At 14:53 20-02-2001 -0700, Chris Weaver wrote:
I am right
now putting together a package for businesses that uses a one-day OST for
the employees to address the theme, "Serving our community in more
innovative ways." A part of the vision for this initiative for me has been
that it is perhaps a "small issue" -- since it is outside normal business
operations, I am hoping that it is less threatening to business leaders and
more likely to invite them to lay down some of their "weapons." So maybe we
are talking about "peripheral" issues, where managers can let go of more
control because the theme is not embedded in the central
control/accountability structures of the organization?
Is there an issue about which organizational leaders and members have
passion, that is peripheral to central operations? Maybe this issue is a
good doorway for OST.
This is VERY INTERESTING!
Talking about Portugal it would be very difficult to sell OS to companies
or Public Administration to solve crucial problems. Even to NGOs - that
I though at first that would be easy - it is not :-(( But I think that if one
can find a "small issue" or "peripheral issue", as Chris referred, it can
be easier and maybe we can after move to more fundamental issues.
Now that Chris gave a word to it, I understood that my "Interactive
Methods for IS" go in the same direction - introduce OS in a peripheral
way (for instance an IS/IT project) and hope that it spreads...
Now, writing this, I made a sort of connection with a different subject
and I would like to have other opinions about.
I think that managers (as some consultants?) are sometimes afraid
of OST because they think they will be unable to "control" the situation.
I have become conscious that other "large group facilitation methods"
(that I think miss the point of self-organisation at the edge of chaos),
are more accepted both by management and by OD/OT people.
Would you agree that maybe it is because they are "more structured"
that people feel less afraid of them? After all when we open the space
we are not changing the concerns of people - only the "way" to address
them - from highly structured to low structured...
Reading about other "large group methods" the first thing that comes to
my mind is that with some of those methods
- managers will feel less afraid and
- consultants will seam to do a complex/expert thing that seams (to
clients? to themselves?) to justify the fee they ask for...
When clients pay a consultant they are paying an "expert" that will
do "some work" for them. "Doing nothing with elegance" - is that
payable by a client as consultancy?
Admitting that it is not (or at least that it is difficult) how can we regain
the "expert role" that is so valued in our society? Combining OS with
other tools, methods or "specialised knowledge"? Concentrating
in training instead of consultancy? (a trainer is always an "expert"
by definition - if he "does nothing with elegance" he can always claim
(or be understood by others) as a specialist in "non directive training
methods"...)
Does this make any sense to others?
Regards
Artur
*
*
==========================================================
osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu
Visit: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
===========================================================
osl...@egroups.com
To subscribe,
1. Visit: http://www.egroups.com/group/oslist
2. Sign up -- provide an email address,
and choose a login ID and password
3. Click on "Subscribe" and follow the instructions
To unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of osl...@egroups.com:
1. Visit: http://www.egroups.com/group/oslist
2. Sign in and Proceed
