Michael,
I am asking for help. May I investigate your thinking?
"...there is no such thing as an equal standing in authority terms."
Will you expose your detailed thinking behind your expression of this
one idea?
On 3/30/14 8:34 AM, Michael M Pannwitz wrote:
Dear Dan and everyone,
here are some bits from my experience:
---When I get a call or an email from someone asking me to facilitate
an ost-event I tell them to please arrange a "contact" meeting that
needs to be attended also by the person that will have the authority
to say yes or no at the end (usually the person that would pay my
fee). The purpose of the contact meeting is for the sponsor to find
out, whether the prerequisites for an OST event are sufficiently in
place. This meeting takes 60 to 90 minutes, no fee charged.
This process has nothing to do with OST, its simply what is needed for
any kind of intervention of any kind of man-made organisation that is
embarking on such a venture.
---Participants in an OST event do not leave the authority bestowed on
them in the wardrobe, there is no such thing as an equal standing in
authority terms. What does happen is that folks differently bestowed
with authority will, in contrast to what they usually do, follow more
freely their "passion and responsibility" which, it seems, in some way
increases their non-bestowed authority... the expanded space for the
forces of selforganisation, the real motor in an OST event, seems to
have this effect. Everyone, all participants, fully well know the
limitations that they will have to deal with "back in the asylum" when
they follow their passion... and very often they are amazingly elegant
and cunning in seeing their project through (responsible). That is why
I encourage the folks in charge not to make any kind of promises
regarding what they will do to encourage projects emerging from the
ost event. Participants will get the conditions in place to see their
projects through.
---Yes, again my experience, coercion, control and such do shut down
open space, not completely though: I have seen the force in a dormant
stage and becoming quite alive when the conditions are right
(prerequisites in place)... isn't it our experience that big CONTROL
seems to shut down just about anything? In OST events I have actually
seen efforts of BiG control being met by counter-activity (this is
sometimes the effect of facilitator intervention when a space-invader
tries his stuff or, and even more effective, the "group" grappling
with space invasion/attempts at control... these observations I have
made when there is a really burning business issue and absolutely
nobody has the foggiest idea regarding the solution, least the folks
with "authority".
I really impress myself with your passion, Daniel. Maybe because I
also have been trying to refine my understanding, find precise
language, get my hands onto, etc. what it is that happens in os-events
or even in os-organisations. In my os-facilitator-career, I have
increasingly given up trying to understand it and focus more on what I
see happening... which has increased my faible for stories. By now, I
know that stories are fact, right, my facts.
Have a great Sunday,
cheers
mmp
On 30.03.2014 13:45, Daniel Mezick wrote:
Hi Michael, Everyone,
I'm sorry there are coercive mandates happening in Berlin, and that you
have to experience them.
Regarding the Sponsor for an OST meeting,
I am saying that I believe this person must have enough formal authority
("sufficient+1") to be able to actually arrange, budget and convene the
meeting. And that the authority that the Sponsor holds is conferred to
him or her by the organization. Is this true in OST?
Regarding the Participants,
I am saying that I believe that after the Marketplace opens, the
intention and in fact the reality of OST is that everyone has an equal
standing in authority terms. At the start, no one person or group has
any more authorization to act than any other person, regardless of their
formally authorized role in the organization. Is this true in OST?
For the record, I am not at all in favor of mandates. I am allergic to
them. I believe mandates and other forms of coercion strongly discourage
self-organization by the imposition of external authority over the
person or group. Self-organization is impossible in scenarios where
individuals and groups are not free to choose. Is this true in OST?
This places out routinely EVERY SINGLE DAY in Agile adoptions. Formally
authorized leadership imposes Agile practices on teams while at the same
time encouraging teams to "self-organize". I for one have seldom if ever
seen it actually work that way.
And so I have my questions about authority in Open Space.
I'm not being cute here: I'm hoping someone can help me break/refine my
model of OST as it pertains to formal and informal authority, in the
Open Space. I'm trying to use more precise language to explain what I
think is going on in OST. In my view, the 1 Law and the 5 Principles
make it clear everyone has equal informal authorization in OST,
regardless of their formal title. I some ways the formal titles are
suspended, as the space is held open for inquiry and dialogue.
This is my current belief. I asking for help in determining if this
belief is close to truth.
Related Links:
http://newtechusa.net/agile/authority-and-power/
http://newtechusa.net/agile/authority-explained/
Regards,
Daniel
On 3/30/14 5:23 AM, Michael M Pannwitz wrote:
Dear Dan, Jamie and Paul,
is there a new (5th or 6th) principle emerging?
Such as:
"Whoever is authorized is the right people?"
Or
"Whoever is mandated is the right people?"
Or is there a new prerequisite for the unfolding of the forces of
selforganisation in sight?
In addition to the 4,5 or 6 that we are often concerned about?
Such as:
"High level of authorisation"
or
"High level of mandation" (Palines for mandate, have a look at this
link
http://de.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Mandation
Or are these thoughts simply a manifestation of "old-paradigm",
remnants of the realm of control?
Control? Wasn't that the effort to shut down selforganisation towards
zero?
Heavy stuff for a sundrenched Sunday morning in Berlin where I and the
entire population (including dogs and cats and other pets kept in
human housing) are suffering from having been robbed of an hours time
by authorities that are mandated to do such stuff.
Oh yes, before I forget, there was the notion that "passion and
responsibility" is all that is needed for "authorisation" (with the
nagging suspicion that folks driven by passion and responsibility and
even taking action under those influences walk through the walls and
obstacles set up by those authorized to raise them as if they were
thin air).
Greetings from Berlin
mmp
On 29.03.2014 21:57, Daniel Mezick wrote:
I am asking for help. Will you help me clarify my thinking?
I'm wondering if 100% equivalence in authorization for all
participants
is actually a key/defining characteristic of any genuine and authentic
Open Space event...
First things first. Definitions:
Authority: The right to do specific work
Authorization: The conferring of authority
Formal Authority: Authorization conferred from the formal organization
to a person. Example: "the CEO".
Informal Authority: Authorization conferred from peers, colleagues and
co-workers. Example: "emergent leadership".
Now let's get into it. I currently think, and believe, that:
1. For an Open Space event inside an organization, the Sponsor must
occupy a role with substantial formal authorization, definitely more
than enough to actually authorize that OST event. The higher the level
of formal authorization of the Sponsor, the better it is for the event
overall.
2. The Sponsor authorizes the participants- the "invitees"-- to meet
together, and do the specific work of exploring and investigating the
Theme. This "authorized work" is done in "authorized space"...in that
specific place, for a specific period of time. The Sponsor explicitly
authorizes all of the above and conveys this message after they stand
up, and before they sit down, at the opening.
2. The Facilitator is formally authorized by the Sponsor to do the
specific work of OST event. Absent this authorization, the Facilitator
has no standing.
3. This is the big one: Everyone else, Sponsor included, has 100%
equivalent authorization (100% equivalent "right to do work") as of
the
moment of opening of the Bulletin Board and/or the opening of the
Marketplace.
4. As the event progresses, authorization dynamics are in play. These
"informal authorization" dynamics occur continuously throughout the
day
in real time, moment by moment. Those who experience net increases in
levels of informal authorization as of the end of the meeting have
membership in the "emergent leadership" group.
I am very interested in what experienced folks think about the
validity
of the assertion in (3) above.
Ex the Facilitator, does everyone else actually have 100% equivalent
authorization in an OST meeting? Why or why not?
Is this 100% equivalence of authorization actually a key/defining
characteristic of any genuine and authentic Open Space event?
Thanks for any insight you may be able to provide, and
Kind Regards,
Daniel
--
Daniel Mezick, President
New Technology Solutions Inc.
(203) 915 7248 (cell)
Bio <http://newtechusa.net/dan-mezick/>. Blog
<http://newtechusa.net/blog/>. Twitter
<http://twitter.com/#%21/danmezick/>.
Examine my new book:The Culture Game
<http://newtechusa.net/about/the-culture-game-book/>: Tools for the
Agile Manager.
Explore Agile Team Training
<http://newtechusa.net/services/agile-scrum-training/> and Coaching.
<http://newtechusa.net/services/agile-scrum-coaching/>
Explore the Agile Boston
<http://newtechusa.net//user-groups/ma/>Community.
_______________________________________________
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
--
Daniel Mezick, President
New Technology Solutions Inc.
(203) 915 7248 (cell)
Bio <http://newtechusa.net/dan-mezick/>. Blog
<http://newtechusa.net/blog/>. Twitter
<http://twitter.com/#%21/danmezick/>.
Examine my new book:The Culture Game
<http://newtechusa.net/about/the-culture-game-book/>: Tools for the
Agile Manager.
Explore Agile Team Training
<http://newtechusa.net/services/agile-scrum-training/> and Coaching.
<http://newtechusa.net/services/agile-scrum-coaching/>
Explore the Agile Boston
<http://newtechusa.net//user-groups/ma/>Community.
_______________________________________________
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
--
Daniel Mezick, President
New Technology Solutions Inc.
(203) 915 7248 (cell)
Bio <http://newtechusa.net/dan-mezick/>. Blog
<http://newtechusa.net/blog/>. Twitter <http://twitter.com/#%21/danmezick/>.
Examine my new book:The Culture Game
<http://newtechusa.net/about/the-culture-game-book/>: Tools for the
Agile Manager.
Explore Agile Team Training
<http://newtechusa.net/services/agile-scrum-training/> and Coaching.
<http://newtechusa.net/services/agile-scrum-coaching/>
Explore the Agile Boston <http://newtechusa.net//user-groups/ma/>Community.
_______________________________________________
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
