[OSList] [GC] Time challenge - multiple short OSTs? (x-posted OS/GC-lists)
Michael M Pannwitz via OSList
oslist at lists.openspacetech.org
Sat Sep 17 04:33:27 PDT 2016
Dear Judy,
in my practice I have always suggested to the sponsor (when that topic
came up) not to make promises regarding the support of any action that
arose out of the ost gathering... other than to provide for what I
called "Next Meeting(s)".
The Next Meeting, 3.5 hours (between 4 and 8 weeks after the ost event),
gives space to
--- visualize the progress to date for each action
--- have an exchange on the progress to date among all present
--- collect and visualise future steps ("And Now?")
--- exchange and add to "And Now?" by everyone present
--- agree to the specific Next Step in each of the action groups
--- have an exchange on the Next Steps and add stuff (ideas, I want to
be part of this, etc.)
This design can be repeated until all actions originally planned are
done with (mostly two such meetings suffice but there have been
situations where up to 4 Next Meetings were needed)... participants
together with the sponsor(s) decide at the end of each Next Meeting
whether and when the next Next Meeting should be.
(A detailed account on this approach can be seen on pages 181 to 192
with lots of pictures in "Meine open space Praxis"... the photos and
German language skills will help. Its available as hard cover and eBook
https://www.westkreuz-verlag.de/de/Meine-open-space-Praxis
https://www.westkreuz-verlag.de/de/Meine-open-space-Praxis-E-Book
This approach ensures that those gathered around an action take the
whole responsibility to actually see the action through. Whatever
ressources they need from the organisation they need to and will acquire
themselves. In other words, stuff happens because originators of actions
see it through... its selforganisation all the way down and if an action
is not supported I have heard of ingenious ways to get approval after all.
This approach is based on various assumptions:
--- participants gathered around an issue that they care/are passionate
about and that they are willing to work/fight for will make progress on
that issue completely irrespective of prior promises of support
--- prior promises by the sponsor reduce either the passion or
responsibility or both for a particular issue and give rise to a
plethora of proposals
--- actions by participants bringing progress to particular issues,
especially sticky ones, will benefit not only a particular issue but
will support the infrastructure for future action in the organisation
Another assumption that I have worked with and which, over the years of
practice has more and more left the realm of assumption is that
resilient, robust action can be expected after an ost event that makes
time for a whole day and a half, with the first day spent in ost and the
second in Action Planning (Action Space)... optimal are 2.5 days (16
hours spread over 3 days and two nights sleep).
And, following that assumption, I have always informed sponsors of the
givens I just mentioned.
In some cases this led to splitting the event in a 1 day ost gathering
and a half day action planning a week later (this always led to having
folks show up in the Action Space that were not at the ost-day... word
spread that something important is going to happen).
I should not forget to mention that I often was asked about a 3 or 4
hour event. Result was always that the sponsor decided to follow my
suggestion to rethink the matter and give me a ring later. That ring
always came and more often than not, the sponsor continued the search
for a different design.
And, if someone has a real business issue that requires immediate
attention or hell breaks lose, if chaos and conflict can be seen right
in front of you... even a space of less than 3 hours has to suffice to
get actions in place... albeit, none of my 170 sponsors in the last 20
years faced such severe conditions but many wanted to reduce the time
for a bypass operation from 7 hours to two.
Greetings from Berlin
mmp
On 16.09.2016 20:53, Judy Gast via OSList wrote:
> To chime in here, I agree with Birgitt. The key to success is insuring
> that there is a commitment to follow up through an officially sanctioned
> and supported process and infrastructure. And as Michael has said an
> appropriate communications plan so that everyone who wants to come knows
> the details with appropriate lead time and accessibility, including how
> to get involved in the implementation. And the results are linked back
> to the meeting, and perhaps even the person or persons who initiated the
> topic. This is true for any open space, however these type of "public
> forum" sessions have more propensity to be seen as an opportunity for
> people to complain and grandstand their issues.
>
> Look forward to reading more about it!
>
> Judy
>
> On Sep 16, 2016, at 12:15 PM, Birgitt Williams via OSList
> <oslist at lists.openspacetech.org <mailto:oslist at lists.openspacetech.org>>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Thomas,
>>
>> I see that you are hoping to use OST and yet not totally sure if it
>> will be your chosen method. I believe that OST is the only method that
>> will be sufficient for what you want to accomplish. It meets all the
>> criteria for when OST works best. The most important factor for me
>> though, is the Law of Two Feet so that people can choose to stay or
>> leave if there is hard lobbying for particular issues. I trust that
>> with the Law of Two Feet and how it is explained, all such attempts
>> will have only the effect that there is energy for...and no more.
>>
>> Long ago, Larry Peterson, Judy Gast, and myself were the three
>> facilitators for three different OST meetings in the same big building
>> at the same time. It is how the sponsors figured we could work well
>> with about 600 people in meaningful ways around a very conflicted
>> issue in the educational sector, in a short time. This allowed the
>> reports of all three sessions to be available simultaneously and there
>> were advantages in this for convergence of themes and the surprise
>> that surfaced at the similarities and also dissimilarities of what
>> came from the three separate OST meetings. Despite the conflicted
>> issue and people picketing outside and us being briefed on the
>> potential for violence and heave lobbying erupting in our meetings,
>> there was no violence and the Law of Two Feet took care of the
>> lobbying. I think you get a very different effect/outcomes if you have
>> three concurrent OST meetings with three facilitators than you do if
>> you have a sequence of meetings in which people who really want to get
>> their agenda through go to all of the meetings.
>>
>> The givens are very important in relation to outcomes. When I work in
>> a political context, I negotiate ahead of time with the political body
>> who must 1. make decisions, 2. assign budget to future action and 3.
>> be held accountable by the public including media. There are endless
>> stories about successful OST meetings in which people feel so good at
>> the end of the meeting. However, the more important stories are the
>> ones in which after some months there was significant positive change.
>> It seems that the job is not only to open space for people to have
>> conversations and reach agreed upon recommendations....it is more
>> importantly to open space in a rigid system that is well entrenched,
>> political, and has certain accountability. I am rather curious about
>> how you have set up for this.
>>
>> So...when I work in a political context, part of my negotiation is
>> about whether action items can move forward by anyone in attendance
>> ie: businesses, other organizations, individuals OR if the action
>> items have to wait for a decision/vote by a particular political body
>> like a school board. My favorite and most impactful experiences have
>> been when the political body says right up front that any agreed on
>> recommendations that do not need to access extra budget through the
>> political body can go forward by anyone who has the passion and
>> resources to do so....without waiting for some agreement on a bigger
>> plan/budget. I admire political groups who are willing to open that
>> much space in their communities to take action on solutions,
>>
>> Best wishes for a fantastic experience!
>> Birgitt
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:37 AM Thomas Herrmann
>> <thomas at openspaceconsulting.com
>> <mailto:thomas at openspaceconsulting.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear friends in Open Space____
>>
>> I write to share about an exciting project and to ask to have
>> feedback/ideas/experiences assisting me to refine/decide on the
>> design I am working on.____
>>
>> __ __
>>
>> The project is in a neighbouring town of about 35 000 inhabitants.
>> They are inviting everyone living there to explore ways to
>> contribute to enhance the learning amongst children/youth
>> complementing/supporting what is happening in the school. The top
>> politician in the town, responsible for education/schools is my
>> sponsor. During the spring I had a couple of meetings with the top
>> politicians and managers for the school system. Then we widened
>> the circles and had some meetings with other interest parties , to
>> invite more engagement for this idea. ____
>>
>> __ __
>>
>> We have a plan that includes follow up, to support what is
>> emerging, decide on next steps and make sure there is report back
>> to what is happening and not.____
>>
>> __ __
>>
>> A couple of days ago we had our “final” planning meeting getting
>> the theme etc. Still working on wording but something like “For
>> the future of our children. How do we create conditions for
>> enhanced learning for pupils in our community?” Of practical
>> reasons evenings are considered the best options. Parents, pupils,
>> teachers, business people, public workers etc etc are all busy
>> daytime and weekends are not considered a good option. “Everyone”
>> will be invited but it’s hard to say how many will come to each
>> meeting. I guess between 10-200 J____
>>
>> Now the plan is to have three 3-hour meetings in three different
>> parts of the small community. I have suggested a fourth meeting
>> where all are invited for convergence/action planning. There are
>> of course several challenges. I am not even sure I will suggest we
>> use OST even though I’d love to. I think a 3-hour meeting is the
>> bare minimum for the simplest form of an OST meeting. On the other
>> hand I see possibilities for this to be looked at like an OST
>> meeting consisting of three occasions á 3 hours + convergence in a
>> fourth meeting for another 3 hours… That looks better, ey?____
>>
>> __ __
>>
>> There are some opportunities with this:____
>>
>> __1. __More time for the divergent process before
>> converging.____
>>
>> __2. __People can choose to join several meetings, deepening
>> their thinking____
>>
>> __3. __People can get access to more ideas/material from the
>> 3 meetings.____
>>
>> __4. __There can be continued conversations online in
>> between meetings and approaching meeting nbr 4.____
>>
>> __5. __There will be opportunities for people to create
>> joint projects over “boundaries” in the community (meeting nbr 4
>> and online)____
>>
>> __ __
>>
>> There are several challenges with this too. ____
>>
>> __1. __There will be different people in all of the meetings____
>>
>> __a. __There needs to be a proper opening each time____
>>
>> __2. __3 hours is very short. My plan: Opening/agenda 45
>> mts. Session 1 (45 mts). Session 2 (45 mts). Individual
>> reflection/personal commitment (15 mts). Closing 30 mts.____
>>
>> __a. __For the actionplanning meeting (meeting nbr 4) I will
>> probably use re-opening, after a brief opening and reading
>> reports/reflecting. A couple of action planning sessions, 1 minute
>> reportback/group and then closing.____
>>
>> __3. __How to bind everything together to one whole____
>>
>> __ __
>>
>> So far I lean towards this plan but I would love to hear to your
>> ideas, thoughts, experiences and/or suggestions!____
>>
>> All the best____
>>
>> __ __
>>
>> Thomas Herrmann____
>>
>> Open Space Consulting AB____
>>
>> www.openspaceconsulting.com <http://www.openspaceconsulting.com/>____
>>
>> You reach us via phone: +46 (0)709 98 97 81 or email:
>> thomas at openspaceconsulting.com
>> <mailto:thomas at openspaceconsulting.com>____
>>
>> __ __
>>
>> Open Space Consulting is a small company with BIG ambitions to
>> assist leaders and organizations as well as local communities to
>> tap into their full power to achieve their dreams. We bring
>> practical tools and knowhow to empower you to find your way
>> forward.____
>>
>> __ __
>>
>> *More info____*
>>
>> LinkedIn profile:
>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/thomasherrmannopenspaceconsult____
>>
>> Facebook Company page:
>> https://www.facebook.com/OpenSpaceConsulting____
>>
>> __ __
>>
>> __ __
>>
>> --
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "Genuine Contact" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to
>> genuine-contact at googlegroups.com
>> <mailto:genuine-contact at googlegroups.com>
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> genuine-contact+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com
>> <mailto:genuine-contact%2Bunsubscribe at googlegroups.com>
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/genuine-contact?hl=en?hl=en
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "Genuine Contact" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>> send an email to genuine-contact+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com
>> <mailto:genuine-contact+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com>.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OSList mailing list
>> To post send emails to OSList at lists.openspacetech.org
>> <mailto:OSList at lists.openspacetech.org>
>> To unsubscribe send an email to OSList-leave at lists.openspacetech.org
>> <mailto: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
>
--
Michael M Pannwitz
Draisweg 1, 12209 Berlin, Germany
++49 - 30-772 8000
Check out the Open Space World Map presently showing 417 resident Open
Space Workers in 68 countries working in a total of 144 countries
worldwide: www.openspaceworldmap.org
More information about the OSList
mailing list