Thought you might enjoy this story of Appreciative Inquiry and Open Space. Peg Holman
-----Original Message----- From: Dave Potter <3...@turbonet.com> To: AI list <appreciative-in...@utdallas.edu> Date: Saturday, October 31, 1998 11:01 AM Subject: AI/Open Space (AMBER Institute - LONG) >Dear AI group, > >Last month, I had a chance to work with a group using AI and Open Space, >and it went very well, bringing the group to a place it hadnt been to in >over ten years of meetings. My thanks to Peg Holman for her posting on "AI >Based Strategic Planning" last month which confirmed and informed our >decision to combine AI and OS. > >As usual, theres a lot of detail here and Ive used headings to make >skimming easier. If you dont want to read through this whole thing, but >are specifically interested in some reflections weve had regarding the >AI/OS integration, you can skip to "ABOUT THE AI/OPEN SPACE INTEGRATION"... > >BACKGROUND > >The 2 1/2 day meeting was for a a non-profit (Ill call it the AMBER >Institute) which sponsors a particular brand of awareness-raising >workshops. Almost since its inception over ten years ago, AMBER had been >invited into organizations to do organizational development work. While >their work with other organizations was usually very good, their own >internal meetings about their OD work were not. The sub-group responsible >for delivering the OD work (some adjunct, some AMBER staff) had been >meeting sporadically for ten years, without ever really clearly defining >their role within AMBER, and these meetings were typically disappointing >and frustrating. Well call this sub-group AMBER-OD > >Since many of the people with the most history with AMBER-OD had stopped >coming to the AMBER-OD meetings, and some had stopped consulting for AMBER, >it was important to gather their experiences and stories for the group that >would be there. For this, AI phone interviews were done by myself and My >co-facilitator, and summaries of the interviews would to be brought into >the meeting. We didnt interview any of the 10 people coming to the >meeting, because we would do AI interviews during the meeting itself. > >THE PRE-RETREAT PHONE INTERVIEWS > >The interview protocol used was very similar to the one that will follow >this posting, except that two questions hadnt been added yet (the second >and the last). This was a refinement that the phone interviews inspired. > >Although all of the interviews were, in the end, positive experiences, some >of the people interviewed still had some unresolved feelings about >AMBER-OD, so some of them were challenging. In fact, My co-facilitator >nearly hung up part way through one of them because she was so discouraged >with the way the interview was going. But, by the close of the interview, >the tone had shifted to a place of hope and potential. > >The printed summary of these interviews was very similar to those Ive >described for "Turner Realty" in a previous post (September 21). The only >difference was that we included a page of "Quotable Quotes" from the >interviews. These and the stories were attributed (with permission, of >course), and everything else (values, life-giving forces, headlines, three >wishes) was unattributed. > >SETTING > >All ten of us stayed at the retreat center, and the meeting took place in a >nice, large room in the center of the complex. Meals were cafeteria-style, >which made the logistics for meals easy and informal. The entire meeting >took place with chairs in a circle, except for small group and paired work. > >RETREAT DESIGN > >My co-facilitator is very experienced with Open Space, and it seemed to the >planning committee that it was important that the group have a chance to >share their knowledge and experience, and maybe even come to some concrete >results, so it was decided to use Open Space for this. Also, everyone on >the planning committee was taken with the idea of Appreciative Inquiry, and >thought it would be a great way to build the field before going into Open >Space. > >The retreat was to begin with a day of Appreciative Inquiry, followed by a >day of Open Space, with a third morning for closure. > >The retreat was designed to answer these four questions: > >WHERE ARE WE NOW? - what have we done so far? >WHO ARE WE? - what makes us unique, collectively and individually? >WHAT IS THE FUTURE OF AMBER-OD? - and where do YOU fit in? >WHEN AND HOW WILL WE DO OUR WORK TOGETHER? > >Sequence of events: > > [DAY ONE, Friday 8:30 - 5:00] >1. Where are we now? >2. What is the world calling us to become? >3. Intro to AI >4. AI interviews in pairs >5. De-brief and more about AI >6. Group sharing of interviews >7. Integrating todays interviews with phone interviews >8. Closing - learnings > >9. Fish-bowl discussion about recent work [after dinner] > > [DAY TWO, Saturday 8:30 - 5:00] >1. Check-in >2. Open Space Introduction >3. Open Space session #1 [9:00 - 10:30] >4. Open Space session #2 [10:30 - 12:00] >5. Open Space session #3 [12:30 - 2:00] >6. Open Space session #4 [2:00 - 3:30] >7. Open Space "Evening News" and Closing > > [DAY THREE, Sunday 8:30 - 1:00] >1. How are we doing relative to the AMBER-OD charter? >2. Actionable decisions/tasks for the next leg of the AMBER-OD initiative. >3. Closing > >[DAY ONE - Friday] > >1. WHERE ARE WE NOW? > >About a one hour update by the manager of Ambers OD efforts, outlining all >the work that had been done since the last meeting, three months before, >including over a dozen clients that are now being worked with. > >2. WHAT IS THE WORLD CALLING US TO BECOME? > >This served as a segue into the AI portion of the meeting. There had been >numerous organizational identity crises for AMBER-OD during the past 10 >years, and it was felt important to determine just where AMBER-OD fit >within AMBER and within the greater context of its calling to OD work. > >3. INTRO TO AI > >Very similar to what was posted to the AI group for "Turner Realty" on >September 21. (if you dont have it, and want it, send me a private note) > >As with Turner, I didnt spend much time here, because I wanted them to get >into the interviews right away. Even so, it was important to set the >stage, since for this group, there was/is a bit of a "no pain, no gain" >philosophy in many of their interventions. We needed to let them know that >we were taking a positive approach consciously and that we werent just >being stupid or naive (ie., "lets talk about the positive stuff just >because it feels good"). More about AI background and theory would come >after the interviews. > >4. AI INTERVIEWS IN PAIRS > >Again, similar to Turner Realty. > >The main difference was that, for this group, the interviews were VERY, >VERY important because much of the discussion in previous meetings was at a >very high level of abstraction, and many of the individual practitioners >didnt really know specifics about how their AMBER colleagues worked with >clients. It was especially important to offer them the chance to talk >about specifics because the organizational work they each do differs >greatly from the structure of the public workshops AMBER sponsors. I think >they all assumed they knew what each other did. > >Because of the importance of the interview and because they are all >experienced facilitators, I gave them an almost three hour period, which >spanned lunch (logistically easy because lunch was cafeteria-style in the >retreat center). This gave them over an hour for each direction, and I >asked them to return with a set of notes which I could read (and which they >had gotten permission to share) which included: > > One story > Things they value about AMBER-OD > Life-giving forces of AMBER-OD > Headline > 3 Wishes > What gave them hope for the future > >I wanted the notes in readable form so I could write these up for them >after the meeting. These were transcribed, printed, and mailed after the >meeting. In the meantime, in the "GROUP SHARING OF INTERVIEWS" section, we >would discuss, record and display on flip-charts some of the information so >it could inform the collective. > >5. DE-BRIEF AND MORE ABOUT AI > >Asked them, content aside, how did this feel? We put their comments on a >flip-chart. There were 5 groups (I got to be in one, since we were exactly >10 people), and of those 5, 3 said they could easily have gone past the >three hours, and 2 said it was exactly the right amount of time. There was >clearly a shift in the room after the interviews, a feeling of peace, >generosity, and support that people in the group told me later they had >never experienced with this group. > >One person said "I thought it was so much time, but we would have needed >another 2 hrs to start anything else. So... we ran out of time, even with >1.5 hours apiece!" Another said, "There was something very peaceful about >the process. Sort of going to a place, both separately and together, where >there is a lot of nurturance, a lot of things available..." > >Even with these comments, I dont think Id ask an inexperienced group to >spend this length of time - every one of the AMBER folks are very >experienced in leading and participating in process. > >Now, I said a little more about AI background and theory, drawing in part >from Cooperriders "Positive Image, Positive Action". (chapter 4 of >"Appreciative Management and Leadership: The Power of Positive Thought and >Action in Organizations"). Parallels/learnings were drawn from sports >(Olympic coaching methodology - Greg Louganis), education (pygmalion >effect), Davids bowling example. Also, a little of the AI theory (law of >simultaneity, etc.) Not a lot of time was spent on AI theory - maybe 10-15 >minutes. > >6. GROUP SHARING OF INTERVIEWS > >Since we were only 10 people, it didnt make sense to split into smaller >groups, so I simply opened it up to the entire group to share what they >thought was significant about what they heard from their partner. This was >in no particular order and I didnt even suggest that one person had to >completely finish describing what they heard from their partner. This gave >it a sense of give/take, and free-flow that we probably wouldnt have had >if I had suggested we go around in a circle and have each go through all >what they wanted to share about their partner. > >I had five flip-charts set up with these titles: > > What do you value (about AMBER-OD)? > Life-giving forces for AMBER-OD? > Headline? > Three wishes? > What gives you hope? > >One of us stood by the easels, and whenever we heard a response that fit >into one of the five categories, wed write it on the appropriate easel. > >As the energy started to die down, I noticed there wasnt much on the >"Headlines" and "What gives you hope", and just mentioned I was curious >about what they had heard. What came out then was some of the most >powerful stuff of this session. > >7. INTEGRATING TODAYS INTERVIEWS WITH PHONE INTERVIEWS > >At this point, I handed out the written summary of the phone interviews >done prior to the meeting of people who werent in attendence. It was >broken down into the following sections: > > Quotable Quotes (attributed to who gave the quote) > Stories (attributed) > Values and Life-Giving Forces > Headlines > Three Wishes > >While Values, Headlines, Three Wishes were unattributed, there was no >boiling down to the least common denominator. Everyones input was >represented (eg., there were eight sets of three wishes). > >I asked them to take a few minutes to look over the phone interview >summaries, then look up at what we now had on the flip charts and consider >similarities, differences, common themes. > >My co-facilitator and I shared a little about our experience with some of >the more difficult phone interviews. Hearing how a positive approach can >still move people through difficult stages caused a significant shift in >several of the people there about the value of an AI approach. Up until >then, several of them thought that maybe AI side-stepped the hard issues. >Simultaneously, and paradoxically, there was also some modification of >their "no pain, no gain" beliefs. > >8. CLOSING - LEARNINGS > >Asked what they had... > learned (what they didnt know before about individuals or the org.) > unlearned (what they thought they knew before, but had that belief shift) >We shared just a tiny bit about what to expect in the Open Space portion >tomorrow >Closed for the day, went to dinner, everyone was invited for the evening >fishbowl > >9. FISH-BOWL DISCUSSION ABOUT RECENT WORK [after dinner] > >This was optional, but everyone came. A very recent organizational >intervention was de-briefed by the three facilitators involved in that work >in the center of the circle. Lots of questions, comments, conversation. >This was very useful since, up to this meeting, it was rare that this much >detail about an intervention was shared, and there were many ahas and much >learning about the different approaches represented in the room. > >[ DAY TWO - Saturday] > >1. CHECK-IN > >We took about 20 minutes to reflect on the day before, and to check-in. > >2. OPEN SPACE INTRODUCTION > >Before the meeting, My co-facilitator put on the walls a matrix of meeting >areas and times, as well as "The Four Principles of Open Space" and "The >One Law of Open Space". She opened the Open Space with a short description >of what it is, letting us know we would be setting our own agenda, using >the four time slots and three meeting areas. As is customary with OS, this >was very short, maybe 10 minutes. > >For those who dont know Open Space, there is a very complete description >of Open Space in Harrison Owens two books, "Open Space Technology - A >Users Guide", and "Expanding Our Now: The Story of Open Space". Highly >recommended. > >Six or seven topics were offered to the group by participants. Convenors >selected time slots and meeting places and the "marketplace" was opened for >people to sign up for sessions. > >It was fascinating to watch the group deal with several of the time slots >that had two or three items. In some cases, the convener opted not to do >their session so they could participate in another in the same time slot, >and in another, two of the topics were very similar and were combined. The >net effect was that the entire group of 10 stayed together for all four >sessions. > >3. OPEN SPACE SESSION #1 [9:00 - 10:30] >4. OPEN SPACE SESSION #2 [10:30 - 12:00] > >These two sessions were very lively, pertinent and productive. The group >had a chance to discover talents, experience, and offerings that had been >available, but not tapped or brought to awareness prior to this meeting. > >5. OPEN SPACE SESSION #3 [12:30 - 2:00] > >This session, after about 45 minutes, was (by some participants >estimation) beginning to drag and to get very abstract and heady. At 1:45, >several participants expressed their concern that we might wind up leaving >Sunday afternoon (the next day) without having accomplished anything that >had a life beyond the weekend. In other words, it might wind up like >nearly every other AMBER-OD meeting that theyd had over the previous ten >years. > >After a few minutes of discussion, the convener of session #4 (one of the >people most vocal about not wanting to "just talk abstractly") offered to >give her upcoming slot up. It seemed there were three or four things the >group REALLY wanted to get started. > >My co-facilitator asked if the group wanted to have another opening >(offering of new topics for the last time slot). They did, and she opened >it up, and four topics were offerred. The "marketplace" was also opened >up, and the group formed into three smaller groups to address three of the >four topics. This all took place in 15 minutes, and the last session (#4) >was devoted to these topics. > >6. OPEN SPACE SESSION #4 [2:00 - 3:30] > >An unbelievable amount got accomplished in this short period, including the >framework for a Field book for AMBER-OD practitioners, and a >transformational evolution of one of AMBERs workshops to make it more >relevant to the kinds of organizations AMBER-OD was involved with. > >Energy was high, and there was clear commitment to make these initiatives >happen. In fact, it seemed then (and now) that there wasnt any way to >stop them, because the individuals and sub-groups involved had taken such >ownership that they were determined to make them happen with or without >AMBERs sponsorship. > >7. OPEN SPACE "EVENING NEWS" AND CLOSING > >Each of the three groups presented their work to the whole. There was a >level of excitement and ownership that several people said had never >happened within AMBER-OD before. > >There was to be another fishbowl this evening, and, in fact, the group >gathered for it after dinner, but there wasnt anyone who really wanted to >do this, so we just visited, told stories, laughed and joked. Mostly, just >enjoyed being with each other. > >[DAY THREE, Sunday] > >By Saturday night, we had already accomplished most of the objectives, and >so we could devote Sunday to tying loose ends and evaluating just where we >were. This was a very different experience for AMBER-OD. They had never >gone into the third day of one of these meetings with their work mostly >done. In fact, they usually got on airplanes Sunday afternoon before any >clear resolution was reached about what they were going to do next. > >The three people that had been with AMBER the longest, each said that in >ten years, they had never had a meeting like this - people usually left >feeling somehow incomplete. In the words of one of these old-timers: >"Something is different, the spirit of generosity and sharing is profound, >safe, available. This meeting is very nurturing. This gives me renewed >hope for AMBER-OD." > >ABOUT THE AI/OPEN SPACE INTEGRATION > >We had originally planned for the AI day to move more smoothly into the >Open Space the next day by generating some themes from the AI part, maybe >even some Provocative Propositions. These were to create the theme for the >Open Space. As it turned out, the AI part didnt develop that far. We had >decided it was more important to extend the interviews than force the AI >day to go into an explicit generation of themes and Provocative >Propositions. Amazingly enough, even without any explicit integration of >AI and Open Space, they worked together in a natural and powerful way. > >My co-facilitator had said in her opening remarks on Saturday morning that, >ideally, a group devotes three days to Open Space. If you only have one >day, it would be useful, but should be thought of as a day of good >conversation. If you had only two, on the second day, there would be an >opportunity for important issues to be raised, but not resolved. If you >had three, then thered be opportunities for issues to be resolved, and for >action-planning. > >We still havent sorted it all out, but it seems that having the day of AI >preceeding the Open Space created such a strong field of connection, shared >values, and common goals that the Open Space component went through a >series of phases that normally takes three days in a much shorter time (the >one day). It had really been quite remarkable to see the group do this >unplanned shift (OS people will remember the phrase "Prepare to be >Surprised") in Session #3. It was clear that they were all of the same >mind and all but forced us to create a new opening so they could get to work. > >EPILOGUE: > >A month later, energy has not died. If anything, its gotten higher as >things begin to happen. The Fieldbook is coming along, with the AMBER >member acting as editor saying that hes so excited about it, he would do >this even if it werent an AMBER-OD initiative. Similarly, several who >have committed to contribute have said that they would write up their parts >even if there werent going to be a fieldbook. The new generation of an >AMBER workshop has already changed (the next scheduled one was held last >week) due to the work begun at the retreat, and everyone is energized about >the new directions. > >Maybe more significantly, it seems that what we did last month for AMBER-OD >has begun to affect AMBER as a whole in a positive way, bringing new hope >and new energy for the ambitious goals AMBER has set for itself. > >----------------- > >Dave > >Discovery-Dialogue-Direction, Inc. (3D) >1191 Tolo Trail >Moscow, Idaho 83843 >tel (208) 882-6880 fax (208) 882-6861 >mailto:3...@turbonet.com >http://personal.palouse.net/3d >+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= >appreciative-in...@utdallas.edu is sponsored by the Organization >Development and Change Management Executive Program in conjunction with >the Dallas-Fort Worth OD Network. >-- >Sending "help Appreciative-Inqry" to majord...@utdallas.edu (no subject >line) will get you information on subscription and other options. Jack >Brittain <britt...@utdallas.edu>, School of Management, University of >Texas at Dallas, is the list manager. >+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= >
