hugs to you! :-} On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Harrison Owen <[email protected]> wrote:
> Good stuff -- as usual. I can think of some things to say -- but I will > do that on OSLIST now that I have my head and computer in more or less > working order. > > > > ho > > > > > > > > *From:* OSLIST [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Suzanne > Daigle > *Sent:* Monday, December 14, 2009 1:23 PM > > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: Future of OST (was: Re: [OSLIST] honouring each other) > > > > Thank you Arthur for creating this post under the new heading of "Future of > OST" ; thank you also for connecting it to what Peggy had written before and > tying it to what Harrison speaks of now, partially in jest, asking whether > the time has come to eliminate OST. > > > > Why, I ask myself, are we having this conversation now? Is the > conversation really about the future of OST or about what's happening in the > world right now? > > > > My public line in the sand right here,right now is that I believe beyond > the shadow of a doubt that these times are viral and fertile for *all*that > OST offers and invites! As I watch so many leaders and others still > gripping the levers of control, working harder and faster with so much > seeming to hang by a thread, I feel myself on the edge of a precipice > knowing that the time for me to jump is right now. > > > > I agree with Arthur and Peggy on pre-work and also with Harrison in Wave > Rider who talks about doing your homework (Chapter 10)-- a lot of this is my > own pre-work (homework). Where do I want to go with this? What do I really > care about? Why? and What might happen along the way? Do I trust the > process? Do I trust myself? Do I trust others? and finally Do I have any > choice? > > > > What Brett Barndt described in his December 13th post (Topic: Open > Government Workshop Series) talking about a recent conference related to the > telecommunications industry and the FCC is a story that plays out in so many > places. All the ingredients for opening space are there: real serious > issues, complexity,diversity, urgency, passion and need. And as I stand on > the edge of my own precipice fearing this jump without a safety net, what I > know for sure, is that Space will Open...if not by me, then surely by others > with others. > > > > It took me awhile to get it, to know that I should "just do it" which is > more than the dabbling that I've been doing so far. Perhaps that's what this > new conversation about the future of OST is all about. It's about courage > and that courage needs to come from inside of me. Inspiration is what I get > from all of you! Thank you so much for that this past year. > > > > Time now to get to work. I've got some serious urgent homework to do. I > know that 2010 will be a busy year. I know I'll bump my head a lot; my ego > will get bruised and I'll feel plenty insecure worrying as I always do that > I may not be good enough or know enough but in the end, I'll always know I'm > not alone thinking as I do because of you. > > > > > > Suzanne > > > > Suzanne Daigle > > [email protected] > > NuFocus Strategic Group > > 7159 Victoria Circle > > University Park, FL 34201 > > Tel: 941-359-8877 > > Cell: 203-722-2009 > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Artur Silva <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Dear Peggy: > > > > Thank you for articulating this an inviting us to think about the “open > spacism”, the future of OST practice and how can we maintain “Open Space” > open, hence, evolving and transforming over time. > > > > The first thing that came to my mind, when reading your post, was a note > that Harrison made many times in the past about the future of OST being to > stop talking about OST - when every meeting will be an Open Space one, there > is no need to talk about OST. > > > > Unfortunately – or not – IMHO, that time is far from happening. So, we must > discuss what will be the future of OST before that time will come or, > putting in a different way, what future do we want to construct for OST (*) > in the next (few) years. > > > > That is where your post invites us to think about. There are so many > different ideas in your post that I will not be able to discuss them all. I > will not event try. But I would like to add to some of your comments some > other (probably even more heterodox) views. > > > > [The previous part of this mail was already written (and saved), before the > post Harrison sent yesterday to some friends about “Wave Riders in the Sky”. > What follows is written after that, but I will try to maintain the points I > wanted to add, and not be influenced – if that is possible – by his post] > > > > 1. Some time ago, I have tried to discuss (twice) about the > “Foundations of OST”. Let me recall those discussions: The first, on *doing > self-organization - OST "foundations”*, began here: > http://listserv.boisestate.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0705&L=oslist&P=R55873&I=-3&X=016DDA0C8CAC43541F&Y=arturfsilva%40yahoo.com. > (May/2007). And the main post of the second one, on *Anti Laws of OST - > Foundations of OST?*, is here: > http://listserv.boisestate.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0906&L=oslist&P=R65903&I=-3&X=016DDA0C8CAC43541F&Y=arturfsilva%40yahoo.com(May-June/2009). > > 2. I will not repeat here what I wrote there but the main point of the > “Foundations of OST” are, IMHO, to give the major attention to the > “Pre-work” (theme, invitation, diversity, etc) and then sit in a circle, > clarify the rule of two feet, create a Bulletin Board, a market Place and go > on with the Business. > > 3. From here I concluded that the Principles (the main basis for > “open-spacism”) are *one more thing not to* do/state/refer. Harrison > himself suggested that more than once. (What about that as a major paradigm > shift for OST?) > > 4. So I don’t even understand how someone can say that the > invitation/preparation is one less thing to do – on the contrary, I think it > is the most important and the most difficult part of OST! > > 5. In what relates to your concern, Peggy, with people that are not > prepared for the *openness* of OST, I don’t think that the solution is to > combine methods (say, add some AI in the beginning, or clarify the so called > – and IMHO useless – “givens”), but to decide - in the preparation phase - > that OST *is not* (yet) the adequate method for that situation. Some other > less open methods (like The World Café or Future Search, to refer only two, > may be what is needed in the situation. (If I conclude that the most useful > method is TWC I can even facilitate that, as a preliminary approach to > arrive later to OST, as I think that TWC is less frightening and opens some > space, which can be later enlarged. If I conclude that what is needed in the > situation is Future Search – which btw never happened – I will have to ask > the client to search for a different facilitator, as I think that FS is not > compatible with OST, because the facilitator is always in a central position > that disempowers the client – later they will never be prepared to OST, and > will be more and more away from it. > > 6. There are so many other things I would like to comment to your > post, Peggy, but this is more than enough for a first take > > > > Warm regards > > > > Artur > > > > > > (*) There is a difference about saying “what will be the future of OST” or > “what is the future that we want to construct for OST”. People that prefer > the second, probably don’t even agree that “whatever happens is the only > thing that could”. What will happen to OST is what we will care (and will be > able) to create. Not “the only thing that could” ;-) > > > > --- On *Mon, 11/23/09, Peggy Holman <[email protected]>* wrote: > > > From: Peggy Holman <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [OSLIST] honouring each other > To: [email protected] > Date: Monday, November 23, 2009, 4:19 PM > > I've been following this exchange wondering what, if anything, I have to > contribute. > > I want to tease out a thread that has to do with what Kaliya called "open > spacisms". It also relates to something Holger said: > > > in my experience, the OS folks are among the most > > change resistant people that I have met in my life. > > Before I expand on this thread, just a few words about the exchange itself: > > Thank you Karen, Wendy, Lisa, Artur, and Holger for your leadership. In > particular, Karen, I appreciated the distinction you gave in your messages: > > > I welcome direct and frank conversations. What I do not welcome is > blaming, name-calling, and yelling. > > Kaliya, thank you for being a voice for change. And, when faced with some > very direct feedback, for moderating your tone in your last several posts. I > value your brilliance and passion and am glad to see you step in on behalf > of this community. > > Michael, thank you for the years of service and being there on behalf of > Open Space's online presence. I hope your dedication to this community > continues. I also thank you for facing a challenging onslaught with, what I > thought was doing your best to be squeaky clean in your communication > through the last several days. > > It is a challenge to be a lightening rod and I honor the work both of you > are doing, Michael and Kaliya, for staying with the deeper purpose I see you > both carrying on behalf of us all. > > **** > > So, here's the thread that I want to pursue: how the Open Space principles > help us both support and resist change and what that means for the evolution > of OST and opening space. > > The OS principles are wise and wily (clever). They are at their best when > they remind people to take responsibility for what they love; when, for > example, people discover that they really can moderate their own conflicts > without a facilitator. > > I think the principles are at their worst when they replace co-creativity > with resistance. For example, someone comes to me when preparing for an OS > gathering and says, Open Space goes broad, not deep. I can turn that back > to them quite simply by telling them that they create their own experience. > And that's true. It also shuts off an exchange about what it means to go > deep and how we can create the space so that people come together with > greater depth. > > Too often, I have taken the "turn it back" route rather than engaging. And > I don't think I'm alone. This may sound heretical, but I believe the cues > for making this choice are embedded in the Open Space community's culture > and to our detriment, that has made us change resistance. I offer a bit of > my personal journey on this and then how I see it relating to this > community. > > > MY STORY > > When I began working with OS, I fiercely defended the space from all > comers. I worked to keep any pre-work to a bare minimum, sure that people > would understand the brilliant freedom of Open Space the moment they stepped > in. Since then, I've found compassion for those who experience the > disorientation of freedom shock when they first experience Open Space. > > When I began working more in community settings, with greater diversity and > where there aren't the implicit "rules of engagement", I found that > cultivating a sense of connection and clarity of purpose is part of creating > a welcome, nutrient space. And contrary to the myth that talks don't work > in Open Space, even Harrison has successfully given them in the morning of > the second and third day of an Open Space gathering. > > In other words, as my practice has grown, I treat quite differently > "givens" that I used to take as gospel and defend. Examples: > > * Pre-work (clarifying the intention and calling question, identifying and > inviting stakeholders) is trivial. If you spend a lot of time on it, you're > working too hard. > > * Open Space doesn't mix well with other practices. In fact, I have found > creative, flowing ways in which different practices work together to meet > the needs of the specific situation and culture. It requires getting > creative with design colleagues and sponsors to meet the needs of a group. > > * Once you're in an Open Space event, stay in Open Space. While this is > still my preference, there are circumstances where integrating other > activities, like a morning talk, serves the needs of the group just fine. > > I want to be clear that I am still there to ensure the space is as open as > possible. I have just come to believe that what keeps the space open is > more nuanced than I understood when I started working with Open Space > Technology in 1993. I no longer defend the space. I co-creatively ensure > it stays open. > > > THIS COMMUNITY > > So what does this have to do with this community being resistant to > change? > > The OS principles contain deep truths. I think most deep truths contain > contradictions. On a light note, here are a few examples of such > contradictions: > > 1. Look before you leap. / He who hesitates is lost. > > 2. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. / Out of sight, out of mind. > > 3. The pen is mightier than the sword. / Actions speak louder than words. > > 4. Better safe than sorry. / Nothing ventured, nothing gained. > > 5. Birds of a feather flock together. / Opposites attract. > > 6. You’re never too old to learn. / You can’t teach an old dog new > tricks. > > Wisdom involves discerning how to navigate the contradictions. > > Yes, whatever happens is the only thing that could have. This is > empowering when used to awaken someone to their own capacity to meet their > needs. When it is used consciously or unconsciously to maintain the status > quo, it becomes destructive. It becomes a way to do nothing. > > Rather than just saying "who ever comes..." or "whatever happens...", when > someone raises an issue, I now treat it as a potential learning moment for > either or both of us; an opening to understand something more fully Most > often, exploring the issue leads to them discovering their own power to > act. But through the conversation, they feel heard, respected, met. And I > learn something about their culture. > > With this change in my practice, I have become more fluid in how I open > space, sometimes using other processes as a doorway in, sometimes hosting a > speaker because it serves the needs of the session. I am less glib than I > used to be about the principles, recognizing both their power and their > shadow. And I am more wiling to experiment with form, knowing that the real > work is opening space within and among us. > > What does this sort of experimentation which many of us are doing mean for > how Open Space Technology itself evolves? > > Is OST's form perfection as is? It is definitely elegant. As Harrison > often says, a system that isn't changing is dead. Isn't this an > interesting paradox? > > I think that the last OST innovation that has been widely embraced was when > several of us began opening space for convergence following a conversation > at the Toronto OSonOS in 1997! > > So with all the people experimenting with how we use OST, what might we > learn about the nature and form of our work? I suspect there's more > fluidity to the nature of opening space than most of us consider. > > For example, I sometimes hear from colleagues who use other conversational > practices that Open Space doesn't surface the collective intelligence of a > group in easily shared ways. I can hear the "open spacisms" raised in > objection to this statement. Indeed, I have seen groups come away with a > deep sense of how they fit together as a system. Yet, through their words > or the notes, communicating that collective intelligence to those who > weren't there is often a mystery. > > How might we approach this as a design challenge while staying true to the > ethics of "one less thing to do" and trusting the people of the system to > find their own answers? > > I've become more willing to experiment, to seek simple, natural forms that > meet these sorts of objections. For example, I have come to appreciate the > intimacy of reflecting in small groups. Since people don't all return to > the large group at the same time, there's a natural rhythm to starting small > then moving to one circle. > > I don't pretend to have "the" answer of how OST and our understanding of > Open Space evolves. Perhaps the evolution isn't in the form but in our > deeper thinking. It could be that the simple elegance of internalizing the > practice of opening space frees us to experiment more with the form. After > 16 years, I still feel like a novice, learning about the nature of opening > space. > > I think it is an important, creative question for the evolution of our work > and our community to consider how we evolve rather than dismissing > criticisms and objections by naming a principle. Is anyone else interested > in such conversations? > > > Kaliya, thanks for calling out open spacisms. It gave me a doorway to > speak to something that I haven't been able to figure out how to say. > > from cold, cloudy Seattle, > Peggy > > > ______________________________ > Peggy Holman > The Open Circle Company > 15347 SE 49th Place > Bellevue, WA 98006 > 425-746-6274 > www.opencirclecompany.com > www.journalismthatmatters.org > > For the new edition of The Change Handbook, go to: > www.bkconnection.com/ChangeHandbook > > "An angel told me that the only way to step into the fire and not get > burnt, is to become > the fire". > -- Drew Dellinger > > > > > On Nov 22, 2009, at 9:20 PM, Raffi Aftandelian wrote: > > > friends, > > > > as someone who has made both positive and hurtful contributions to the > ost community, two more > > things come to mind: > > > > i notice myself asking myself what are the ways in which i have showed up > at my best in this circle, > > and also at less than best in this unexpected and wondrous time on > OSlist. > > > > also, i wonder what else seeks to be expressed right now, what remains > unfinished? > > > > thank you all! > > > > warmly, > > raffi > > > > p.s. and yes, jon, absolutely vegetarian chicken, my omission > > > > p.p.s. thank you alan re: good things happen! > > > > * > > * > > ========================================================== > > [email protected]<http://us.mc546.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > > ------------------------------ > > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, > > view the archives of > > [email protected]<http://us.mc546.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > : > > http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html > > > > To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs: > > http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist > > * > * > ========================================================== > [email protected]<http://us.mc546.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > ------------------------------ > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, > view the archives of > [email protected]<http://us.mc546.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > : > http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html > > To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs: > http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist > > > * * ========================================================== > [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 > > > > > -- > Suzanne Daigle > NuFocus Strategic Group > 7159 Victoria Circle > University Park, FL 34201 > FL 941-359-8877; CT 203-722-2009 > www.nufocusgroup.com > [email protected] > * * ========================================================== > [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 > > * * ========================================================== > [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 > -- Suzanne Daigle NuFocus Strategic Group 7159 Victoria Circle University Park, FL 34201 FL 941-359-8877; CT 203-722-2009 www.nufocusgroup.com [email protected] * * ========================================================== [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
