<html>
At 11:35 AM 9/27/2002 +1000, Rob wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>Then we go back into the world
around us. The facilitator, well we did it<br>
ourselves so why bother, it is so simple anyone can do it. So
we see the<br>
organisation reform about their old norms and get on with the job.
The<br>
participants filled with the experience bounce back into the world, only
to slam<br>
headlong into brick walls of the REAL world. Confused, bruised and
wiser they<br>
may choose to keep going but many are not prepared for the hard yards
required<br>
to be successful.</blockquote><br>
The distinction between the Real World, and the world of Open Space is
one that is often made. I definitely know what people are saying and why
-- but I am very uncomfortable with it for several reasons. First of all,
I think it is wrong, or at the very least, it has the cart before the
horse. From where I sit, I must consider the world in all of its multiple
manifestations (galaxies, people, countries, neutron stars etc) to
be fundamentally self organizing. What we do on top of that
(creating departments, divisions etc) is a secondary addition which works
when in accord with the basic principles of self organizations, and
falters when they are not aligned. For me, Open Space is not about doing
something new, but rather recognizing what we truly are. So if we are to
accord "reality" to anything, it is what we (everybody)
experiences in Open Space. All the rest of it is an add on, and very
often delusional. I know there are some folks who actually think they are
"in charge" -- and I know of many others who co-conspire with
that notion, if only so that they do not have to take responsibility for
what happens, including their own actions. But given the massive
complexity, added to the chaotic changeableness of this thing we call
life, being "in charge" is a non thought so far as I am
concerned.<br><br>
My second reason for discomfort is that when we make such a distinction
(real world vs Open Space) our job becomes infinitely harder. As I see
it, all we are trying to do is to help folks understand and practice what
they already are. If they choose to be miserable with miseries of their
own making, there is not a great deal that we can do to help. But we can
bring them to the point where they recognize the choice.<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>For me Open Space is a form of
traumatic experience, and an experience that<br>
needs to carefully processed so that I use the goodness in the most
effective<br>
way when I leave the space for other parts. This is for both
facilitator and<br>
participant. It also means that it takes a special
environment in<br>
organisations to support the cultural change required to apply Open
Space. I<br>
believe that these organisations will be successful but most likely
not the<br>
most visible or profitable at least until the world changes to
champion<br>
sustainable, simple, life of interdependence .</blockquote><br>
There is no doubt the Open Space can be shocking. I used to call it
Freedom Shock. At some level it is very nice to believe that your life is
controlled and that your options are limited at best. You are then free
to bitch to your heart's content and blame "them" for whatever
is going wrong. Obviously there are limitations, but typically we don't
even approach them -- and at least in terms of my life, the areas of
freedom so vastly out weigh the areas of constraint that there is truly
no comparison. Of course, I live a privileged life, and reside in a
privileged land... but I have known many others who live under vastly
different circumstances who's range of freedom I find awesome --
terrifying, and of course shocking. Frankly, I don't think we have to
wait, or in fact can afford to wait, "until the world changes
to champion<br>
sustainable, simple, life of interdependence," given the issues of
the moment and the stakes we face. We can of course continue to do what
we've done, and we will get what we've gotten. But there is the option of
unleashing the kind of creative power and energy that bubbles up in every
Open Space -- which, I would argue, is nothing but the innate power of a
well functioning self-organizing system. Of course, if we don't do it,
others will. Some have suggested that Ben Laden and Co. constitute a good
example of an Open Space Organization. Doubtless he never heard the
words, and would object to them if he had -- but I think the point is
tenable. And if it is -- it would become clear that Open Space is not
<i>just</i> about warm fuzzies, love, and light. I guess that would take
us into a whole new discussion.<br><br>
Harrison<br><br>
<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>