Hi John,
No worries about the clumsiness. Luckily all old messages are viewable
and searchable here.
https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org
I tend to delete most of the email thread from my replies because
eventually the message to the OSList will get too big and will get
blocked by the 1 megabyte limit. (We need the limit to help prevent us
from being tagged a "spammer".)
This awareness that we all have "stakes" in our client systems seems
critical. Absolute neutrality? I doubt it's possible. If anything, we
were drawn to our clients because we cared about them as well as what
they care about. What do we do with the knowledge that comes from
caring? Is it a kindness to withhold something that might help?
In short, most of the time the answer is yes, we should hold back.
Especially if we're doing Open Space, but not only then.
Why? First of all, usually we don't have permission. Unwanted help is abuse.
Second is the one you mentioned already. The temptation is to offer it
too quickly. Even if the client wants the help, did we really understand
what's going on? There are many studied cognitive biases and effects
related to this. There's the Dunning-Kruger effect where people who are
less competent often overestimate their competence. That effect has a
corollary for those who have some mastery, in that we wisely
underestimate our competence because we know how vast is what we don't
yet know. Maybe this is why Harrison steps back entirely. We become much
more humble.
This second reason is why I find it really helpful to do an authentic
open space for a client system, and not advocate anything. Just listen,
observe and learn. Help after that is more likely to really help.
This last reason I list might be the most important. As Harrison would
say, what we do for our clients, they won't do for themselves. A related
awareness to this is the Navy submarine captain who wrote a book about
stepping back as the leader. Stepping back helps spread leadership and
competence to the people under his command. They usually know the sub
better than him anyway, especially in this story
(https://youtu.be/HYXH2XUfhfo).
Given all that, John, it sounds like you know what you're doing in how
you are operating. I very much enjoyed your systems awareness of water
as a hydrologist, and your patience holding something important. Finding
the sharing balance is one I struggle with very much. Maybe it's better
to give away the goods in the face of obvious ignorance, but my own
experience is usually lightly planting seeds around the edges might be
more effective. But I'd agree with the idea, sometimes it is better to
just hand off the responsibility to the listener, and let it go. Like
Jesus told his apostles, shake the dust off your feet if the town
doesn't receive what you have to offer.
And I'm totally with you about bring our whole self to the dialog. How
can we really care if we compartmentalize? There are lots of folks here
on the OSList that help teach how to bring the whole self as an OS
Facilitator. I've benefited from Genuine Contact training. And there are
lots of people teaching this beyond the OSList as well.
How have you practiced not just bringing a "small fraction of ourselves"
to dialog?
Regards,
Harold
On 5/8/23 6:59 PM, John Warinner via OSList wrote:
/*As each of us closely watches our system(s) of interest, and
supports emerging changes/adaptations that we consider positive,
to what degree should we introduce our own ideas of where and how
the system should proceed?*/
/*
*/
I will offer four related thoughts:
(a) We all have "stakes" in the systems we care about. We all also
have unique perspectives that are relevant to the systems we
participate in. As long as our intentions are genuinely/sincerely
aimed toward what we perceive to be "the Common Good," I believe
we have a responsibility to engage and share our perspectives and
suggestions. To me it is not a question of "if" but "when" and "how."
(b) When we are balancing Sponsor/Facilitator/Participant roles,
one strategy is to WAIT (at the risk of biting off the tips of our
tongues) to provide others the open space to say (in their words)
what we wish to say (in our words). Sometimes this happens... and
it is delightful! Other times, we WAIT until we reach a point
where it appears to us that what we wish to say has not, and will
not, be said by others... AND we fear that the Common Good will be
underserved without this input... THEN I believe it is serving the
Common Good to share the perspective that we have to share.
(c) One real-life example. I am a hydrologist. I have
collaborated with other people to sponsor, organize and faciliate
an Open Space dialogue about the water that flows through a basin
that I care about. As I participate in the dialogue, I recognize
a prevailing paradigm focused on the "scarcity" of water flowing
through the system. Lots of comments along the lines of, "there
isn't enough for everyone," hence the need for change. Because of
the prevailing "scarcity" paradigm, the dialogue drifts toward
"haves and have nots," "giving and taking", "givers and getters,"
and "winners and losers." I WAIT for someone to question, "How
much water is there?" "What is the evidence that "there isn't
enough for everyone"?" But this question does not arise. I
develop the feeling that I may be one of the few participants in
the space that "knows" the numbers... and detects the paradigm in
play. The Sponsor part of me wants to optimize the Common Good.
The Facilitator part of me wants to keep the space open for the
other participants. The Participant part of me wants to share
something along the lines of, "What if there IS enough for
everyone?"... or "I believe there IS enough for everyone. Our
average annual supply is X. Our average annual consumptive use is
Y. Z flows through the watershed in an average year... and Z is
two-thirds of X." I have learned (in time) that few (if any) of
the other participants "know" this. I have also learned (in time)
that some may not believe it when I share it with them. But it is
my conviction because I have personally studied the data and
developed this perspective/belief. /I am being careful here NOT to
say that I "know" it is "True."/
(d) One more idea before I drop the mic, because I think it is
important and relevant. How often do we participate in dialogue
as a small fraction of ourselves? Who am I in this space, here
and now? Am I the caring Sponsor? Am I the judicious
Facilitator? Am I the passionate Participant? Am I the Community
Citizen? Am I the son of the fighter pilot (father) or the
sociologist (mother). Am I the Agricultural Engineer or the
Ecological Designer... or am I the Poet that only my family
knows? As Father Time continues to herd me toward my 60th
birthday, I have started to believe that this "being a small
fraction of ourselves" may be one of the "seeds" at the root of
our problem(s).
Thanks again for this Open Space!
JW
*John Warinner
*(541) 815-4103*
*[email protected]
--
Harold Shinsato
[email protected]
https://shinsato.com
OSList mailing list -- <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]"; rel=3D"norefe=
rrer" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a><br>
To unsubscribe send an email to <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]=
" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a><br>
See the archives here: <a
href="https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org";>https://oslist.org/empathy/list/everyone.oslist.org</a>.
