[OSList] Private vs Public OST Differences?

Fri Oct 17 07:15:42 PDT 2014

Not sure the differences you articulate have anything to do with public and
private, Daniel. It's about the different structures.  I've seen very loose
corporate add-on events and very productive and long-lived action (spanning
years and continents) come from open public conferences. So id say
structure matters much more than setting.

On Friday, October 17, 2014, Daniel Mezick via OSList <
oslist at lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:

>  Greetings Christine,
>
> Thanks for your detailed reply. I must admit, I have no experience
> whatsoever with doing quasi-public OST events arranged for guilds,
> industry-associations and the like. I'm clueless!
>
> As such, my opinion does not have much (if any) validity about those use
> cases. I do have some theories however, and I hope I can ask some questions
> about OST for guilds & industry associations...
>
> I see it like this:
>
> (1) At one extreme end of the spectrum, there is the very private,
> business-org-specific event. A kind of big-family system.
>
> (2) At the other extreme, there is the totally public conference that
> anyone can attend, if they pay the money...
>
>     - It is an event that has some Open Space of varying quality, in 1/2
>       day, full day or multiple day formats.
>        - It may of may not have a Sponsor, it may of may not have
>       Proceedings. It may or may not have posters on the wall. If it has
>       Proceedings at all, they are often late.
>       - "Agile" conferences are commonly at found at this end of the
>       range.
>
>
> My theory is that quasi-public OST events for and with guilds, industry
> associations and the like lie somewhere in the middle of these two
> extremes. And I can certainly imagine (theorize) how these events take on
> the look, feel, tone, temp and flavor of the very private,
> business-org-specific event. They might even effectively BE private events.
> It's not like anyone with the fee (if any) can just waltz into the meeting
> right?
>
>
> And so, for now, I want to set these quasi-public OST events aside, and/or
> characterize them as private events. Is that OK?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> And so, referring to (1) and (2) above, I continue to see very huge
> differences between these two ways to use Open Space.
>
> Like, the difference between Night and Day.
>
>
> Here's one of those very striking differences: in public-conference events
> where OST is an add-on in 1/2 or full day formats, getting good Proceedings
> is difficult. Or impossible. The Proceedings are typically late and poorly
> formatted, or more commonly: *non-existent.*
>
> Yet inside private events, you can't pull the people off the task of
> Proceedings creation. The task attracts them like a magnet. They typically
> wave off any offers of help and take an absolutely huge interest in the
> Proceedings generation. They rivet on it.
>
>
>
> And this is just one example. There are many more BIG differences. And so
> I continue to assert that for public-conference events where OST is a full
> day or 1/2 day add-on, a Barcamp or Unconference can and does get
> equivalent, similar, as-good results.
>
> Stated another way, Barcamp and/or Unconference can never do what Open
> Space does for organizations. And that's because Open Space is optimized
> for enabling "development and transformation in organizations. "
>
> And those other two aren't.
>
>
> Daniel
>
> PS I realize some public, paid, Agile conferences that feature all-day
> Open Space do a very good job with Proceedings. Yet this is clearly the
> exception, and not the rule where Agile conferences are concerned.
>
>
>
>
> On 10/15/14 11:43 AM, Christine Whitney Sanchez wrote:
>
> Daniel and all,
>
>  In my experience, public events have the same buzz and meaningful
> results as an in-organization OST.  I’ve facilitated a number of them that
> were sponsored by a group of organizations in the community.  For instance, Vibrant
> Phoenix <http://vibrantphx.com/next-actions/top-ideas/>, was a very
> productive economic development OST, sponsored by two mayors of large
> municipalities and several local businesses.  One of the business sponsors
> agreed to be the contact for folks who wanted to take their “actionable
> ideas” to the next level.  However, there was no budget and no
> infrastructure to really keep folks connected the the ideas they cared the
> most about.
>
>  This is where the public open spaces generally fall short.  Because the
> ongoing action is not the core mission of any of these organizations, it is
> hoped that the participants will self-organize going forward.  With very
> few exceptions, this does not happen.  I believe that sponsorship for the
> work after the OST is what is called for.
>
>  The Collective Impact
> <http://www.ssireview.org/blog/entry/channeling_change_making_collective_impact_work> model
> speaks to this.  It’s nothing new, really, but does represent a simple way
> to talk about the necessary conditions for sustaining collective action.  I
> now include my version of this model when I talk with potential sponsors to
> shine the light beyond the meeting so that we can discuss their intentions
> for providing backbone support for self-organized action going forward.
>
>  I especially love public Open Space events and look forward to working
> with sponsors who see the meeting as merely the first small step in
> collaborative action.  There is so much potential!
>
>  Warm wishes from a sunny autumn morning in the rain-greened desert,
>
> Christine
>
> Christine Whitney Sanchez, M.C.
> Phoenix, AZ, USA • +1.480.759.0262
> www.innovationpartners.com
>
> Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/ChristineWhitneySanchez> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/christinewhitneysanchez> | Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/CWhitneySanchez>
>
>  On Oct 15, 2014, at 6:33 AM, Daniel Mezick via OSList <
> oslist at lists.openspacetech.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','oslist at lists.openspacetech.org');>> wrote:
>
>  Greetings To All,
>
> I notice that there are many big differences between
> public-conference-type OST events, and OST events arranged for
> organizations.
>
> Do you also notice this? Maybe I am imagining this....just making stuff
> up...
>
> ...maybe not. In many key dimensions, I experience these differences as
> striking. Even disturbing.
>
>
>
> And so I have been poking around inside the GUIDE (3rd edition) and I
> notice that, in some spots, the implication is that the discussion is about
> a public event. Up to page 18 for example, this implication is clear:
>
>
> <THE GUIDE PAGE 18>
>
> Working With The Client if you ARE NOT the Sponsor
>
> "To this point I have assumed that you (the reader) will be the sponsor
> and facilitator of the Open Space, and therefore *it is your decision as
> to whether or not to proceed*...(*emphasis added.*)
>
> </THE GUIDE PAGE 18>
>
>
>
> My current belief is that having the same person in the Sponsor role
> **and** the Facilitator role is probably a very bad idea for an OST event *inside
> an organization*. For the typical public-conference event on the other
> hand, this seems to work just fine. Kinda like a Barcamp or Unconference....
>
>
> Another current belief I hold is that OST is the essential tool for
> creating "Development and Transformation in Organizations". It is best
> suited for use in organizations.
>
> It is interesting to note how the Barcamp and/or "Unconference" formats
> seem to get the same or as-good results as Open Space, in the public
> conference setting.
>
> Not so inside organizations! In fact, as of now, I don't think Barcamp or
> Unconference has any chance whatsoever at being effective in bringing about
> Development and Transformation in Organizations the way Open Space can.
> Something about the Sponsor?
>
> 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.
>  _______________________________________________
> 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.
>

-- 

--

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/20141017/19d88e51/attachment-0004.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 10191 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20141017/19d88e51/attachment-0004.png>