
>
> I think this is one of the few times I have a different point of view that
> you. I believe OS's have natural containers built in. I also believe you
> need a container for open space to be effective. I think the difference
> stems from having a different definition or viewpoint on what a container
> is and can be. My view has been heavily influenced by Glenda Eoyang's
> theory and work in this area. For something new to emerge from self
> organization something has to hold our bind the diverse agents together for
> them to have exchanges across their differences.
>
>
>
> - The room or space the OS is being held in is a container...
>
> - A concept or idea that people care about brings the people
> together.....it binds or contains them creating the space to have the
> conversations to emerge.
>
> - The bulletin board is a container.....scheduling a specific conversation
> at a specific place and time.
>
>
>
> In my experience there are always multiple containers that are massively
> intertwined.
>
>
>
> My thoughts along the way.
>
>
>
> David
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 9:33 PM, Michael Wood <michael.wood at uwa.edu.au>
> wrote:
>
> Thanks, Harrison, for your response to my question on 'boundaries',
> particularly your paraphrasing of my question - which was spot on.  One
> thing I've taken from this brief conversation is that although considering
> the boundaries can be useful, we also need to accept that boundaries are
> never entirely clear, always moving on a spectrum from clear to
> uncertain/murky and if we, as a sponsor or facilitator, get overly bound up
> with boundaries then we might have moved, once again, into being too
> controlling.
>
> Michael Wood
> Perth, Western Australia
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 12:01:40 -0400
> From: "Harrison Owen" < hhowen at verizon.net>
> To: "'World wide Open Space Technology email list'"
>         < oslist at lists.openspacetech.org>
> Subject: Re: [OSList] Open Space and boundaries
> Message-ID: <000301cf4f56$00776480$01662d80$@net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> 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 <http://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
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org
> [mailto: oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org<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
>
>
> End of OSList Digest, Vol 38, Issue 3
> *************************************
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> David Osborne
>
> [image: http://www.change-fusion.com/ChangeFusionLogo.jpg]
>
> www.change-fusion.com | dosborne at change-fusion.com | 703.939.1777
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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<http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech..org>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> David Osborne
>
> www.change-fusion.com | dosborne at change-fusion.com | 703.939.1777
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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<http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech..org>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> David Osborne
>
> www.change-fusion.com | dosborne at change-fusion.com | 703.939.1777
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>

--

David Osborne

www.change-fusion.com | dosborne at change-fusion.com | 703.939.1777
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20140422/84ff1658/attachment-0008.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 8138 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20140422/84ff1658/attachment-0008.jpg>