<HTML>
<FONT FACE="Times New Roman" DEFAULT="FACE"><FONT SIZE="3" POINTSIZE="12" DEFAULT="SIZE">Dear Sticky Dotters,<BR>
I have used the standard, 55 dots Delphi Method. It is a statistical procedure (described in the Users Guide), that gives you a standard curve. There are at least 4 issues, often 5 or 6 and sometimes 7, but never more than that which really have the heighest weight. This is regardless of number of issues in the sense of very many and regardless of the number of participants. It is very predictable. In addition, you get a broad field of issues closely bunched and always at least one that has a very low weight, sometimes two, I never had three.<BR>
To me the question is, regardless of what weighing procedure you use (I try to avoid the words voting or prioritizing) what do you do with the results. What do the results mean?<BR>
After having done it several times according to the book and in other ways, I found that often the issue with weighed most heavily did not get any action.<BR>
Now, I have gone to consider all this as additional data. Just that, additional data for participants or the system. <BR>
But not the basis for action planning.<BR>
So after having done dots or a procedure I call "forming of families" (people selforganize bunching of issues and find a new heading for each bunch, usually it turns out to be seven bunches) I pause, ask everyone to have a look at all this and try to figure out what that means for them individually, for their work, their community, etc.<BR>
And then I ask them to go to the center and write down (open space style) what they want to take action on.<BR>
It is these action proposals I then ask people to congregate around and decide on first steps.<BR>
Greetings from Berlin<BR>
mmp<BR>
<BR>
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003 22:34:19 +1100, Fr Brian S Bainbridge wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>For Lisa Heft et al<BR>
>I have only ever used five dots, regardless of the number of<BR>
>participants.<BR>
>Always comes out with a small number of items focused on, and then a gap<BR>
>to the other matters on the walls.<BR>
>Whatever of mathematics and such - and I'm not into that - it just might<BR>
>be that participants re able to express their opinion clearly and<BR>
>helpfully. That's how it seems to me, at least.<BR>
>And there's always a gap between the "high dotted" items and the rest.<BR>
>It's kind of uncanny, but it always happens.<BR>
>One delicacy is the difficulty participants sometimes have in dotting a<BR>
>whole topic or a single item of that topic report. As usual, if they<BR>
>ask I respond whatever seems the right thing for you. That works, too.<BR>
>It's their program, after all.<BR>
>Cheers and blessings, BRIAN.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
>*<BR>
>*<BR>
>==========================================================<BR>
><FONT COLOR=0000ff><U>OSLIST@LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU<FONT COLOR=000000 DEFAULT="COLOR"></U><BR>
>------------------------------<BR>
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,<BR>
>view the archives of <FONT COLOR=0000ff><U>oslist@listserv.boisestate.edu<FONT COLOR=000000 DEFAULT="COLOR"></U>,<BR>
>Visit:<BR>
><BR>
><FONT COLOR=0000ff><U>http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html<FONT COLOR=000000 DEFAULT="COLOR"></U><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Michael M Pannwitz<BR>
boscop<BR>
Draisweg 1<BR>
12209 Berlin, Germany<BR>
FON +49 - 30-772 8000 FAX +49 - 30-773 92 464<BR>
www.michaelmpannwitz.de<BR>
<BR>
An der E-Gruppe "openspacedeutsch" für deutschsprechende open space-PraktikerInnen interessiert? Enfach eine mail an mich. <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST@LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist@listserv.boisestate.edu,
Visit:
<p>
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html