[OSList] is our voting software dead?

Thu Aug 28 10:59:05 PDT 2014

Thanks Michael and Harrison.  Actually, I think, "opening space for action"
might have been my line, Harrison, at least I've been saying it that
way since osonos5 in Toronto (1997) and a session convened by Peggy Holman
called "Day 3 and convergence."  I think "non-convergence" might have come
out of that session, as well.  I know it did for me.  and then it came up
very strongly for me again, in late 2001, after I facilitated a 200-person
event that we ended with standard multi-voting.

that was about the same time that Chris and I captured and published the
"user's non-guide" (
http://www.michaelherman.com/cgi/wiki.cgi?OpenSpaceTechnology/UsersNonGuide)
from the OSLIST conversations, so the "non-" part might have emerged then.
 i convened a session at tmn, the second version you invited us into,
called "beyond convergence (and training)."  the tmn conversation is long
gone, but much of my original posting there is in the oslist archives and
also on my site... http://www.michaelherman.com/cgi/wiki.cgi?NonConvergence

all that said, i can't remember hearing much about the logistical details
of what folks are doing in this post-voting era, specifically in groups
that are too big for sticky dots and also big enough (few hundred, maybe)
to make reopening the space for action a bit more chaos than some
groups/leaders will yet tolerate.

it's easy to imagine reopening the space for action, having new sessions
created and convened in one final round on the morning of day 3 (or
afternoon of day 2 or otherwise at the end of first, diverging sessions.
 new topics go up on the wall.  they reflect perfectly all the learning
that's been done since the first sessions went up in the original opening.
 if a group is large and leadership is quick, any "bounding" of the new
opening on the third day can be articulated in the sponsors introduction to
that morning.  in some cases, the leader might even be the one making the
invitation to name and discuss actions/projects.

in those sessions, the way(s) forward can be explored to the greatest
extent possible within time constraints, specific links can still be made
to various breakout sessions held in previous days (same as was done in the
old convergence process), and immediate next steps articulated, recorded
and compiled.  all good.  and what are we learning about grounding that
work in the ongoing life of the organization?  it seems that's what
convergence/voting was for.  have organizations really evolved from
voting/crunching/priorities to ongoing opening for action?

so here are some more specific wonderings i have now:

1. what are you seeing in "the markets" where you operate.  has
non-converging or re-opening the space for action or projects really become
the most common way of finishing (and restarting/continuing)?  does anyone
find much pressure/demand for standard sort of prioritization to finish
events anymore?

2. how are you doing it -- specifically?  what are the specific ways you
are most often offering or proposing a non-converged/re-opened finale to
clients?  how large are the groups in which we have we gotten away with
non-converging like this?  for all the english speakers who don't live in
one of chicago's oldest german neighborhoods, can we articulate something
here in english about how those offerings are worked/working out... or
asked differently, what kind of support are you offering and able to
contract for AFTER all the notes are tied up in a document?  how are you
getting from that document, through the last day or session, into action --
and supporting folks in staying in action, in open space, in some ongoing
ways?  what is now possible?  what are the specific things you're doing
AFTER the proceedings are all packaged up?  this "bazaar" process, or at
least the naming here, is completely new to me.  can you say more about the
logistics of this Kari?  i'm assuming this was the most recent berlin
wosonos?

3. is our species learning?  are we finding it's enough to open the space,
capture the notes, re-open the space for action and then walk away?  my
original posting back in 2002 was actually titled "beyond convergence (and
training)."  in what ways are you able to help "re-opening the space for
action" inform the ongoing structure and process of the groups you're
working with?  are we still selling events or does the end of voting point
to greater opportunity for offering transformation?  is training also
dissolving into "just do it, just do what we've just done, just do it
again"?  this was the wish in my original posting.  are we getting there?
 or are there things we still must do in "most" situations, to help our
clients realize the promise and potential of ongoing open space?  is it
enough to sow the seed of "opening space for Actionable Issues and Opps?"

finally, Harrison, your bit about "actionable issues" seems especially
ripe, and with your usual elegance in these things, cuts through, or really
opens up all the group's assumptions about the possibility for change,
movement, action and everything going forward. this allows everyone, not
just the leaders, to collectively bound the new space.  that one phrase
might be the most important development I've heard in our story in the last
decade.  re-opening the space for Actionable Issues and Opportunities.  i
think "actionable" might be as important as "open" and "invitation."

and... on a purely technical note, sprung from my having just begun a
long-awaited updating and clean-up of openspaceworld.org...

4. does the voting software still work on the newest PCs.  should i
continue to offer and explain it at openspaceworld.org?

thanks, m

On Thursday, August 28, 2014, Harrison Owen <hhowen at verizon.net> wrote:

> Actually I still have the old software, but I agree with Michael. There
> are much better ways. The problem for me with that software, as with all
> efforts (including Sticky-dots) to prioritize the issues that were raised
> on the first day or so of the OS is that it is  measurement of “yesterday’s
> passions.” Very much like the most recent Quarterly Financial Report... all
> it tells you about is old news. On a standard 2 ½ day OS, when the 3rd
> day dawns, everybody had had a night to sleep on everything. Almost
> inevitably a lot will have changed. Hot issues will merge with other hot
> issues, hot issues will cool, new issues will have been thrown up thanks to
> the interaction of the preceding two days. There is also the question of
> Actionable Issues (which is the focal point of the 3rd day) which don’t
> necessarily include all the issues previously discussed. I believe Chris
> Corrigan started it all when he talked about “opening the space for
> action.” Anyhow that is what he did, and I do as well. Very simple
> procedure which I think I covered in the 3rd Edition of The User’s Guide.
> Nowhere near as elegant as Michael’s “Praxis” – but it will do in a pinch,
> and is not in German. J
>
>
>
> 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 <http://%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
>
>
>
> *From:* OSList [mailto:oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org] *On Behalf
> Of *Michael Herman
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 28, 2014 5:41 AM
> *To:* OSLIST
> *Subject:* [OSList] is our voting software dead?
>
>
>
> hi all, especially those of you who've used the old multi-voting software.
>
>
>
> i'm wondering when was the last time you used the multi-voting software to
> do prioritization at the end of an OS meeting?  i'm trying to figure out if
> it's still useful on the latest PCs.  i'm a mac guy, so can't test it
> locally here.
>
>
>
> and if not using the old software, what are you using on day 3 of os
> events that are too big for dots?  is there a new state-of-the-art when it
> comes to converging into action with larger groups?
>
>
> many thanks, m
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Michael Herman
> Michael Herman Associates
> 312-280-7838 (mobile)
>
> http://MichaelHerman.com
> http://OpenSpaceWorld.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20140828/f9bb4711/attachment-0004.htm>