Yes and Daniel, there are the words of a story and the
feeling/meaning of it. I considered writing a longer message in
the telling of this story, but I wanted to transmit as much of
the spirit/experience of it as I could.
Ralph didn't offer any explanation of his observation that
morning. He did just like I said, got up in a morning news
circle, it was an OTgathering as I noted but that doesn't matter,
it was open space and morning news. He said his piece and sat
down. The experience for me, and others I have learned only
later, was stunning and disorienting, for sure.
I thought to honor and convey this experience through some
measure of similar brevity in my retelling. Maybe this is what
you picked up on. The disorienting magic of Ralph's moment.
There are moments in open space of surprise and disconnect, maybe
frustration or confusion or misunderstanding or disorientation
and even disappointment that arise in open space. This we all
know and have experienced. This, to me, is not so much a thing to
be solved but the nature of the territory. It just is.
Ralph never did explain his statement, as far as I know. He had
something to say and he said it. That was his only job. After
that, each of us had to figure out for ourselves what, if
anything, to do with his story, to decide if it was wisdom or
wisecrack. The storyteller, I think, has only the responsibility
for finding and sharing what's true for him/her. The rest is up
to us.
Maybe this points to the learning and challenge that we all have
in open space, namely learning to trust more and more that we
already are always included in a flow that is bigger and deeper
or whatever than we can see or understand or articulate
sometimes. Exclusion is the illusion. A little bit of errant and
temporary mental structure. Discomfort is not a problem (and
can't be solved by anyone!); it's a trail marker. Which is to say
about exclusion and missing out, "welcome!" The good news is,
and the bad news is, you're in! And, it's all still happening Now.
As I scroll up to send tha now, I notice the word tyranny again
in the subject. Is it not some kind of tyranny we all attempt
over and over again when we expect and insist that the world
explain itself to/for us? Is this not something of our central
challenge, something all of us work with? The edge of open space
is an end of comfortable, conventional understanding? Or something?
On Tuesday, October 6, 2015, Daniel Mezick via OSList
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi Harrison,
Thanks for the tips on how to search OSLIST and Google, etc.
I did do those things actually. However, that's a bit of an
effort, especially searching the OSLIST archives. I guess I
could eventually pick up OSLIST culture that way, little by
little. I suppose an earnest person with loads of time could
sift through OSLIST archives to figure this culture out. The
hard way.
However, like the SPIRIT book teaches, there is nothing like
a good story to convey culture. The kind of story with a
beginning, a middle and an end.
I notice that, when you are the one referring to a certain
OS-mythos story, you usually tend to include the short list
of pertinent details, the essential details that provide the
essential context, so the reader can follow along, and engage.
And I'm always grateful for that, as it helps me to follow
along, and get what you are referring to, and more fully
understand the story, and feel oddly included in the story.
Earlier, I express how not having the context tends to (for
me) arouse feelings of: exclusion, cluelessness, and a
general lack of membership in whatever
"historic-OS-mythos-episode" is being referred to. Sort of an
"out group" feeling. You know? Sometimes, I wonder what the
poster might be thinking by posting random fragments of a
"you had to be there" kind of story. Other times, I wonder if
other readers are also feeling these feelings. Or if it is
"just me."
And so: I am very grateful for your stories, in part because
you include the pertinent details, and in so doing, make me
(for one) feel included.
So thanks for including the context in your stories. It makes
them fun, and easy to follow. OSLIST culture certainly has
it's quirks, and for me, your stories make this culture
easier to figure out, and navigate, and enjoy.
Getting back to the Tyranny of Structurelessness:
Do you think these 3 assertions by the author are actually
true? Do these ideas have legs?
* /This hegemony can be so easily established because the
idea of "structurelessness" does not prevent the
formation of informal structures, only formal ones./
* /For everyone to have the opportunity to be involved in a
given group and to participate in its activities, the
structure must be explicit, not implicit. /
* /It is this informal structure, particularly in
Unstructured groups, which forms the basis for elites./
Daniel
On 10/6/15 10:04 AM, Harrison Owen wrote:
Dan, Google can often help.
https://www.google.com/#q=ralph+copleman
ho
*From:*OSList
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf
Of *Daniel Mezick via OSList
*Sent:* Monday, October 05, 2015 4:51 PM
*To:* Harrison Owen; World wide Open Space Technology email list
*Subject:* Re: [OSList] The Tyranny of Structurelessness
Howdy Harrison,
Thanks for describing the context of the Ralph Copleman
story- I'm very thankful for that info.
I notice that, lots of times here, there are references made
to notable OST episodes, and situations from times past...
...the "OST-mythos" as it were.
These mythical stories often have me wondering what I
missed, and what I might now be missing. (Being clueless as
I am.)
I'm sure these story-fragment postings are not posted with
intent to exclude anyone, or to be discourteous, or unkind.
More like: some good old basic camaraderie is taking place
between some old friends.
Still: Do these "inside-story-fragments" on OSLIST tend to
evoke feelings of exclusion in readers who were /not/ there
at the time?
Not sure.
<CONFESSION>
As for me, personally, I sometimes find myself experiencing
curiously odd feelings of exclusion, when a told-fragment of
an old OST-mythos story lacks explicit context. So I can
follow the story, you know? The terms "outsider" or
"clueless" or "not in the story" describe these feelings
fairly well. "Not invited?"
I sometimes wonder if some of the hundreds of /other/
members of OSLIST ever feel this way...or if it is "just me."
</CONFESSION>
Daniel
On 10/4/15 2:59 PM, Harrison Owen via OSList wrote:
“Everythingis moving.† .... Michael -- I remember
that moment verywell. And Dan, I’m not sure the
context, etc, would helpvery much. But just for the
record the odd phrase popped out at one of the
International Symposia on Organization Transformation
which happened to be taking place at a small college
south of Seattle. I have no idea why Ralph said what he
did, and I’m not sure Ralph did either. But then
againa lot of marvelous stuff seems to burst out with no
obvious logic train. Indeed it may be that the lack of
logic train enables the thought?
Â
Whatever the genesis, the phrase wandered about my head
for some time, quite unattached, and it also happened
that I was working my way slowly through one of the
masterpieces of 20^th century western philosophy when a
fuzzy connection began to form. The work was that of
Alfred North Whitehead, and the title: “Process and
Reality.†I’ve been through thebook probably 4-5
times, and I am frank to confess that I don’t think I
really understandit. But then again I’veheard a
number of people with much greater credentials, tenure,
etc – say the same thing. But I did get that ithad
something to do with, “Everything is moving.†Andthe
more I thought and read, the more I felt that the good
philosopher had made a small mistake on his title. It
shouldn’t be “Process/and/ Reality,†but
rather“Process*is* Reality.â€
Â
Now, Anna Caroline we come to “structure,†or perhaps
Ishould say the fallacy of Structure? Yes I know –
we’ve all been taught that structure is the precursor,
the “determinator†of everything. My face looks as it
doesbecause of my bone structure. My life proceeds the
way it does because of my social structure. My business
works as it does because of the organizational
structure. And of course, meetings happen the way they
do because of meeting structure, which apparently is the
prime domain of “facilitators.†And even if we
hadn’t been“taught†all this, the primacy of
structure would appearto be blatantly obvious – as
plain as the nose on yourface.
Â
Unfortunately, it does seem to turn out that sometimes
the blatantly obvious is not necessarily so. For example
just looking at things it is pretty clear that the world
is flat, or at the least bumpy flat. And any fool can
see that we are the center of it all – Sun, moon, and
stars whiz around us. But when we think about it, as we
have been doing for the last 500-600 years, the obvious
isn’t so obvious.
Â
It is reasonable to ask what would start to make us
think differently – to the point that we begin to
question theobvious, and even come to see things in a
different way? Taking a leap, I will suggest that it all
begins with the perception of anomaly. Things just
don’t make sense. Our eyes tell us one thing...
but???? And then we start making up stories to explain
the apparently unexplainable. We imagine different ways
of looking at things so that the nonsensical makes
sense. Some of those stories get pretty strange, but if
they actually work – that is to say, helpus to see in
new and useful ways – that’s great!
Â
There is, of course, a proper term for the activity I
have been describing. It is called Theory Building. And
for whatever it is worth, “theory†comes from the
Greek “/theoreinâ//€ /– to see. In a word, theories
are ways of looking atthings – likely stories you
might say.
Â
Now, at long last (too long?) we come to the odd story I
was starting to tell, to the effect that Structure is
only a figment of our imagination, a flash frame of a
moment gone by. Interesting, and helpful under some
circumstances... but always partial and in a sense
illusory. What’s“really†happening is all flow.
Everything is moving –That’s Ralph’s story, and I
guess it is mine too.
Â
So how did I get to such a weird condition? It was all
about anomaly – more particularly, the anomaly of Open
Space.Everything that I had ever learned told me that it
could not work. Unfortunately it did (work) – and not
just once, butevery time, hundreds of thousands of
times. Something was definitely weird. It seemed to me
that I had to re-consider all those things I thought I
had learned, beginning with the basics... such things as
Structure.
Â
Common sense would say that Open Space works because we
somehow created a structure that enabled it to work.
That’s theway things get done, or so I had been
taught. But that’snot the way things happened in Open
Space. Structure emerged along the way and only
momentarily. Worse yet it (structure) seemed to have
little to do with the obvious power, connections,
creativity.... all of which created structures, and
passed them by. And actually it always seemed to me that
the “structures†I “saw†existed only because
Iwanted to see them – or perhaps that I “shouldâ€
seethem. But they were only momentary wisps, figments
– neverto be mistaken for what was really going on. Or
so I’vebeen thinking.
Â
Harrison
Â
Â
Â
Â
Â
Â
*From:*OSList
[mailto:[email protected]] *On
Behalf Of *Michael Herman via OSList
*Sent:* Saturday, October 03, 2015 6:31 PM
*To:* JL Walker; World wide Open Space Technology email list
*Subject:* Re: [OSList] The Tyranny of Structurelessness
Â
you remind me, harrison, of one morning news session
years ago, somewhere, probably OT... where ralph
copleman walked to the center of the circle and
announced, all serious and mischievous at the same time,
"it's all moving!" Â
Â
then put the stick down and went back to his seat.Â
Â
--
Michael Herman
Michael Herman Associates
http://MichaelHerman.com
http://OpenSpaceWorld.org
Â
On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 1:47 PM, JL Walker via OSList
<[email protected]> wrote:
I was thinking that maybe the antidote to the eventual
tyranny of structurelessness is to open space, again and
again, until true democracy can emerge.
Â
Juan Luis
Â
*De:*OSList
[mailto:[email protected]] *En
nombre de *Rosa Zubizarreta via OSList
*Enviado el:* sábado, 03 de octubre de 2015 12:19
*Para:* Daniel Mezick; World wide Open Space Technology
email list
*Asunto:* Re: [OSList] The Tyranny of Structurelessness
Â
Hi Daniel,
Yes, this is a key piece... I see it as very similar in
some ways to what Ken Wilber wrote later,
about the "shadow side of the green meme". (Each meme
has its own shadow, as well as its own gift...)
So, I love "green". I love circles, I love
non-hierarchy, etc.
And, part of the "shadow side of the green meme" is how
ideologically anti-structure it can become...
to the point where some people may not even agree that
OST does, in fact, offer a very simple and effective
structure.
By way contrast, think of a situation where group of
people (who don't know about OST, and/or, who are having
a power struggle around "which process to use",
and/or.... ) might easily spending a whole weekend
arguing /about /"how to self-organize ourselves"... with
a great deal more pain and frustration and a great deal
less value.
whereas, instead, IF someone knows about OST, and, a
clear invitation has been extended, and, there is enough
trust/suspension of disbelief so that participants are
willing to enter into that format,
then, we end up with a very simple and elegant structure
that allows people to self-organize beautifully....
at least that's how i see it! :-)
with all best wishes,
Rosa
Â
*/Rosa Zubizarreta/*
/Developing Participatory and Co-intelligent Leadership
Author of *From Conflict to Creative Collaboration*
<http://www.conflict2creativity.com>/
/For more resources and learning opportunities, visit
*www.DiaPraxis.com*/
Â
On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 9:26 AM, Daniel Mezick via OSList
<[email protected]> wrote:
THE TYRANNY of STRUCTURELESSNESS
by Jo Freeman aka Joreen
I find this essay extremely interesting. I hope you do,
too.
Here is a pertinent quote, from the essay:
".../the idea of "structurelessness" does not prevent
the formation of informal structures, only formal ones."
/
Circa 1970. Context: the women's movement. Quick summary
of the main points: from the essay...
ï‚·/During the years in which the women's liberation
movement has been taking shape, a great emphasis has
been placed on what are called leaderless, structureless
groups as the main -- if not sole -- organizational form
of the movement. /
ï‚·/The idea of "structurelessness," however, has moved
from a healthy counter to those tendencies, to becoming
a goddess in its own right./
ï‚·/Contrary to what we would like to believe, there is
no such thing as a structureless group. /
ï‚·/This means that to strive for a structureless group
is as useful, and as deceptive, as to aim at an
"objective" news story, "value-free" social science, or
a "free" economy. A "laissez faire" group is about as
realistic as a "laissez faire" society; the idea becomes
a smokescreen for the strong or the lucky to establish
unquestioned hegemony over others. /
ï‚·/This hegemony can be so easily established because
the idea of "structurelessness" does not prevent the
formation of informal structures, only formal ones. /
ï‚·/For everyone to have the opportunity to be involved
in a given group and to participate in its activities,
the structure must be explicit, not implicit. /
ï‚·/It is this informal structure, particularly in
Unstructured groups, which forms the basis for elites./
Just in case you have not yet encountered the full text
of this essay, here it is:
THE TYRANNY of STRUCTURELESSNESS
by Jo Freeman aka Joreen
http://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm
Regards,
Daniel
http://www.OpenSpaceAgility.com/about
http://www.DanielMezick.com
203 915 7248 <tel:203%20915%207248>
_______________________________________________
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
Past archives can be viewed here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
Â
_______________________________________________
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
Past archives can be viewed here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
Â
_______________________________________________
OSList mailing list
To post send emails [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email [email protected]
To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
Past archives can be viewed
here:http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
--
Daniel Mezick, President
New Technology Solutions Inc.
(203) 915 7248 <tel:%28203%29%20915%207248> (cell)
Bio <http://newtechusa.net/dan-mezick/>. Blog
<http://newtechusa.net/blog/>. Twitter
<http://twitter.com/#%21/danmezick/>.Â
Examine my new book:Â 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.Â
--
Daniel Mezick, President
New Technology Solutions Inc.
(203) 915 7248 <tel:%28203%29%20915%207248> (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.
--
--
Michael Herman
Michael Herman Associates
http://MichaelHerman.com
http://OpenSpaceWorld.org
