[OSList] Private vs Public OST Differences?
Michael Herman via OSList
oslist at lists.openspacetech.org
Fri Oct 17 15:58:51 PDT 2014
one of my favorite stories, too, chris. here's some of the detail, from my
website. some of the links might be dead, but the story is a good one.
and it was totally open, public. he (vancouver, bc) and i (chicago)
worked with a blogger in texas to set it up. we were about 40 people at
the first event, but we touched many more, in various organizations and
networks. the proceedings were posted online (still are, actually) during
the event, so definitely weren't late! i can think of at least two others
from the list here who participated.
the last line of this story reminds me of another dimension of public vs.
private, that the public events can be a lot harder to track. it's not
that action isn't there, it's that it takes place in a more diffused way
and/or in a larger space.
...began with the GivingConference
<http://www.michaelherman.com/wordpress/projects/%E2%80%9C/givingconference%22>,
initiated with Phil Cubeta at GiftHub
<http://www.michaelherman.com/wordpress/projects/%E2%80%9Chttp://www.gifthub.org%22>,
which brought together philanthropists, weblog publishers, financial
advisors, and community organizers. A core group then moved to
OmidyarNetwork
<http://www.michaelherman.com/wordpress/projects/%E2%80%9Chttp://www.omidyar.net%22>
and
convened a number of O.net members summits. Some of the people at the first
of those summits went on to organize RecentChangesCamp
<http://www.michaelherman.com/wordpress/projects/%E2%80%9Chttp://www.recentchangescamp.org%22>,
which connected software technologists and community leaders and activists
(see OregonianNewspaper
<http://www.michaelherman.com/cgi/wiki.cgi?OregonianNewspaper>). All of
these summits have been 3-day meetings, attended by 40-120 people, and run
completely in OpenSpace
<http://www.michaelherman.com/cgi/wiki.cgi?OpenSpaceTechnology>. At least
three new conferences are now being planned for 2006. Update May 2006
<http://www.michaelherman.com/wordpress/projects/%E2%80%9Chttp://giving.typepad.com/theworldwewant/2006/05/open_letter_to_.html%E2%80%9D>
. Ted Ernst <http://www.tedernst.com/>facilitated another in this lineage,
O.net Uganda, 2007 and later introduced WikiSym to meeting in OpenSpace
<http://www.michaelherman.com/wordpress/projects/%E2%80%9C/cgi/wiki.cgi?OpenSpaceTechnology%22>.
Theresa Williamson took OpenSpace
<http://www.michaelherman.com/wordpress/projects/%E2%80%9C/cgi/wiki.cgi?OpenSpaceTechnology%22>
back
to her work running CatalyticCommunities
<http://www.michaelherman.com/wordpress/projects/%E2%80%9Chttp://www.catcomm.org%22>
in
Rio de Janeiro. *UPDATE 2011:* SeeRecentChangesCamp
<http://www.michaelherman.com/wordpress/projects/%E2%80%9Chttp://www.recentchangescamp.org%22>
which
has been a great success story, in its own right, now having been repeated
on three continents since 2005. Beyond this, results flowing from
RecentChangesCamp
<http://www.michaelherman.com/wordpress/projects/%E2%80%9Chttp://www.recentchangescamp.org%22>,
WikiSym’s shift to Open Space, and other Giving Confernce beginnings get
harder and harder to track and record — which is just great.
--
Michael Herman
Michael Herman Associates
312-280-7838 (mobile)
http://MichaelHerman.com
http://OpenSpaceWorld.org
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Chris Corrigan <chris.corrigan at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Underlining this. The Giving Conference, an open and public event in 2003
> was transformational for the few dozen people who were there and launched
> scores of long term and sustained work that had a influence far beyond what
> we could have imagined. It’s one of my best practice stories, and it was
> entirely a public thing.
>
> Also, an initiative I was a part of in 2011 to address addictions related
> stigma in the health care system was both open to the public and supported
> by an organization (The Vancouver Coastal Health Authority). The weight
> and institutional support made it possible, supported many follow up
> experiments and sustained results. the reliance on a single institution
> for this work also eventually compromised the results when the organization
> was restructured and the directorate that had initiated the work ceased to
> exist.
>
> Chris
>
> On Oct 17, 2014, at 2:15 PM, Michael Herman via OSList <
> oslist at lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:
>
> it's not about minimum requirements for me, daniel. many of the things on
> your list show up in most of the meetings/events i've facilitated, but it's
> all very situation specific.
>
> what i heard you saying earlier, and maybe i heard it wrong, was about
> corporate/organization/private events that have org structure and process
> and culture behind them, adding momentum and to longer, more resource-full
> meetings/events. AND i heard public events described as being shorter and
> bringing fewer resources and less common cultural momentum.
>
> if i heard those characterizations accurately, i only wanted to say that
> they can be teased apart. generalizing on public vs. private is not going
> to be as accurate as generalizing on the quality of the preparations,
> commitment, energy... shall we say... complexity, diversity, urgency and
> passion. yes, organizations have some ways of whipping up these
> conditions, but they also have ways of damping them down. energy and
> resources in communities can be more diffused, but also very focused and
> abundant.
>
> i'm just saying that just cuz it's public, you can't assume than it's
> shorter, lower quality and that the proceedings won't be out when promised.
> that can happen in orgs, same as anywhere else. and long, high quality,
> on-time and ongoing work is very possible in open, emergent community
> events.
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Michael Herman
> Michael Herman Associates
> 312-280-7838 (mobile)
>
> http://MichaelHerman.com <http://michaelherman.com/>
> http://OpenSpaceWorld.org <http://openspaceworld.org/>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Daniel Mezick via OSList <
> oslist at lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> I'm confused now, and so I believe I am about to learn something new
>> here... I'll know by your answers to these questions:
>>
>> What are the minimum essentials of Open Space structure? For example, are
>> the following elements necessary at all?
>>
>>
>> 1. Sponsor
>> 2. Theme
>> 3. Invitation in advance, referring to Theme
>> 4. Opening Circle
>> 5. Facilitator
>> 6. Explanation of the 1Law/ 5Principles
>> 7. Posters
>> 8. Closing Circle
>> 9. Timely Proceedings
>> 10. Sponsor commitment to follow though on Proceedings
>>
>>
>> If these are not essential to structure, why not? If so, why so?
>>
>> Thanks for your help! Very Eager to hear your (hopefully *detailed*)
>> answers!
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>>
>> On 10/17/14 1:27 PM, Michael Herman wrote:
>>
>> No. I'm saying the setting, context, culture doesn't matter so much. The
>> structure, setup and commitment matter. I'm saying don't assume that public
>> gatherings aren't capable of having real impact. And of course
>> corporate/organizational/private isn't any guarantee of impact and follow
>> through.Â
>>
>> On Friday, October 17, 2014, Daniel Mezick <dan at newtechusa.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Michael,
>>>
>>> I hear you, saying:
>>>
>>> "I've seen very loose corporate add-on events"
>>>
>>> ..and then I also hear you saying:
>>>
>>> I've seen...very productive and long-lived action (spanning years and
>>> continents) come from open public conferences.
>>>
>>> I do not hear you saying this:
>>>
>>> "I've seen very loose corporate add-on events generate very productive
>>> and long-lived action spanning years"
>>>
>>> I wonder if you are saying this.
>>>
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>> On 10/17/14 10:15 AM, Michael Herman wrote:
>>>
>>> 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.Â
>>>
>>>
>>> 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. Â
>>>>
>>>> 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>Â 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
>>>> <Mail Attachment.png>
>>>> Christine Whitney Sanchez, M.C.
>>>> Phoenix, AZ, USA • +1.480.759.0262
>>>> www.innovationpartners.comÂ
>>>>
>>>> Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/ChristineWhitneySanchez>Â |Â
>>>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/christinewhitneysanchez>Â |Â
>>>> Twitter <https://twitter.com/CWhitneySanchez>
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 15, 2014, at 6:33 AM, Daniel Mezick via OSList <
>>>> 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/>.Â
>>>>
>>>> Examine my new book:Â 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.Â
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/>.Â
>>>>
>>>> Examine my new book:Â 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.Â
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Â
>>> --
>>>
>>> Michael Herman
>>> Michael Herman Associates
>>> 312-280-7838 (mobile)
>>>
>>> http://MichaelHerman.com <http://michaelherman.com/>
>>> http://OpenSpaceWorld.org <http://openspaceworld.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/>.Â
>>>
>>> Examine my new book:Â 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.Â
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Â
>> --
>>
>> Michael Herman
>> Michael Herman Associates
>> 312-280-7838 (mobile)
>>
>> http://MichaelHerman.com <http://michaelherman.com/>
>> http://OpenSpaceWorld.org <http://openspaceworld.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/>.Â
>>
>> Examine my new book:Â 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.Â
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20141017/6a7b33b7/attachment-0004.htm>
More information about the OSList
mailing list