Lisa asked, "So what is the form which we can name as Open Space?"
My belief is the same as Lisa's. In my case I say, stick to the "User's Guide". It has NEVER failed me. Lisa, as always, thank you for the loving attention to our Open Space success. You're the BEST!! Elwin Guild Portland CT --- On Wed, 8/29/12, Lisa Heft <lisah...@openingspace.net> wrote: From: Lisa Heft <lisah...@openingspace.net> Subject: Re: [OSList] Conversation today with Brian Burt of MaestroConference To: "World wide Open Space Technology email list" <oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> Date: Wednesday, August 29, 2012, 5:51 PM I am glad of this part of the conversation - I think it is truly useful to know 'inside and out' the human dynamics of what someone sees, moves like, feels in face-to-face interaction and facilitation - in order to design virtual and other technical tools to approximate that. And important to know what one loses or gains in human dynamics, inclusion and interaction - when one adjusts, hybridizes, stretches or omits any part of a process. Koos, thanks for your kind words - and I look forward to seeing you at the WOSonOS. I have a very nice photo of you at WOSonOS 2003 as a group of one. It makes visual to me a lovely reflective moment. It's interesting to think how - in Open Space we honor the visionary - the group of one. Who is encouraged to explore and write their thoughts even if nobody else comes to their discussion. How to support and honor that person in this online / phone call environment. It is also interesting to think of multiple modalities - how different individuals absorb and exchange data / sensing / communication / feeling in a face-to-face event.Online: often people who do are not of the culture to hang out in online spaces disappear from the process or the conversation - because they cannot 'feel' it. Which is why facilitation online is more than just setting up rooms where people can go. Good facilitation online highlights what's happening to those who may not have the ease or culture to go seek it. So I like these ideas about making so many things visible and visual for the not-usually-online sorts of people.Also some people do not absorb much orally - or via text - but instead absorb and navigate kinesthetically, relationally, graphically.One of the basic approaches to designing a learning environment (for example) are to design everything everywhere to include multiple modalities (kinesthetic, relational, audio, text, graphic, reflective thinking / silence and so on) - to include / welcome / honor people who's mode is not text-based, computer monitor-based, audio. Something else to consider - this is personally important to me as I like to call tools by their names so non-facilitators can understand and access what they will need for different tasks and deliverables - and I imagine important to you, Brian, so you do not call some new product by a name that implies otherwise: When can it be called 'Open Space' and when has it morphed to become some very lovely facilitated / interactive / dialogic process - but no longer namable as 'Open Space'. This is true for what we do face-to-face and what we create online. There are so many great things facilitators do that include a group co-creating an agenda, or breaking into small groups and being able to go from group to group, or posting things on walls, or sitting in circles. And they work. But they tend to work differently / hold together differently / have different deliverables and dynamics than Open Space. And whenever I have heard from someone who said, 'Yes, we did Open Space and it did not work at all / felt funny / was rushed / had no 'there there' - it turns out that it was a few parts of Open Space-like stuff - but not the full form. When I say 'Open Space' I mean its complete form. Otherwise I drop the name and that is fine, also. But I do not call something l-i-k-e Open Space, 'Open Space'.Just as I do not call something l-i-k-e World Cafe, 'World Cafe'.Important for me to know that clients and others using these tools know what they are picking up and applying - just as it is to know what a hammer or a sewing needle do. What tool for what job / what deliverables. Especially when dealing with humans and their time and their emotions and their important work and interactions. So what is the form which we can name as Open Space? You may feel differently than me, dear colleagues, and I welcome your other opinions, whether I may agree with them or not.I think - as a learning community - our periodically exploring this can help Brian and others know when to not name the final product 'Open Space' but to find some other great name - or to not use a process name at all. I will begin here and see what you think: What is Open Space? - Opening Circle including the naming and posting of participant-driven topics (hopefully not rushed, to include the reflective thinkers as much as the quick-responders; not voted on, crowd-sourced or clustered - so even the visionary thinker's topic has equal presence and even a group of 1 is valued; ideally not done in advance of the circle - so people can 'play off of each others' energies and ideas rather than just get their stuff up there) - Principles and law(ideally with explanations that honor the group of one / visionary thinker and the self-care-as-productivity that the principles and law invite) - a participant's ability to move between groups, and to have side / butterfly conversations; ability to 'see what is happening in the room' - facilitator not as an interventionist or 'helper'(more visibility than usual may be necessary online to equal the non-interventionist presence / holding space an Open Space facilitator is and does) - continuous session times (what I mean by that: not a one hour here, then another hour the next day sort of thing) and (if possible) multiple session times (Michael - this is for the meeting part - I understand what you are saying for the open open ongoing space you mention. And yes: a bit trickier across international time zones but I agree Koos - bounding the time does its part to create the container even with the flexible participant-driven whenever-time within the container) - Closing Circle for comment and reflection - documentation of the conversations so more than just the members of a group get to learn from each other; so participants can reflect upon and integrate their learning post-event(participant-driven documentation of some kind - any kind - is such an amazing and natural output of Open Space that is different than other dialogic process - I would hate to lose this part - though I am not attached to its being disseminated to participants 'before they leave' the event - to me, it can also happen post-event) I know that many OS events are wonderfully successful without what I personally see as ideal. But those are often the times when I drop the name.Again: I welcome others' completely different opinions and experiences. I welcome great new designs and processes. Including new tools and processes that take their inspiration from other great tools and processes.And: I am interested in hearing your thoughts on the naming of things, dear colleagues. Lisa -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ OSList mailing list To post send emails to OSList@lists.openspacetech.org To unsubscribe send an email to oslist-le...@lists.openspacetech.org To subscribe or manage your subscription click below: http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
_______________________________________________ OSList mailing list To post send emails to OSList@lists.openspacetech.org To unsubscribe send an email to oslist-le...@lists.openspacetech.org To subscribe or manage your subscription click below: http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
