[OSList] From linkedin today

Daniel Mezick dan at newtechusa.net
Fri Jan 10 05:49:25 PST 2014


Hi Michael...

So interesting this phrase:

"...Sort of a permaculture for
     human systems."

Organizational Permaculture is a interesting idea.

A little while ago, I think in late 2012, I set up a Facebook group to 
discuss the application of Permaculture concepts to organizations...it 
has over 100 of members now...here is the link: 
https://www.facebook.com/groups/147096195442450/. OST is a prime example 
of an OrgPerma practice. I hope you will consider taking a look.

Kind Regards,
Dan






On 1/10/14 4:03 AM, Michael M Pannwitz wrote:
> Here is a link to a long list of measures the European Union is employing
>> http://ec.europa.eu/education/programmes/llp/guide/glossary_en.html
>
> mmp
>
> On 10.01.2014 08:55, christine koehler wrote:
>> Thank you Peggy and David
>>
>> I' will  think over all your answers
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 6:03 AM, Peggy Holman <peggy at peggyholman.com
>> <mailto:peggy at peggyholman.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     I have a different response to Christine’s question:
>>>      if we want to keep the system healthy and alive, what should  we
>>>     do ?”
>>
>>     I’d say take responsibility for what you love.
>>
>>     A system exists through the interactions among its diverse agents.
>>     Some of those agents, whether in an organism or in an organization,
>>     attend to the system’s health. Think of the role of kidneys for
>>     flushing out toxins. In human systems, people, rather than cells,
>>     organize stuff. You could argue that hierarchies are an
>>     overcompensation of a system that ultimately leaves unflushed
>>     toxicity in its wake, sometimes killing off the organization. Or at
>>     least making it function in less optimal ways.
>>
>>     As David said, as we come to understand principles of
>>     self-organizing, we’re better equipped to do stuff that is congruent
>>     with natural patterns. I think current trends towards network forms
>>     of organizing are a promising experiment in a system’s agents
>>     working with those natural principles. Sort of a permaculture for
>>     human systems.
>>
>>
>>     Christine, to your questions about size:
>>>     But then how do you do with very large systems ? Or does it mean
>>>     that any system that is too large to come regularly together as a
>>>     whole is oversized ? should split into several smaller systems to
>>>     keep its good health
>>
>>     Important questions. I suspect as we learn more about how networks
>>     function, the answers to your questions will get clearer. I can only
>>     speculate. I can imagine people meeting on behalf of the whole in
>>     transparent ways that are open to anyone who cares to show up. And
>>     if overwhelming numbers want to be there, perhaps intersecting
>>     circles come into play.  Layers of wholeness exist in systems. So
>>     those who feel called to convene on behalf of the whole take
>>     responsibility for it. And connect with others who share in that
>>     sort of stewarding function. Holding it all lightly and not working
>>     too hard, of course. :-)
>>
>>     Just mulling…
>>
>>
>>     Peggy
>>
>>
>>
>>     _________________________________
>>     Peggy Holman
>>     peggy at peggyholman.com <mailto:peggy at peggyholman.com>
>>     Twitter: @peggyholman
>>
>>     15347 SE 49th Place
>>     Bellevue, WA  98006
>>     425-746-6274
>>     www.peggyholman.com <http://www.peggyholman.com>
>>     www.journalismthatmatters.org <http://www.journalismthatmatters.org>
>>
>>     *Enjoy the award winning *Engaging Emergence: Turning Upheaval into
>>     Opportunity <http://peggyholman.com/papers/engaging-emergence/>
>>     Check out my series on what's emerging in the news & information
>>     ecosystem
>> <http://www.journalismthatmatters.net/the_emerging_news_and_information_eco_system>
>>
>>     "An angel told me that the only way to step into the fire and not
>>     get burnt, is to become
>>     the fire".
>>        -- Drew Dellinger
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     On Jan 9, 2014, at 5:00 PM, David Osborne
>>     <dosborne at change-fusion.com <mailto:dosborne at change-fusion.com>> 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>     Christine,
>>>
>>>      I think the tendency toward coherence or fragmentation is the
>>>     organizing principle.
>>>
>>>     I see supporting coherence as a part of the process, not an
>>>     organizing principle in itself. It's a choice, similar to the
>>>     other individual and group choices that are a part of
>>>     self-organization.
>>>
>>>     Most of us here on the list serve choose to facilitate / host open
>>>     space sessions. I'd suggest this choice usually leads to building
>>>     coherence. So it is with other coherence supporting choices.The
>>>     system may or may not do it itself.
>>>
>>>     Another way I would frame it is that organizations I frequently
>>>     work in are stuck in patterns that they are dissatisfied or
>>>     frustrated with. Think poor business results, customer
>>>     satisfaction, work environment, employee engagement / satisfaction
>>>     etc. Control is the great inhibitor of self-organization and often
>>>     prevents new coherent patterns being able to emerge.  I find that
>>>     I can often guide or make suggestions that enable these groups to
>>>     tap into the power of organization to create new self-reinforcng
>>>     patterns that they prefer. And my involvement and the choice to be
>>>     open to my suggestions are all choices that are part of the
>>>     self-organization. I'm suggesting that we / they that support
>>>     coherence are also part of the self-organizing, not separate 
>>> from it.
>>>
>>>     I don't mean to be cryptic in my above comments. I find myself
>>>     continuing to build my own (and hopefully shared) language that
>>>     describes self-organization. I loved the statement earlier in this
>>>     exchange that compared self-organization to gravity. I do believe
>>>     they are both laws that operate invisibly all the time. The point
>>>     made was that understanding gravity is key to being able to fly to
>>>     the moon. I think similarly the more we understand and can share
>>>     the principles of self-organization, we can help humanity fly
>>>     versus staying stuck in conflict and competition.Thus my continual
>>>     search to find better ways of sharing and communicating.
>>>
>>>     I'm really enjoying tracking and participating in this dialogue
>>>     and thanks to all that are contributing and listening/reading.
>>>
>>>     David
>>>     703-939-1777
>>>     dosborne at change-fusion.com <mailto:dosborne at change-fusion.com>
>>>     <image.png>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Christine
>>>     <chris.alice.koehler at gmail.com
>>>     <mailto:chris.alice.koehler at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>         Hi David
>>>
>>>         Very interesting, that makes sense to me. Does it mean that
>>>         supporting coherence of the system as a whole should be an
>>>         organizing principle ?
>>>         But then Harrison will say I guess that it is not necessary,
>>>         as self org. will take care of the system itself.
>>>         Then there is something that I don't understand about
>>>         self-org. : if we want to keep the system healthy and alive,
>>>         what should  we do ?
>>>
>>>         Christine Koehler
>>>         06 13 28 71 38 <tel:06%2013%2028%2071%2038>
>>>
>>>
>>>         Le 9 janv. 2014 à 22:20, David Osborne <
>>>         dosborne at change-fusion.com
>>>         <mailto:dosborne at change-fusion.com>> a écrit :
>>>
>>>>         I found the questions about how do you keep a system as a
>>>>         coherent whole fascinating.
>>>>
>>>>         Part of the dance is the back and forth between coherence and
>>>>         fragmentation. Chaos offers both opportunity and threat, new
>>>>         life and death. Coherence leads to new life patterns
>>>>         emerging, fragmentation leads towards death and the cycle
>>>>         toward new life continues. In my experience there is lot's
>>>>         that can be done to reinforce, nurture and support coherence.
>>>>         Holding the space is one aspect. Drawing attention and
>>>>         building consensus around what is emerging is another,
>>>>         supporting parts of the system through conflict in a manner
>>>>         that continues to increase the likelihood of coherence is a
>>>>         third. There are many more...and those are some quick
>>>>         thoughts for now. All of this can and is done with in the
>>>>         context of self-organization and someone having the passion
>>>>         and taking the initiative to do it. The two are not mutually
>>>>         exclusive.
>>>>
>>>>         Cheers to all.
>>>>
>>>>         David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 4:06 PM, christine koehler
>>>>         <chris.alice.koehler at gmail.com
>>>>         <mailto:chris.alice.koehler at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>             Peggy
>>>>
>>>>             If I simplify what you say (and I apologize for it), I
>>>>             understand that  you say that what keep a self-organized
>>>>             system coherent as a whole is coming regularly together
>>>>             as a whole, following our two feet to sessions called
>>>>             around we love, coming back as a whole, dispersing again
>>>>             for the evening. Of course I would tend to agree with
>>>>             that. But then how do you do with very large systems ? Or
>>>>             does it mean that any system that is too large to come
>>>>             regularly together as a whole is oversized ? should split
>>>>             into several smaller systems to keep its good health ?
>>>>
>>>>             and what about decision making ?
>>>>
>>>>             Christine
>>>>             end an email to OSList-leave at lists.openspacetech.org
>>>> <mailto: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
>>
>

-- 

Daniel Mezick, President

New Technology Solutions Inc.

(203) 915 7248 (cell)

Bio <http://newtechusa.net/dan-mezick/>. Blog 
<http://newtechusa.net/blog/>. Twitter <http://twitter.com/#%21/danmezick/>.

Examine my new book:The Culture Game 
<http://newtechusa.net/about/the-culture-game-book/>: Tools for the 
Agile Manager.

Explore Agile Team Training 
<http://newtechusa.net/services/agile-scrum-training/> and Coaching. 
<http://newtechusa.net/services/agile-scrum-coaching/>

Explore the Agile Boston <http://newtechusa.net//user-groups/ma/>Community.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20140110/3853752b/attachment-0008.htm>


More information about the OSList mailing list