[OSList] Private vs Public OST Differences?

[Daniel Mezick via OSList]

Wow Lisa,

I am very grateful for your detailed reply to my 4 questions, and for 
your kind invitation. Thank you!

I receive and accept your kind invite. But before I act, I plan to 
ruminate on your thoughtful send.

Regards,
Daniel

On 10/19/14 7:39 PM, Lisa Heft - wrote:
> Hi, folks - Daniel it’s hard for me to stay in these email streams for 
> immediate back-and-forth because my life and client task work does not 
> always allow that - but I wanted to ‘dip my toe’ in and say I echo 
> what Michael H and Chris and others say about it not in my experience 
> being anything about public or private, organizational or community, 
> existing community or temporary one, or any of that. It’s about 
> thoughtful pre-work, appropriate documentation design, selecting the 
> right process (tool for the job), doing good full-form Open Space, and 
> other things very specific to each client (sponsor / host / convenor / 
> however we wish to name them) and each situation or need.
>
> We’ve had earlier conversations on this list about what is the minimum 
> for what is Open Space, and our other conversations (though you could 
> see it differently / that’s welcome) tend to find:
> - host / client / sponsor / coordinator / convenor - usually useful if 
> it is not the facilitator
> - facilitator though it does not have to be one that is ‘professional’ 
> or uses this way of naming themselves
> - opening circle
> - agenda co-creation (without a facilitator’s ‘helping’, merging, 
> synthesizing, the group voting, etc. - all ideas welcome and on the 
> agenda)
> - explanation of 4 principles and law (some people use the 5th 
> principle, some do not, either works), butterfly, bumblebee (for some, 
> also ‘be prepared to be surprised’, for some people, not)
> - these guidelines / invitations above - about how participants might 
> choose to be - are usually helpful on visual / posters
> - multiple discussion areas around (ideally) a great big room, 
> (ideally but different people have different opinions) over multiple 
> session times
> - closing circle for reflection and comments
> - ideally, some form of documentation so folks can see / learn across 
> all the groups, not just the ones they were able to get to
>
> Okay now here is where I would like to invite you to imagine that each 
> situation is different, when it comes to documentation. I would like 
> to invite you to release a measurement of what is ‘timely’ and what is 
> ‘late’ proceedings. Assuming thoughtful discussions have happened in 
> the pre-work, appropriate documentation is designed, and this is 
> (ideally) custom for each event / organization / community / situation 
> / need / context.
> There are some conversations which inform us (facilitator and client) 
> that it is absolutely appropriate to have a full book-like, full-on 
> narrative of all the conversations that happened-sort-of-style-of Book 
> of Proceedings. And reasons to either turn it around overnight - right 
> there in the event - or reasons to on-purpose, delay dissemination to 
> actually leverage the momentum of the event, include reflective 
> thinkers taking more time for their notes (not just the 
> quick-responders), help people rest and integrate their experience 
> before looking back at their ‘data’ to learn about the knowledge 
> shared across all the groups, and so on. Reasons to say ‘everything in 
> by x:00 and we won’t be helping you remember that - whoever is in by 
> then is in’ - and reasons to interact with each convenor and 
> notes-taker post-event to ask if the’d like to add or refine or 
> complete or add things. Each need / situation appropriate to the 
> context, culture, use of information post-event, and so on. Sometimes 
> documentation is appropriate as a list of who raised what topic, and 
> that is all. Sometimes it’s about action and next steps. Sometimes 
> it’s just about knowledge-sharing without the need for next steps. And 
> so on. Whether organization or community, public or private, 
> conference or planning meeting, issue or experience-sharing.
>
> Then there is the ‘sponsor commitment to follow through’ - which is 
> nice (in those particular instances when that was appropriate to the 
> situation) but not always necessary, in my experience. People do 
> amazing things and (as someone mentioned) not always measurable to the 
> eye, ‘by 5:00’, post meeting, for us to see. People do the work 
> whether approval happens, if they want to. They stay with an 
> organization or leave it to follow their passion, if they discovered 
> their passion and voice in the Open Space event. They find ways 
> around. They decide not to. So yes - in an organization, it’s always 
> nice when the sponsor commits, when pre-work conversations help the 
> sponsor think in advance, perhaps even create the mechanisms that 
> support follow-up and post-event sustainability. When really 
> thoughtful pre-work discussions inform whether action or next steps 
> *are* needed and possible *after THIS* event - or are unrealistic / 
> unsupportable, in reality. Or are better discerned and articulated 
> after reflecting on the patterns and learnings of this event, even 
> perhaps after more work is done identifying resources or champions or 
> partners and such, and where the Open Space is part of a *chain* of 
> meetings / actions / steps / reflections / and so on over time.
>
> And to me? It’s not about the process, that part. That part is 
> universal to any facilitation process that engages group wisdom and 
> diverse voices.
>
> Here I go swimming away back into my life and client work but I do 
> like dipping in now and then ;o)
>
> As always, thanks for inviting the question, Dan, and I look forward 
> to hearing, as always, what others think and have experienced…
>
> Lisa
>
> On Oct 17, 2014, at 11:38 AM, Daniel Mezick via OSList 
> <oslist at lists.openspacetech.org 
> <mailto: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 followthrough.Â
>>>
>>>
>>>     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
>>>>
>

-- 

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/20141019/838671a9/attachment-0004.htm>