Alan - thank-you for your comments on the cafe process. I was recently
introduced to this process at Systems Thinking Conference in San Diego. Both
Meg Wheatley and Juanita Brown were there to lead some of the sessions and it
was fabulous. The main conference area where the 1000 plus delegates gathered
for Plenary Sessions etc. was set up as a Knowledge Cafe (small tables for 4-6
people, checked clothes covered with a sheet of paper, coloured pens and
pencils, and provocative questions to discuss). This was new to me and I found
it exciting, interesting and stimulating. On the second day I joined a lunch
time session on "What is a knowledge cafe". I asked about the difference
between Open Space and Knowledge Cafes and one participant with experience in
both said that she felt that Cafes were great for exploring questions and ideas
that needed no action, whereas Open Space was better when there was a desire
for action (or something like that).
After our experience in San Diego my colleagues and I have decided to
introduce the idea of the "Conversation Cafe" as part of a Jan 25th Conference
we putting together for our Managers to help them navigate the technical,
legal, compliance, HR and financial 'waters' of our large health care region.
I am going to share your comments with my colleagues as I found them very
helpful.
If people are interested on how it goes for us I can write something up in late
January. At the same time Laurel Doersam and I should do a post on what
happened with our first Open Space experiment with these same managers and how
we are progressing (a bit of a bumpy road with some important learnings about
allowing for enough time for convergence) in our quest to create a "learning
organization that people love'.
Terrie
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan Stewart
To: osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu
Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2000 2:43 PM
Subject: Re: Open Space a la carte (long)
Hello to Birgitt, Ingrid and All
Your request for clarification and elaboration of my interest in World Cafe
processes is just what I need to
put these on 'paper.' For I have long had the thought to do this, since the
time of Birgitt and I conversed about these matters
while on a walk on which she had her first experiencing of kangaroos and of
an echidna (spiny anteater) in the wild during her first
visit to Australia, last year.
I did a fair amount of composing of what to put out when seeing people's
experiencing at the Berlin gathering, among which were
expressions of disquiet at having 'Dialogue' imposed on small group
gatherings.
Then a gift arrived in the form of an opportunity to facilitate a different
kind of meeting process (Passion Cafe) in the boardroom of one
of the world's best known consulting companies, Ernst and Young, in Sydney;
what I referred to as 'the big end
of town.' This was for a KMLF (Knowledge Management Leaders Forum). Entitled
'Is Conversing Working?' this Cafe was a remarkably
successful gathering in that people commented:
'I am so hungry for this kind of communication.'
'At these forums we usually sit in rows looking at a speaker. This is the
first time that we turned around to look at each other.'
'This is an idea whose time has come.'
Following this there was another extraordinary happening, in the form of
driving with a close friend (Lloyd Fell, who writes songs)
from Sydney to a conference held near to Melbourne called 'Spirituality,
Leadership and Management' (www.slam.net.au).
There I facilitated a 'Passion Cafe' with the theme 'Time to Converse: it's
time to talk about, create and sustain a culture
of conversing in workplaces'. Participants noted that their experiencing of
the process was highly congruent with the
theme and pervading spirit of the conference.
Lloyd and I then came on to Adelaide along the coast (Great Ocean Road),
arriving here late last week. Last Friday we gave a
joint offering on 'No singing or cafe tables allowed in this boardroom' in
which we used the Cafe format to introduce ideas - in a light
touch way - about stages of human knowing that contribute to 'wholeness of
being.' Participants reportedly liked this very much.
And so I have been 'in communicado' to the outside world for the past couple
of weeks and yet in very close communication
with Lloyd during our wonderful travels. I will foreshadow that his work will
come to your attention in the not too distant future
and that it could resonate deeply in you. To say more here could be a
distraction; nonetheless you at least have an inkling
that something profound is in the wind. Some idea of what this could be can
be found be found at www.autopoiesis.net.au.
Birgitt's request has a number of questions imbedded in it. Perhaps a good
way of commenting on my use of Cafe processes
in relation to OST is to address these questions in turn.
> I wonder if you could please elaborate a little on the difference
>between how you perceive conversational processes in relation to what is
>known as "Dialogue" Process.
I have come to appreciate that there is value in using the verb 'converse'
rather than conversation. For those interested references on this are
available. For practical purposes I sometimes describe OST and World Cafe as
'conversational processes.'
Perhaps what is salient here is that, when I facilitate either of those this
is what I say, _in addition to_ the principles of OST:
. We are here to treat each other well
. 'We're in this together.'
. This gathering will only happen once; never again will this group of people
be together to experience the learning that could only
happen with those who are here.
I feel that these are important to set the context in which people converse,
talk openly and freely with each other. This is what
a participant commented last year when I facilitated a 3 day residential for
graduate students in Social Ecology:
"The 'keeper' for me was the wonderful notion that every time we talk openly
with another human being, a third -joint-level of consciousness
is created, from the best of both of us. When we argue or debate, we actually
seek to block the other's contribution and limit potential solutions
or suggestions, limiting world consciousness."
And so I sense that _conversing_ is what happens at gatherings underpinned by
the principles of OST. This is not Dialogue, as I understand the term,
which is a formal process which requires certain conditions in which to
operate and specific instructions.
Conversing 'just happens' when the conditions are right. And when it does
people:
. collaborate in an open, friendly format
. build ideas together, with enthusiasm
. 'talk up' issues, rather than try to 'score points' or to persuade
. harness the collective intelligence of the group
. arrive at surprising solutions to complex questions
. notice and honor the emotional underpinnings of other's and of own responses
. recognise that right and wrong, winning and losing are irrelevant
. welcome diversity of opinion as a wellspring of creativity
. sustain openness to creativity
. appreciate the value of alliances based on interdependency
. enlarge their vision
. recognise and acknowledge 'blind spots' in their own perspectives, without
losing face.
>....[I] would very much like you to elaborate on the difference of what
happens in the world cafe
> to what happens in an OST meeting.
Among the differences I note are:
PHYSICAL ARRANGEMENTS
. people sit at small tables, maximum of 6. At least to begin with. As the
meeting proceeds participants set their own arrangements!
. participants are in the same room continuously - apart from when they use
the L2F to wander where they please.
. what emerges from the conversing is recorded on paper table cloths. These
recordings can be transcribed or photographed later.
. decor and music are used to create the ambience of a Cafe. It is amazing
how a few drapes, candles, vases of flowers can transform a room.
On my recent travels I used Jennifer Lopez' "Lets get loud" to set toes
tapping at the start of the Cafe. Nancy Margulies notes that 'You can also end
by dancing.'
FACILITATION
The main point is that the facilitator has no role in providing direction to
the content of the conversing.
The extent to which the facilitator 'intervenes' in asking people to move
depends ing on the purpose of the exercise.
When it is 'the real thing' ie for real business purposes facilitation is
very much like 'true blue' ie pure 'holding the space' OST practice, although
there can be benefit in suggesting that people move around.
When it is for 'demonstration purposes ie to introduce people to the process
then the facilitator does invite people to move to other tables every now and
then.
CHOICE OF TOPICS TO ADDRESS
I have used OST to 'bring forward' topics that have been 'fleshed out' in
subsequent Cafe gatherings. Other members of this listserve have done the
opposite.
OST can be used to address very complex and conflicted issues and that this
takes time ie 2-3 days. As I have used Cafe processes these have focused on
quite specific questions and have been conducted over periods ranging from 1 to
4 hours.
An important point to note, which the founders of Cafe processes (Juanita
Brown, David Isaacs and Nancy Margulies) emphasise, is that Cafe is used
primarily to go deeper into questions. It is Nancy who coined the term 'Open
Space a la carte', in my understanding.
> One of my current explorations follows from the premise that it is the
>Sponsor who opens the space and the facilitator who then can proceed with
>facilitating the Open Space Technology meeting. I am convinced of the
>importance that the Sponsor should have the opportunity prior to the Open
>Space Technology meeting to make "informed consent" about saying "yes" to
>having an Open Space Technology meeting in the organization.
I will speculate here, without having had direct experience of this belum
(lovely Indonesian word meaning
'Not yet'), that a Cafe process could be a useful way to introduce a sponsor
to the conversing that happens
in an OST gathering. And it could be used pragmatically, as Ingrid suggests,
to clarify and formulate the
theme for the Open Space.
This is not a comprehensive analysis of correspondence and differences
between Cafe and OST processes. It is an
expression of some of my lived experiencing that the two can, in particular
contexts, complement each other nicely.
In the near future these ideas will be located on the World Cafe website
www.theworldcafe.com.
I share these ideas in a spirit of 'here is a contribution that members of
the list may find of value.' Whether you do is not my business.
For this is what Meg Wheatley (whose name pops up periodically on this list)
pointed out to me through her writings:
There is only the fight to recover what has been lost
And found and lost again and again: and now, under
conditions
That seem unpropitious.
But perhaps neither gain nor loss.
For us, there is only the trying. The rest is not our business.
TS Eliot East Coker V
My 'trying' may provoke new questions about the conduct of our wonderful
practice - which is about recovering what has been lost!
Some of you may have a different 'take' on these matters, perhaps
specifically on what you understand by 'Dialogue', and would wish to contribute
your perspective
to this conversation. Please do.
Whatever, please accept whatever you notice as significant here as having
come via a channel from the land downunder, whose residents are reputed to
stand on their heads all day. (I do a lot, but that's a family secret!).
Good to converse, with love
Alan
Alan Stewart
Multimind Solutions
Adelaide
