Bryan, Thanks for hosting us, and for the comprehensive "small" write-up! I'm excited to start focusing on practical case studies in my next column <https://github.com/whit537/openorg/issues/7>.
chad ---- Chad Whitacre http://whit537.org/ +1-412-925-4220 (cell) On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 8:31 PM, Bryan Behrenshausen <bbehr...@redhat.com> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I'm writing with a small report on the productive, inspiring, and > energizing meetings the ambassadors held in Raleigh during last week's > All Things Open conference. The ambassadors were all over the > conference—Laura, Rebecca, and Jono were on a panel together; Chad gave > a lightning talk; Jono emceed like the pro that he is; and Laura offered > a dynamite session for attendees—but I'll let them all share their > experiences successes here. I'd specifically like to offer a recap of > our joint workshops devoted to our ambassador community. > > The ambassadors met for a multi-hour session on Tuesday, October 25. > Many folks in attendance were in fact instrumental in crafting the > agenda for that session, which began at 1 p.m. with some introductions > and a few opening remarks about the nature of the ambassador community. > Laura Hilliger facilitated a lovely activity that involved all of us > generating ideas about our collective mission and vision (thanks, > Laura!), and then Brook Manville walked us through an exercise that > helped us imagine steps we might take to grow our community, evolve our > mission, and enhance the contributions we're making to the broader > conversation concerning the future of work, management, and leadership > from an open perspective (thanks, Brook!). As part of this effort, I > presented a brief overview of 1) the goals/metrics we track at > Opensource.com, and 2) the materials our community has produced so far > (as well as metrics indicating community uptake of those materials). > > We then joined the Opensource.com community moderators for a joint > meeting with Jim Whitehurst, and the ambassadors "reported out" to Jim > on some of our community's victories, as well as on some of the > challenges that confront us as we move forward and grow. Jim was > extremely receptive and offered valuable context for both the _Open > Organization_ book and the movement as a whole, much of which (we were > pleased to see!) mirrored our own thinking and discussion from earlier > in the day. > > After that session, the ambassadors reconvened to digest the > conversation together, and to ruminate a bit further on future plans, > paths, and directions. You can read Chad's summary of the day on GitHub > at this link: > > https://github.com/gratipay/inside.gratipay.com/issues/ > 757#issuecomment-256234457 > > Several critical takeaways emerged from our meeting, and I will do my > best to rearticulate them here (relying, of course, on attendees to > chime in, keep me honest, and add their perspectives). In general, the > community expressed a desire for the following: > > * Increased editorial focus on "case studies." Several ambassadors and > advisers suggested that we need to "broaden the aperture," so to speak, > onto new types of stories at Opensource.com—stories about non-Red Hat, > non-tech organizations that are successfully utilizing open principles > in creative, exciting, and innovative ways. This is especially important > for demonstrating the innovative potential open principles portend for > organizations of varying sizes and with varying missions. > > * Increased editorial emphasis in the "business value" of open > organizational principles. Ambassadors recognized that leaders in > organizations won't respond to "open for open's sake"—that openness in > and of itself isn't the "draw" to make large-scale changes. Instead, we > (as a community) need to find new ways to stress the concrete benefits > of "going open," however they appear in our research. > > * Greater discussion of and specificity around the concrete _qualities_ > of open organizations themselves. What are the characteristics these > organizations share? What do they have in common? What are the core > values that one "must see" in order to consider an organization an > _open_ organization? How does "the open organization" relate to other, > similar concepts in the increasingly crowded field of "new management" > approaches (holocracy, etc.)? And how do we define these for interested > parties? This is part and parcel of a wider attempt to crystallize some > conceptualization of open organization that we share and can use for > definitional purposes—not necessarily to _exclude_, per se (though this > is an inevitable outcome of making distinctions and crafting > definitions) but really to better structure discussions about _what_ > organizations can _do_ to become more open (what they can begin > practicing). > > * Fresh emphasis on materials for practitioners. While organizational > leaders benefit from case studies that help them envision the benefits > of going open, practitioners in departments and teams at all levels of > an organization need more materials to help them enact those benefits. > The ambassador community can be on the lookout for opportunities to > offer such materials to organizations with whom they're connected, and > report back to the community when they perceive specific needs we might, > as a community, come together to address (e.g., by creating tools, > assessments, guides, handouts, etc.). > > * Additional insight into the publishing process at Opensource.com. > Ambassadors indicated they'd simply like to know more about how we make > editorial decisions at Opensource.com, how we schedule stories for > publication, what's "on deck" in the queue, and, in general, how we can > make our _own_ community more open. > > In response to these emerging themes, several action items appeared: > > * Community members agreed to begin leveraging their personal networks > to uncover "case studies" and begin bringing them to Opensource.com. We > can use a collective document to perhaps list and maintain a register of > such organizations. Additionally, and to aid this effort, we discussed > the benefit of generating a shared "interview protocol," a bank of > general questions we can use when approaching people for interviews > (something to catalyze a conversation!). We'd really like to see this > come to fruition. > > * Community members began discussing ways we could begin inflecting our > writing with more emphasis on "business value"—de-emphasizing, perhaps, > stories about more abstract principles and toward concrete cases and > their outcomes (good or bad!). > > * Community members will collaborate on a "definition" of open > organizations, a shared set of characteristics (or, in Jim's words, > "necessary and sufficient conditions") we like to see when considering > something an open organization. This emerged as another high-priority > project. > > * Community members will collaborate on building future materials for > would-be practitioners in open organizations, folks who request guidance > on implementing the principles they're now convinced can help them > innovate. The Opensource.com team has ideas on the form(s) these may take. > > * The Opensource.com editorial team is working on various initiatives to > bring greater transparency and participation to the publishing process. > > * The ambassadors in attendance stressed the need for another in-person > meeting to continue the conversation and reconvene to review the work we > accomplish post-ATO. > > On Wednesday, October 26, several ambassadors met with Red Hat CMO > Jackie Yeaney to relay these discoveries and to gauge her opinion of > them. Jackie's initial response to the directions we'd like to take was > enthusiastic and supportive. > > So this is perhaps becoming more than a "small report," but I would like > to end with several questions I believe we face more immediately: > > * Is the above account/description inclusive of the items we discussed > at the meeting? Is anything missing? If so, what? > > * How can those of us on-hand for the meeting help explain and clarify > our discussion and/or intentions to those who weren't? > > * Where should we begin (in light of that fact that overwhelming > consensus at All Things Open seemed to be that we begin taking action to > bring about demonstrable results)? How would you prioritize the work? > > After we've discussed, I'll volunteer to develop a work plan that > outlines our priorities, goals, timelines, etc., for the coming months. > > In sum, friends, it was a dynamite session, and we're very grateful to > everyone who not only participated but also invested their time and > energy into shaping and executing the event itself. I came away from our > meeting with a head swirling full of ideas, directions, and > opportunities. I hope other attendees will chime in here to correct > anything I've mischaracterized, to add anything I've missed—and to > simply keep the excellent conversation going. > > Sincerely, > Bryan > > _______________________________________________ > Openorg-list mailing list > Openorg-list@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/openorg-list >
_______________________________________________ Openorg-list mailing list Openorg-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/openorg-list
