Hi All, I have been thinking about the Law of Two Feet. In the book it says that "When you feel that you are neither learning nor contributing, you go elsewhere." Maybe it has to do with my Dutch Reformed upbringing that I like to examine rules and laws closely. In this case, it made me think that the Law might benefit from a small addition.
I know that Open Space generally benefits from less rather than more - I will get to that too. It occured to me that it is rather serious - as long as I am learning and contributing, or even if I am doing only one of those two, it is OK. Strictly taken, this would mean that there are two valid excuses to bash the ego of the speaker or the convener: I am not learning and I am not contributing. But how about: I don't think it is fun here? Even though I may be learning a very important lesson here, or I may have a great contribution to make to the group, if I don't want to learn that lesson or if I am sick of discussing the topic that I have been teaching about all my life - I can also be very miserable and the best thing for me to do could be to go. And of course, in the spirit of Open Space, I would encourage anybody in that situation to go elsewhere. I have seen people exercise the Law of Two Feet in situations where I had the strong impression there was a lessen for them to learn, but if the person would rather not be there, learning will hardly be effective. On the other hand, I can be in a situation where I am not learning and not contributing but having a great time. Does that mean that I should leave and make myself useful? This certainly appeals to my Calvinist upbringing mentioned earlier! Of course, in my vision of OS, there is nothing wrong with having a good time and I will stay. So that made me think of making an addition to the Law: if you are neither learning nor contributing or if you are not having a good time, go somewhere else. This could work for me: I can be contributing and even though there maybe things that I'd rather do, making this contribution here and now is important so I stay. Same for learning. In the ideal situation I will be doing all three, but if not, two out of three ain't bad and I could even do with one. But this led me to another question. Do I have to have a reason for leaving? I think this is not the idea of the Law of Two Feet. The idea is that I could be in a situation where I find myself starting to feel miserable and really not wanting to be there. The Law is there to remind me of the fact that I have a choice. Not the reasons why are important, but the fact that I have a choice and that I am the only one responsible for the situation that I am in. Even staying and feeling miserable is perfectly OK. The only thing that is not OK is blaming someone else for it. So now back to the Less is More thing. Maybe we need not an addition to the Law, but simply a more general version: whenever I find myself in a situation I don't want to be in, I can go. And if I am explaining it to someone, I can use all sorts of examples about learning, contributing, having a good time, being too lazy to get up (or too afraid), or whatever, to stay or not to stay. When I started writing this, I did not think it would turn out this long... Anyway, I am very interested in your thoughts on this. Cheers, Koos ------------ koos de heer auryn management advies utrecht, netherlands mailto:koos...@auryn.nl http://www.auryn.nl/