[OSList] The Tyranny of Structurelessness

Sun Oct 4 10:48:18 PDT 2015

i like your tomatoes story, anna.  chris corrigan shared with me years ago
a distinction i think he heard the dalai lama make, noticing the difference
between structures that bound and restrict movement and freedom and those
that support.  they were explained as a closed, grasping hand and an open,
palm-up, offering hand.  i think this lines up with what we've said here
before about letting go of control.

the point of the story i shared earlier, doesn't rest on ralph copleman
himself, though he was important for me and many others.  he might also be
the only person to attend every single OT (organization transformation
symposium, where harrison discovered OS as a practice).  the point was that
in open space it is possible to notice that everything is moving, that if
structures themselves are not imaginary, their solidity is.

it's easy to "imagine" everything as more stuck and solid than it needs to
be, than it might be.  some years ago i translated this into:  "open space"
is fundamentally a decision and a commitment (on the part of sponsors,
hosts, facilitators and other leaders) -- to movement.  it might be worth
adding that it's not about driving or causing movement, but allowing and
supporting it, in the spirit of the open hand above.

this last bit makes it hard to hold a strong opinion or assumptions about
how things are and should be and at the same time offer a genuine
invitation for others to do what they sense is best for themselves.  i
really like what you are sharing here, anna, about how we have to keep
examining and be aware of these two potentials all the while we are
creating and facilitating.

on the real or imagined solidity of structure, i once asked mark pixley
(who shows up here on the list every so often), while shopping for training
program materials in hong kong, about the relationship between China and
Taiwan.  Specifically, because I didn't remember much of the history, I was
wondering how this small island country could talk so tough with such a
large and powerful neighbor.  His answer was just amazing to me:  "Well,
you know... a country is only a country because we say it's a country."

--

Michael Herman
Michael Herman Associates
http://MichaelHerman.com
http://OpenSpaceWorld.org

On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 9:27 AM, via OSList <oslist at lists.openspacetech.org>
wrote:

> Dear Daniel, thank you for sharing the synopsis of the essay. Sounds very
> valuable to me!
>
> Rosa, yes I am also a 'green' lover - but living with the assumption that
> I am pretty aware of the shadows...
>
> For me sitting in a circle is a structure. Starting with a break is
> another element of structure. Allowing participants to co-create the agenda
> is a structure. Etc.
>
> Harrison, I don't understand why you say structure is only a figment of
> our imagination.
>
> I believe structure is something very real - even if it's not always as
> tangible as the structure of a house - how we structure time, decision
> making, dialogue, sharing, connecting ... Coffee breaks, all pretty real
> stuff to me.
>
> I believe nobody is obliged to follow a given structure. But structure -
> if it's purposefully designed can enable people to enter into a state of
> flow with ease and joy.
>
> Of course structure is not the only reason why we experience flow, joy and
> ease in a meeting.
>
> Let's take the example of a tomato. The wooden structure that holds the
> tomato is not determining how the tomato grows, but if purposefully placed
>  it can supports the tomato to grow.
>
> The tomato's purpose is not to follow the wooden structure, the tomato is
> growing, and the structure is an invitation to support the growth and
> development. The structure itself is not the flow. The structure can enable
> flow and healthy growth.
>
> I think there are several structural factors that can increase joy, ease
> and creativity to emerge.  I'll name those that come to mind - inspired by
> the 'Deep Essence Tool' of the Genuine Contact program. Let me list those
> factors as questions that help me when I design meeting structures/
> processes I facilitate:
>
> - is the purpose of the meeting/process clear?
> - what are our values? Is the design of the meeting aligned with these
> values?
> - what assumptions do I and my clients have? (Watch out - assumptions have
> a uber impact on the structure) I, you, a group, a leader have to be super
> clear and honest about our assumptions - huge shadow trap - not being clear
> honest about our assumptions when we create structure.
> Now let's find and create a structure for our meeting, for our
> organization, our movement...
> The more purpose, values, assumptions and structures are aligned, in order
> to create a life nurturing environment, the more the people have the
> opportunity to take leadership for inspired action.
> Step by step a story unfolds that is characterized by people
> experimenting, sharing, trying, daring, learning ... Taking responsibility
> and leadership.
>
> Depending on my abilities, resources and assumptions, and
> consciousness/awareness I create structures as a facilitator. My wish is
> to design and facilitate meetings where people connect with their passion
> and take leadership. My aim is to be very clear why I create which
> structures and I do my best to stay open to learn from the group and adopt
> the structure  to their needs if needed.
>
> I believe the purpose of the structure is to serve people, life and flow.
> Structure shall never be created in order to be obeyed by the people. But
> it may enable and empower people to step into their full potential and life
> force.
>
> We as OST community create a structure that continues to allow flow,
> learning, sharing, seeping our understanding: an international email list,
> language specific lists, wosonos, Stammtisch, Facebook group, online
> calls...
>
> I am grateful that this structure exists otherwise I could not learn from
> all your perspectives, insights, questions and sharing.
>
> much Love
> Anna Caroline
>
>
>
> On 03 Oct 2015, at 20:40, Harrison Owen via OSList <
> oslist at lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:
>
> And just to churn the pot a bit.... open some space??? An off thought
> which has pestered me recently. Goes like this. “Structure is only a
> figment of our imagination. It is our “take” of reality, a flash frame of
> the passing scene. In our minds it looks solid, even unchanging. But
> actually it is just a momentary view of the ongoing flow.” Or something.
>
>
>
> Harrison
>
>
>
> *From:* OSList [mailto:oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org
> <oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org>] *On Behalf Of *Daniel Mezick
> via OSList
> *Sent:* Saturday, October 03, 2015 9:26 AM
> *To:* oslist at lists.openspacetech.org
> *Subject:* [OSList] The Tyranny of Structurelessness
>
>
>
> THE TYRANNY of STRUCTURELESSNESS
> by Jo Freeman aka Joreen
>
> I find this essay extremely interesting. I hope you do, too.
>
>
>
> Here is a pertinent quote, from the essay:
> "...
>
> *the idea of "structurelessness" does not prevent the formation of
> informal structures, only formal ones."*
> Circa 1970. Context: the women's movement. Quick summary of the main
> points: from the essay...
>
>    - *During the years in which the women's liberation movement has been
>    taking shape, a great emphasis has been placed on what are called
>    leaderless, structureless groups as the main -- if not sole --
>    organizational form of the movement. *
>
>
>    - *The idea of "structurelessness," however, has moved from a healthy
>    counter to those tendencies, to becoming a goddess in its own right.*
>
>
>    - *Contrary to what we would like to believe, there is no such thing
>    as a structureless group. *
>
>
>    - *This means that to strive for a structureless group is as useful,
>    and as deceptive, as to aim at an "objective" news story, "value-free"
>    social science, or a "free" economy. A "laissez faire" group is about as
>    realistic as a "laissez faire" society; the idea becomes a smokescreen for
>    the strong or the lucky to establish unquestioned hegemony over others. *
>
>
>    - *This hegemony can be so easily established because the idea of
>    "structurelessness" does not prevent the formation of informal structures,
>    only formal ones. *
>
>
>    - *For everyone to have the opportunity to be involved in a given
>    group and to participate in its activities, the structure must be explicit,
>    not implicit. *
>
>
>    - *It is this informal structure, particularly in Unstructured groups,
>    which forms the basis for elites.*
>
>
>
> Just in case you have not yet encountered the full text of this essay,
> here it is:
>
> THE TYRANNY of STRUCTURELESSNESS
> by Jo Freeman aka Joreen
> http://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Daniel
> http://www.OpenSpaceAgility.com/about
> http://www.DanielMezick.com
> 203 915 7248
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> Past archives can be viewed here:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/oslist@lists.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
> Past archives can be viewed here:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/oslist@lists.openspacetech.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20151004/a861efac/attachment-0002.htm>