[OSList] Management and Organization

[Harold Shinsato]

Chris - thank you again for the mention of the Cynefin framework. I very 
much enjoyed your youtube presentation about the framework to the Art of 
Hosting Community at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRn3BM56W74. It was 
well worth the 55 minutes. I especially enjoyed your questions and 
answers section.

After I listened, YouTube presented a related video of a keynote by 
David Snowden to a Lean, Agile & Scrum conference in Europe. His talk is 
titled "Making Sense of Complexity". 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6RfqmTZejU

I found his talk brilliant. I enjoyed the insights, but also the 
challenges. David called himself a "Constructive Irritant" or a 
curmudgeon. I'm not sure I'd recommend the talk to everyone in this 
group - but there is one piece that was particularly confrontational and 
important. I carefully transcribed it for you here. David Snowden makes 
these remarks while showing a slide of a dragon towering over two 
Knights, and one Knight says "Oh No! A big, evil, DRAGON!". The other 
says "Quick! Somebody hold a meeting". Here is what David says (it is at 
49:05 in the talk):

"This sort of hold a meeting mentality, or worse still, I mean if there 
was an Agile version of this, it would be 'Quick let's hold an Open 
Space', because we can all have a nice time and nobody will be 
challenged. Just to make a controversial statement: Open Space is the 
enemy of innovation because it enforces consensus. There are actually 
larger group techniques certainly which we and others have developed 
which actually increase conflict because if you don't increase conflict 
you don't get diversity and you don't get proper testing. So the Law of 
Two Feet is the *enemy* of innovation because it allows people to avoid 
confrontation where they need to do confrontation. Right, it doesn't 
mean it doesn't have value, but it's a contextual method."

This statement from David actually interfered with my sleep. I made me 
question for a couple hours my deep emotional investment in OST. As 
mentioned earlier, I saw and still see Cynefin as a way to help promote 
the use of OST. Earlier in David's talk, when he described how to work 
in the complex space, his recommendations sounded a lot like an OST 
event. But quote I offer from him was clearly hostile to OST. My first 
reaction to his "irritant" statement was that OST does *not* enforce 
consensus. But other parts of his statement raise interesting questions. 
Is there value in setting up large group processes that don't allow 
people to avoid confrontation? Can OST prevent needed conflict?

My take on Open Space as a method is that it has been traversing the 
chasm on the innovation cycle between Early Adopter phase, and Early 
Majority. I had expected Agile to help push Open Space over to Early 
Majority. It sounds like OST may already be in the Early Majority phase 
in the Agile community based on David Snowden's missive against it. I've 
also predicted that OST will start facing open and active hostility as 
it starts to break into Early Majority. David Snowden may be some 
evidence this is happening.

I'm quite curious how others receive this statement against OST from 
David Snowden.

Harrison, I quite enjoy what you've written, and I think there's 
something in OST that most consultants and organizational development 
experts are going to miss simply because the fundamental assumptions of 
their traditions go 180 degrees in the opposite direction of Open Space, 
wave riding, and the ancient mystery we might now call our 
self-organizing universe. For me, I don't think there is any end to the 
digging, because there is no way a "theory of everything" will ever be 
able to capture it all. And still, there are some of us that have not 
yet tired of digging. But my aim in the digging into game theory, Agile, 
Cynefin, brain science, Tavistock and group relations, sociology, 
psychology, etc. etc. is not "how to deal with massive complexity ... by 
... making models, and gathering data." The joy in the digging is not to 
try to get to the bottom of it. There is no bottom. There will never be 
a theory of everything. But making maps, as long as we understand their 
fundamental limits, is a wonderful thing. As long as we don't confuse 
them with the territory.

     Harold


On 7/31/14 12:59 PM, Harrison Owen wrote:
>
> Good thinking Peggy, and having spent no small amount of time, paper, 
> and ink exploring the world of emergence or self organization -- I can 
> definitely appreciate the effort. Helping people to develop an 
> awareness of the flow of the enterprise is definite plus. Having said 
> that, I find myself needing to issue a caveat. Producing a model, even 
> a very good model, of the flow of self organization as it relates to 
> complexity, is not to suggest that we can fully understand the 
> process, even less that we could predict or control it. My experience 
> has been that the more I know, in the sense of actual experience and 
> perception, the less I understand. Perhaps it is the advance of 
> senility, but I find my rational capacity totally overwhelmed and 
> over-awed by the magnificent mystery of our evolving cosmos. This is 
> not simply the majesty of infinite space/time -- but equally the 
> fantastic complexity, diversity and connectedness of the smallest 
> creatures. The Hummingbirds, for example who feed at my window. The 
> Paramecium (single celled protozoa that swim in my lake). A single 
> snow flake.
>
> Some might take my statement as the despairing cry of an old man. The 
> "old man" part is dead on... but there is no despair. Just the 
> opposite, in fact. It feels just wonderful! I am reminded of 
> conversations over the years with various "Systems Thinking" friends. 
> Bright people all, with enthusiasm unbounded. They were certain that 
> if they thought hard enough, collected data long enough -- for sure 
> they could design the perfect system, or at least understand the one 
> of which they were a part (their business, etc.). They sensed victory 
> just over the hill, and I surely wished them well. For myself, 
> inspired by their effort, I tried to do the same. But for me, the 
> harder I tried, the worse it got. In fact it became an infinite 
> regression into ultimate complexity. One could call it an exercise in 
> despair. But that is not how it felt... Liberation was more to the 
> point with the realization that you just couldn't get there from 
> here...Wonderful!
>
> But how to deal with massive complexity in real life situations if not 
> by thinking about it, making models, and gathering data? It is not 
> that thought, models and data were somehow evil or useless, but in 
> terms of my quest, they only led down a rabbit hole out of which I 
> could not come. And the harder I tried, the deeper I sunk... It felt 
> just wonderful to just stop digging! But the complexity of life remained.
>
> Somewhere along the line an odd curiosity captured my attention. As 
> our marvelous natural experiment in self organization (AKA OST) 
> proceeded, it dawned on me that contrary to all of my preconceived 
> notions, multiple groups of people of all sorts and conditions from 
> every part of the world seemingly engaged their complex, self 
> organizing world in an effective and productive fashion without 
> benefit of prior instruction, models of whatever sort, intense 
> facilitation (handholding)... In a word it appeared to be a natural 
> act. Even more counter intuitive (counter to my intuition and 
> expectations) was the fact that in those (relatively few) situations 
> in which either I or some colleague had endeavored to "prepare" the 
> participants with conceptual models, exercises of various sorts, or 
> explanation of the process (other than the normal OS invitation to sit 
> in circle) there was no visible sign of improved performance, so far 
> as I could see, and in fact there was some indication of a decline. 
> Now, almost 30 years into the experiment I also have to say that my 
> most difficult groups, without exception, were those composed of The 
> Professionals. Those people who made it their business to THINK about 
> all the details (facilitators, systems theorists, etc.). Eventually 
> even these folks "got with the program" and everything happened just 
> as it usually does in Open Space. But the shift occurred, as I saw it, 
> only when they stopped thinking about it.
>
> I think there may be a lesson here. Engaging complexity is not 
> primarily a rational act. Even though complexity is a basic 
> existential concern for all of us, right up there with Death -- the 
> resolution to our dilemma will not be found through rational 
> enterprise (thinking about it). A major frustration for us all! But 
> the good news is that we do not have to travel that route. Indeed we 
> really don't have to travel at all. We're already there!
>
> Proof is a slippery word, but I think it fair to say that the 30 year 
> Natural Experiment of Open Space has rendered a verdict almost as 
> good. Highly Probable. Given our experience of 1000's of groups 
> effectively dealing with complex, conflicted, inflammable issues 
> prepared only by a 10-15 minute invitation/introduction...It is highly 
> probable that the essential skills and mechanisms were already present 
> within the group prior to their arrival at the circle. In short they 
> were "already there." No need to think about it. Just Do it!
>
> Once done, it is then time for rational reflection. In truth our 
> innate capacity for dealing with complexity, once awakened, flows so 
> seamlessly that most people hardly notice. At the end of every Open 
> Space in my experience the people evidenced some real sense of joy, 
> satisfaction, completion... and little appreciation of how it all 
> happened. It just was. That is all they know, and all they care to 
> know. That status may be more than sufficient in the moment, but it is 
> also true that rational reflection in all its forms (model building, 
> data collection, etc) can enhance the appreciation, and deepen the 
> experience.
>
> As one who has spent a lifetime doing all that "rational activity" 
> from model building to data collection (well, story collection J), I 
> can truly appreciate and applaud the effort. Useful undertaking, I 
> think. BUT none of that can hold a candle to the profound sense of 
> wonder and awe that I experience in the silence of my not-knowing. 
> That is truly wonderful.
>
> Harrison
>
> Winter Address
>
> 7808 River Falls Drive
>
> Potomac, MD 20854
>
> 301-365-2093
>
> Summer Address
>
> 189 Beaucaire Ave.
>
> Camden, ME 04843
>
> 207-763-3261
>
> Websites
>
> www.openspaceworld.com <%20www.openspaceworld.com>
>
> www.ho-image.com
>
> OSLIST To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the 
> archives of OSLIST Go 
> to:http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20140802/ed5abd82/attachment-0003.htm>