[OSList] Interdependence and Vulnerability: a delayed reframe re: Trust

Kári Gunnarsson kari.gunnarsson at simnet.is
Mon Mar 10 01:06:41 PDT 2014


I am an instunent, I am finely tuned.
I am an outsider, not part of the current debate.
I risk vulnerability and lead the way as a demostration.
I have done my homework with fairness, transparency, truthfulness and
presence.
I am an instunent, I am finely tuned.


"They had determined that I was trustworthy, which I would suggest is short
of trust. They were willing to risk vulnerability, in part, because I had
demonstrated fairness, transparency, truthfulness and presence... enough to
take a risk on the process."


On Wednesday, 12 February 2014, Chris Kloth <chris.kloth at got2change.com>
wrote:

> Thank you for your question, Eric.
>
> I was going to make a quick response when I tripped over an artichoke full
> of thoughts and feelings I am trying to get to the heart of. Please be
> patient as I try to honor your very good question with a a worthy answer.
>
> --
> Shalom,
>
> Chris Kloth
> ChangeWorks of the Heartland
> 254 South Merkle Road
> Bexley, OH 43209-1801
> ph 614-239-1336
> fax 614-237-2347
> www.got2change.com
>
>
> Quoting Eric Hansen <ehansen917 at gmail.com>:
>
>  Hi, Chris:
>>
>> I know I am a stranger on this list. My wife, Elaine Hansen, I think is
>> more
>> active, and is friends with Suzanne Daigle, who also responded to your
>> post.
>> I did not respond on top of Suzanne's response so as not to "muddy the
>> waters." None of which matters except to provide some context for who I
>> am.
>>
>> You're email caught my eye for several reasons. The comment that struck me
>> most is this one:
>>
>> "They had determined that I was trustworthy, which I would suggest is
>> short
>> of trust. They were willing to risk vulnerability, in part, because I had
>> demonstrated fairness, transparency, truthfulness and presence... enough
>> to
>> take a risk on the process."
>>
>> I am wondering: Could you tell me (us) more about why, for you,
>> trustworthiness falls short of trust.
>>
>> I am not asking you to justify the distinction, only to explain it more.
>> At
>> this point, I do not understand.
>>
>> If you do decide to provide an answer, I would then invite you to answer
>> one
>> more question:
>>
>> Why is that distinction important to you?  Again, I am not asking you to
>> justify that distinction. I am, instead, inviting you to reflect on why
>> the
>> distinction has meaning for you and then to share that meaning with the
>> list.
>>
>> Eric Hansen
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org
>> [mailto:oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org] On Behalf Of Chris Kloth
>> Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2014 5:05 PM
>> To: World wide Open Space Technology email list
>> Subject: [OSList] Interdependence and Vulnerability: a delayed reframe re:
>> Trust
>>
>> I have re-read the Trust thread several times. I noted the passion and
>> thoughtful reflections it triggered.
>>
>> Like the rest of you, over the many years (decades) I have been engaged in
>> working with individuals, groups, organizations and communities the issue
>> of
>> trust has certainly been raised as an explicit or implicit source of
>> concern
>> when people are having difficulty getting something done.
>>
>> At the risk of both sacrilege and hyperbole, I think trust is overrated,
>> or
>> at least misunderstood. Here is an OST story I hope helps explain my
>> perspective.
>>
>> About 20 years and several governors ago a statewide community mental
>> health
>> system I was working with was deeply enmeshed in turmoil. There were three
>> major factions: rural agencies, urban agencies and the state oversight
>> agency. They were all actively engaged in lawsuits against one another.
>> Then
>> the state legislature introduced a piece of legislation that all three
>> factions strongly opposed because of the negative consequences for people
>> suffering from mental illness. However, a series of highly publicized
>> individual tragedies (circumstances beyond their control - control is
>> always
>> such an illusion) made it seem likely the legislation would pass.
>>
>> I was asked to help find a way for the three factions to work together to
>> defeat or amend the legislation. After considerable pre-work I proposed
>> OST
>> as a way to proceed. A group of 6 people (2 from each
>> faction) worked for the better part of a day to craft a question to
>> convene
>> a larger group to explore. The first half of the planning day was fairly
>> tense and colored by the mistrust they all brought into the room.
>> Crafting a
>> question that would reflect their shared interests required owning their
>> distinct interests, which initially tended to reinforce their mistrust of
>> one another. By the end of the day they had a question they all agreed was
>> sufficiently compelling to attract a significant cross-section of their
>> world to gather, talk and listen.
>>
>> What they did NOT have by the end of the day was trust of one another.
>> What they had determined was that they could not succeed in achieving
>> their
>> shared outcome without one another. They were interdependent, which also
>> meant they were vulnerable. They had determined that I was trustworthy,
>> which I would suggest is short of trust. They were willing to risk
>> vulnerability, in part, because I had demonstrated fairness, transparency,
>> truthfulness and presence... enough to take a risk on the process.
>>
>> Approximately 100 people, a credible cross-section of people from all over
>> the state, gathered in open space to explore their question... to figure
>> out
>> what, if anything, they were able and willing to do together.
>> They were the right people doing the right work. I was not surprised they
>> found ways to work together to address their shared concerns. What did
>> surprise me was that, in the process of addressing their common threat
>> they
>> "inadvertently" discovered opportunities to begin to resolve the lawsuits
>> that had been pending for years. Of course, all these years later I would
>> not be surprised. I might even have expected it, though I would not have
>> suggested it as a possible outcome at the front end of the process.
>>
>> The question remains, did they trust each other during and after working
>> in
>> Open Space? I would say they trusted each other and the process just
>> enough
>> to risk vulnerability in this particular situation because they knew they
>> needed each other. They laid a foundation for building trust over time.
>> Over
>> the next several years they experienced gains and setbacks, largely due to
>> larger social and political conditions beyond their control. (Again,
>> control
>> is always such an illusion.)
>>
>> However, despite the ebbs and flows in their level of trust, they were
>> able
>> and willing to continue to risk vulnerability because they knew they
>> needed
>> each other... they were authentically interdependent.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> --
>> Please note that my new e-mail address is chris.kloth at got2change.com. You
>> may also contact me by using the Contact Page at www.got2change.com.
>>
>> Shalom,
>>
>> Chris Kloth
>> ChangeWorks of the Heartland
>> chris.kloth at got2change.com
>> www.got2change.com
>> phone - 614.239.1336
>> fax - 614.237.2347
>>
>> Think Globally, Act Locally
>>
>> Please think about the environment before printing this e-
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Kári Gunnarsson
kari.gunnarsson at simnet.is
gsm: +354 8645189
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20140310/e76e9121/attachment-0008.htm>


More information about the OSList mailing list