[OSList] The Tyranny of Structurelessness
Daniel Mezick via OSList
oslist at lists.openspacetech.org
Fri Oct 9 07:30:16 PDT 2015
Now, wow!
It appears Pernilla Luttropp may have some legitimately clairvoyant
powers! I mean seriously. She may be able to see the future.
For example, she has (by all appearances) anticipated and fully answered
most of these questions, almost 10 full days in advance of these
questions actually being asked:
Questions: from 10/8, yesterday:
/how does this essay inform your practice of opening space? or
participating on the list? //if everything in the essay is true, what
//should//the next wosonos invitation process look like? //can we put
this in practice terms? //what is one to do in the presence of
tyrannizing structurelessness? what has anyone done in the past, in
those instances you've seen, that made some positive difference?
/
Answers: from 9/30, almost 10 full days previous:
The countries/places that wish to host a future WOSONOS could post this
on the OSLIST and Facebook and send a gentle reminder a few weeks before
the upcoming WOSONOS. The inviting hosts would then be posted on a flip
chart at the WOSONOS and announced as a session when creating the
bulletin board or at the evening news. As always there is the
opportunity to add places, sessions and news announcements up until the
closing circle, both on the spot and via other ways of communicating.
This would make it easier for everyone to approach the hosts, express
their delight or ask clarifying questions. It would also enable the
hosts (or their representatives) to come together in a session and find
out how they would like to do the invitations in the closing circle.
Maybe some will wait until next year? Maybe multiple WOSONOSes in one
year? Maybe in different continents at the same time? Maybe with
different themes/urgent questions?
On 10/8/15 5:23 PM, Michael Herman wrote:
> i love this bit about bucky the verb, harold.
>
> what i don't understand about this tyranny business is that it sounds
> like somebody, the system or some people are doing some other people
> wrong.  alternatively, that somehow -- naturally or maybe just
> unconsciously or unintentionally -- winners and losers, ins and outs,
> are being created.  i can't tell if the suggestion is that this
> is a malicious thing to be defeated, a natural thing to observe, or
> some kind of problem to be solved. ÂÂÂ
>
> leaving aside those instances when people do truly horrible things to
> others, how does this tyranny story square with the core open space
> story that each of us is ultimately responsible for our own
> experience, we all have two feet or some equivalent and need to use
> them for ourselves? ÂÂÂ
>
> how does this essay inform your practice of opening space?  or
> participating on the list?  if everything in the essay is true,
> what should the next wosonos invitation process look like?  can
> we put this in practice terms?  what is one to do in the
> presence of tyrannizing structurelessness?  what has anyone
> done in the past, in those instances you've seen, that made some
> positive difference? ÂÂÂ
>
>
>
>
> ÂÂÂ
> --
>
> Michael Herman
> Michael Herman Associates
> http://MichaelHerman.com
> http://OpenSpaceWorld.org
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Michael Herman
> <michael at michaelherman.com <mailto:michael at michaelherman.com>> wrote:
>
> you've made my statement a little stronger than i did,
> daniel.  i said i didn't see the connection, not that there
> wasn't one.  i'm catching up here not resisting.
>  i'm inquiring.
>
> in the situation of osonos, it seems to me that we have a formal
> practice, written up in the users guide, wherein it is written
> that anyone can post a topic and people will have the right to
> choose what they want to attend.  but we don't actually do
> that in selecting osonos sites.  we often default
> informally to old habits like voting.  or said another way,
> i guess i can't quite determine what is formal and informal
> structure, or which one is maybe running over the other.
>  we have oslist faq's but probably not many people read and
> live by them.  it would seem we're not at a loss for formal
> structure, we just prefer to operate by informal habits.
>  that's not uncommon, is it?  harrison's line about,
> "if we did business here the way we say we do business, we'd be
> out of business," comes to mind.  and the union tactic of
> working to rule. ÂÂÂ
>
> so is the question you're asking here about the relative value of
> formal and informal structures?  are you suggesting formal
> structures are better than informal?  am i still missing
> something?
>
>
>
> ÂÂÂ
> --
>
> Michael Herman
> Michael Herman Associates
> http://MichaelHerman.com
> http://OpenSpaceWorld.org
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Daniel Mezick
> <dan at newtechusa.net> wrote:
>
> 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.  ÂÂÂ
>>
>> 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." ÂÂÂ
>>
>> 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. ÂÂÂ
>>
>> 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?ÂÂÂ
>>
>> 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?" ÂÂÂ
>>
>> 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. ÂÂÂ
>>
>> 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)? ÂÂÂ
>>
>> i notice that you said in your first message that you find
>> this "extremely interesting" but you've yet to say why.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ÂÂÂ
>>
>> ÂÂÂ
>> --
>>
>> 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> 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.ÂÂÂ
>>>
>>> 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. ÂÂÂ
>>>
>>> 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.ÂÂÂ
>>>
>>> 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.ÂÂÂ
>>>
>>> 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.ÂÂÂ
>>> The rest is up to us.ÂÂÂ
>>>
>>> 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!ÂÂÂ
>>> And, it's all still happening Now.ÂÂÂ
>>>
>>> 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?ÂÂÂ
>>> The edge of open space is an end of
>>> comfortable, conventional understanding?ÂÂÂ
>>> Or something?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, October 6, 2015, Daniel Mezick via OSList
>>> <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
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> ho
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> *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
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> 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:
>>>>
>>>> â€ÃÂ
“Everythingis
>>>> moving.†ÂÂÂÂ
>>>> .... 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?
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> 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:
>>>> â€ÃÂ
“Process and Reality.â€
>>>> 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’veheardÂÂÂÂ
>>>> a number of people with much greater
>>>> credentials, tenure,
>>>> etc – say the
>>>> same thing. But I did get that ithad something
>>>> to do with,
>>>> â€ÃÂ
“Everything is moving.â€
>>>> 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 â€ÃÂ
“Process/and/
>>>> Reality,†but ratherâ€ÃÂ
“Process*is*
>>>> Reality.â€
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> Now, Anna
>>>> Caroline we
>>>> come to
>>>> â€ÃÂ
“structure,â€
>>>> or perhaps Ishould say the fallacy of
>>>> Structure? Yes I know
>>>> – we’ve
>>>> all been taught that structure is the
>>>> precursor,
>>>> the
>>>> â€ÃÂ
“determinatorâ€
>>>> 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
>>>> â€ÃÂ
“facilitators.â€
>>>> And even if we
>>>> hadn’t beenâ€ÃÂ
“taughtâ€
>>>> all this, the primacy of structure would
>>>> appearto be blatantly
>>>> obvious – as
>>>> plain as the nose on yourface.
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> 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!
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> 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,
>>>> â€ÃÂ
“theoryâ€
>>>> comes from the
>>>> Greek
>>>> â€ÃÂ
“/theoreinâ//€
>>>> /– to see. In a
>>>> word, theories are ways of looking
>>>> atthings –
>>>> likely stories you might say.
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> 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’sâ€ÃÂ
“reallyâ€
>>>> happening is all flow.
>>>> Everything is moving
>>>> –That’s
>>>> Ralph’s story,
>>>> and I guess it is mine too.
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>> â€ÃÂ
“structuresâ€
>>>> I
>>>> â€ÃÂ
“sawâ€
>>>> existed only because
>>>> Iwanted to see them
>>>> – or perhaps that I
>>>> â€ÃÂ
“shouldâ€
>>>> seethem. But they were only momentary wisps,
>>>> figments –
>>>> neverto be mistaken for what was really going
>>>> on. Or so
>>>> I’vebeen thinking.
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> Harrison
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> *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
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> 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!" ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> then put the stick down and went
>>>> back to his seat.ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Michael Herman
>>>> Michael Herman Associates
>>>> http://MichaelHerman.com
>>>> http://OpenSpaceWorld.org
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> Juan Luis
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> *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
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> */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*/
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>> ÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> 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/>.ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>> 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.ÂÂÂÂ
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> 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/>.ÂÂÂ
>>>
>>> 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.ÂÂÂ
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ÂÂÂ
>>> --
>>>
>>> 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/>.ÂÂÂ
>>
>> 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.ÂÂÂ
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
--
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/>.ÂÂÂ
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.ÂÂÂ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20151009/a8396356/attachment-0002.htm>
More information about the OSList
mailing list