Harrison! I love the way you keep insisting on "staying out of the way" or to take a nap. And still you are constantly here on the list, keeping me aware of what I do when I open space, interfering if you like, but very much present. And that makes a difference, your presence makes a difference. And I like to think that kind of presence makes a difference in any open space.
Thanks! Pernilla Den 2012-12-20 21.33, skrev "Harrison Owen" <[email protected]>: > Lisa The Body Worker! I like that!! And I have no question that you do what > you do with great enthusiasm, heart, skill -- and all to positive effect. > That said, my question (quest) really goes in another direction. It is not > so much about doing something wrong. And certainly not that YOU are doing > something wrong. But perhaps we are all doing the wrong thing. Or maybe > doing anything at all. Put somewhat differently, I find myself coming to the > conclusion that much (perhaps most) of what we do, even with the best of > intentions, produces results that are the very antithesis of what we hope > for. And there is an alternative. > > In your earlier message you said, "Sometimes it is as simple as helping an > organization look at who does what tasks and re-arranging each role's tasks. > Or doing an assessment of what is reasonable pay. Or giving the organization > some sample structure for how to hold supervisor-staff individual meetings > or quarterly evaluation." Nothing problematical here, indeed I think most > people would see all of this as good, standard practice. The "right" thing > to do, as it were. > > But I think there may be an implicit assumption that can lead us in the > wrong direction with the net result is that we "do the wrong thing." The > assumption is that when we confront a floundering organization, we are > engaging a structured entity that we (or somebody) created (organized), > which for whatever reason is malfunctioning. The "fix" is obvious: Adjust > the system so that it works better. > > However, were the object of our attention (The Organization) something quite > different than we presumed -- our well intentioned "fix" is likely to be > irrelevant at best, and possibly destructive. It is a good idea in the wrong > situation (doing the wrong thing). I think that is our situation. > > An alternative view would look something like this -- The organization we > confront is actually the product of Self Organization, and while we may have > some part in its initiation (our passion and responsibility created the > space in which the emergent organization appeared), the manner and > mechanisms of its growth come from a very different place--not us. It is an > organism, and like all organisms it emerges and evolves in response to > multiple, complex, interacting forces -- some of which are observable by us, > but the vast majority simply pass us by. Too much, too fast, too subtle. > > When we, in spite of our obvious limitations, seek to impose our > understanding of design and function upon that organization, we are on very > thin ice, I think. Indeed, I would make the case that were we to set out to > create a powerful system that would limit creativity, eliminate emergent > leadership, destroy self respect, prevent communication and reduce morale to > zombie levels -- I really don't think we could do any better than the > current corporate/government/NGO model. It does one hell of a job, and when > we set out to strengthen that system with yet more organizational structures > and strategies, even with the best of intentions... > > The truly amazing thing to me is that our organizations function as well as > they do in spite of our best efforts to constrain their space and force them > along paths of our choosing. However, I suppose this amazing fact is the > strongest testimony to the power of self organization. And one of our (or > certainly my) major learnings from the OST Experiment is that even brutally > conflicted and constrained organizations perform brilliantly when the space > is opened. It is not about doing anything new or different, it is quite > simply about STOP DOING all the things that inhibit superior performance. No > new structures, procedures, tweaks, trainings, programs -- just fully be > what you already are: Self Organizing! There is really no preparation needed > for Open Space if only because everybody is already there. It is just that a > lot of us are doing it badly, or trying desperately not to do it at all. > Weird! > > Once in existence, we may surely observe the organization, learn about its > function, and perhaps most importantly, learn how we may effectively live > with it, and in it. And if we are careful and attentive, we may even learn > how to enhance its growth and nurture its development (Good Body Work!). But > our efforts will always be of secondary importance. The organization will > have its own structure, its own flow, its own unique way of being. That, > after all, is the nature and definition of self organization. It is said > that the body is its own best healer, and under most circumstances it needs > only the space and time to heal. Oh sure, a little help and encouragement > along the way is great, and a good massage is Nirvana! > > Harrison > > > Harrison Owen > 7808 River Falls Dr. > Potomac, MD 20854 > USA > > 189 Beaucaire Ave. (summer) > Camden, Maine 04843 > > Phone 301-365-2093 > (summer) 207-763-3261 > > www.openspaceworld.com > www.ho-image.com (Personal Website) > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of OSLIST > Go to:http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Lisa Heft > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 8:07 PM > To: World wide Open Space Technology email list > Subject: Re: [OSList] Is it true that Open Space does not really work when > there are many internal conflict? > > Harrison my friend, that is the beauty of it. > We see things in different ways at times, at other times we see / feel / do > exactly what the other would do - always rich for co-learning. > > I do not see it as 'nasty details' - I see it as wonderful stuff rich with > learning - as people telling the stories to inform what may help. Also the > stories help me know how to work with the client on clarifying the task / > focusing question / objective for the Open Space day. It also draws out who > else to invite perhaps, rather than the original small circle the client or > community may first have been thinking about. Or a way to adjust the form of > documentation to match how they might wish to use the information, ideas and > relationships post-event. Things like that. > > And I do not see actions / systems / conversations / meetings that might be > useful to groups as 'interventions'. I see them more as nutrition. I see > myself more as a body worker, helping the system breathe and access its > greatest resources: its human resources. I like to ask about the whole > chain of things because there are some things the organism has capacity to > do for itself (exercise, nutrition, reflection) and some things I can help > with (acupuncture, massage, if you will). I feel there is value in telling > the story and being witness to the story, as well. > > Just some thoughts playing off your thoughts... > > Thanks for sparking my thinking, > Lisa > > > On Dec 19, 2012, at 12:48 PM, Harrison Owen wrote: > >> Good one, Kari! ("Is Open Space not working when there are many >> internal >> conflicts?") >> >> For me the place to begin is with a clear understanding of "working," >> and I find that there are at least three questions (meanings) here. >> You have to make sure you which one you are asking and answering. >> Specifically, do you mean, Does Open Space work in formal terms? -- >> i.e. people sat in a circle, opened a market place, etc -- The answer >> in my experience is, Yes at the 100% level. If you mean Does Open >> Space work as a productive activity? -- were critical >> issues/opportunities raised, clarified, and usefully dealt with? Again >> the answer in my experience is Yes and pretty close to the 100% level. >> However, if you mean "works" as in "solves all problems forever and >> ever..." it gets a little more complicated, and depends greatly on the >> situation and context. >> >> There are multiple examples of Open Spaces involving large groups of >> very angry and/or confused people resolving major complex issues by >> the end of the closing circle. I wrote up one of the earliest in the >> opening chapter of the User's Guide. In that situation 240 people >> consisting of Federal, State and Local officials along with a equal >> number of Native Americans had the task of writing guidelines for the >> expenditure of $1.5 billion for Highways on Tribal lands. This group >> had been fighting for 2 years, and absolutely nothing had been >> accomplished. When the meeting began the group had only 2 months >> additional time before the whole $1.5b would disappear back into the >> US Treasury. In the course of the gathering the discussion was indeed >> hot and heavy, putting it mildly. However, by the closing circle, the >> task had been accomplished, the guidelines had been created. To be >> sure, those guidelines had to be put in formal, legal language -- But >> by any reasonable standard it can be said that Open Space worked in >> and through intense conflict. >> >> In a different situation and context the question becomes more nuanced >> and complicated -- but the answer, simply put, is the same. Open Space >> works. >> For example, I am currently working with a relatively large >> organization (2000+ employees) which was described to me by several of >> the senior folks as "dysfunctional." When I asked what that meant they >> said something to the effect that the anger, low morale, missed >> communication, games playing, etc. >> was so severe that nobody really even knew what the problems were, and >> for sure the productive output of the organization was seriously >> compromised. >> They wanted to do an Open Space for their Washington people and did I >> think it would work? >> >> I had no problem saying, Yes. At least it always had worked so long as >> the participants fell somewhere within the genetic pool of Homo >> sapiens. >> HOWEVER, that is only the beginning of the story. The truth, it is >> really quite easy to enable any group of people, who share some common >> concern, albeit in highly diverse and conflicted ways -- to reach a >> point of intense, meaningful, and productive interaction and >> solutions. But that is just a start, albeit a good one -- and never to >> be confused with eternal salvation. >> What next? >> >> The simple fact of the matter is that if a group of people, having >> experienced deep, meaningful and productive joint activity (in the >> Open >> Space) are simply thrown back into the situation which caused all the >> dysfunction in the first place -- they are twice damned. They have >> seen the lights of Paris, and are definitely back on the farm. Now >> they know, as perhaps they never did before, just how really miserable >> they are, and worse yet -- they know it could be better. In an odd >> way, this is real progress, but very painful and not conducive to a >> long term, positive outcome. >> >> Right here we run head on into all the "nasty details" so well >> described by my friend Lisa H. ("...without looking at the whole >> ecology of communication, history, context, resources, differences, >> internal and external reasons for issues that feel like conflict, >> communication styles, what happens before and after the event, how the >> event fits into the ongoing work of the community or organization, and >> so on...."). >> >> But when it comes to finding the way forward, I have to take a >> different path than friend Lisa seems to be suggesting. If I >> understand her correctly, the critical next steps involve careful >> analysis of all the "nasty details" >> (I think we call it Systems Thinking) combined with strategic >> interventions (re-organizations, etc) to achieve the fix. >> >> This is a great idea and Grand Theory -- but frankly it gives me a >> massive headache. I simply can't think all that and I seriously doubt >> that anybody else can either. It is simply too massive, too complex, >> too interconnected, too fast moving. Mind boggling -- and I really >> don't think I am stupid, just finite human. And when it comes to >> designing useful solutions, the stakes have just simply gone off the >> charts. I don't think we can do that! >> But more >> to the point, my experience tell me, we do not have to. >> >> If we have learned nothing else in the 27 year Natural Experiment >> Called Open Space it is that Self Organization is powerful and >> effective. >> Left to >> its own devises, the organization (any group of people gathered >> together to do something) will in short order manifest orderly >> patterns that enable their efforts. Those patterns (structures) may be >> minimal, but they work. >> And if we provide some minimal initial focus (sit in a circle, create >> bulletin board...), what happens naturally appears to happen with even >> greater dispatch. All we have to do is stay out of the way. This is >> not a process we do, as in run, create, even facilitate. It is what we >> are, and it happens all by itself. >> >> Perhaps it is an unjustifiable leap -- but I absolutely believe that >> the only difference between the Organization of a group of people in >> Open Space and Organization of any other sort is a matter of size and >> duration. >> It is >> all self organizing. And in all cases it remains true: Organizing a >> self organizing system is not only an oxymoron, but stupid, a waste of >> time, and ineffective. Truth is the organization (organism) can and >> will do a much better job -- and virtually every effort on our part >> slows things down and effectively thrown a "spanner" in the works. >> Putting it in the baldest of terms, our efforts to organize the system >> and create the "fix" >> actually >> create most of the pain and dysfunction we seek to resolve. Self >> inflicted wounds. >> >> So when we follow the path that Lisa suggests, which of course is also >> the path that most all of contemporary management theory and practice >> supports, we are essentially adding fuel to the fire and creating new >> levels of potential dysfunction. Our "fixes" may seem to work for the >> moment, but in all too short a time we hear the magic words - >> Re-Organize! Re- Organize! The good news is that it does keep all >> managers, consultants, and I'm sorry to say, facilitators employed. >> But it is an odd situation: Seems we create the very problems we are >> then paid to resolve. >> >> Total heresy I know, but on the off chance that some grain of truth >> may reside therein -- what is the alternative? My experience says that >> the alternative is a simple one, and one we already know: Open Space. >> >> This might mean "doing an Open Space"--but more usually it would mean >> applying the lessons learned from our Natural Experiment in our >> everyday world of life and work. The lessons have been multiple, but >> we might start with the simple ones. For example, when starting a >> project INVITE participation -- DON'T Order it. And guess what, the >> right people will turn up. And when they do show up, get rid of the >> tables and work in a circle. >> And forget about the Program Plan; elicit the passions and >> responsibilities of those who cared to come. Well you get the idea. >> >> All of this is really the heart and soul of the 5th Principle >> "Wherever it happens is the right place." And we will learn, I think, >> that it can and does happen anywhere and everywhere. >> >> Goodness me, I have gone on. And indeed there is a lot more to go. >> If you >> are interested in my best shots to date, check out my last two books, >> "The Practice of Peace," and "Wave Rider." But better yet just start >> with your own experience and let it grow. It could really get >> exciting. >> >> So Kari -- Does Open Space work in conflicted spaces? You bet! And >> everywhere else as well. >> >> Harrison >> > > _______________________________________________ > OSList mailing list > To post send emails to [email protected] To unsubscribe send an > email to [email protected] > 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 [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > 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 [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] To subscribe or manage your subscription click below: http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
