<html>
<head></head>
<body>
<div dir="ltr">
Thanks for this reminder Harrison.
<div>
<br />
</div>
<div>
David
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<br />
<br />
<div class="gmail_quote">
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 1:25 PM, Harrison Owen
<span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:hhowen@verizon.net" target="_blank">hhowen@verizon.net</a>></span> wrote:
<br />
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">I just love the serendipity! The LIST was dead silent for a day or two, and suddenly there is this marvelous conversation about structure, heavy, lite, whatever. Turns out OSLIST was not dead at all. Just gestating. And during that period of gestation, I received a note from a friend raising issues about structure. That note turned me on, and I replied at length – not knowing a thing about the burgeoning conversation online. Imagine my surprise when I signed on! And being the lazy sort that I am ... I am simply passing on my response to my friend with his name removed. But he does know that stuff is happening on OSLIST, and perhaps he will join us?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">Ho<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">************************************************************* <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">XXXX -- Love to talk about structure. As a matter of fact, it is a subject I have found myself pondering increasingly over the past several years, often taking me to some odd places, which shouldn’t surprise you, knowing me as you do.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">Your observations and questions are rich places to start, (“Nothing gets done without a structure. Open Space is a minimal structure which is why it doesn't get in the way of self-organization. Does it mean that it is the only minimal structure? Can it be combined usefully with some other minimal structure? Are there situations where another minimal structure might be just as or more useful?”). However, my wanderings, make it necessary to back off a bit, explain a bit, and then proceed. Sorry for the detour, but it is the best I can do. </span><span style="font-family:Wingdings;color:#1f497d">J</span><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">Last spring, Peter Block did a conference, and prior to its opening, he invited me to sit for a filmed interview which he moderated. I don’t remember how the subject came up exactly, but Peter asked me what I thought about structure, and my reply surprised even me. I said that I rather thought that structures were possibly a figment of our imagination, or at the very least a snapshot of the process of reality at a moment in time. My basic thought was that everything from the moment of the Big Bang is flowing energy, which does in fact assume certain configurations in the moment, and then flows on. What we call structures are actually a freeze-frame representations of a moving process. Thus whenever we depict a structure it is always a picture of how things were in that moment now past. That picture does not, and cannot, capture the present reality, and it is no predictor of future configurations. Perhaps not figments of our imagination, but artifacts of our memory?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">So, for example, if you look at a mountain, we might say that for sure we are confronting a “Structure,” some might say an eternal structure. Mountains, after all seem to hang about for a bit. But all of that is only “true” within our restricted (one might say, infinitesimal) snap shot of time. Extend that time frame to cosmic proportions and the solid mountain structure transmutes into a flowing sea of cresting waves. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">I rather suspect that the same sort of thinking applies to Organizational Structures. Most people, I believe would acknowledge that the famous Organization Chart is most notable for its irrelevance. At best it represents how someone thought things should look, but everybody “knows” that isn’t how things work. Were we to move from something supposedly cast in stone, or at least printed in all the corporate manuals, to a more contemporaneous representation, we have a similar problem. No matter how hard we try we have, at best, a snap shot of how things were at that point in time. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">The situation doesn’t get much better with the structures we design. They can only represent how we hope things will work, and even if the design is truly detailed and elegant, the moment they are put into operation, things change. I think this is true at every level of our endeavors, from the “design” of a simple meeting or process up to the design of a whole corporation. It may look great on paper, but the instant the “start” button is depressed – things change. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">If any of this thinking coincides with how things actually are, we have some interesting difficulties. Or at least all those who presume the priority of structure as an <i>a priori</i> truth in organizational life, have some difficulties. They (whoever “they” are) take it as an article of faith that FIRST you create/design the structure and THEN you do the business. That certainly makes logical sense, but I fear the logic is based on a pretty weak reed. A figment of our imagination, I could say.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">I believe the source of our difficulty arises from that strange creature you and I so much enjoy, the phenomenon of Self Organization. I will confess that my infatuation with the critter over the last 50 years has led me into some strange places, to say nothing of heretical opinions, as some would see it – but it has been a fun ride. The history of that adventure is lengthy and convoluted, but as I approach the end of my journey I have come to two conclusions, which may well be the only things I have truly learned in 78 years on the planet. Whether this is the result of Insight or Alzheimer’s I can’t say – but the conclusions are as follows:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">All systems (including all human systems) are open.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <span style="color:#1f497d">All systems (including all human systems) are self organizing. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">The first conclusion (All systems open), I take to be self evident. It is also true that I can’t think of any possible way to prove it. In the scientific community, as I read the literature, I think there would be substantial agreement. From the cosmos as a whole down to the level of the lowliest Quark, with ants and asteroids in between, it is all one big churning mass with each element actually, or potentially, interacting with all others for 13.7 billion years. Yes there are discrete systems, here today and dissipated tomorrow – but none stand in splendid isolation. It is all connected and therefore open to any and all interactions. At least that is how I hear the story. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">The second conclusion (All systems self organizing) certainly could be open to debate, but from where I sit, it is the natural correlate of the first. In as much as all systems are open they are all subject to the pushes, pulls and challenges of the external environment, which is constantly shoving them out of their comfort zone (equilibrium) into chaos. Self organization is the natural response through which life and existence is sustained. And it doesn’t <b>start</b> with order (structure). It <b>creates</b> order/structure. In a word, structure is emergent. Which is what self organization is all about.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">How and why all this alchemy takes place is obviously a matter of major moment. If you can accept the work of Stuart Kauffman “the magic sauce” seems to be a set of very simple pre-conditions, which if present, automatically initiate the process. But note, these are preconditions and not structures. Indeed one of the preconditions is the <i>lack</i> of pre-existing structure. My memory is a little foggy, but I think Kauffman describes this as “minimal prior connections.” Another one of his preconditions is that the system be at the “edge of chaos” which is actually the dissolution of structure. I understand that Kauffman’s work is subject to ongoing discussion, but I have not seen any substantial disagreement with his core idea, although others surely suggest different conditions or ways of describing them. On more familiar ground, I like Kauffman’s explanation/preconditions because they parallel almost exactly the “essential preconditions for Open Space” which I had noticed for a number of years before I ever heard of Kauffman. When asked when to use Open Space my response was that it always seems to work when the following preconditions are in effect. 1) A real business issue that people care about. 2) With mind numbing complexity 3) lots of diversity. 4) Much passion and conflict. 5) A real sense of urgency. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">And now – at long last – back to the points/questions you raise about structure and Open Space. In all honesty I just do not think that the initiation of Open Space has anything to do with structure, minimal or maximal. Certain preconditions – YES. But structure, NO. Structure does manifest in Open Space (as it does in all self organizing situations) – but it is emergent, and not prior. At least that has been my experience. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">Recently I have found myself fascinated with what I might call “natural occurrences” of Open Space. This began with a conversation with Claudia Gross, a friend and colleague from Egypt. We were talking about the events of Tahrir Square in which she participated. She remarked that the overall impression of the happening was that of a great mob scene, with thousands of people milling about in apparently random patterns. Occasionally someone would ascend a makeshift podium and address the crowd, but there was something else going on. Smaller groups would form in the midst of the mass, spiraling inwards to form circles of conversation. In the center of these circles, the focused attention was such that the ambient noise and confusion seemed shut out. The conversations themselves were intense but respectful. To be sure there were flashes of passion, but there was also a sense of shared intimacy, and people spoke of an awareness of brotherhood and connectedness. The conversation circles would continue for a time, some longer, some shorter – and then the circles would dissolve, only to form again with different people in a different place. Sounded an awful lot like Open Space to me, but its occurrence was purely a natural phenomenon. There wasn’t a facilitator in sight, and certainly no prior structure or process. It was all emergent. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">Some little time later, I had occasion to speak with another friend who had been in Tiananmen Square, and she reported precisely the same phenomenon. Those are my only two examples, but I strongly suspect that were one to make a broader study of such events, the Natural Open Space would be seen as a regular occurrence. All of which made me think that we needed a 5<sup>th</sup> Principle – “Wherever it happens is the right place.” <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">So where does all this leave our discussion? For me it comes out something like this. Open Space is in fact a naturally occurring phenomenon. It is clearly not a process that I, or anybody else, invented, and it is certainly not initiated by a “structure” of our design, be that heavy or light – see Tahrir Square above. However, when the essential conditions are present, it is possible to invite or “allow” space to open. Of course it is always possible to fight or oppose this natural emergence – which sadly is what much of management seems to be about. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">It is also true that we may encourage the appearance of Open Space with the provision of certain simple elements: a place to meet, chairs to sit in, magic markers, post-its, flip charts, and even temple bells. </span><span style="font-family:Wingdings;color:#1f497d">J</span><span style="color:#1f497d"> But none of that is essential. In fact Open Space works all by itself. Self organizes. I think.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">Harrison<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Harrison Owen<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">7808 River Falls Dr.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Potomac, MD 20854<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">USA<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">189 Beaucaire Ave. (summer)<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Camden, Maine 04843<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Phone <a href="tel:301-365-2093" value="+13013652093" target="_blank">301-365-2093</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">(summer) <a href="tel:207-763-3261" value="+12077633261" target="_blank">207-763-3261</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.openspaceworld.com%20" target="_blank">www.openspaceworld.com</a> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.ho-image.com%20" target="_blank">www.ho-image.com</a> (Personal Website)<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Consolas">To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of OSLIST Go to:<a href="http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org" target="_blank">http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<br />_______________________________________________
<br /> OSList mailing list
<br /> To post send emails to
<a href="mailto:OSList@lists.openspacetech.org">OSList@lists.openspacetech.org</a>
<br /> To unsubscribe send an email to
<a href="mailto:OSList-leave@lists.openspacetech.org">OSList-leave@lists.openspacetech.org</a>
<br /> To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
<br />
<a href="http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org" target="_blank">http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org</a>
<br />
<br />
</blockquote>
</div>
<br />
</div>
<br />
<p>--</p>
<p>David Osborne</p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><img src="http://www.change-fusion.com/ChangeFusionLogo.jpg" alt="" width="150" height="58" /></p>
<p style="text-align: left;">www.change-fusion.com | dosborne@change-fusion.com | 703.939.1777</p>
</body>
</html>