[OSList] Authority in Open Space - "All Open Space"

Thu Oct 16 15:29:07 PDT 2014

Of course ! It's the wonderful irony of "all" statements.

Paul

On 16 Oct 2014, at 22:43, Daniel Mezick via OSList <
oslist at lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:

 Including this one?

On 10/16/14 2:15 PM, paul levy via OSList wrote:

I'd just venture to add a third to Harrison's first two...

  1) All Systems are Open. 2) All Systems are self organizing.

 And 3. All "all statements" are possibly self-limiting

 Best regards

 Paul Levy

On Thursday, 16 October 2014, Harrison Owen via OSList <
oslist at lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:

>  John – Thank you, Thank you for all the rich stuff! Sort of a Tidal
> Wave, but that’s when it gets fun, albeit a tad difficult to keep track of
> the sundry bits and pieces J
>
>
>
> Picking Just One:   “But I can't get past the feeling that *there are
> lots of barriers to the openness of space, and to self organisation*.”
> Absolutely. And if we were to put that into the language of the trade
> (Complexity Theorists and the like) we would be talking about “system
> constraints.” But as I understand it, that does not mean that Self
> Organization is no longer operative. And in fact the System Constraints are
> part and parcel of the process, a very important part. I think it goes
> something like this –
>
>
>
> I have found myself coming to  two conclusions, or better yet
> observations. 1) All Systems are Open. 2) All Systems are self organizing.
>
>
>
> As Open Systems, we, in all permutations of our “us-ness” – businesses,
> countries, families, planets, etc) are open to, and impacted by, all other
> systems. Sometimes a lot, and sometimes a little, but in our cosmos there
> is no safe, protected place. Everything is related to everything else, and
> we are no exception. If true, this has a number of implications. First of
> all the environment in which we exist is so complex, fast moving and
> inter-connected we can’t even think at that level. Secondly, what you can’t
> even think about, you can’t control. So the notion that somebody is
> actually “in charge/in control” is not just a silly idea, it is delusional.
> 3) System preservation/growth depends on our  ability to navigate this
> environment. And it is a good news/bad news situation. Sometimes the
> impacts drive us in new and creative directions, and open up new
> opportunities which are ours if we respond appropriately. At other times
> the impacts drive us to the wall, and it’s Game over. Another word is
> Death. If this story is in any ways valid, it would seem like Mission
> Impossible. And yet this story has seemingly been going on for 13.7 Billion
> years and we are still here to complain about it. How could that be?
>
>
>
> All Systems are Self Organizing – Self Organization is in fact the
> mechanism whereby we navigate the environment, and all systems do it, I
> think. And when they stop doing it, they disappear. Self Organization is
> not the product of some CEO or executive committee. After all, they really
> haven’t been around for all that long. Self Organization is the product of
> the total system in all of its aspects and bits and pieces. How all that
> works has been a matter of stunning discovery over the past 40 years or so.
> I doubt we have it all right, but I do think we may have the major elements
> of understanding in place. The outline goes something like this – a) Steady
> State b) Chaos c) A bifurcation to either dissipation (poof) or
> reconstitution at new and higher levels of order. Of course you have to
> fill in a lot of the blanks, and there is a massive literature attempting
> to do just that. But I do believe we have enough to get started with some
> basic observations. It really is a Whole System affair, in which all
> elements must work together, and no element has an *a priori* claim to
> centrality. In a business this could mean that the dumb question of an
> intern could just open the doors for the future. You just don’t know. But
> you do know that an organization’s future directly relates to its capacity
> to bring total system assets to bear on emergent challenges and
> opportunities quickly and effectively. It is always tempting to  try and
> “hedge the bet” with some plan, policy or procedure, but it worthwhile
> noting that the tighter (more constraining) the plan, the greater the
> likelihood of failure. It’s not that the plan was bad... but unfortunately
> the challenge or opportunity came from a different direction, and all our
> eggs were in one basket – the wrong one.
>
>
>
> So we have a very existential question – How do we assure sufficient room
> (dare I say Space?) so that the infinite elements of any organization may
> quickly and effectively align to meet new challenges and opportunities –
> recognizing in advance that we can never know what will be required?
>
>
>
> Open Space Technology is just a bit player in all of this, but good old
> OST can be useful none the less both as a natural laboratory to explore
> what is going on, and also as an effective intervention to encourage the
> appearance of the elemental power of self organization, particularly when
> it seems blocked and constrained.  There are no guarantees of course, and
> it may well be that The Organization’s time is now: Game Over. But the
> chances of renewal are pretty good, at least that has been my experience.
> And no matter what, the magic sauce is not OST – but the power of self
> organization. So you could say, just as a way of speaking, “It’s all Open
> Space.” But that’s just a joke, son.
>
>
>
> Harrison
>
>
>
>
>
> Winter Address
>
> 7808 River Falls Drive
>
> Potomac, MD 20854
>
> 301-365-2093
>
>
>
> Summer Address
>
> 189 Beaucaire Ave. <x-apple-data-detectors://4>
>
> 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
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org');>] *On
> Behalf Of *John Baxter via OSList
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 16, 2014 2:57 AM
> *To:* Harrison Owen
> *Cc:* World wide Open Space Technology email list
> *Subject:* Re: [OSList] Authority Distribution in Open Space
>
>
>
> I have knots about empowerment, and the ubiquitous openness of space.
> These knots are about to inspire a rant.
>
>
>
> These knots, I should start with, are not entirely the result of this
> present discussion thread - it is just this discussion that prompts me to
> speak.
>
>
>
> I think I understand Harrison, if you suggest that self-organisation is
> more common than we realise... if not ubiquitous, omnipresent, then at
> least that we can fruitfully challenge the assumption that formal and
> top-down organisation dominates how things get done.
>
>
>
> But I can't get past the feeling that *there are lots of barriers to the
> openness of space, and to self organisation*.  Everywhere and all the
> time.  In my recent work, mental barriers by all involved about authority
> and role relationships.  My personal barriers around trying too hard to
> "empower".  My client's patronising assumptions about the "capacity" and
> "maturity" of "the sector".  Information asymmetries.
>
>
>
> So I get really conflicted when anyone starts saying "well space is open
> all the time" (implication: 'so chill out cos there's nothing you need to
> do').
>
>
>
> I am also conflicted about stepping back from the goal of empowerment, as
> if everybody else needs to just step into open space and take
> responsibility.
>
>
>
> Yes - many people don't realise the power that they have.  (In my last
> project; nobody seemed to quite buy into the fact that *they could
> directly author the document that they were trying to influence*.)
>
>
>
> But it is also patronising to suggest that empowerment lies in just
> helping people to see how powerful they are... because many people *don't* have
> the power that we or they might like.  To suggest that people have the
> power and just don't use it... that effectively blames them for their
> situation, and washes our hands of responsibility.
>
>
>
> The biggest barrier to group change I see time and time again is authority
> figures who believe others need to change, not themselves.  (Most commonly,
> that their employees need to "be empowered", and that they need to manage a
> culture change program to get there... or better yet, that HR needs to
> manage the change program, while we are busy getting the real work done.)
>
>
>
> I don't pretend that empowerment is something that can be done to other
> people (patronising), but I do firmly believe that we all first need to
> look to ourselves and what we need to do to play our role making such a
> future possible.  And, in fact, that *this is all that we can ever do*.
>
>
>
> Maybe the wisdom in what you say Harrison is that we do this by focusing
> on respect first, as a productive way to enable empowerment.
>
>
>
> Maybe I am picking on the wrong things and have misunderstood them, and I
> apologise if I have been critical.  But I also see a lot of things said
> that make me uncomfortable, that knot me up.  Again, most of these things
> are from my memory, not the present discussion.  While my memory might not
> be the best, I'm sure it is based on something.
>
>
>
> Thank you all for your patience and for being in this discussion
>
>
>
>
> *John Baxter*
>
> ***Co****Create Adelaide Facilitator, Director of Realise consultancy*
>
> CoCreateADL.com <http://cocreateadl.com/localgov%E2%80%8B> |
> jsbaxter.com.au <http://www.jsbaxter.com.au/>
>
> 0405 447 829
>
>  | 
>
> @jsbaxter_ <http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_>
>
>
>
> *City Grill— An Election Forum More Magnificent Than Any Ever Seen
> <http://citygrill.eventbrite.com.au>!*
> *, Saturday 18 October 2014 <x-apple-data-detectors://14> Connect with
> your candidates, get your voice heard by joining with others in your
> community, and Influence the future of the city*
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 6:06 AM, Harrison Owen <hhowen at verizon.net
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','hhowen at verizon.net');>> wrote:
>
> John -- I’m rather curious what you meant by “The overall project was more
> complicated than OST?” My confusion comes in part from my experience that
> complexity is actually an essential precondition for OST, or more exactly
> the effective operation of self organization. The essential pre-conditions
> as I have experienced the are: A Real business issue (something that people
> really care about). High levels of complexity such that no single person or
> group has a prayer of figuring it out. High levels of diversity in terms of
> people and points of view. Lots of passion and conflict. And a decision
> time of yesterday (urgency). Given these 5 conditions, self organization in
> the more formal setting of OST or as a natural occurrence just seems to
> happen... unless...And this may be the point of problem... It is
> arbitrarily constrained... which usually means that somebody already has
> the plan/program/design and they are just looking for buy-in or (worst
> case) they are simply trying to sugar coat the pill, and make it seem like
> the folks are creating something, when in fact the cake is already baked.
>
>
>
> A clue to the dilemma may be in the phrase, “I struggled to help the
> client (the funding body) to really 'empower'...” I know we talk a lot
> about empowerment, but I have come to the conclusion that it is really a
> red herring, and most painfully so in those situations where you actually
> try to do it. Sounds odd, I guess, but think about it. If I empower
> you...you are in my power. And the more I try to empower you the worse it
> gets. Real empowerment, in my book, is not an act that we (or somebody) do,
> but an acknowledgement of a pre-existing condition...you are powerful. Of
> course I might encourage you a bit to be as powerful as you are, but it is
> not something I can give you. You must claim it for yourself. Strange as it
> may seem, I find the notion of “empowerment” to be just the opposite of
> that fundament of effective working relationships (or any relationship)
> RESPECT. And I suspect that it is precisely here that the fickle finger of
> fate is pointing to the critical issue.
>
>
>
> Another word that fits in here for me is “Patronizing.” Everything may
> sound super nice, and all the proper and correct words may be spoken, but
> if the implication is that the folks (participants) really do not have the
> competence or ability to deal with the issues, it is fairly predictable
> that they will not bother to try. Or if they “try” it will be pretty much
> of a pro forma situation. Sound familiar?
>
>
>
> Harrison
>
>
>
> Winter Address
>
> 7808 River Falls Drive
>
> Potomac, MD 20854
>
> 301-365-2093
>
>
>
> Summer Address
>
> 189 Beaucaire Ave. <x-apple-data-detectors://18>
>
> 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
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org');>] *On
> Behalf Of *John Baxter via OSList
> *Sent:* Monday, October 13, 2014 2:41 AM
> *To:* Daniel Mezick
> *Cc:* World wide Open Space Technology email list
> *Subject:* Re: [OSList] Authority Distribution in Open Space
>
>
>
> Hi Daniel.  Thanks for your considered response.
>
>
>
> I will try to keep my response in line with the topic.... but expect it
> may meander.
>
>
>
> The OST day I was preparing for has since come and gone.
>
> I decided in the end to least give OST a crack and see what happened.
>
>
>
> It didn't go very well; but it also went well enough (vis overall project
> goals, and client expectations), so I don't feel so bad about it... even if
> I had personally envisaged more.
>
>
>
> I am not one to worry about the cannon... which means sometimes I break
> things, as I did this time.  There was still an (informal) sponsor, the one
> that sent the invites.  They just did not have a presence on the day.
> Thank you Daniel as you did make me think critically about the strength of
> my role as host.  I think I dealt with that through my introduction to the
> day; and as it turns out the authority to host was not an issue.
>
>
>
> But as it turns out, that was not really the biggest challenge!
>
>
>
> The main lessons I took away about what contributed to the average result:
>
>
>
> *There needs to be clear, compelling shared work.*
>
> The overall project was more complicated than OST, so it wasn't clear what
> turning up actually meant, and I think many did not turn up on the basis of
> wanting to resolve a shared challenge (the work), as you might expect for
> OST.   In straight OST terms, you could say this was an issue of
> invitation, but really it was many things.
>
>
>
> So the group was interesting.  They had the heart, but not the will.  They
> were committed, but without ownership of the result.  I've seen this a lot
> in the community engagement field, but nowhere that I have used (or seen)
> OST.
>
>
>
> I thought about this a lot, I thought it might have been about the
> invitation and self-selection; but at the end of the day I think it comes
> down to the sense of (and invitation in to) shared work.
>
>
>
> *It is super hard to dissolve ingrained power and authority relationships
> in the short term.  These can't be sidestepped by an external facilitator.*
>
>
>
> I struggled to help the client (the funding body) to really 'empower'.
> They talked about it and genuinely want to, but old habits and mental
> models don't change overnight.  They really struggled to push beyond
> managing the process as superiours (to a set of subordinate participants).
> This is 'empowerment' within a patriarchal system, and it doesn't work.  It
> felt very yucky at times.
>
>
>
> A curious side effect of this partriarchal 'empowerment' was an
> unwillingness to be clear about the work ("we want to be open and let them
> lead the process" they would say... I got the client to agree that *the*y were
> clearly the leaders, but we didn't quite work out how to put that into
> practice).
>
>
>
> Over the course of the engagement, we all took baby steps together that
> invest in their (/our) capacity to really work together in future.  They
> learned a LOT in a short period of time, and so did I, but it was too
> short.  By the end of the project I had the client calling me up to ask how
> they could reword things so they didn't reflect a control response. : )
>  That was good, but obviously if they need me for this then there is some
> way to go.  And different client reps had different levels of self
> reflection.
>
>
>
> Hosting an isolated OST workshop against this grain was very ambitious, it
> was always going to be, no matter how we conducted ourselves.
>
>
>
> And perhaps 20% were very proactive, and led the bulk of the work that
> occurred... they saved the day!
>
> But the length of the OST was not enough for this leadership to really be
> contagious and precipitate a productive culture.
>
>
>
> *Or in other words: we struggled to free up authorisation to be more
> dynamic*
>
> Reading your blog post Daniel, the idea of dynamic authorisation would
> have been very useful earlier in the project.  Another way of looking at
> the project: we struggled to free the space of ingrained authority to
> enable dynamic authorisation.
>
>
>
>
>
> There were lots of other insights into how we could have done it
> differently, but to me these were the fundamental stumbling blocks for us.
>
>
>
> Still, they were not too big, and I'm pleased we made a good start.
>
> My favourite feedback was "thank you, this was the first time I have been
> part of genuine engagement in more than a decade in the sector" : )
>
>
>
> Next time, we will do better.
>
>
>
>
> *John Baxter*
>
> ***Co****Create Adelaide Facilitator, Director of Realise consultancy*
>
> CoCreateADL.com <http://cocreateadl.com/localgov%E2%80%8B> |
> jsbaxter.com.au <http://www.jsbaxter.com.au/>
>
> 0405 447 829 <0405%20447%20829>
>
>  | 
>
> @jsbaxter_ <http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_>
>
>
>
> *City Grill— An Election Forum More Magnificent Than Any Ever Seen
> <http://citygrill.eventbrite.com.au>!*
> *, Saturday 18 October 2014 <x-apple-data-detectors://28> Connect with
> your candidates, get your voice heard by joining with others in your
> community, and Influence the future of the city*
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 12:07 AM, Daniel Mezick <dan at newtechusa.net
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','dan at newtechusa.net');>> wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> Yours is a very interesting story.
>
> You say:
>
>
>
>
> *"...To be honest I am not sure how I need to deal with this, though my
> strategy is to accept the authority for hosting the space in the next
> workshop, obsolving the department of their responsibility to manage the
> day." "...I don't think it is feasible for the obvious authority candidates
> hosting something genuinely participatory.  The relevant director has said
> she doesn't want to speak formally and become The Authority for the day, a
> position I agree with."*
>
>
>
>
>
> In the situation as described, it sounds like the org is the very earliest
> stages of moving in a direction of more open/participatory/inviting.
>
> Do you agree with this assessment?
>
>
>
> If this assessment is correct, based on what you describe, I would
> probably avoid attempting Open Space in the canonical form whatsoever (as
> described in the OST GUIDE)  because the Sponsor role is vacant.
> Unoccupied. And so, by my reckoning, if I understand you right, a true Open
> Space event isn't even possible, because the essential OST-Sponsor-role is
> in fact not willingly occupied by anyone with enough authority to play that
> essential role well.
>
> What's clear is that someone who could function as OST-Sponsor is
> currently unwilling to do so. And so I might try a "taster" or "demo" event
> instead, where the goal is to *learn about Open Space in general*, and do
> a *little* bit of "real" work too. Especially if the allotted time a mere
> 1/2 day, I am even more inclined to strongly favor this re-framing of the
> stated goals.
>
> So the primary and stated goal for the "taster" is learning about OST.
> Another goal for a short event might be to see who shows up
> super-interested in the art of Facilitation, and then offer to mentor those
> who do self-select by showing interest.  In this manner some Facilitation
> capacity is developed inside the org, to help with current meetings and
> processes. Introducing Facilitation into typical meetings is a easy and
> effective "culture hack".
>
>
>
> For me, the total unwillingness of an obvious candidate to occupy the
> Sponsor role is a huge warning signal to slow down, pause, or even stop.
>
> Lots of people here have more experience than me, and might be willing to
> lend you some of their expertise regarding the authority dynamics of
> Facilitating an OST event with the essential OST-Sponsor-role completely
> vacant
>
>
>
> Kind Regards,
> Daniel
>
>
>
> On 9/28/14 11:30 PM, John Baxter wrote:
>
>  I am navigating some challenging authority dynamics in a project at the
> moment.
>
>
>
> I was brought in a week out from the first of three forums, and asked to
> 'facilitate a codesign process' which was at that stage a black box (with
> many hidden expectations) scheduled into that event (1 hour before lunch
> and 1 hour afterwards).
>
>
>
> It's a long journey, but you can imagine how my role has changed as I
> prepare for the third forum which I am hosting in Open Space.
>
>
>
> The overall process is an engagement between a government department and
> their funded agencies.  The most obvious direct power dynamics are obvious,
> the effective power and authority dynamics are much more complex (though
> predictable).
>
>
>
> Department staff have authority challenges as much as the agencies.  They
> are trying so hard to be 'neutral' and 'non controlling' that they are
> effectively reinforcing their own authority positions (which often have
> little real correlation to the power, knowledge etc that they imagine them
> to).
>
>
>
> To be honest I am not sure how I need to deal with this, though my
> strategy is to accept the authority for hosting the space in the next
> workshop, obsolving the department of their responsibility to manage the
> day.
>
>
>
> It has been interesting to watch push back so far from agency reps who are
> committed to participating, who are genuinely engaged, but are playing to
> an us-them tension that is getting in the way of the shared work (and
> serves them no good ends except protecting them from their own
> responsibility).  Stand-offishness is gradually being resolved, though some
> pockets are holding firm.
>
>
>
> I am crossing my fingers for WS3 that we can traverse these and get into
> Open Space without being pushed off the bridge by the reactionary tension;
> and that once on the other side, the department reps can embrace Open Space
> and take responsibility for their role.
>
>
>
> We will get across *as long as I have the authority* to host the space
> for them.
>
>
>
> I don't think it is feasible for the obvious authority candidates hosting
> something genuinely participatory.  The relevant director has said she
> doesn't want to speak formally and become The Authority for the day, a
> position I agree with.
>
>
>
> But it does leave something of a shell, where I am crossing my fingers
> that our time together thus far affords me the authority to host that space.
>
>
>
> I think we are ready. I am bringing my harness and floaties just in case.
>
>
>
>
> *John Baxter*
>
> * CoCreate Adelaide Facilitator, Director of Realise consultancy*
>
> CoCreateADL.com  <http://cocreateadl.com/localgov%E2%80%8B> |
> jsbaxter.com.au <http://www.jsbaxter.com.au/>
>
> 0405 447 829
>
>  | 
>
> @jsbaxter_ <http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_>
>
>
>
> *City Grill— An Election Forum More Magnificent Than Any Ever Seen
> <http://citygrill.eventbrite.com.au>*, Saturday 18 October 2014
> <x-apple-data-detectors://36>
> Influence your city by building relationships and joining voices with
> others in your community
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Daniel Mezick via OSList <
> oslist at lists.openspacetech.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','oslist at lists.openspacetech.org');>> wrote:
>
> Hi Harrison,
>
> So interesting how the Law of 2 Feet authorizes me, and every other member
> of an OST event, to go anywhere we may want to go.
>
> Without asking anyone else for any kind of "permission"...
>
>
> Reminds me of this past June, being in Camden with you, and Ethelyn, and
> Harold, and friends... when we were standing on the porch of that Camden
> restaurant... waiting for everyone to arrive, and assemble for dinner...
>
> And as we wait, I notice there is this convenient-looking, alternate
> entry-door... into the dining area.
>
> And I say: "Hmm...I wonder if we are authorized to use that door."
>
> And you say:
>
> "We're authorized to go Anywhere we want to go."
>
> ...and I like that.
>
> Daniel
>
>
> Picture of that place:
> https://twitter.com/DanielMezick/status/483054326265692161
> See also:
> https://twitter.com/danielgullo/status/483434622009999360
>
>
> <mime-attachment.png>
>
> On 9/25/14 4:58 PM, Harrison Owen wrote:
>
>  Daniel... You really did it! I think. Your language comes from a place I
> don’t know... which is to say that I probably wouldn’t say what you say in
> the way that you do (duh). BUT when I run my “translator” it comes out
> sounding pretty good! So... I can’t help with the questions you have
> raised. Actually I think you are doing pretty well on your own, and
> (hopefully) will incite others to a similarly riotous performance. Thanks!
>
>
>
> Harrison
>
>
>
> Winter Address
>
> 7808 River Falls Drive
>
> Potomac, MD 20854
>
> 301-365-2093
>
>
>
> Summer Address
>
> 189 Beaucaire Ave. <x-apple-data-detectors://2>
>
> 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
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org');>] *On
> Behalf Of *Daniel Mezick via OSList
> *Sent:* Thursday, September 25, 2014 9:39 AM
> *To:* oslist at lists.openspacetech.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','oslist at lists.openspacetech.org');>
> *Subject:* [OSList] Authority Distribution in Open Space
>
>
>
> Greetings to All,
>
> For the past several years I have attended conferences of the Group
> Relations community, and encouraged others to do the same. I've studied
> their literature, and harvested some important learning as a result. One of
> the things I have come to understand a little bit better is the role of
> "authority dynamics" in self-organizing social systems.
>
> Link:
> www.akriceinstitute.org
>
> Over the past several years I've been using Open Space with intent to
> improve the results of my work in helping companies implement Agile ideas
> in their organizations. We do an initial Open Space, then the folks get
> about 3 months to play with Agile (we carefully use the word
> "experimentation" with management,) then we do another Open Space after
> that, to inspect what just happened across the enterprise. The initial and
> subsequent Open Space events form a "safe" container or field in which the
> members can *learn*... as they explore how to *improve* together by
> *experimenting* with new practices, and see if they actually work. I call
> the process Open Agile Adoption.
>
> Link:
> OpenAgileAdoption.com
>
> This seems to work pretty good. It seems to "take the air out of" most of
> the fear, most of the anxiety and most of the worry that is created. The
> key aspect is *consent*: absolutely no one is forced to do anything they
> are unwilling to do. No one is *coerced* to *comply*. Everyone is instead
> respectfully *invited* to help *write* the story, and be a *character* in
> the story...of the contemplated process change. Open Agile Adoption
> encourages a spirit of experimentation and play.
>
> The spirit of Open Space is the spirit of freedom. Isn't it? In the OST
> community, we discuss and talk a lot about self-organization,
> self-management and self-governance. The Agile community also talks about
> these ideas a lot.
>
> So I have some questions. What is really going on during self-organization
> in a social system? What are the steps? What information is being sent and
> received? >From whom, and by whom? Is the information about *authority*
> important? How important? Can a social system self organize without regard
> to who has the right to do what work? *How do decisions that affect
> others get made in a self-organizing system?*
>
> Who decides about *who decides*? How important is the process of
> *authorization* in a self-organizing system? Is self-organization in
> large part the process of dynamic authorization (and *de-authorization*)
> in real time?
>
> What *is *authorization? Can self-organization occur without the sending
> and receiving of authorization data by and between the members?
>
> Is Bruce Tuckman's forming/storming/performing/adjourning actually
> decomposing the *dynamics of authorization* inside a social system?
>
> The essay below attempts to answer some of these difficult questions. I'd
> love your thoughts on it. Will you give it a look?
>
>
> Essay: Authority Distribution in Open Space
> http://newtechusa.net/agile/authority-distribution-in-open-space/
>
>
>
> Kind Regards,
> Daniel
>
> --
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> --
>
> 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.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OSList mailing list
> To post send emails to OSList at lists.openspacetech.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','OSList at lists.openspacetech.org');>
> To unsubscribe send an email to OSList-leave at lists.openspacetech.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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.
>
>
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
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.

_______________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20141016/57d67109/attachment-0004.htm>