...yes, i think the recitation of the 4 principles and the recitation of the one law are quite different. the principles are a good but not essential warmup for the law. but the law seems essential. the law is where what is usually internal... becomes visible... external and observable... "when your mind wanders, take your body with it." in this way the inner and outer come closely together again. wholeness follows soon enough. ...in an event. the principles do seem necessary to support a longer-term, ongoing sort of ost-as-life practice.
...which is perhaps long way of agreeing with a good bit of what artur and marei are saying. and to the point of org and community... i would say that i like also the direction that marei is heading with community... though i would suggest some more words. summarizing what is at http://www.globalchicago.net/wiki/wiki.cgi?InvitingOrganizationEmerges ...i see community as one form of organization, so i am inclined to let org be the broad thing, and community to be a level of development along a spectrum of org evolution... a spectrum that runs like this: (1) crew/cast/taskforce the sort of ad hoc, formational group that gets together or is gathered to put on some show, might be a party or might be a quick fix on a high visibility issue. (2) team/hierarchy ...when the first kind of org has some success, they appoint a leader to safeguard that and take responsibility for making sure the group gets what they want. in return for that security, members pledge loyalty. this can be any size, from a simple committee to general motors... the key is that where responsibility was once implicitly everyones, now it begins to be concentrated one level above where the work is done. (3) when hierarchy atrophies into bureaucracy, things slow down, fragment, and folks start bemoaning "silos" as the reason nothing gets done, they start making connections between silos and network/matrix organization emerges. the focus here is on the connections. (4) what open space does, i think, is invite the next level... community is the way i would say it feels, and "marketplace" is the way it functions. the focus shifts from the connections to the stuff that flows through the connections. exchange matters. dialogue. iterations. make and forth. dealmaking. trading. and this sort of marketplace is characterized not by the sort of trading that is common in financial markets where many players are simply trading all kinds of things... but like farmers markets, where each one has invested some life in the creation of somehting that he/she must offer in the market, because it is who they are... they have invested some of their life in making tomatos... so that is what the offer and sell... they are not there with tomatoes in the morning and hoping to rebalance their portfolio into cukes and beets by the end of the day... they are there to give it all and come away with new cash/energy for the the next planting. so the farmers market view is more like community... or as we sometimes describe the wall in ost... community bulletin board or community marketplace. (5) then, when things really get moving in open space, i would suggest that the focus or manifestation of org is beyond the people of first level, the position of second, the connections of third, and even the goods/services/info being exchanged in the market fo fourth... but comes to be about the experience of the movement itself, pure flow, spirit, grace, elegance and the like. i think most orgs function normally at second and third levels... ost is suggests ways to function at fourth level and to put ourselves through this practice in more ready range of this emergent spirit space of fifth level. and finally, i would add that through the invitation into os, we can decide just how far we want to invite folks to go... we might for instance invite people to come together to create a "learning network" inside of an org. or we might invite "learning exchange" or we might stretch a bit further to invite the creation of a "learning movement" in the org. each one seems a bit bigger and more open... more moving. in this way, the practice of ost supports org evolution toward faster adn easier movement... and so it seems too that the law of two feet must be somewhere close to the core of this practice... must be how it is embodied at the equivalent of the cellular level of the organization. in this way, i think it also brings the formal and informal together, the inner and outer together, the individual and the org into alignment. these "sides" of org are always and already present... but so often held in opposition. os seems to transcend the opposition and still include the distinctions. that seems to be how it manages to take work to higher levels... in transcends without dominating or defeating, and includes without dictating. my three and a half cents. m Artur Silva wrote:
Harrison: So I am proposing that without the law there is no OST, and that the principles are much less fundamental than the other foundations. At least "not needed" - eventually (please forgive my heresy) non-existing.
-- Michael Herman Michael Herman Associates 300 West North Avenue #1105 Chicago IL 60610 USA (312) 280-7838 http://www.michaelherman.com - consulting & publications http://www.globalchicago.net - laboratory & playground http://www.openspaceworld.org - worldwide open space ...inviting organization into movement * * ========================================================== [email protected] ------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of [email protected]: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
