We tend to lean on the more "structured" side of preparing for an OS.
One of the ways we use OS is as the core of a larger change management process with clients who are facing major organizational and business change efforts. The full change process has three distinct phases which include: the prework (which I will describe here), the conference and the follow up to the conference. Prior to doing an OS we are looking for three things: 1. Alignment of the entire system around a complex issue which has a high degree of passion and urgency. 2. Clarification of givens, boundaries, information needs, resistance issues and potential areas of conflict. 3. Coordination of any activities that need to be done prior to opening the space to better prepare people to work on their change issue. We talked to several clients who had not achieved the results they had hoped for out of an OS conference and found that in several cases the "passionate issue" identified by the person who had contracted with the consultant was not one that the rest of the organization cared about in the same way. Often there were a number of related issues, but each part of the organization was so focussed on their own particular issues they could not see the issues of the others - and they could not see how their issues all interconnected. We do three issue identification sessions - one with the leaders, another with the staff or stakeholders (only) and a third joint session with all the members of both groups where the whole system is represented. Together they identify an issue or change direction that has passion and that everyone feels is both critical to their overall success and needs to be dealt with in an urgent manner. When we do this we have often found that the final issue is actually a reframing of the original issue, but that by doing that reframing the issue is stated in a way that is more inclusive of the concerns and needs of other groups and stakeholders. The result is much higher feeling of connection to the process and a growing sense of energy and passion for the OS day(s). For example with one group the issue we started with was "improving efficiency", for which the director had great passion and the rest of the dept, including the department heads did not. We started by taking the entire leadership team with the director offsite for a day to explore the current change forces, needs and issues. It initially looked like every dept head had a different view and the group did not have an issue in common. By the end of the process we had discovered that all of their issues connected - all of them were symptoms of a lack of preparedness for a shift from an internal department to a free standing business and the likelihood of a great surge of new business in about 6 months. A parallel staff session yielded many of the same concerns about being ready to take on new clients and a surge in their business. Their joint session was extremely dynamic as everyone began to see the synergies and possibilities of everyone working together. In the end we did a great OS on "issues and opportunities for preparing XYZ to thrive in a new competitive market" and we had 90% voluntary participation in the session (the original estimate of participation was 30%). During a training session we spoke to an associate who did an OS for an internet organization on how to be more competitive, they had a great day with lots of ideas generated and then had no one volunteer to move any initiatives forward. In his opinion OS failed - we know that it did not, it just showed the truth of the system - that people were not willing to put their energy into improving the company for whatever reason. I believe if they had done the prework that we do the "real" issues would have come forward early enough to determine whether to refocus the event or cancel it. Once we have identified our issue we then look for givens and boundaries. We need to know how much space is open? What can people really work on? What expectations can they have about what will happen with their ideas? How will actions be moved forward in the system? We also form a design team of representatives across the larger group (usually particiants from the issue identification sessions). This group identifies what information do people need before they can work on the issue? Are there concerns and barriers about moving forward? Do people need to grieve the past? Are there issues of letting go? etc. to create a sense of readiness for entering the space and beginning to work on the change issue. We look for what is the absolute minimum structured process that needs to happen prior to the open space. For example with an externally initiated change we often bring in the senior people to answer questions of the group on what the change is about and why it is happening. My partner has experience with both Real Time Strategic Change and Future Search and we often use components of those interventions on the day or half day prior to the OS. For the organizations we work for this "structured" entry into OS seems to make sense to them. Our prework gives us a chance to get the whole system to a point where they are ready to enter the space. We do not try to reduce the complexity of the issue - if anything we increase it by including more viewpoints. We do not try to eliminate conflict. We do not let anyone get into proposing solutions. We do not try to share all the data/wisdom in the system - we just try to ensure each person has what he or she needs so that they can bring their own unique wisdom to the OS. I know that even without the prep OS can be successful - but feel that it is important that my clients do not find the experience so negative that they are not willing to try OS again. My clients often have their careers on the line when they contract with us to do a change intervention in a new way and it is important to me that I do not let them down. Also we have found that by aligning the system prior to the OS we dramatically increase the willingness of people to participate in a voluntary manner which in turn improves the quality of the conversations and improves the focus of the results of the session and the outputs. Follow through is greatly improved due to the high level of alignment and commitment up front. We have never had a "failure" or bad client experience with an OS when we have done this prework. We have been able to reintroduce OS to a few clients who had only experienced an OS without any prework and who were feeling quite negative about OS. These clients wanted more balance between a structured planning process and the chaos and creativity of OS before they were willing to open the space again. We do find that once we have worked with a client the prework for future sessions becomes easier and easier and expect that eventually will be able to enter OS without any prep at all. Sharon shar...@pdesigns.com
