Matthias, hello and it is good to greet you on-line. Your strategy following the Open Space event is good for keeping the results moving forward and using the people to keep removing obstacles (which is an important job for management).
The only thing that I do differently is always to understand that the accountability should go back to the whole and not just to management or convenors. So, at an Open Space event with an intact workgroup I always end the event by seeing when the group would like to meet again to hear from each of the groups about the progress made from the issues/opportunities. Sometimes, the agreement is in four months or six months.The report backs happen, without anyone along the way having to take a role in making sure that the work gets done, because the groups do find a way of doing it. We have a very quick report back that includes what the blocks/obstacles are and then move into Open Space again to determine issues/opportunities based on the results in the reports. It works well to keep the whole group involved. Not everyone can get there, or wants to come, but at least they know they are welcome. If you put this into the context of one of the diagrams that Harrison is using about results from the original Open Space being in three categories 1) Clear (do it!) 2) Cloudy (get more info) and 3) Cloudy and confused (do another open space) you could see the flow of this all emerging over time. The "do it" ones should report back quickly that "it" is done, making everyone feel there is success from the first open space, to be celebrated and to keep building momentum. The "get more info" should be reporting back with the info and can now move into "do it" or "don't". And the rest are subject to further exploration in Open Space. I think you will see exceptional progression, more so than if it is only going back to the management/convenors team (and then they feel like more experts at the next Open Space than the others. Anyway, that is my viewpoint and experience. Kindest regards, Birgitt