[OSList] Management and Organization

Tue Feb 4 19:52:30 PST 2014

Harrisson: THis is your next book not a email message!
I need some time to read it beceuse it is interesting!
Thank you, you keep sharing your ideas with so much inspiring ideas!
Adriana

2014-02-04 Harrison Owen <hhowen at verizon.net>:

> Go well, My Friend!
>
>
>
> ho
>
>
>
> 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 *Elwin and Joan
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 04, 2014 3:54 PM
> *To:* World wide Open Space Technology email list
> *Subject:* Re: [OSList] Management and Organization
>
>
>
> I'm 8 hours from Opening Space with just such a classical command and
> control organization here in Sarajevo.
>
> I've read your thread twice Harrison and here I go!
>
> Always more than grateful,
>
> Elwin Guild
> Future Development International
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, February 4, 2014 9:42 PM, Suzanne Daigle <sdaigle4 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Oh Harrison, how I love this bunch of words that you put out there... I
> don't want to comment on any of them. In the same way that I always work
> myself into a box if I explain too much and boy do I ever get myself into
> tight and uncomfortable places. Instead I just want to invite and invite
> and invite in whatever way will seem to strike the right chord with the
> conditions of Open Space being there.
>
> Thank you for encouraging me/us to continue to "nudge" and to "be
> patient".  I am way better at the first than the second.
>
>
>
> from ...
> "the fundamental understanding of "organization" remains unchanged
> (predesigned structure and controls with Leaders/Managers in charge) and
> the new effort is to enable "leaders (to) move toward approaches that
> support greater and greater self-organization." Tactically I can certainly
> understand the approach, but what if organization is fundamentally,
> essentially, in *totality *- Self Organizing?"
>
> to...
> "nor can I resist the compulsion to share the experience in whatever way
> with whomsoever might show up. I think the bottom line may come down to:
> Move slowly with empathy, and be prepared to wait."
>
> and finally...
> "I will do the Open Space in order to introduce anomaly... one more nudge
> towards Paradigm Shift.
>
>
>
> I know full well that I can't shift paradigms for people. The same is true
> of Transformation, which has a lot to do with paradigm shift. Both will
> happen all by themselves...or not. But I can and will nudge when given the
> opportunity. After that it is all about waiting..."
>
>
>
> Suzanne
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Harrison Owen <hhowen at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> Hello David O. and David S. I've re-titled to give the thread a new name
> if only because I think it is headed in some new directions with hopefully
> a long and useful discussion in prospect.
>
>
>
> This discussion may get a little difficult as we attempt to define and
> understand the words we are using, "Management," for example. I had in mind
> the more common garden variety of Management's role in organizations. As
> Wikipedia (that source of all useful information) notes, "Despite the move
> toward workplace democracy, command-and-control organization structures
> remain commonplace as *de facto* organization structure." (Wikipedia).
> Back in the old days a common definition of a good manager was one who,
> "Makes the plan, manages to the plan, and meets the plan." And we all know
> how that was supposed to be done. Single word: Control. Lots of Command and
> Control.
>
>
>
> David has moved in new, interesting and effective directions saying, "What
> I have found is that as I'm able to share the conditions that support
> self-organization and how they can be integrated into individuals
> leadership approach that the leaders move toward approaches that support
> greater and greater self-organization."
>
>
>
> I applaud the effort, but it seems to me it may be rather a half step. If
> I hear David's words correctly, the fundamental understanding of
> "organization" remains unchanged (predesigned structure and controls with
> Leaders/Managers in charge) and the new effort is to enable "leaders (to)
> move toward approaches that support greater and greater self-organization."
> Tactically I can certainly understand the approach, but what if
> organization is fundamentally, essentially, in totality - Self Organizing?
> If that is the situation, "greater and greater self organization" makes
> little sense for a very simple reason. It is all self organizing to begin
> with! But I guess that is just splitting hairs, and for sure the heart is
> moving in the right direction.
>
>
>
> The revolutionary in me (and yes there is some of that J) would dearly
> love to shake the organizational world by the scruff of the neck saying
> something like, Move on, Wake up! You just can't get there from here. And
> for a certainty, such an approach would have no chance of success. There
> needs to be a change in view, I am sure -- but forced change, were it even
> possible, falls back on the old way which wasn't effective then and won't
> work now. And there is another way which unfortunately requires some
> patient waiting. But we may not have to wait that long.
>
>
>
> It is a very common lament -- that, "things just aren't working." What
> "things" and the nature of their dysfunction are often left unsaid, but the
> universal uneasiness is pretty clear. To date, the usual response has been
> to do more and more of what we've always done, but maybe with a different
> name (Quality Circles, Process Re-Engineering, Dialogue, maybe even AGILE
> when mandated etc.). The results have not been inspiring. Some would even
> include Open Space Technology as a new tool. But I don't think that works
> either if the intent is to fix the old system.
>
>
>
> As the lament continues, some strange things are happening. Every now and
> again something actually WORKS! And it works even when the plans are
> busted, the leadership is incompetent, the environment sour and
> threatening. Who knows how or why - but it worked. The Brits usually call
> this Muddling Through, which is what happens when everything goes a
> different way than it was supposed to - but it all turns out fine. Phew!
>
>
>
> There is another name for this strange phenomenon. Anomaly. Anomaly
> literally means being outside the law (lawless) from the Greek *a*(without)
> *nomos* (law).  Anomalies cause one to scratch the head in wonder...How
> on earth could THAT happen? Most often, we just pass them by with a
> dismissive, "weird!" I think that is a mistake.
>
>
>
> Peter Vaill, an old friend and colleague, had a knack for seriously
> noticing anomalies. He observed that some organizations performed at levels
> of excellence that definitely blew away the competition. He called them
> High Performing Systems. The problem was, these systems broke all the rules
> of how organizations were supposed to work. As a Professor of Management,
> Peter could be accused of a flawed effort because instead of attempting to
> analyze how they worked, Peter contented himself with a delightful
> description of what they did, which he captured in a short paper (1977*),
> The Behavioral Characteristics of High Performing Systems*. I say
> delightful because he wrote in a totally colloquial fashion, and definitely
> not in the style of Academe, even though he was the (then) Dean of the
> Business School at George Washington University.
>
>
>
> Writing almost 10 years before Open Space Technology, Peter seems
> prescient, for his "Behavioral Characteristics" are a perfect description
> of the common behavior at every Open Space I have ever seen. Taking a tall
> leap in logic, I have argued (Wave Rider) that the link between Peter's
> High Performing Systems, and what we have experienced in Open Space is the
> phenomenon of self organization. Or put somewhat differently, High
> Performing Systems are well functioning self organizing systems. And in
> function and effect they are definitely anomalous for according to the
> accepted wisdom, they simply could not happen or do what they do!
>
>
>
> On the subject of Anomaly and the importance of same, the work of Thomas
> Kuhn comes to mind. Author of, "The Structures of Scientific Revolutions,"
> Kuhn gave us that wonderful concept, "paradigm," as in Paradigm Shift. As
> an historian of Science, Kuhn describes how the scientific world grew in
> wisdom and stature, passing through several understandings of the nature of
> things, on the way to new (and presumably better) ones. That passage he
> called, Paradigm Shifts. According to his story, the scientific  or learned
> community held a certain view of reality for a period of time, which worked
> very well, and seemed to explain most, if not all, of the phenomenon of
> their experience. This view (paradigm) was taken as The Truth, and defended
> with ferocity. For example, everybody "knew" at one time that the Earth was
> the center of everything and those who disagreed were considered heretics,
> and often dispatched. Galileo, for instance. Then funny little anomalies
> began to show up as people observed the heavens. If the anomalies were not
> an illusion then Earth centeredness was false - which everybody knew must
> be wrong, insanity, or worse. But the anomalies refused to go away, which
> made people more and more uncomfortable, to say nothing of angry. Then one
> shinning day the view shifted. Same old heavens as before but seen with
> totally new eyes. Paradigm shift. Very powerful and never comfortable.
>
>
>
> This brief sojourn into the History of Science can be helpful to our
> present concerns, I think, for we are facing a very similar situation in
> our understanding of organizations, as well as management. The traditional
> understanding of organization, and therefore management, has been around
> for a long time. As with all paradigms, it is taken to be The Truth, and
> those who challenge will inevitably be subject to dismissal at the
> beginning, changing to discomfort, and perhaps ending with anger. The
> reason is very simple. The investments in this particular paradigm are
> enormous, and include ways of life, ways of making a living, and for some,
> life itself. Messing with all of that cannot be done lightly.
>
>
>
> And yet the anomalies persist. Some are quite subtle and are perceived
> only as a growing sense that "things are not working as we expected."
> However, when the system/organization seems broken, it is clear that we
> must fix it and we think we know how. If the organizational process is
> screwy, then obviously we need Process Re-Engineering. But it didn't work.
> We try harder and harder, doing variants of what we've always done, and
> (surprisingly) we get what we've always got. But hope springs eternal, and
> someday we will find The Fix. Or so it says in all the books. Maybe.
>
>
>
> Other anomalies are not so subtle. Open Space Technology is such an
> anomaly. I believe it to be true that Open Space violates virtually all
> principles and practices of traditional organizational theory and
> management practice. To the extent that it (OS) works as we have
> experienced it working - much if not all of current practice is called into
> question. My view is doubtless biased, but some 20 years ago, a senior
> official from the American Society for Training and Development (pardon the
> repeat) seemingly had the same impression when he told me, after hearing
> what happened in Open Space, "Harrison, if what you say is true, then 99%
> of what we are currently do does not need to be done." I would have been
> greatly relieved had I been able to argue with him. But I couldn't. I can't.
>
>
>
> So David(s) - where does that leave us? Discretion might dictate picking
> up our toys and going home. Others might suggest heading for the
> barricades. Personally I don't think either possibility is very useful. I
> simply cannot deny what I have experienced in Open Space, nor can I resist
> the compulsion to share the experience in whatever way with whomsoever
> might show up. I think the bottom line may come down to: Move slowly with
> empathy, and be prepared to wait.
>
>
>
> And what would that mean for us and what we do...? At a practical level,
> it could mean something like this. Let's suppose that the Management of a
> very traditional Organization shows up on our doorstep. They are concerned
> that organizational function is dismal, the people seem to dislike each
> other and what they are doing, and profits have disappeared. The request is
> simple: Help!  Somewhere they heard about Open Space and believe (hope) it
> could fix their system, or at least make a start.
>
>
>
> It sounds like a marvelous opportunity, and a natural response would be,
> YES! At least that would be my response. All the essential preconditions
> for OS seem to be in place (real issue, complexity, etc) - BUT ... There
> are some issues to consider. First, if by "fixing their system" the client
> means that the "traditional Organization" is going to be put back together
> as it once was, that is a real problem, I think. The reason is simple - the
> root of their problems is precisely the system (understanding of
> organization) they were working under. Make it even stronger. Were I to
> design a system that would maximize separation and alienation, minimize
> creativity and collaboration - I don't think I could do any better than the
> system they were operating under. Fixing, or restoring that system would
> only compound their misery. Secondly, Doing an Open Space in that
> organization is quite likely to increase the general dissatisfaction with
> how things are done. As one senior executive from a very traditional
> organization said to me following an Open Space we did, "You have ruined me
> for work in this place. I am not sure whether to thank you or hate you."
> Talk about being caught on the horns of a dilemma! If fully successful with
> my task (opening space), I will have failed the clients' primary
> expectations (fixing the system) and simultaneously raised the level
> employee dissatisfaction.
>
>
>
> All true, I think. And I would still do the Open Space, but my reasons
> could cause some problems unless very carefully explained, and that
> explanation itself is problematical. At one level I will do the Open Space
> because I know that it will enable people to be more comfortable, powerful,
> sure of themselves. That's the easy part. But at another level I will do
> the Open Space in order to introduce anomaly... one more nudge towards
> Paradigm Shift.
>
>
>
> I know full well that I can't shift paradigms for people. The same is true
> of Transformation, which has a lot to do with paradigm shift. Both will
> happen all by themselves...or not. But I can and will nudge when given the
> opportunity. After that it is all about waiting...
>
>
>
> So what do you think about all that?
>
>
>
> 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, February 03, 2014 9:47 AM
> *To:* World wide Open Space Technology email list
> *Subject:* Re: [OSList] Trust
>
>
>
> I'm not sure I agree OS fails as a management tool.....Self-Organization
> has become the lens I look at all my work as an individual who supports
> groups and organizations in change and in my leadership and management
> development work. It's not an either / or for me os works or doesn't work
> as a management tool.
>
>
>
> Leadership is simply supporting an organization in moving toward its
> goals. The invitation in OS is the goal or issue that people care about.
> What I have found is that as I'm able to share the conditions that support
> self-organization and how they can be integrated into individuals
> leadership approach that the leaders move toward approaches that support
> greater and greater self-organization. This is not top-down, traditional
> leadership or management. As you propose in Wave-Rider Harrison, I believe
> the principles of OS / self-organization can be integrated as a leadership
> approach with great results.
>
>
>
> David
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 8:57 AM, Harrison Owen <hhowen at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> David - I would totally agree that OS "utterly fails as a management
> tool." Then again I think that OS shares this fate/condition with all other
> "management tools," at least as I understand "management" and "tool" in the
> context of enabling effective human performance. And thereby hang the
> beginning of a long and useful discussion, I think.
>
>
>
> ho
>
>
>
> 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 stevenson
> *Sent:* Monday, February 03, 2014 1:51 AM
> *To:* World wide Open Space Technology email list
> *Subject:* Re: [OSList] Trust
>
>
>
> Ho indeed Harrison! OpenSpace opens space for freedom of spirit and heart,
> choice and the weaving of our fates and destinies with that of our
> world, it does not achieve complience and so, at least to the extent that
> people are to be managed...
>
> On Saturday, February 1, 2014, Harrison Owen <hhowen at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> Brendan said: "And in my view , all germinating from that initial transfer
> of trust between mentor and sponsor" Right on! I don't think it makes a bit
> of difference how elegantly one "does" the Open Space. It is really all
> about TRUST. When I said that anybody with a good heart and good mind can
> "do it," that is just a long winded way of saying what I've always found to
> be true. Expertise is interesting. Integrity and Trust are essential. A new
> comer to the OS world, opening space for the very first time, muffing some
> lines, and forgetting others - can do every bit as well as a 20 year
> veteran. The coin of the realm is Integrity, authenticity, trust. But none
> of that should be news, for that trio is the bedrock of all positive human
> encounter, I think. Which may just be another way of pointing out that OS
> is not some special process we do, it is just life lived well. Or something.
>
>
>
> ho
>
>
>
>
>
> 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 *Brendan McKeague
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 01, 2014 12:57 AM
> *To:* World wide Open Space Technology email list
> *Subject:* Re: [OSList] Sponsor PreWork Conversation (long)
>
>
>
> A very interesting question Chuni Li...
>
>
>
> The sponsor was being mentored by one of my colleagues in our local Open
> Space community of practice (Wave Riders) who suggested to him that OS was
> the right method/model for the task at hand.  As his coach (the formal role
> as perceived by the organisation), my colleague encouraged the sponsor to
> get in touch with me to avoid any perceived conflict of interest. The
> sponsor researched OS for himself first and then engaged me to provide the
> specialist knowledge....Harrison often says that anyone with a good heart
> and head can open space - and I agree - while at the same time, I
> acknowledge that 'Open Space wisdom' is often helpful, if not necessary, in
> situations of increased complexity and potential conflict.
>
>
>
> After his initial attraction to OS in theory, and as part of his research,
> the sponsor then ran a mini Open Space within his own jurisdiction to see
> how it worked in reality - he wished to speak from his lived experience
> when engaging with his higher-uppers.  He also watched a few of the growing
> library of YouTube clips that are so wonderful for educating potential
> sponsors.
>
>
>
> Now totally convinced, the transfer of trust was complete at various
> levels....trusting the process (OST works) AND trusting the facilitator
> (who was aligned with the essence of OST - i.e living in it) AND trusting
> that both facilitator and process were 'fit-for-purpose' in this context.
>
>
>
> And in my view , all germinating from that initial transfer of trust
> between mentor and sponsor
>
>
>
> Hope this story helps
>
>
>
> Cheers Brendan
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 31/01/2014, at 1:10 PM, chunili2000 at yahoo.com wrote:
>
>
>
> Thank you Brendan for taking the time to organize and share this
> information - so precious and such a generous gift!
>
>
>
> I am curious about the sponsor who "put his neck out" to make the event
> happen.
>
> Had he experienced OST before? Did you have to "convince" him? What made
> him willing to "jump through the hoops?" Was it the OST process or was it
> you that he trusted?
>
>
>
> Chuni Li
>
> New Jersey
>
>
>
> *From:* Brendan Mc
>
>
>
> --
> David Stevenson
> Sent from Gmail Mobile
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Suzanne Daigle
> Open Space Facilitator
> NuFocus Strategic Group
>
> FL 941-359-8877
> Cell: 203-722-2009
> www.nufocusgroup.com
> s.daigle at nufocusgroup.com
> twitter @suzannedaigle
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>

-- 

Adriana Díaz-Berrio Ph.D. CRHA
(514) 739 2268
www.diazberrio.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20140204/e32be418/attachment-0008.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 8138 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20140204/e32be418/attachment-0008.jpeg>