Alan, A story and recommendation In 1995, in Canada, one of the 10 provinces had a referendum vote to determine whether or not it wanted to leave the Country and be an independent entity. The vote was 50.5 % in favor of remaining in Canada and 49.5% in favor of leaving the country. A very close vote. There were many angry and grief stricken feelings throughout the country. The country in general is one of the most peaceful nations on earth but there has been a history regarding relationships with this one province that has included violence and bad feelings that go a long way back. There is a different language and culture in this one province than in the rest of Canada. Our colleague Eleanor Belfry-Lytle called a meeting immediately after the vote, while the country was feeling torn apart, to determine if there was any interest on the part of any of us in the Toronto, Ontario area to use our skills with Large Group/Whole Systems meetings to do something to assist the Country to move to a better future. The initial ideas included one large and highly publicized event in the capitol city. I remember suggesting, after a talk with Harrison, that we invite all Large Group/Whole Systems facilitators across the country to join us in offering a day (and the day we picked was Feb 19th of 1996) to host a meeting called For the Love of Canada and that the meeting format in each venue, if possible, be Open Space Technology. Eleanor, Larry Peterson and myself were the primary workers behind the scenes, getting information out, getting press releases to get media coverage, participating in media events about the project, and so on. We had no budget, each of us giving what we could as a love offering.
As I sat in my office of those days, a windowless tiny space in our home that I shared with four lively children and their friends, I remembered laughing as I spent endless days in faxing, mailing, e-mailing and in telephone conversations. The reason for my laughter was thinking, if these people could only see where this was all taking place from to create a better future for the country, they would be in disbelief (Larry and Eleanor were in fairly similar situations of less than ideal conditions) and I laughed also because I enjoyed our confidence that we could make a difference. Each Larry, Eleanor, and myself also organized our own events in our local area too. For me, I had the opportunity of being invited to have events in four close municipalities and had them on the dates leading up to Feb 19th. While all the planning was going on, the Mayor of my own municipality called and spoke of his displeasure that he was hearing about our event from others and why had I not contacted him to make sure our town had an eventand after that call, we did organize a meeting for the 19th itself to which he assured me all of town council would attend and they did. It was key that we did not ask anyone for permission to do this, but followed what had heart and meaning for ourselves. The hundreds of events on and around the 19th of February focusing on For the Love of Canada were profound. Individuals responded to our invitation and meetings were held and facilitated, some large, some small. I cant remember the media events that Larry and Eleanor did, but I do know that I had the opportunity to get word out through interviews in newspapers, tv and on national radio. Many many people had good ideas AND immediately put some of them into action to bring about healing. Those of us who were involved cannot tell you exactly what this event achieved, but we know that several groups were formed for relationship building and healing that continue today. About a week after the Feb 19th Larry and I co-facilitated an equivalent to an OST meeting on line in a chat room for the national news magazine. The meeting duration was three hours. At the end, we talked with the editor and he said that in all his years he had never experienced such a positive solution focused dialogue across the country as that which we facilitated. The investment of our time to do this project was about a month of solid work each (with lost revenue opportunity due to unavailability to take on other contracts during that time). The cost for each of us was about $500. The experience and the outcome: priceless. The story and what I recommend to you may or may not be helpful to you in your thinking so please accept it as a perspective that I offer as a possible way for you to achieve what you want to do, although not in the way you wanted to do it. My understanding is that you want to provide input to the Democratic party to influence its future. My knowledge is that any means of simply creating a one way information flow of ideas and the inevitable push of complaints, does not bring about change, any more than does brainstorming and other think tank approaches to problems. I have met with many many city, county, province planners and they all have the same challenges. Even when they are willing to receive all of that data, cull through it to get what is valuable, come up with new policy papers/plans and so on, the net result is that when they present their work to the public, it is generally what the planners call a blood bath of complaints and dissatisfaction. There are a number of books including (I recommend) the Change Handbook edited by Peggy Holman and Tom Devane, Berrett-Koehler publishers, 1999 that speak to the process of bringing about change, what is needed, and what methods exist to bring change about. A common ingredient is to get a critical mass to buy in to the new, to the ideas while simultaneously stirring the passions to be involved in the new and simultaneously creating opportunities for that involvement. OST is at the top of my list when it comes to achieving this and served us and the country well in our For the Love of Canada. No one need remember who and how the outcomes were achieved, or the influence that we had. And that is part of being totally present and totally invisible in facilitating a large mass of people, a whole country. Blessings, Birgitt -----Original Message----- From: OSLIST [mailto:osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu]On Behalf Of Harrison Owen Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 10:13 AM To: osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu Subject: Re: Help with Idea / Democratic Party - Internet - New Technology At 07:28 AM 1/10/2003 -0500, you wrote: 1. Write an "Open Letter to the Democratic Party", the gist being that, considering outcomes of the past two elections, the Democratic National Committee should ask Democratic voters and the American people: "What should we do now?" Not a doubt about it. The Democratic Party, of which I have been a life long member, could certainly use some help. And the thoughts that you are noodling would make a real contribution. However, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for acceptance. That said, it is always worth a try. Some years ago, inspired by a wonderful happening in Canada (and Birgitt was a central actress), I proposed using Open Space (computer based and face to face) to create what I called a "Civil Conversation." I think there was a discussion about all this sometime back -- which might still be in the archives. More recently, I have been a part of a conversation to help the Governor of Georgia (The US State) repair his education system -- with Open Space as a Key component. There is no indication that anything will happen with all this -- but you might find some of the language useful. Our brief proposal follows (actually less than a proposal, and more of a conversation opener). ********************************* The renewal of the education system of Georgia (as indeed any human system) requires not only innovative approaches, but also a deep knowledge of the nature of the system and its context (external stakeholders and forces). Such knowledge permits the choice and tailoring of approaches to assure an appropriate fit, thereby minimizing negative unintended consequences (fix one problem and create 20 new ones). Such knowledge also allows for the preparation of the system to receive and effectively utilize the innovations. Among other things, this preparation will enhance buy-in from those who constitute the system and must implement the system changes. Standard approaches towards meeting the requirements indicated above include massive data collection combined with system modeling. Under ideal circumstances, data from all aspects of the system is combined to form a fully accurate map (model) of the system. Unfortunately, time, budget, and in some cases ability, all conspire to limit the collection of data, effective analysis, and accurate modeling. The net result is a compromised product. In order to save on the costs of data collection and system modeling, an Expert Panel is frequently appointed on the presumption that their experience and knowledge can make up the deficit. Doubtless, such an approach is better than nothing, but not without its costs. A finite group of people can never know the full richness of a large system, and their presuppositions and biases (which everybody has) inevitably limit and/or skew their understanding of problems and potential solutions. Further, any solutions that may be devised must then be offered to the population of the State for implementation. Unfortunately, it is a common experience that movement from the proclamation of an outstanding solution to implementation is often barred at the point of execution by the infamous NIH Not Invented Here! In short, there was no buy-in. Further Considerations One of the central insights from the world of Systems Thinking is that a system is its own best model. This simple statement of the obvious is a reminder that complex systems boggle the mind when it comes to identifying and understanding the constituent elements and their interactions. Thus, if you desire a perfect model of the system, the system must be its own model. Another insight, coming from the work of those who assist in the process of large systems change, is that buy-in, in terms of identified solutions, is enhanced when those who must implement the solutions are essentially the same individuals as the ones who created the solutions. Therefore the more people substantially involved in the change process, the higher the likelihood of success. Or, as it is sometimes said, Get the whole system in the room. In this present context, The Whole System would potentially include every person in the State of Georgia, and doubtless many others who reside beyond the State. At the very least, the target group would include all those who care about the education of children in Georgia. Obviously there is no single room large enough for the millions who might choose to be involved, nor would it be desirable to simply shut down the State in order to free them all for a meeting. But there is a way. A Different Way Utilizing a combination of Open Space Technology and widely available computer technology (Internet), it is technically possible to involve the entire State of Georgia in the process of the enhancement of education for the people. Open Space Technology is a simple approach to large group interventions which has been in existence for almost 20 years. To date it has been utilized in 70+ countries approximately 30,000 times with groups ranging is size from 5-1500. Participating groups have included governmental agencies, Native Americans, Israelis and Palestinians, and AT&T executives. Focal Themes for the gatherings were The Future of American Forests, Building Roads on Tribal Lands, Peace in the Middle East, and design of the AT&T Pavilion for the 96 Olympics. Organizing time for such events is minimal, and given the basic logistics (a place to meet, and the presence of the people), 24 hours is sufficient. Costs are also minimal primarily because the services of only single facilitator are required, regardless of the size of the group. In situations where space is donated (a High School Gymnasium, for example), people bring their own food (Brown bag it), and the facilitator comes from the group, the cost is essentially zero. The results of an Open Space are basically guaranteed to be the following: 1) Every issue of concern to anybody will be on the table. 2) All issues will be discussed to the extent that anybody cares to do so. 3) Written reports of all discussions are prepared, and available to all participants prior to departure. 4) All issues will be prioritized. 5) Related issues are converged. 6) Action plans for high priority issues are developed, and responsibility is assumed for execution. With the addition of The Electronic Environment it becomes possible to link multiple Open Space gatherings both in time and space. Simply put, reports generated in any Open Space are instantly made available to all other Open Spaces, regardless of when or where they may occur. It is also possible to allow for real time interactions between all participants and gatherings, essentially creating a meta open space. The basic technology for doing all of this is essentially available to any 12 year old, although some additional Bells and Whistles can markedly enhance the result. A most valuable bell or whistle is Data Mining. As reports are generated and consolidated in a common data base it becomes possible to search for emerging themes and solutions. In essence, the system models itself. Further, since the authors and participants behind all reports are part of the record, the basic outlines of emerging networks and coalitions are revealed. Effective utilization of such networks and coalitions in the implementation of potential solutions can be a powerful tool. Harrison Harrison Owen 7808 River Falls Drive Potomac, MD 20854 USA phone 301-365-2093 Open Space Training www.openspaceworld.com <http://www.openspaceworld.com/> Open Space Institute www.openspaceworld.org <http://www.openspaceworld.org/> Personal website http://mywebpages.comcast.net/hhowen/index.htm 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