Hello all! The Village Care inspired skypes have continued and the notes from our second to most recent chat follow. Notes from most recent talk last week will follow in the near future ;)
*OS skype 5/7/13* * * *Participants:* Linda Stevenson, Celia Bray, Pernilla Luttropp, Paul Levy, Tricia Chirumbole, David Glenwinkel’s shadow – he was on, but then lost in cyberspace…. *Discussion:* *Next steps in OS and implementation criteria* – can be a part of the invitation. OS is never a free for all; there is a theme, an invitation. Someone queries: “What’s the best thing about open space?” Someone responds that they resonate with something HO talks about, “The nexus of caring”. *Disseminating OS principles/philosophy/practice* There is interest among some to contribute to disseminating the practice of OS to a larger and broader audience. Suggestion: One day events to talk about these things? Linda: I do open space every year, but it is not enough money to live on. I would like to see it more out there. *Messaging/branding: *David [Glenwinkel] doesn’t highlight the term, “Open Space” – does it make sense for the OS community to discuss calling it something else? Are practitioners interested in collaboratively exploring messaging and ways to communicate and connect with a wider audience? We [OS practitioners] are talking about what we’re excited about [using the terminology that works for us] because we’ve experienced it – when you are talking about sales and marketing – what’s going to get those interested who have not experienced OS? *Purpose vs. means: *Paul Levy references Forum Theater to illustrate some reasons why it can be difficult to communicate the value of OS and similar practices to payer’s/financial stewards in an organization. Paul discusses how a Forum Theater practitioner (a founder?) feels that it is to be used at the community or village level, but not to be used in capitalism. Paul disagrees that it should never be used in the world of capitalism, but identifies conditions under which it is less likely to make sense and be effective: at a time where an organization and/or participants in a circle are experiencing a *misalignment of purpose with means.* More and more organizations find that the *purpose* of the organization does not match the *means* For many, the purpose becomes the maximization of profit, which is separate from the means. In leadership conversations, they know to justify the expenditure on the OS. They have to convince the people who are paying that it will justify the purpose, which often is to make money. When you get most people in the room in an organization, their goal is to do their job well, to innovate, etc. - the means – but this may not be serving the purpose of the organization, which may be the maximization of profit, or perhaps the unreasonable maximization of profit. Unless you can get the shareholders in the circle in a meaningful way the engagement will not be effective – there is no circle if the focus is solely on the profit and not on the means. Linda and Pernilla share that they both have had experiences where the initial discussion has had a lot to do with profit and financials, but when it came down to creating a marketplace, no issues raised were solely profit-focused. There are loads of “means” type stories to sell – I [Paul, I think] thinks they [clients] are booking him because they have “means” type questions. An engagement may be untenable if the organization/leadership is too unhinged and detached from the means and the employees on the ground are spiritually committed to the means – our purpose [as facilitators] is not to stand in between the groups. *Communicating/messaging: *What is the *point of pain* you are seeing when working with a client/prospective? *NGOs’ pain* - Key donors feel disconnected, founders – sense of mission, sacrificing, no sense of economics. The compassion model imho is upside down and wrong – I can’t change that [uncertain of contributor, think it is Paul]. In the *business world*, money is the point of pain that attracts them; There needs to be some frustration in the leadership for them to be willing to come to a meeting to work things out – you can then sprinkle in open space principles. *Organizations are often confused about the true nature of their problems and the solutions/interventions needed: *The problem and the solution are often not what they think it is. Is that something they have to find out for themselves? *Money is never your solution* at the end of the day – it does not solve all of your problems. When the prime purpose is not the same as the means, you can chase the money like Ebeneezer Scrooge and not solve your problems. *Self-organization* as the main brand or tool – this can be a put off leaders, can be seen as an act of subordination. Talk about potential, about opening space for possibility or for ________whatever resonates with the group/organizations. In David’s Village Care model entitled, “Outcomes, Practices, and Open Space” – OS is reported to be the least attractive term. Lead with, what do you want to achieve? How are you going to achieve it? How are you going to organize it? …then the last part is OS. Should we explore branding term that works, WOM referrals, and success stories to spread OS? -- Tricia Chirumbole US: +1-571-232-0942 Skype: tricia.chirumbole
_______________________________________________ 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