Paul - Can always count on you. Thanks
ho 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> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org From: oslist-boun...@lists.openspacetech.org [mailto:oslist-boun...@lists.openspacetech.org] On Behalf Of paul levy Sent: Monday, October 14, 2013 4:48 PM To: World wide Open Space Technology email list Subject: Re: [OSList] The OST Game Harrison Whatever you experienced as OST when it first escaped has largely become a game. A game of training. A game of "go back to base and read the manual". Even you play a regular game on here as one of the elders who keep defending OST against change (oh yes you do). It's become a game with a book of instructions with bells, anti-clockwise circle walking and "rules". That's a shame and, thankfully, fairly pointless as it keeps on escaping in different and lovely ways anyway. Now, opening space, that's something really worth trying... (Waits as the usual elders line up to deliver their wise pronouncements)... So it goes. Paul Levy On Monday, 14 October 2013, Harrison Owen wrote: A marvelous conversation... and I have been absent a bit for a good cause, I hope. I have been doing my homework, reading all the assigned material about broken reality and culture hacking. Interesting journey! And along the way I came upon an odd realization - I really just don't like games! Seems it had something to do with early childhood trauma... my mother just loved games, and she would beat me unmercifully. Oh well. Unfortunately that aversion carried on into my adult life, particularly as it related to the so called Group Dynamics games that we were all supposed to play prior to serious discussion. Seems like you just couldn't have an adult interchange without some "warm-up" to break the ice. Or so they said. Really bugged me. I just couldn't believe that consenting adults could not communicate without some elaborate foreplay - funny tools drawn from the omnipresent Facilitator's Tool Box. So much for my inherent pathology and prejudices, but there may be something of a positive outcome. I simply had to believe that given reasonable conditions, human beings could sit down and talk productively with each other - all by themselves. As adults. It did take two martinis to get me there... but "there" was (guess what) Open Space. We have been doing that ever since, and it turns out that children do just as well. What may have started as childish rebellion (against Mother, Facilitators, etc) has only gotten worse. With increasing age and experience it has become clearer and clearer that the less I do the better things work. It is not that I have no agency or contribution, but it does turn out that the ambient wisdom and capacity of the individuals and groups that I am privileged to interact with so vastly exceeds my own that I would do very well to fold my hands and shut my mouth. Anything else has me working much too hard, and generally messing things up... Such are the eye glasses through which I view my world. Distorted perhaps, and different for sure, but I'm stuck with it. And it is through those glasses that I read my assignments, beginning with "Reality is Broken." Jane McGonigal weaves a fascinating tale of the strange (to me) world of Game Makers, Gaming, and Gamers. I can certainly understand why she has created a stir, and I applaud her massive research and clear prose. That said, my reaction was close to horror, and the thought that the world and techniques she describes should become a model and a means to fix our world was pretty close to terror. Doubtless much of this can be ascribed to my aforementioned phobia - but I suspect that others might share such feelings. Two points stand out in my mind-Gaming is addictive, a point she develops in infinite detail, and secondly that good Game Makers actually capitalize on this phenomenon and make every effort to enhance the addictive power. Their success is obvious and awesome. It seems that one massive, online game attracted 5,000,000 man/years of attention. George Orwell, where are you now that we need you? I joke a bit - and my concerns run deeper. When Jane says, "Reality is Broken," I feel constrained to ask, Who's reality? Not mine, for sure. It is not that I experience every day as a walk in the park, but there have been precious few moments when I have felt bored, without challenge, non-productive and unappreciated/respected. And I have many friends and colleagues around the world who seemingly have a similar experience. Doubtless that makes us odd, perhaps aberrant, but there is a certain consolation in numbers. We are not alone. When I think about the factors that positively contribute to my reality they include such things as the indeterminacy of my surroundings. The moment I think I know where it is all headed, I am confounded by the twists of happenstance. Then there is the total lack of clarity when it comes to goals and objectives. Certainly I have hopes and desires, but just about every time I have locked on some particular outcome, it doesn't turn out that way - usually better. And lastly, if there are clear cut rules, I certainly have never found them. Of course there are moments when I think it is all a dreadful mistake and I am scared to death. But even that has its positive: I know I am alive. So for me, my reality is doing just fine. Exciting, challenging, growthful, rewarding -- In fact it seems to be working perfectly. I am truly sorry for those who have a different experience, but if reality for them is broken, it is reasonable to ask, Who broke it? Or could it be that it isn't really broken, they just think it is, if only because it doesn't measure up to their expectations. That would certainly be the case if reality was supposed to work by clear cut rules, heading in a pre-determined direction, always under somebody's control. That understanding of reality is certainly alternate to anything I know anything about. It just never happened, and if it did I believe it would be unendingly boring. But that might account for the Game Maker's success - for if I read Jane correctly, that is pretty much the reality they create. And if that is the reality you want, no wonder people spend 5 million man/years immersed in it! And on to a related question: Is OST a game? Possibly, but not according to Jane's rules/criteria. To be sure, there is a correlation with Jane's first criteria: Opt in = Voluntary Self Selection, and a second one relating to Good Feedback (we might say documentation). But it seems to me it all goes downhill from there. If there are any rules in Open Space, I have yet to encounter them. To be sure there are 5 principles and a law, but none of them are things you have to do. In fact they all seem to emerge no matter what you do - all by themselves. As for a clear goal, I think you have precisely the opposite. Everything begins with a question, and under the best of circumstances there is no attachment to outcomes. As we say, Whatever happens is the only thing that could have. Just to drive a little deeper. If OST is not a game - what is it? Drum roll... Cutting edge revelation... OST... is ... Life. It does not bring anything new. Represents no mind bending revelation. In fact it doesn't DO a thing. Nothing. OST simply and quietly invites us to be, fully, what we already are - ourselves. It really is shocking. Just be yourself as you really are. Drawn by a question (Quest) - you are invited to explore what you really care about. No foregone conclusions. No prior exclusions (givens). No rules prescribed (by somebody else). Just be yourself and take it from there. Of course it helps to be honest. What do you really care about? And if you care, take responsibility for what you care about. Nobody else will. And you don't need an act of Congress, Parliament, the Legislature, or the writings of the latest Guru. It's just you. But not just you. Who shares your passion? Who will join you in the assumed responsibility? In advance you simply don't know, nor can you predict. But when it happens, you know it happens. Life not only goes on - it gets deeper and richer with the shared passions and responsibilities that weave the rich tapestry of the human odyssey. I know you have heard this song before, but I think it bears re-singing. The temptation to change this simple invitation into some complex process, procedure, structure is almost overwhelming, driven I am sure by our hope to improve and also perhaps to make it something we own or do. Something that requires the professional touch, as it were. But the truth of the matter, I believe, is that there really isn't anything to improve and still less to do. Above all, Don't fix it if it ain't broke, and always think of one less thing to do. So where does all this discussion leave Agile and OST, or more exactly the relationship between the two? Closely united, I believe - but perhaps not in the way that Dan and others seem to be suggesting, even though that way appears to be eminently rational and definitely a good plan. I understand that Agile (as described in the Agile Manifesto) is an elegant set of principles which await implementation (adoption) through some method or process, SCRUM for example. The principles are magnificent and represent the latest iteration of a longish tradition beginning perhaps with Quality Circles, and passing through Excellent Organizations (Tom Peters et al), Learning Organizations, with possibly a side trip through Process Re-Engineering. In every case, elaborate processes, procedures, and protocols were designed in order to bring the noble ideas into everyday practice. In every case the energy and enthusiasm surrounding the several efforts was considerable (aided I suspect by the fat consulting fees that could be generated). And in every case I believe we learned many useful lessons. However, in terms of the desired outcome, which might be described as "enhanced organizational function," I think the record is less than positive. Only people of a certain age will even remember Quality Circles, Excellent Organizations seem evident mostly by their absence, The Society of Organizational Learning disbanded last year, and Process Engineering has been retired by general consensus as an embarrassing failure. Jane McGonigal may just have written the epitaph, "Reality is Broken." Whether Agile and its several implementation procedures (SCRUM, etc) will meet a similar fate remains to be seen. Reasonable people might well ask, how could we invest so much and accomplish so little? Doubtless there are multiple answers, but one stands out for me. We've been trying to organize self organizing systems. This is a thankless task if only because we will never get it right; the systems involved (our businesses, countries, organizations) are so complex, inter-related, and fast moving that we can't even think at that level - let alone effectively structure and control them. Even worse it seems all too often that our best efforts and intentions make the situation worse - our fixes end up with painful unintended consequences. But worst of all our efforts are not needed because the system itself, all by itself, can do a better job. Frankly our efforts are just plain clunky. It is precisely at the point where I think other efforts have been less than successful that OST may enable Agile to succeed -- but not by facilitating the adoption Agile as a set of principles, but in a much more immediate and direct fashion: by enabling Agility. The principles are definitely nice, but what we truly care about is real, meaningful, organizational agility, which others might call High Performance, and Open Space demonstrably delivers on that score. My favorite story, of course is the AT&T design team for the '96 Olympic Pavilion. In 2 days they designed a $200,000,000 structure which had taken them 10 months on a previous effort. That is a 15,000% increase in productivity. Not bad. If that were the only instance of such a phenomenon it would be interesting but not helpful, but there are others, a lot. And how does all that work? It is just a well functioning self organizing system. And if you ask whether it is all scalable - the answer is it is already scaled to the highest levels. Been around for 13.7 billion years, and the Cosmos (along with everything else) is the product. Don't adopt Agile, BE agile. Honestly, it is a natural condition if we stop trying to fix it. So I think we have some very good news here. Reality ain't broke and serious Agility is available any time we want to open the space to let it happen. And if you were wondering who all those friends and colleagues around the world who know that their reality is unbroken (albeit painful sometimes) you can start by looking in a mirror. Yes, I am talking about all those folks who have wandered into Open Space to discover, many times in spite of themselves - that deep, meaningful, productive, playful, respectful encounters with their fellows can and do happen. That is just a taste, of course - but it can happen all the time -- 24X7. I know. Harrison Harrison Owen 7808 River Falls Dr. <x-apple-data-detectors://3> Potomac, MD 20854 <x-apple-data-detectors://4> From:
_______________________________________________ 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
