[OSList] The Tyranny of Structurelessness
Daniel Mezick via OSList
oslist at lists.openspacetech.org
Thu Oct 8 09:41:43 PDT 2015
Greeting All, Greeeetings Michael,
Wow. Michael. Seriously. You can really type (and talk) a blue streak.
You know? You're wearing me out...
...no no, just kidding. I'm not QUITE exhausted yet...I've had time to
rest up!
So, by all means keep it coming. I'm rested and ready!
....Now: A couple things do stand out here:
1. The Tyranny of Inquiry?
================
Michael, you say:
"i notice that you said in your first message that you find this
"extremely interesting" *but you've yet to say why.*"
Wait. Stop right there.
Earlier, you ask:
"*Is it not some kind of tyranny* we all attempt over and over again
*when we expect and insist that the world explain itself to/for us?*"
(brief pause of silence here, for an ironic, even paradoxical effect....)
Seriously. Inquiry is good! There is no tyranny to be found in it.
I like the essay because it speaks to a really, really, important topic,
namely:
The various problems with informal authority-distribution, inside groups
that devalue "structure," or value other things -over- "structure."
I also like this essay because it feels very timely and pertinent with
respect to Pernilla Luttropp's recent (and important) post on
decision-making, entitled: "An invitation to future invitations to WOSONOS."
2. Some Disconnected Dots?
==================
You express:
"i'm having some trouble connecting "elites," "movement,"
"authorization" and some other terms in the essay to my experience in
open space and on the list. the essay seems to want to fix a problem,
*but one that's not familiar to me, at least not as a sort of thing to
be solved."*
I'm assuming, perhaps incorrectly, Michael, that you have completely
examined this essay.
To be clear: You are not familiar with /any/ of the many problems (not
even one) described in this essay?
If you are familiar with any of these, then you see them as /"not as a
sort of thing to be solved?"/
(For the record, the term "authorization" does not appear anywhere in
this essay. The term "authority" does appear 5 times.)
Now: We've recently had exactly the type of concerns the essay
addresses, voiced right here on OSLIST recently.
You yourself are a heavy contributor Pernilla Luttropp's post, "An
invitation to future invitations to WOSONOS."
Here is a part of that, provided for convenience (I copied this verbatim
from the post, with my emphasis added...)
<BEGIN>
/"At the inspiring WOSONOS in Krakow there were some learning
conversations on how this community goes about when expressing and
accepting//invitations from countries/places to host the upcoming
WOSONOSes. In the big circle *there were voices that expressed some
confusion and discomfort *with the process...//
//
//"...*There seems to be something unclear* about the "tradition" *on
how to get information about who is inviting and why. *If that
information were *transparent from the very start *of the WOSONOS, it
might enable more dialogue with the inviting hosts and between the hosts."
<END>
/
This expression by Pernilla is about how decisions. About how
future-WOSONOS-venues are identified, developed, and then authorized.
This issue does pertain quite directly, I think, to the essay. Right? I
wonder if others reading agree, or disagree.
Either way, it is always great when a new voice shows up!
Here is the specific part of the essay that clearly pertains: emphasis
added...
<BEGIN>
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. The rules of decision-making must be open and available to
everyone, and this can happen only if they are formalized.* This is not
to say that formalization of a structure of a group will destroy the
informal structure. It usually doesn't. But it does hinder the informal
structure from having predominant control and make available some means
of attacking it if the people involved are not at least responsible to
the needs of the group at large. /
<END>/
I wonder if anyone else (besides Michael) thinks that these two items,
what Pernilla is saying and what this essay is saying, are in no way
related?
On 10/7/15 4:48 PM, Michael Herman wrote:
> wasn't actually intended as personal feedback, daniel. was meant to
> be a comment on the territory we all share, even when we might, any of
> us, feel in the moment like an outsider, that disorientation is
> actually a part of being included in the experience of open space.
>
> as for the essay, i guess i'm still a little unclear about the
> connection. open space doesn't strike me as any sort of striving for
> structurelessness. and i've seen both formal and informal structure
> arise in open space. harrison's term in his "millennial organization"
> book and what i've seen happen is "appropriate levels of structure and
> control."
>
> the oslist doesn't seem structureless, either. there are all kinds of
> limiting and supporting structures that make it possible. and then
> there are the customs we've developed, like it's common and desired
> for people to reply to the whole list with answers to questions, and
> even personal stories and sidebars, rather than always taking that
> stuff to private emails. much of the informal stuff was captured in
> chris corrigan's oslist faq's i mentioned earlier. and these things
> change. the address changed. the admin changed. the archives moved
> but survived, thanks to harold. now we allow attachments. the
> archives were private and later became publicly searchable. new
> people show up all the time, and join in. the user's non-guide
> (ebook) captured one great moment in joining when julie smith showed
> up very new to all of this, asked some great questions, and sparked
> all kinds of conversation on many important dimensions of the practice.
>
> maybe your definition of structure will also define structureless. i
> guess i don't know what ever could be structureless, in line wiht
> chris' story... except that everything's moving, it's all flow, as
> harrison says. but maybe those two stories aren't at odds, either...
> some bits are just more dense or more slowly flowing than others, but
> it's all flow in the end. is flow structureless?
>
> is the tyranny of structurelessness just to say that everything's
> moving, and moving on, even the parts we really like, and that can
> make for some difficult experiences... that would also be nobody's
> fault, but just part of the shared condition? uncomfortable in spots,
> to be sure, but nobody's and no system's "fault" or "responsibility?"
>
> as mentioned earlier, OS and the circle don't make people equal. some
> will always be better, faster, stronger, more attractive, more
> connected than others. is thta a problem to be solved? i'm having
> some trouble connecting "elites," "movement," "authorization" and some
> other terms in the essay to my experience in open space and on the
> list. the essay seems to want to fix a problem, but one that's not
> familiar to me, at least not as a sort of thing to be solved.
>
> why is this essay important for you? how does it inform your
> understanding and practice of open space? or your participation on
> the oslist? are we a movement? are you an elite? is open space at
> risk of being taken over? help me make the connection(s)?
>
> i notice that you said in your first message that you find this
> "extremely interesting" but you've yet to say why.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Michael Herman
> Michael Herman Associates
> http://MichaelHerman.com
> http://OpenSpaceWorld.org
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 2:25 PM, Daniel Mezick <dan at newtechusa.net
> <mailto:dan at newtechusa.net>> wrote:
>
> Yo Michael,
>
> The whole "story-context-is-missing" thing is really just a
> sidebar to the important (and much wider) issues around authority.
>
> These authority-issues are raised by the subject essay, "The
> Tyranny of Structurelessness." What a great essay!
>
> Story-context is a really, really important topic though,
> especially if "missing-context" does have at least the potential
> to evoke feelings of exclusion, in at least some members of the list.
>
> Regarding some of the things you are saying:
>
> You say, "Exclusion is the illusion. A little bit of errant and
> temporary mental structure."
>
> I say, my current belief is that my feelings are not illusion
> whatsoever, nor are they error. Rather they are real and valid,
> human emotions. They are emotions which, when experienced fully,
> are in fact an essential aspect of living well.
>
>
> You say, "...I notice the word tyranny again in the subject. Is it
> not some kind of tyranny we all attempt over and over again when
> we expect and insist that the world explain itself to/for us?"
>
> I say, my current belief is that inquiry is not simply important,
> it is in fact essential. Inquiry is good.
>
>
>
> In any event, and as always, I do appreciate your feedback.
>
>
>
> I am now keen to get back to the main topic !
>
> I wonder how we might, in the here and now, go about defining the
> term "structure," for purposes of further discussing issues raised
> by this essay with much more clarity.
>
> That's a question I'm keen to explore with you, and the other
> members of this list, inside this thread.
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Daniel
> http://www.Prime-OS.com
>
>
>
>
> On 10/6/15 11:56 AM, Michael Herman wrote:
>> Yes and Daniel, there are the words of a story and the
>> feeling/meaning of it. I considered writing a longer message in
>> the telling of this story, but I wanted to transmit as much of
>> the spirit/experience of it as I could.
>>
>> Ralph didn't offer any explanation of his observation that
>> morning. He did just like I said, got up in a morning news
>> circle, it was an OTgathering as I noted but that doesn't matter,
>> it was open space and morning news. He said his piece and sat
>> down. The experience for me, and others I have learned only
>> later, was stunning and disorienting, for sure.
>>
>> I thought to honor and convey this experience through some
>> measure of similar brevity in my retelling. Maybe this is what
>> you picked up on. The disorienting magic of Ralph's moment.
>>
>> There are moments in open space of surprise and disconnect, maybe
>> frustration or confusion or misunderstanding or disorientation
>> and even disappointment that arise in open space. This we all
>> know and have experienced. This, to me, is not so much a thing to
>> be solved but the nature of the territory. It just is.
>>
>> Ralph never did explain his statement, as far as I know. He had
>> something to say and he said it. That was his only job. After
>> that, each of us had to figure out for ourselves what, if
>> anything, to do with his story, to decide if it was wisdom or
>> wisecrack. The storyteller, I think, has only the responsibility
>> for finding and sharing what's true for him/her. The rest is up
>> to us.
>>
>> Maybe this points to the learning and challenge that we all have
>> in open space, namely learning to trust more and more that we
>> already are always included in a flow that is bigger and deeper
>> or whatever than we can see or understand or articulate
>> sometimes. Exclusion is the illusion. A little bit of errant and
>> temporary mental structure. Discomfort is not a problem (and
>> can't be solved by anyone!); it's a trail marker. Which is to say
>> about exclusion and missing out, "welcome!" The good news is,
>> and the bad news is, you're in! And, it's all still happening Now.
>>
>> As I scroll up to send tha now, I notice the word tyranny again
>> in the subject. Is it not some kind of tyranny we all attempt
>> over and over again when we expect and insist that the world
>> explain itself to/for us? Is this not something of our central
>> challenge, something all of us work with? The edge of open space
>> is an end of comfortable, conventional understanding? Or something?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, October 6, 2015, Daniel Mezick via OSList
>> <oslist at lists.openspacetech.org
>> <mailto:oslist at lists.openspacetech.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Harrison,
>>
>> Thanks for the tips on how to search OSLIST and Google, etc.
>> I did do those things actually. However, that's a bit of an
>> effort, especially searching the OSLIST archives. I guess I
>> could eventually pick up OSLIST culture that way, little by
>> little. I suppose an earnest person with loads of time could
>> sift through OSLIST archives to figure this culture out. The
>> hard way.
>>
>> However, like the SPIRIT book teaches, there is nothing like
>> a good story to convey culture. The kind of story with a
>> beginning, a middle and an end.
>>
>> I notice that, when you are the one referring to a certain
>> OS-mythos story, you usually tend to include the short list
>> of pertinent details, the essential details that provide the
>> essential context, so the reader can follow along, and engage.
>>
>> And I'm always grateful for that, as it helps me to follow
>> along, and get what you are referring to, and more fully
>> understand the story, and feel oddly included in the story.
>>
>>
>> Earlier, I express how not having the context tends to (for
>> me) arouse feelings of: exclusion, cluelessness, and a
>> general lack of membership in whatever
>> "historic-OS-mythos-episode" is being referred to. Sort of an
>> "out group" feeling. You know? Sometimes, I wonder what the
>> poster might be thinking by posting random fragments of a
>> "you had to be there" kind of story. Other times, I wonder if
>> other readers are also feeling these feelings. Or if it is
>> "just me."
>>
>> And so: I am very grateful for your stories, in part because
>> you include the pertinent details, and in so doing, make me
>> (for one) feel included.
>>
>> So thanks for including the context in your stories. It makes
>> them fun, and easy to follow. OSLIST culture certainly has
>> it's quirks, and for me, your stories make this culture
>> easier to figure out, and navigate, and enjoy.
>>
>>
>> Getting back to the Tyranny of Structurelessness:
>>
>> Do you think these 3 assertions by the author are actually
>> true? Do these ideas have legs?
>>
>> * /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./
>>
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>> On 10/6/15 10:04 AM, Harrison Owen wrote:
>>>
>>> Dan, Google can often help.
>>> https://www.google.com/#q=ralph+copleman
>>>
>>> ho
>>>
>>> *From:*OSList
>>> [mailto:oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org] *On Behalf
>>> Of *Daniel Mezick via OSList
>>> *Sent:* Monday, October 05, 2015 4:51 PM
>>> *To:* Harrison Owen; World wide Open Space Technology email list
>>> *Subject:* Re: [OSList] The Tyranny of Structurelessness
>>>
>>> Howdy Harrison,
>>>
>>> Thanks for describing the context of the Ralph Copleman
>>> story- I'm very thankful for that info.
>>>
>>> I notice that, lots of times here, there are references made
>>> to notable OST episodes, and situations from times past...
>>>
>>> ...the "OST-mythos" as it were.
>>>
>>> These mythical stories often have me wondering what I
>>> missed, and what I might now be missing. (Being clueless as
>>> I am.)
>>>
>>> I'm sure these story-fragment postings are not posted with
>>> intent to exclude anyone, or to be discourteous, or unkind.
>>> More like: some good old basic camaraderie is taking place
>>> between some old friends.
>>>
>>> Still: Do these "inside-story-fragments" on OSLIST tend to
>>> evoke feelings of exclusion in readers who were /not/ there
>>> at the time?
>>>
>>> Not sure.
>>>
>>> <CONFESSION>
>>>
>>> As for me, personally, I sometimes find myself experiencing
>>> curiously odd feelings of exclusion, when a told-fragment of
>>> an old OST-mythos story lacks explicit context. So I can
>>> follow the story, you know? The terms "outsider" or
>>> "clueless" or "not in the story" describe these feelings
>>> fairly well. "Not invited?"
>>>
>>> I sometimes wonder if some of the hundreds of /other/
>>> members of OSLIST ever feel this way...or if it is "just me."
>>>
>>> </CONFESSION>
>>>
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/4/15 2:59 PM, Harrison Owen via OSList wrote:
>>>
>>> “Everythingis moving.† .... Michael -- I remember
>>> that moment verywell. And Dan, I’m not sure the
>>> context, etc, would helpvery much. But just for the
>>> record the odd phrase popped out at one of the
>>> International Symposia on Organization Transformation
>>> which happened to be taking place at a small college
>>> south of Seattle. I have no idea why Ralph said what he
>>> did, and I’m not sure Ralph did either. But then
>>> againa lot of marvelous stuff seems to burst out with no
>>> obvious logic train. Indeed it may be that the lack of
>>> logic train enables the thought?
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> Whatever the genesis, the phrase wandered about my head
>>> for some time, quite unattached, and it also happened
>>> that I was working my way slowly through one of the
>>> masterpieces of 20^th century western philosophy when a
>>> fuzzy connection began to form. The work was that of
>>> Alfred North Whitehead, and the title: “Process and
>>> Reality.†I’ve been through thebook probably 4-5
>>> times, and I am frank to confess that I don’t think I
>>> really understandit. But then again I’veheard a
>>> number of people with much greater credentials, tenure,
>>> etc – say the same thing. But I did get that ithad
>>> something to do with, “Everything is moving.†Andthe
>>> more I thought and read, the more I felt that the good
>>> philosopher had made a small mistake on his title. It
>>> shouldn’t be “Process/and/ Reality,†but
>>> rather“Process*is* Reality.â€
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> Now, Anna Caroline we come to “structure,†or perhaps
>>> Ishould say the fallacy of Structure? Yes I know –
>>> we’ve all been taught that structure is the precursor,
>>> the “determinator†of everything. My face looks as it
>>> doesbecause of my bone structure. My life proceeds the
>>> way it does because of my social structure. My business
>>> works as it does because of the organizational
>>> structure. And of course, meetings happen the way they
>>> do because of meeting structure, which apparently is the
>>> prime domain of “facilitators.†And even if we
>>> hadn’t been“taught†all this, the primacy of
>>> structure would appearto be blatantly obvious – as
>>> plain as the nose on yourface.
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, it does seem to turn out that sometimes
>>> the blatantly obvious is not necessarily so. For example
>>> just looking at things it is pretty clear that the world
>>> is flat, or at the least bumpy flat. And any fool can
>>> see that we are the center of it all – Sun, moon, and
>>> stars whiz around us. But when we think about it, as we
>>> have been doing for the last 500-600 years, the obvious
>>> isn’t so obvious.
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> It is reasonable to ask what would start to make us
>>> think differently – to the point that we begin to
>>> question theobvious, and even come to see things in a
>>> different way? Taking a leap, I will suggest that it all
>>> begins with the perception of anomaly. Things just
>>> don’t make sense. Our eyes tell us one thing...
>>> but???? And then we start making up stories to explain
>>> the apparently unexplainable. We imagine different ways
>>> of looking at things so that the nonsensical makes
>>> sense. Some of those stories get pretty strange, but if
>>> they actually work – that is to say, helpus to see in
>>> new and useful ways – that’s great!
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> There is, of course, a proper term for the activity I
>>> have been describing. It is called Theory Building. And
>>> for whatever it is worth, “theory†comes from the
>>> Greek “/theoreinâ//€ /– to see. In a word, theories
>>> are ways of looking atthings – likely stories you
>>> might say.
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> Now, at long last (too long?) we come to the odd story I
>>> was starting to tell, to the effect that Structure is
>>> only a figment of our imagination, a flash frame of a
>>> moment gone by. Interesting, and helpful under some
>>> circumstances... but always partial and in a sense
>>> illusory. What’s“really†happening is all flow.
>>> Everything is moving –That’s Ralph’s story, and I
>>> guess it is mine too.
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> So how did I get to such a weird condition? It was all
>>> about anomaly – more particularly, the anomaly of Open
>>> Space.Everything that I had ever learned told me that it
>>> could not work. Unfortunately it did (work) – and not
>>> just once, butevery time, hundreds of thousands of
>>> times. Something was definitely weird. It seemed to me
>>> that I had to re-consider all those things I thought I
>>> had learned, beginning with the basics... such things as
>>> Structure.
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> Common sense would say that Open Space works because we
>>> somehow created a structure that enabled it to work.
>>> That’s theway things get done, or so I had been
>>> taught. But that’snot the way things happened in Open
>>> Space. Structure emerged along the way and only
>>> momentarily. Worse yet it (structure) seemed to have
>>> little to do with the obvious power, connections,
>>> creativity.... all of which created structures, and
>>> passed them by. And actually it always seemed to me that
>>> the “structures†I “saw†existed only because
>>> Iwanted to see them – or perhaps that I “shouldâ€
>>> seethem. But they were only momentary wisps, figments
>>> – neverto be mistaken for what was really going on. Or
>>> so I’vebeen thinking.
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> Harrison
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> *From:*OSList
>>> [mailto:oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org] *On
>>> Behalf Of *Michael Herman via OSList
>>> *Sent:* Saturday, October 03, 2015 6:31 PM
>>> *To:* JL Walker; World wide Open Space Technology email list
>>> *Subject:* Re: [OSList] The Tyranny of Structurelessness
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> you remind me, harrison, of one morning news session
>>> years ago, somewhere, probably OT... where ralph
>>> copleman walked to the center of the circle and
>>> announced, all serious and mischievous at the same time,
>>> "it's all moving!" Â
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> then put the stick down and went back to his seat.Â
>>>
>>>
>>> Â
>>> --
>>>
>>> Michael Herman
>>> Michael Herman Associates
>>> http://MichaelHerman.com
>>> http://OpenSpaceWorld.org
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 1:47 PM, JL Walker via OSList
>>> <oslist at lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> I was thinking that maybe the antidote to the eventual
>>> tyranny of structurelessness is to open space, again and
>>> again, until true democracy can emerge.
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> Juan Luis
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> *De:*OSList
>>> [mailto:oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org] *En
>>> nombre de *Rosa Zubizarreta via OSList
>>> *Enviado el:* sábado, 03 de octubre de 2015 12:19
>>> *Para:* Daniel Mezick; World wide Open Space Technology
>>> email list
>>> *Asunto:* Re: [OSList] The Tyranny of Structurelessness
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>
>>> Yes, this is a key piece... I see it as very similar in
>>> some ways to what Ken Wilber wrote later,
>>>
>>> about the "shadow side of the green meme". (Each meme
>>> has its own shadow, as well as its own gift...)
>>>
>>> So, I love "green". I love circles, I love
>>> non-hierarchy, etc.
>>> And, part of the "shadow side of the green meme" is how
>>> ideologically anti-structure it can become...
>>>
>>> to the point where some people may not even agree that
>>> OST does, in fact, offer a very simple and effective
>>> structure.
>>>
>>> By way contrast, think of a situation where group of
>>> people (who don't know about OST, and/or, who are having
>>> a power struggle around "which process to use",
>>> and/or.... ) might easily spending a whole weekend
>>> arguing /about /"how to self-organize ourselves"... with
>>> a great deal more pain and frustration and a great deal
>>> less value.
>>>
>>> whereas, instead, IF someone knows about OST, and, a
>>> clear invitation has been extended, and, there is enough
>>> trust/suspension of disbelief so that participants are
>>> willing to enter into that format,
>>>
>>> then, we end up with a very simple and elegant structure
>>> that allows people to self-organize beautifully....
>>>
>>> at least that's how i see it! :-)
>>>
>>> with all best wishes,
>>>
>>> Rosa
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>>
>>> */Rosa Zubizarreta/*
>>>
>>> /Developing Participatory and Co-intelligent Leadership
>>> Author of *From Conflict to Creative Collaboration*
>>> <http://www.conflict2creativity.com>/
>>>
>>> /For more resources and learning opportunities, visit
>>> *www.DiaPraxis.com*/
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 9:26 AM, Daniel Mezick via OSList
>>> <oslist at lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> 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...
>>>
>>> ï‚·/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. /
>>>
>>> ï‚·/The idea of "structurelessness," however, has moved
>>> from a healthy counter to those tendencies, to becoming
>>> a goddess in its own right./
>>>
>>> ï‚·/Contrary to what we would like to believe, there is
>>> no such thing as a structureless group. /
>>>
>>> ï‚·/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. /
>>>
>>> ï‚·/This hegemony can be so easily established because
>>> the idea of "structurelessness" does not prevent the
>>> formation of informal structures, only formal ones. /
>>>
>>> ï‚·/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. /
>>>
>>> ï‚·/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 <tel:203%20915%207248>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>> 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
>>> Past archives can be viewed here:
>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/oslist@lists.openspacetech.org
>>>
>>> Â
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>> OSList mailing list
>>>
>>> To post send emails toOSList at lists.openspacetech.org
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe send an email toOSList-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
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Daniel Mezick, President
>>>
>>> New Technology Solutions Inc.
>>>
>>> (203) 915 7248 <tel:%28203%29%20915%207248> (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
>>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Daniel Mezick, President
>>
>> New Technology Solutions Inc.
>>
>> (203) 915 7248 <tel:%28203%29%20915%207248> (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
>> http://MichaelHerman.com
>> http://OpenSpaceWorld.org
>>
>>
>
> --
>
> Daniel Mezick, President
>
> New Technology Solutions Inc.
>
> (203) 915 7248 <tel:%28203%29%20915%207248> (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/20151008/d876d801/attachment-0002.htm>
More information about the OSList
mailing list