Hello Julie,
I agree with Larry. I would tend to try to get enough time to be able
to have two short rounds exept for one especially if the group is large.
I remember when I started I sort of refused to do an Open Space when I
felt there was too little time.
Now I find myself asking myself
Gerard--
Great suggestions for finding more time for Open Space in a meeting. In the
example I mentioned, we changed the original design, which had a separate
needs-assessment exercise before the OS and a separate exercise after for
convergence and action plans, and included those tasks in the OS
Dear Elena,
what is the "right place" and the "right time" that leades of next
sessions should be at?
hugs
mmmp
--Original Message Text---
From: Elena A. Marchuk
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 06:03:13 +0700
letting people know that they can work any way they want if they
don't =
finish the previous di
e (they think that somebody should do it) but may be it is also
not your case
best wishes and good luck
elena
- Original Message -
From: Julie Denny
To: osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 7:18 PM
Subject: Too Little Time
I am an Associate Member of
Julie--
A few months ago, a colleague and I facilitated a two-hour Open Space with a
professional organization that wanted to do some future planning and get more
people engaged in the tasks needed to keep the organization going.
It was a small group, which was easier. We finally decided on one
Julie:
What is the size of the group? This makes some difference to me in
terms of design. If you really have two hours to both explore possible
next steps and close the event then I make this suggestion:
Do one round of people identifying the next steps for which they have a
passion, and then
I am an Associate Member of the Institute for the Study of Conflict
Transformation, a think tank of Transformative Mediators, and we have a meeting
next
Sunday/Monday. They have asked me to facilitate one segment of the meeting in
Open Space. After two days of caring and sharing, we want to decide
