Birgitt: I've read the material again. This is great stuff and the more I read it the clearer I get. I need to test the clarity because that changes the story:
--If you are being brought in by the consultant then who "owns" the use of Open Space and the possible shift to an Open Space organization--the consultant or the CEO? Is the CEO capable of leading on Open Space organization of this size? Does he/she have the spiritual depth or can they develop it? --Who are the internal transformational leaders? If they have blocked all the other change efforts to this point, why do you assume they will go for this? How set is the dominant coalition against change? You may need to look at this on a department by department basis. At the Bank of Montreal, after the Learning Institue staff picked it up, the divisional leadership was the next to seriously try open space. It has taken two years to get all the divisional leaders to try Open Space at their major meetings. It began with one champion and a success. It would not have happened if it were imposed! One part of the organization has still not chosen to have an Open Space event. I led a one day event with Operations leadership, two levels down. It was a good event, but the senior people were not willing to champion the approach. We coached them for three meetings, they still did not understand--"it was mainly for their people". The mid-management folks strategized to get the managment on board. I don't know if it has happend yet. If you want the change in 6 months, you have to be able/willing to fire key leaders who will oppose operating in open space. You do have the pressure of do or die! --Transforming the work processes into open space processes will be the task. In the higly unionized environment, there are a lot more givens based in the union contract. The nature of that contract and the union leadership as part of a dominant operational coalition will be critcal to effectiveness in implementation. If you are really moving to an Open Space organization, then job classification and pay scales will be challenged and need to be re-aligned somewhere down the road. --How does Open Space fit with the exisiting re-engineering effort? Is it seen as a way to enable the new work processes design or as a move to an Open Space organization. What stake does the current consultant have in the outcomes of this? --In house leadership training would take on more of the character of the AIM project we did this summer. It would work best focused on particular changes or business issues confronting the whole or parts of the organization---as will the Open Spaces. How much of a critical mass of leadership will require such training? How many do you assume can be done a month? Are we talking about between now and the middle of next year---with the January change over in the middle. It take a week for each leadership event of the AIM type, with a maximum of 25-30 folks at each. It can't all happen before the Open Space events--but some critical mass or key points in the organization. --Even in that 4 day piece, we do not cover much about behaviour re ongoing sustaing of spirit and focusing story. The coaching process of key leadership so that new behaviour is exibited (and thus believed by others) will require substantial time from multiple consultants. --Have you (or the previous consultants) surfaced the old story of the organization--That kind of interviewing would help but would take conversations with enough people to surface the data and build trust in the "new" consultants down the line. --Is there a clear new vision and strategic directions based on strategic assumptions, even at the senior level? It took 4 months to develop this at the senior and next level down at the Royal Bank. (In my meeting, they said that the stuff that resulted from my work has become the benchmark for the rest of the organization--nice eh). --What kind of technology do they now have? Many gov. agencies are behind. Do they have an intra-net?? If they do not, then setting one up could be difficult, depending on the nature of their current LAN. I know some folks who develop those things who are interested in Open Space. They have workded with a number of large government and health organizations on information flow. They are also extremely busy and expensive. ---If the CEO wants to be leading an Open Space organization, to whom does he account? Does he/she account to Metro Council now? Will he/she account to the new Toronto Council? That Committee, eventually, has to be willing to permit an Open Space organization and then to support it. One political mistake and the CEO and the Open Space organization are gone. The Union knows this well. They also know how to get rid of the current leadership if necessary. This is part of their lack of willingness to actively participate in change. This is also true of Management in gov't organizations. Is everyone clear that it is do or die, or can they dismiss it as this CEO's fantasy? --Developing the inital momentum will require a critical mass event that impacts the whole. That was certainly the case at the Bank of Montreal. With the CEO clearly and intentionally opening the space around a real business issue more is possible. That did not happed at B of M. It did at Regionional Health Department on one issue---violence and health. That one issues has been a lever for substantial changes externally to the organization and internally. Violence is now the region's #1 health issue, partly becasue of the outcomes of the critical mass open space. A song sung at the closing of Open Space was so powerful that it was developed as a presentation piece. The author, the Medical Officer of Health and his wife performed it at Regional Council and the Violence as #1 Health Issue passed. There are 7-8 internal Open Space groups still going on, doing great stuff across silos. Some managers are seeing some limits--one person hogging one of the groups--and trying to use that to discredit Open Space. However the CEO is committed to moving toward a more open management process and said (we shall see) that he will send 3-4 managers to our workshop in November. That and some additional open space events inside will build the momentum. The critical mass event has to be communicated througout the system so that people believe & trust the outcomes. They have to hear it from a friend that it was good. This communication takes some time. To do the regional or department events will require that the leadership there be willing to Open the Space. The next level down of leadership may require one day events--like I did with Alberta Division B of M--or our training to prepare them. That led to one staff to take the training from Alberta. However, no one came to our last training from B of M???