<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:verdana, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12pt">
<div><div style="font-family: verdana, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; "><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT">Doug:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT">Some short
comments before leaving for a much needed 15-day vacation, in the mountains,
without Internet ;-) <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT">I think your first
question is tautological. You ask:"</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:7.5pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;
mso-fareast-language:PT">do we suppose it is a good thing to promote
competition?</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT">". With this
formulation one must answer "No".<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT">But the point is
that this is not, IMHO, the right question. Indeed the question should be
"Does competition exists? And what to do with it?". <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT">Because, of
course, competition exists. It comes with the territory. And for that question,
I understand the principle "Whatever happens...".<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT">First: competition
for resources and food exists in nature. Without death, without competition and
without the scarcity of natural resources, there would have been no species
evolution at all.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT">Second:
Competition also exists between companies or other organizations that may be
our clients.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT">Third: competition
also exists between consultants, only in a disguised form, and always treated
as if it was not there... I will "secure this territory" or this
"variant of OST", but I will never admit I am doing that - to give
only two examples.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT">And to the
question "What to do?" I would answer: first, <b>understand
clearly that competition exists and talk about that openly</b>!!!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT">IMHO, your second
question is also formulated in the wrong way. Asking "</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:7.5pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;
mso-fareast-language:PT"> does competition for learning align with
what *we* (as in the open space community) know of reality?</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT">" is also a
tautology. But that is not the point. The point is about "how can we
improve individual and collective learning?". You are talking about
"competition for learning", I am talking about learning (or not) in a
world where many things exist, including competition...<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT">Best regards<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:PT">Artur<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div style="font-family: verdana, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; "><br><div style="font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;"><font size="2" face="Tahoma"><hr size="1"><b><span style="font-weight:bold;">From:</span></b> douglas germann <76066.515@compuserve.com><br><b><span style="font-weight:bold;">To:</span></b> Artur Silva <arturfsilva@yahoo.com><br><b><span style="font-weight:bold;">Cc:</span></b> World wide Open Space Technology email list <oslist@lists.openspacetech.org><br><b><span style="font-weight:bold;">Sent:</span></b> Mon, July 18, 2011 12:46:32 AM<br><b><span style="font-weight:bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [OSList] A tale of two companies<br></font><br>
Artur--<br><br>The issues I raise are the larger societal ones: do we suppose it is a<br>good thing to promote competition? Especially when it comes to learning?<br><br>And my second question is like the first: does competition for learning<br>align with what *we* (as in the open space community) know of reality?<br><br> :- Doug.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br>On Thu, 2011-07-14 at 14:51 -0700, Artur Silva wrote:<br>> Doug:<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> In what concerns your first question, and to understand what are my<br>> assumptions (indeed, the assumptions of the Shell study Arie de Geus<br>> reported) you may read a post I sent in 2001 to a different list, that<br><span>> is still online here: <a target="_blank" href="http://www.learning-org.com/01.07/0155.html">http://www.learning-org.com/01.07/0155.html</a>.</span><br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> In what concerns
your second question, the study is based in "real<br>> companies", so it is at least
aligned with what they thought to be the<br>> "reality"...<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> Regards<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> Artur<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> PS: I like very much the other post of yours, where you said: "The<br>> Open Space disrupted business as usual" which is why I call<br>> us "community disorganizers!". Maybe we can try to convince Harrison<br>> to include that in the 4th edition of the User's Guide ;-)<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> ______________________________________________________________________<br>> From: doug <<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:os@footprintsinthewind.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:os@footprintsinthewind.com">os@footprintsinthewind.com</a>><br>> To: World wide Open Space Technology email list<br>> <<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:oslist@lists.openspacetech.org" target="_blank"
href="mailto:oslist@lists.openspacetech.org">oslist@lists.openspacetech.org</a>><br>>
Sent: Tue, July 12, 2011 2:38:03 AM<br>> Subject: Re: [OSList] A tale of two companies<br>> <br>> Artur and all--<br>> <br>> Just what are the assumptions inherent in a phrase like "learn faster<br>> and more profoundly than other organizations?" Do they align with what<br>> we know of reality?<br>> <br>> :- Doug.<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> On Sat, 2011-07-09 at 20:50 -0700, Artur Silva wrote:<br>> > Peggy, Harrison, Suzanne, David, Doug and Chris:<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > I ended last Friday a very intensive work period, to finish the<br>> first<br>> > (and bigger) phase of my students' examinations and submitting a<br>> paper<br>> > to a Conference. In the meanwhile, I have read the first marvelous<br>> > initial post of this thread from Peggy, and the interesting answers<br>> > that followed. <br>> > <br>> >
<br>> > After Peggy's first mail I had the intention - but not the time - to<br>> > write some comments. This afternoon, when I had the time, I reread<br>> > everything, but before beginning to write I have received all the<br>> > careful answers that Peggy sent to each of the comments.<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Now it is almost all said, and my comment is only concerned with a<br>> > small point where this thread relates with the paper I wrote, namely<br>> > the importance of Power and Care (that I prefer to "Love") in the<br>> tech<br>> > company's experience Peggy shared with us.<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > As many of you know, I have been struggling, after some years, with<br>> > two related questions:<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > 1) first, how can we create the "Patterns of a Learning<br>> Architecture"<br>> > for a company (or other organization) so
that it can learn faster<br>> and<br>> > more profoundly than other organizations, especially in what<br>> concerns<br>> > questions of generative (double-loop) learning, and namely when<br>> > "sensible questions" are at stake? In other words: how can we change<br>> > the learning patterns of a company (which usually have strong<br>> learning<br>> > disabilities) if and when that change is possible? (which btw<br>> assumes<br>> > that it is not always possible...)<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > 2) Second, what is - or can be - the role of OST in all of this? <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Of course, one can always say that power doesn't exist at all, or<br>> that<br>> > "you never have to let go of it, because you never had it in the<br>> first<br>> > place" (I am paraphrasing a recent answer from Harrison to Eleder's<br>> > "Quote"). <br>> >
<br>> > <br>> > Or, at least, we can say that, in many situations we all know of,<br>> > Power can be kind of "dissolved" in the OST event(s) - in a way that<br>> > it can't be in other more "directive approaches", like "team<br>> > building", to give only one example. <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > But what happens in those situations were power doesn't "dissolve"?<br>> > (Having worked 20 years for IBM, I know a lot of situations where<br>> the<br>> > best intentions of senior professionals and middle managers couldn't<br>> > change what was decided "at the Top".)<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > And what happens in those situations where it is not even good for<br>> the<br>> > future of the organization that power dissolves too quickly, as the<br>> > "person in charge" has a more clear and compassionate vision that<br>> the<br>> > people that contest
her/him, even if - or especially when - those<br>> ones<br>> > are the majority?<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Any comments?<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Best regards from late night in Lisbon<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Artur<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> ><br>> ______________________________________________________________________<br>> > From: Peggy Holman <<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:peggy@peggyholman.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:peggy@peggyholman.com">peggy@peggyholman.com</a>><br>> > To: World wide Open Space Technology email list<br>> > <<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:oslist@lists.openspacetech.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:oslist@lists.openspacetech.org">oslist@lists.openspacetech.org</a>><br>> > Sent: Sat, July 9, 2011 9:31:55 PM<br>> > Subject: Re: [OSList] A tale of two companies<br>> > <br>>
> Hi Chris,<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > I
have followed up with my client. To paraphrase a comment from the<br>> > client: when the community is part of creating the change and<br>> > leadership is engaged, the invitation may seem more authentic and<br>> > therefore participating is less of a stretch.<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Ironically, the group is in the midst of a re-org, with little<br>> > information to anyone. Based on my contact's reflections, I see no<br>> > appetite to reflect on the experience. And I doubt there will be<br>> > much, if any, forward motion.<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > The power dynamic was certainly an important factor. Thanks for the<br>> > reference to Adam's work. <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Even when the agenda isn't hidden, if it is coming from the middle,<br>> as<br>> > this event demonstrated, it may well be rejected. The group took
on<br>> > some real business issues but steered clear of anything related to<br>> the<br>> > power structures. In retrospect, that makes sense. Management<br>> didn't<br>> > open the door to that arena.<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > And you're so right: when that opening appears, things will shift.<br>> > Given the amount of denial at play, it will likely be pretty messy<br>> > when it happens. So Engaging Emergence may well be a help! In<br>> fact,<br>> > my contact just gave a copy to the group's manager.<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Peggy<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > On Jul 8, 2011, at 11:50 AM, Chris Corrigan wrote:<br>> > <br>> > > Both Suzanne and Harrison have made some excellent reflections<br>> > > here...Peggy, have you had a
chance to follow up with the tech<br>> > > company folks? Seems like an important harvest from that<br>> experience<br>> > > is a naming of some of the things that are holding them back.<br>> They<br>> > > may choose to use OST or some other process for these<br>> conversations,<br>> > > but it certainly seems apparent that without talking about this<br>> > > stuff, they are not going to move forward well. <br>> > > <br>> > > <br>> > > Your story does point to an important question that I have been in<br>> > > recently, and that is, how do we relate what we are doing to the<br>> > > realities of power in the organization? Adam Kahane's recent work<br>> > > on Power and Love has highlighted the need to be sensitive to both<br>> > > the relational and the transactional contexts at play in an<br>> > >
organization. Using processes like OST is often a vote for the<br>> > > relational to be activated in the work, but if the transactional<br>> > > power dynamics are at play, people will often behave the way you<br>> > > describe. Suzanne names it well - a well-intentioned hidden<br>> agenda<br>> > > - and the effect can be that it increases mistrust and confusion<br>> and<br>> > > people feel that the intervention has not actually dealt with the<br>> > > real issues. <br>> > > <br>> > > <br>> > > When the opening appears for THAT conversation, things will flow.<br>> > > And that is where YOUR book has much to offer around the skills<br>> of<br>> > > working with emergence and disruption. <br>> > > <br>> > > <br>> > > C<br>> > > <br>> > > On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:28 PM, doug
<<a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:os@footprintsinthewind.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:os@footprintsinthewind.com">os@footprintsinthewind.com</a>><br>> > > wrote:<br>> > > Peggy and all friends--<br>> > > <br>> > > Question 1: It was 1975 when I last lived inside a Fortune<br>> > > 200<br>> > > corporation, so take this with a grain of salt. What came<br>> > > through my<br>> > > sixth sense on reading this was that somehow it was not a<br>> > > good mix to<br>> > > have both managers and field people in this particular OS.<br>> > > They had<br>> > >
different issues to be
worked by.<br>> > > <br>> > > Question 2: speaks of the same dynamic to me: a very highly<br>> > > controlled<br>> > > group, where the inside circle did not want interlopers, or<br>> > > were so<br>> > > perceived.<br>> > > <br>> > > Had one company just recently acquired another in this tech<br>> > > company? It<br>> > > feels we/they to me.<br>> > > <br>> > > Hopefully this gives a bit of a different echo from the<br>> > > hills across the<br>> > >
way.<br>> > > <br>> > > :- Doug.<br>> > > <br>> > > <br>> > > <br>> > > On Sat, 2011-07-02 at 16:29 -0700, Peggy Holman wrote:<br>> > > > In the last few months, I opened space at a tech company<br>> > > and a biotech<br>> > > > company. On one level, they looked similar: one<br>> functional<br>> > > area,<br>> > > > international participation, a mix of managers and<br>> > > individual<br>> > > >
contributors.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > Yet the experiences and the outcomes couldn't have been<br>> > > more<br>> > > > different! I'll describe the two events and my<br>> > > reflections on what<br>> > > > made the difference between them.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > Note: I wrote the story about the tech immediately<br>> > > following the Open<br>> > > > Space but didn't have a chance to edit and send it before<br>> > > the second<br>> > > > experience. You'll see a couple of questions that the<br>> >
> experience<br>> > > > raised for me embedded in the story. They took on a<br>> > > little different<br>> > > > light following the second experience.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > Corporate dynamics at play in a technology company...<br>> > > ><br>> > > > This OS was with an international sales and marketing<br>> > > meeting for the<br>> > > > launch of a new year. Day 1 was not in Open Space. It<br>> was<br>> > > a manager’s<br>> > > > only session, using a mix of conversational forms (a huge<br>>
> > stretch for<br>> > > > the power point, info-out culture). It went well. People<br>> > > appreciated<br>> > > > talking rather than just listening. Many of the field<br>> > > people<br>> > > > acknowledged the quality of listening from headquarters<br>> > > people who<br>> > > > usually do most of the talking.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > On the first afternoon, the larger meeting – 100 people –<br>> > > began with a<br>> > > > conversation between execs and the people in the room. A<br>> >
> great, candid<br>> > > > conversation.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > On day 2, we opened the space. During the Open Space, I<br>> > > ran into a<br>> > > > several issues that I haven't experienced before and<br>> > > wondered if<br>> > > > others have.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > Overall, it was a terrific day. And one of the unexpected<br>> > > dynamics<br>> > > > surfaced: the managers didn't feel complete with the<br>> > > conversations<br>> > >
> that they wanted just amongst themselves. And they didn't<br>> > > feel they<br>> > > > had the space for their private conversation in the Open<br>> > > Space. My<br>> > > > client caught wind of the situation as they planned to<br>> > > organize a<br>> > > > session during day 3's action planning/next step breakout<br>> > > session<br>> > > > time. That meant the management layer wouldn't be part of<br>> > > action<br>> > > > planning/next step conversations.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > We negotiated having
the manager session posted in the<br>> > > context of<br>> > > > action planning/next steps so that it would be visible<br>> > > even if not<br>> > > > open to everyone. In practice, it was announced but not<br>> > > posted.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > We added a second action oriented round of breakout<br>> > > sessions in the<br>> > > > afternoon following a short briefing of what came out of<br>> > > the morning<br>> > > > group to fit the timing of the manager’s session, It<br>> made<br>> > > room
for<br>> > > > managers or others to host more action/next step<br>> sessions.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > So question 1: have others run into the managers-only<br>> > > dynamic? If so,<br>> > > > how have you dealt with it? Are there questions you use<br>> > > in your<br>> > > > pre-work for the OS to surface the issue and deal with it<br>> > > in advance?<br>> > > > We thought we had handled the need with the pre-meeting<br>> > > among<br>> > > > managers. What signs might have tipped us off to the need<br>> > >
for more?<br>> > > ><br>> > > > The second dynamic completely blindsided me. Normally the<br>> > > second<br>> > > > morning of an OS just buzzes! Perhaps it was the party<br>> > > the night<br>> > > > before but the group was really subdued. When I opened<br>> the<br>> > > space for<br>> > > > action, no one came forward. Given the energy in the<br>> room,<br>> > > I had the<br>> > > > sense that an elephant was sitting there untouched. I<br>> > > asked if anyone<br>> > > > would
speak to what was up. Someone said they didn't want<br>> > > to step on<br>> > > > headquarter people's toes by proposing action sessions<br>> > > that were<br>> > > > really HQ responsibilities. The exec in the room<br>> > > encouraged people to<br>> > > > do so, saying that HQ was there to serve the field's<br>> > > needs.<br>> > > > Ultimately, five sessions on topics of importance were<br>> > > posted.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > After the meeting, my client said she thought the<br>> > > reluctance came
from<br>> > > > a pattern of headquarters taking field input and having<br>> > > the<br>> > > > suggestions disappear without any feedback on what<br>> > > happened to the<br>> > > > ideas or why. So why should field people offer anything?<br>> > > ><br>> > > > I got the impression that the field saw it as the<br>> > > responsibility of<br>> > > > headquarters people to take the lead. And the HQ people<br>> > > already felt<br>> > > > full up so they weren't stepping in. Plus, people didn't<br>> > > see a
need<br>> > > > for action sessions since they felt they’d been<br>> > > identifying actions<br>> > > > throughout the Open Space.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > Question 2: Given that tension between field and<br>> > > headquarters is<br>> > > > common, have others run into this sort of reluctance to<br>> > > post action<br>> > > > sessions? Might we have anticipated this perception<br>> before<br>> > > it put a<br>> > > > damper on things?<br>> > > ><br>> > > > It was
one of the only Open Space gatherings I've ever<br>> > > done in which<br>> > > > people didn't come away saying, "Wow! Best meeting I've<br>> > > ever<br>> > > > attended." Instead, we heard from many that the meeting<br>> > > was too open<br>> > > > and confusing. People wanted to hear more from the senior<br>> > > managers<br>> > > > about what was on their minds. I left the experience<br>> > > pondering the<br>> > > > dynamics that led to that outcome. The contrast with<br>> this<br>> > > second<br>> > >
> meeting helped me identify some possibilities.<br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > > High times in a biotech...<br>> > > ><br>> > > > The work was part of a company-wide change initiative.<br>> The<br>> > > senior<br>> > > > manager was its host. He was actively involved. For<br>> > > example, he<br>> > > > opened the meeting by speaking of his aspirations for the<br>> > > department.<br>> > > > He also said a few words at morning announcements and<br>> >
> evening news on<br>> > > > each of the two days.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > Like the tech company, this session was basically one<br>> > > function --<br>> > > > human resources -- with a few others invited for spice.<br>> > > Also similar<br>> > > > to the tech meeting, people came from around the world.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > The meeting was a hit! People instantly leaped out to<br>> > > post sessions.<br>> > > > With about 100 participants, more than 50% posted<br>> > >
something. I don't<br>> > > > think I've ever had a group that size post in that ratio.<br>> > > The<br>> > > > conversations were rich and useful. Along with the<br>> variety<br>> > > of topics,<br>> > > > people worked through issues around organizational levels<br>> > > as well as<br>> > > > field/headquarters dynamics. At least three Open Space<br>> > > meetings<br>> > > > resulted, to be hosted by different attendees over the<br>> > > coming<br>> > > > weeks. In fact, I was invited to help with one of them.<br>> > >
><br>> > > > One other aspect of this session: I ran a workshop before<br>> > > and after<br>> > > > the OS for about a half a dozen internal people to<br>> support<br>> > > them in<br>> > > > opening space in the organization. We also met to reflect<br>> > > on the<br>> > > > experience before morning announcements and after evening<br>> > > news during<br>> > > > the Open Space. In other words, they had already adopted<br>> > > Open Space<br>> > > > as a key element of how they wanted to work. The<br>> >
> organization is<br>> > > > investing in a group of people to support creating a<br>> > > conversational<br>> > > > culture.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > At a second OS I did with them a few weeks later, we<br>> > > brought most of<br>> > > > the new practitioners together to continue to learn<br>> > > together. It's<br>> > > > wonderful because they now have an internal community of<br>> > > practice to<br>> > > > support each other.<br>> > > ><br>> > >
> I was grateful to have the biotech meeting on the heels<br>> of<br>> > > the<br>> > > > technology meeting! I went from questioning what I<br>> thought<br>> > > I knew to<br>> > > > having some ideas of what created the differences in the<br>> > > experiences.<br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > > Reflections on the differences that made a difference<br>> > > ><br>> > > > The biotech was committed to changing their culture and<br>> > > open to new<br>> > > > ways of working. The OS was focused
on the group<br>> > > envisioning how it<br>> > > > can best perform its role in the company in light of<br>> those<br>> > > changes.<br>> > > > The tech company meeting was more of a “stealth action”<br>> by<br>> > > a mid-level<br>> > > > individual contributor familiar with Open Space. She was<br>> > > seeding the<br>> > > > idea of a conversational culture. In other words, the<br>> > > biotech event<br>> > > > occurred in fertile soil, the tech company event was<br>> > > breaking up the<br>> > >
> hardpan.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > At the biotech, the sponsor was a senior manager who was<br>> > > explicit<br>> > > > about using the event to spark culture change. His whole<br>> > > team<br>> > > > participated throughout the event so there was no issue<br>> > > around hearing<br>> > > > what senior people were thinking. They were in the room.<br>> > > In contrast,<br>> > > > the tech company host was a mid-level individual<br>> > > contributor. She is<br>> > > > highly trusted and used her
influence to bring Open Space<br>> > > in. Her<br>> > > > goal was to take steps towards creating a more<br>> > > conversational<br>> > > > culture. Both intentions are valid. They just created<br>> > > different<br>> > > > experiences.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > At the biotech, the sponsor had used Open Space at a<br>> > > previous<br>> > > > organization as part of a successful culture change<br>> > > initiative. He<br>> > > > "got" the simplicity of Open Space, not even feeling a<br>> > >
need for an<br>> > > > action round. Instead, as part of session notes, we<br>> asked<br>> > > people to<br>> > > > include both a discussion and a "next steps/commitments"<br>> > > section. That<br>> > > > dealt with one of the disconnects in the tech company<br>> > > meeting. They<br>> > > > were confused when I re-opened the space for action,<br>> > > saying they had<br>> > > > been naming actions throughout. The biotech meeting<br>> helped<br>> > > me see that<br>> > > > re-opening the space for action
turned out to be an<br>> > > unnecessary thing<br>> > > > to do.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > The biotech meeting was offsite, so even those who were<br>> > > stretched by<br>> > > > the Open Space stuck around because it was a big effort<br>> to<br>> > > leave.<br>> > > > That gave them time to warm to the experience over the<br>> two<br>> > > days. The<br>> > > > tech company meeting was onsite, making it easy for the<br>> > > senior<br>> > > > managers and others to show up briefly and leave.<br>>
> > ><br>> > > > Finally, the biotech is thriving and growing while the<br>> > > tech company is<br>> > > > really struggling to rediscover its identity. This<br>> > > external factor<br>> > > > strikes me as a key difference in the environments.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > So what does it all mean? I would still Open Space in<br>> the<br>> > > tech<br>> > > > company. There were plenty of people who found the<br>> > > experience<br>> > > > worthwhile, even if their feedback was quieter than
those<br>> > > who were<br>> > > > frustrated or confused. I believe we prepared the soil<br>> for<br>> > > a few seeds<br>> > > > to take root.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > For the tech company to take further steps, it strikes me<br>> > > that the<br>> > > > person who hosted the Open Space would benefit from<br>> > > finding informal<br>> > > > partners, other inside change agents. I like to believe<br>> > > that even<br>> > > > without strong leadership support, she can make a dent.<br>> >
> As the<br>> > > > biotech company shows, management involvement can be an<br>> > > accelerator.<br>> > > > Still, as I think about what someone sitting in the<br>> > > middle of an<br>> > > > organization can do, enlisting partners who share<br>> interest<br>> > > in creating<br>> > > > a conversational culture could be a way to continue to<br>> > > move forward.<br>> > > > By forming an informal community of learners, she can<br>> > > create a system<br>> > > > of support.<br>> >
> ><br>> > > > Could we have done better? No doubt. I look forward to<br>> > > any thoughts<br>> > > > you have.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > Appreciatively,<br>> > > ><br>> > > > Peggy<br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > > _________________________________<br>> > > > Peggy Holman<br>> > > > <a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:peggy@peggyholman.com" target="_blank"
href="mailto:peggy@peggyholman.com">peggy@peggyholman.com</a><br>> >
> ><br>> > > ><br>> > > > 15347 SE 49th Place<br>> > > > Bellevue, WA 98006<br>> > > > 425-746-6274<br>> > > > <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.peggyholman.com">www.peggyholman.com</a><br>> > > > <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.journalismthatmatters.org">www.journalismthatmatters.org</a><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > > Enjoy the award winning Engaging Emergence: Turning<br>> > > Upheaval into<br>> > > > Opportunity<br>> > >
><br>> > >
> "An angel told me that the only way to step into the fire<br>> > > and not get<br>> > > > burnt, is to become<br>> > > > the fire".<br>> > > > -- Drew Dellinger<br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> >
> ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > <br>> > > > _______________________________________________<br>> > > > OSList mailing list<br>> > > > To post send emails to <a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:OSList@lists.openspacetech.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:OSList@lists.openspacetech.org">OSList@lists.openspacetech.org</a><br>> > >
> To
unsubscribe send an email to<br>> > > <a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:OSList-leave@lists.openspacetech.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:OSList-leave@lists.openspacetech.org">OSList-leave@lists.openspacetech.org</a><br>> > > > To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:<br>> > > <br>> > > ><br>> > ><br><span>> <a target="_blank" href="http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org">http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org</a></span><br>> > > <br>> > > <br>> > > <br>> > > _______________________________________________<br>> > > OSList mailing list<br>>
> > To post send emails to <a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:OSList@lists.openspacetech.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:OSList@lists.openspacetech.org">OSList@lists.openspacetech.org</a><br>> > > To unsubscribe send an email to<br>> > > <a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:OSList-leave@lists.openspacetech.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:OSList-leave@lists.openspacetech.org">OSList-leave@lists.openspacetech.org</a><br>> > > To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:<br>> > > <br>> > > <br>> > ><br>> <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org">http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org</a><br>> > >
<br>> > > <br>> > > <br>> > > <br>> > > -- <br>> > > CHRIS CORRIGAN<br>> > > Facilitation - Training - Process Design<br>> >
> Open Space Technology<br>> > > <br><span>> > > Weblog: <a target="_blank" href="http://www.chriscorrigan.com/parkinglot">http://www.chriscorrigan.com/parkinglot</a></span><br><span>> > > Site: <a target="_blank" href="http://www.chriscorrigan.com/">http://www.chriscorrigan.com/</a></span><br>> > > <br>> > > upcoming Art of Hosting retreats:<br>> > > Bowen Island, BC - October 23 - 26th<br>> > > Saskatchewan - September 19 - 22nd<br>> > > <br>> > > <br>> > > <br>> > > <br>> > > _______________________________________________<br>> > > OSList mailing list<br>> > > To post send emails to <a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:OSList@lists.openspacetech.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:OSList@lists.openspacetech.org">OSList@lists.openspacetech.org</a><br>> > > To unsubscribe send an email to<br>> <a rel="nofollow"
ymailto="mailto:OSList-leave@lists.openspacetech.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:OSList-leave@lists.openspacetech.org">OSList-leave@lists.openspacetech.org</a><br>> > > To subscribe or manage your subscription
click below:<br>> > ><br>> <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org">http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org</a><br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > _______________________________________________<br>> > OSList mailing list<br>> > To post send emails to <a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:OSList@lists.openspacetech.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:OSList@lists.openspacetech.org">OSList@lists.openspacetech.org</a><br>> > To unsubscribe send an email to <a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:OSList-leave@lists.openspacetech.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:OSList-leave@lists.openspacetech.org">OSList-leave@lists.openspacetech.org</a><br>> > To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:<br>> > <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank"
href="http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org">http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org</a><br>>
<br>> <br>> _______________________________________________<br>> OSList mailing list<br>> To post send emails to <a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:OSList@lists.openspacetech.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:OSList@lists.openspacetech.org">OSList@lists.openspacetech.org</a><br>> To unsubscribe send an email to <a rel="nofollow" ymailto="mailto:OSList-leave@lists.openspacetech.org" target="_blank" href="mailto:OSList-leave@lists.openspacetech.org">OSList-leave@lists.openspacetech.org</a><br>> To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:<br>> <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org">http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org</a><br>> <br>> <br><br><br></div></div><div style="font-family: verdana, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; "></div>
</div><div style="font-family: verdana, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; position: fixed; "></div></div></body></html>