<html>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica">In the wake of 911 it occurred to me that
the new reality (or the old reality seen with new eyes) might possibly
provide the opportunity to take a few large steps in the direction
of truly enhanced organizational effectiveness. Not for everybody
or all organizations -- but for those who care to take a leap, having
perceived that their present circumstances were less than ideal. The
result of my reflections was the following proposal which became the
basis for a marvelous gathering of 25 here in Washington. Our discussions
were rich indeed. They also appear to be ongoing. I share all this with
you good folks on the LIST in the hope that it might tickle your fancy. I
would love your reactions and thoughts, and should you care to try the
approach suggested (it is by no means proprietary) I would love to know
how it goes. On one level there is nothing new here -- in one way or
another it is what we have all been thinking and doing. What is new (I
think) is the directness of approach. I tried it out with several
potential clients, and am pleased to say that one (a good sized
corporation) has apparently come on board. I say "apparently"
because agreement and follow-through can be two very different things.
Anyhow, some thoughts for the new year. And Happy New Year
everybody!<br>
Harrison<br><br>
</font><div align="center"><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=5><b>********************************<br><br>
</div>
Phoenix Rising<br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=4><i>A Proposal<br>
October, 2001<br><br>
Harrison Owen<br><br>
</b>A proposal to enable the transformation of organizations from their
present state to what Dee Hock has called a Chaordic Organization, and
what I have called an InterActive Organization. Under either name (or a
new one) the reality pointed to is that of a conscious self-organizing
system which knows itself, its environment and its prospects – and
optimizes all of them. <br><br>
<br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=3><b>Background and
Presuppositions<br><br>
<br>
</i></b><x-tab> </x-tab>The
events of 911 have re-contexted, if not totally changed, the world in
which all organizations do business. Heightened levels of security,
restricted travel, altered relationships with customers and suppliers,
employee shock – all combine to produce a new and constricted
environment. Add in massive economic dislocation to say nothing of
down-turn and we have a very challenging situation.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>The
immediate response is predictably a very conservative one. Conserve cash,
energy, and all other resources, and indeed this is just what is
happening, as we watch massive layoffs, with more doubtless to come. The
conservative response is not only predictable, but probably necessary,
but as a continuing solution to the present dilemma it will not be
effective. <br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>Effective
alternatives will require ways of doing business that are efficient and
effective in the extreme. We are not talking incremental movement, but
something approaching quantum leaps. And these new ways cannot be
draconian in nature, a 21<sup>st</sup> century version of the sweatshop.
Humanitarian considerations aside, common sense, to say nothing of
massive amounts of experience, tells us that stressed out, over-worked
people do not make it over time, and equally importantly, they lack the
essential characteristic for the moment: agility. As difficult as things
may be at the moment, it is absolutely guaranteed that they will change,
and change, and change. What works now will fail soon. <i>Lightening fast
adaptation to emergent conditions will spell the difference between
survival and less pleasant alternatives</i>. <br><br>
<b><i>The Power of Self-Organization and a New Way of Doing
Business<br><br>
</i></b><x-tab> </x-tab>Self-organizing
systems have been around for ever, probably since the moment of the Big
Bang. It is only recently that we have begun to understand their function
and power, and even more recently – that human systems, like all
systems, are basically self-organizing. This later notion is perceived as
heretical in many (most) quarters if only because it flies in the face of
virtually all organizational theory and practice. However, it is a
testable hypothesis, and I believe there is substantial evidence to
support it. If this is true (or to the extent that it is true) we
have some good news indeed. Based upon the 15 year ongoing, natural
experiment with Open Space Technology with thousands of iterations in a
myriad of circumstances, I would definitely agree with Johann
Paulsen who recently mailed me that, “OST is the most potent 'tool' to
apply the principles of complex adaptive systems in an organizational
context!” And the news is even better in detail. We know as a matter of
experience that enormously complex (sometimes very technical) issues can
effectively be dealt with quickly, sometimes amazingly quickly. And while
the substantive output may be impressive, I am even more impressed with
the “softer side of things.” Leadership appears without training,
personal empowerment is a common experience, productive teams the norm,
and diversity is appreciated as a resource and not a problem. Learning
often occurs at lightspeed, genuine community manifests, and best of all,
people have fun. There is High Play in abundance. <i>In short, the common
experience in Open Space is exactly the sort of thing required by our
present circumstances: Super efficient and effective organization which
does not achieve these characteristics in a sweatshop environment.</i>
<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>Of course
this is just “Open Space” which is usually a time limited event, and not
necessarily to be confused with an on-going organization. But this, I
think, is to put the cart before the horse, so to speak. The issue is not
the magic of the methodology, but rather the power of the pre-existing
reality – self-organizing systems. All Open Space does is to
introduce us to what is going on anyhow.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>While the
Open Space experiment was under way, another experiment was also taking
place, and it too was a natural one – which means nobody set it up
intentionally, but we have sure learned a great deal from it. This is Dee
Hock’s experience with Visa International, to which he has now attached
the glorious title, <i>Chaordic Organization. <br>
</i><x-tab> </x-tab>I
believe, and I think most would agree, that what Hock is talking about
is, once again, Self-organizing systems. It is interesting to note how
(apparently) it all came about. It wasn’t planed, it wasn’t intended, and
it certainly wasn’t designed. But somehow, in some way – and probably in
spite of the best efforts to the contrary – the system did it all by
itself. Totally remarkable when seen from the point of view of
“standard” organizational theory and practice. And totally predictable
when seen in the light of what we now know about self-organization.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>Now it
seems that everybody (or at least a lot of somebodies) wants to be a
Chaoridic Organization. And for good reason: They work. It is interesting
to note, however, how folks are going about doing this. A presentation at
a recent ODN gathering offered to enlighten participants on <i>How To
Organize Self-Organizing Systems</i>. And based on some unsubstantiated
gossip, I understand the Dee Hock is traveling a similar road. With his
notoriety as the inventor of Chaordic Organizations it is reasonable that
a number of people would like to benefit from his experience. And he is
attempting to oblige. However, as I understand it, the success rate to
this point in time has been zero. I do not have the details, but I
believe he has started with the “traditionals” – Clear Mission, Goals ...
etc. etc. Sounds an awful lot like trying to organize a self-organizing
system. His heart is definitely in the right place. However, I
think we can do it better.<br><br>
<b><i>The Program<br>
</i></b><x-tab> </x-tab>Reduced
to basics, the critical issues are how to start up a self-organizing
system, (or start it up again if stopped or damaged) and to sustain it
over time. With regard to the later (sustenance) I refer you to Part IV
of my book cited above, where I have outlined practical approaches to
maintaining effective communication and coordination, as well as the
deeper task of sustaining the focus (mission) and values of the
operation. The tools are familiar: InterNet and the organizational
mythology. <br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>Start-up
or Re-start is a job well performed by Open Space Technology. It has
become clear that the “magic” of Open Space is that we unintentionally
stumbled upon the essential preconditions for self-organization. In short
it is no “magic” at all – simply what all of us do, all of the time
whether we like it or not, even if we are totally unconscious of our
actions. Nothing new, simply a blinding flash of the obvious.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>But
obviously the obvious is not all that obvious to all. In fact the
majority of present organizational activities (managerial and executive)
are premised upon the notion that somebody has to be in control, and that
organization happens only when we design, create and control it. After
all, what are we being paid for?<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>And there
is the rub. Much of what happens in a well functioning self-organizing
system (as also in an Open Space event) is perceived as being
counterintuitive at best and probably impossible – even illegal,
immoral and fattening. So why would anybody want to go there? The answer
is simple one: It works. Not only does it work in substantive terms, but
the results are achieved (typically) in a fraction of the “usual” time
and with minimal stress and strain. Clearly one can continue to do
business as usual based on the traditional model of command and control –
that works too, but in a hugely sub-optimal fashion.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>When the
stakes are high enough and the time available short enough –
impossible alternatives become acceptable, which has been our experience
globally with Open Space. Possibly 10,000 organizations and groups around
the world have chosen to do what most would call impossible. In short
there is a track record.<br><br>
<i>The Core of The Program <br><br>
</i><x-tab> </x-tab>The
core of the program is less about creating the conditions for
self-organization and sustaining them over time than about enabling
current executives and managers to be comfortable and competent with all
of the above. And whatever we do, it must be congruent with the painful
constraints of the moment, to say nothing of a wildly turbulent
environment. In short it must be fast, economical, and effective – which
not incidentally – is precisely our experience with Open Space. There is
a natural rhythm to the proposed undertaking: <i>Open Space, Reflection,
Improvement, Open more Space strategically... <br><br>
</i><b><u>Opening Space</u>:</b> Initiating/re-starting self-organization
is the easy part. It always works, and the results are predictable, if
not in detail then certainly at the grosser levels of group performance
and production. In a word there is immediate return on the investment –
no training necessary, no planning required. The good news is, any
concerned group can quickly become what it already is, a self-organizing
system. Best of all, the benefits are concrete and almost immediate: new
products, resolution of thorny issues, new and expanded bodies of
knowledge, in addition to a great bunch of “fringe benefits.” The major
problem is that things happen so fast and appear so natural (easy) that
many, perhaps most, people simply do not realize what has gone on. Which
means, unfortunately that they are less likely to do it again and do it
better.<br><br>
<b><u>Reflection:</u></b> Reflection need not be a major time consumer
for the objective is simply to acknowledge and anchor the experience.
This is not about reviewing the substantive outcomes, but rather a
consideration of how we did what we did with the thought that next time
around we might do it better – or all the time. <br><br>
<b><u>Improvement:</u></b> I suppose this might look a lot like a
“training program” but it is radical, experiential learning. Concepts may
be useful, but the experience is primary. Thus the group may have noticed
that Leadership in a self-organizing system was emergent and effective.
Definitely good news, which raises the question – how do we do it better
and more consciously? And then some bad news appears. Turns out that
positional power is not only absent, but when present (a holdover from
the <i>ancien regime) </i>it gets in the way and generally mucks things
up. Worse, effective leadership seems to have a lot to do with Letting Go
and forgetting about Span of Control, Lines of Authority, Direct Reports
– all those things dear to the heart and ego of most of us. It would
appear that some attitude adjustment, might we say Coaching, would be in
order.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>And there
are a few other dis-comforting things that may come to view. For example,
at any given time a person may be leader and follower in multiple groups.
So how should we handle compensation and benefits? Or – it appears that
innovation and application can occur very rapidly and not on a
pre-existing schedule. So how do we handle Planning and Accounting?
Clearly we do not want to discard a real money maker because it is not in
The Plan (and I’ve seen that done) nor do we want to loose the money
because our Financial System is so rigid that we can’t book it. It
appears that the new (old ) reality requires the best attention of folks
from Human Resources and Finance – not to do the same old thing, but to
utilize their considerable talents in support of productive work as it is
actually taking place. <br><br>
<b><u>Strategic Self-Organization</u></b>: Self-organization is something
that happens quite naturally, without our assistance. At the same time we
may become more fully conscious of the process and learn to ride the
waves of our lives with greater competence. The reference to “waves” is
not happenstance, for I believe conscious life in self-organization has a
lot to do with surfing. The surfer does not create the waves, but he/she
can learn to recognize a good one. Technique matters, experience counts,
and good equipment won’t hurt. Helping organizations to realize and
practice Strategic Self-Organization is the top of the mountain. It
begins with first steps, as in Opening Space, Reflection and then
Improvement – but the whole is more than the sum of the parts, and the
journey is more than the sum of the steps. This is going “meta” to the
whole affair. Everybody is surely capable of doing all this at some
level, but those who’s view encompasses the highest levels will surely be
in a position to contribute mightily to their organization’s future. I
think we can get them there.<br><br>
Harrison Owen<br>
7808 River Falls Drive<br>
Potomac, Maryland - 20854<br>
Phone 301-469-9269<br>
Email owenhh@mindspring.com<br>
</font><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<div align="center">Harrison Owen<br>
7808 River Falls Drive<br>
Potomac, MD 20854 USA<br>
phone 301-365-2093<br>
Open Space Training
<a href="http://www.openspaceworld.com/" eudora="autourl">www.openspaceworld.com</a>
<br>
Open Space Institute <a href="http://www.openspaceworld.org/" eudora="autourl">www.openspaceworld.org</a><br>
Personal website <a href="http://www.mindspring.com/~owenhh" eudora="autourl">www.mindspring.com/~owenhh</a><br><br>
<font color="#0000FF"><u>OSLIST@LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU<br>
</u></font>To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,<br>
view the archives of <font color="#0000FF"><u>oslist@listserv.boisestate.edu<br>
</u></font>Visit: <a href="http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html" eudora="autourl"><font color="#0000FF"><u>http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html</a><br><br>
<br><br>
</font></u></div>
</html>