Bryan, thanks--some thought provoking comments! Maybe it's time to take
another run at defining "open"--updating the concept in light of some of
these conversations, and your several points? Do all our Ambassadors hold
today to a common definition? (Could be buried in some other thoughtful
email string that I missed--if so, mea culpa).

Regards

On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Bryan Behrenshausen <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Very engaging discussion, and thanks to Brook for kicking it off with an
> example of "open" in the vernacular. These are the best places for us to
> "go to work" and assess what's happening around "openness." I've enjoyed
> reading everyone's responses. Just a few thoughts here.
>
> >From the article:
>
> > The flip side of cohesion is exclusion. The consequence of exclusion
> is decline.
>
> Pithy statements like these are always appealing and fun to read (let
> alone write!), but I doubt issues of identity and difference (to which I
> think cultural "cohesion" is indebted) are so easily reducible to bytes
> like that.
>
> For example, I think one could just as easily make the argument that
> cultures of openness require "exclusionary" practices to _remain_ open
> (might we say the GPL is exclusionary to the extent that it disallows
> certain practices—namely, practices that involve _not_ giving back?). In
> this case (and likely others), one could just as easily argue that the
> consequence of exclusion is not "decline" (if the goal is the
> propagation of, say, freely-licensed code), but a certain type of
> flourishing. It cuts both ways.
>
> Some theories of identity expressly contend that identity is _nothing_
> but the series of exclusionary differences one is able to make ("I know
> who/what I am because I am _not_ this, _not_ that, _not_ this other
> thing, etc.), and so exclusion is part and parcel of _any_ type of
> identity formation—including the identity of a thing we call "openness."
> Therefore (echoing Huiren here), to say that "openness" is simply
> analogous to "without borders" is incorrect, because the very identity
> of openness itself is predicated on exclusionary practices (all those
> things people juxtapose with openness to give it meaning—like "closed,"
> "proprietary," "authoritarian"—pick your favorite).
>
> "Organizational cultures" are no different. I just read a call to drop
> the term entirely [1], but I don't know as I'd go that far (I do think
> it's necessary for naming the thing that we produce through these
> boundary-drawing practices). At any rate, I get the sense that the "old
> guard/new guard" (thanks, Laura and Sam!) dynamic owes something to the
> way people tend to parse "culture" and "behavior." The former is broader
> than the latter, but the latter is what perpetuates the former.
> Nevertheless, because the latter is observable (while the former is much
> more abstract), people tend to use it as a barometer of "the cultural
> situation" in an organization—they see people doing things that "aren't
> like we do them here," and assume some difference in "cultural values."
> But values find expression in multiple, nuanced, and ever-changing ways.
> So the complexity here is key for understanding what people tend to be
> worried about when they start wringing their hands over a supposed "loss
> of culture."
>
> Thanks for good reading and discussion on a bleak and overcast Friday
> here in Raleigh.
>
> Bryan
>
> [1] https://hbr.org/2015/04/why-company-culture-is-a-misleading-term
>
>
>
> On 03/24/2017 10:49 AM, Sam Knuth wrote:
> > Thanks Laura - on the grow vs. shrink and die piece, I don't disagree
> > with you at all. What I mean is that within the system we have of
> > publicly traded companies (speaking of our organization specifically),
> > that's the paradigm that is established. I think we could have a very
> > interesting (and long!) discussion on this topic
> >
> > -Sam
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Laura Hilliger <[email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >
> >     Interesting discussion. I think this:
> >
> >     "The driving truth is that if we don't grow, we will shrink and die.”
> >
> >     and this
> >
> >     "The average rate of GDP growth in countries with shrinking
> >     working-age populations is */only/* 1.5%.” (Emphasis mine)
> >
> >     are misnomers. This idea “growth is good" is aggressively promoted
> >     because the economic systems that support it (e.g. systems based on
> >     consumerism), depend on growth as a metric for success. What it
> >     doesn’t take into account is the happiness and well-being of the
> >     people inside the system. It’s been generally established that
> >     countries with lower GDP have equal or higher levels of happiness
> >     compared with countries with high GDP. If we had data(!) we could
> >     start looking at this at an organizational level.
> >
> >     Greenpeace is doing a research and strategy around mindsets that are
> >     prevalent in our society. The “infinite growth is possible and good”
> >     mind set is one that the ecological movement is desperately trying
> >     to change as the growth-driven consumerism is the root cause of
> >     almost all environmental issues. Maybe it’s better to say “If we
> >     don’t change, we will shrink and die.” Even that might depend – if
> >     you think about tribal cultures that stayed the same way for
> >     hundreds and hundreds of years, only to die out when change was
> >     introduced.
> >
> >     None of this is a dichotomy, of course. We’re a group of people who
> >     are hyper aware of the nuance (this pleases me :)
> >
> >     Rands wrote an article in 2014 that I’ve shared a thousand times.
> >     It’s specifically about cultural identity, the shifting of culture
> >     when new people are introduced, and the fear that can elicit – He
> >     called it “Old Guard, New Guard”.
> >
> >     http://randsinrepose.com/archives/the-old-guard/
> >     <http://randsinrepose.com/archives/the-old-guard/>
> >
> >     —laura
> >
> >     Laura Hilliger
> >     Zythepsary (part of the We Are Open Co-op <http://weareopen.coop>)
> >     @epilepticrabbit <http://twitter.com/epilepticrabbit>
> >
> >
> >
> >>     On Mar 24, 2017, at 12:44 PM, Sam Knuth <[email protected]
> >>     <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >>
> >>     Thank you, Brook for keeping us engaged with deep topics!
> >>
> >>     I like the comparison/contrast of our work on "open" culture with
> >>     what's happening in the global political climate right now. I'm
> >>     surprised I hadn't made this connection myself now that I think
> >>     about it. I see a lot of parallels. Working in an organization
> >>     that has been "open" since its founding, it does become part of
> >>     the identity of the people working in the organization. But, as
> >>     the organization grows, and welcomes more and more new people
> >>     ("immigrants" - never made that analogy before), we see a lot of
> >>     fears among some that our culture will change or will become "like
> >>     them" instead of "them" becoming "like us". Other people welcome
> >>     the newcomers and embrace what we can learn from them, accepting
> >>     that how we've always done things might not be the best way. The
> >>     driving truth is that if we don't grow, we will shrink and die. In
> >>     a company, it's easier to convince people of this truth, and
> >>     people can more easily leave if they really don't like the
> >>     direction we're heading (whereas as much as liberal American's
> >>     joke about moving to Canada, doing so is actually quite difficult).
> >>
> >>     As I'm writing this and thinking about the comparison, I'm seeing
> >>     a lot of similar challenges but not easy answers or ways to apply
> >>     our learnings to broader society or public policy at a national
> >>     level. My personal feeling here is that looking at this kind of
> >>     data doesn't sway people. Companies, I think, are much more
> >>     receptive to convincing data than citizens. It's more about how
> >>     people feel in relation to deeply ingrained cultural identity.
> >>     Those feelings are so strong that they result in the election of
> >>     leaders who take an extreme stance on one end of the spectrum or
> >>     the other.
> >>
> >>     Great food for thought!
> >>
> >>     Sam
> >>
> >>     On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 10:01 AM, Brook Manville
> >>     <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >>
> >>         Dear Open enthusiasts....recent opinion piece in WSJ by
> >>         columnist Bret Stephens caught my eye (below)--talking about
> >>         immigration, open borders, greater diversity and innovation;
> >>         and imply such things should be more part of today's policy
> >>         debates (but aren't). There are some "meta" themes about
> >>         "open" at the national level that might deserve more attention
> >>         among us. At a minimum, it makes for some interesting compare
> >>         and contrast discussion, e.g. how much of the culture-building
> >>         implied by best open organizations should be/could be applied
> >>         to a nation's public policy? What is the data about innovation
> >>         and other measures of "good" between companies that are more
> >>         open versus those that are less? etc...Regards
> >>
> >>
> >>           Other People’s Babies’
> >>
> >>
> >>             If the U.S. slipped into demographic decline like Japan,
> >>             it would tear itself apart.
> >>
> >>         Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe with President Trump in
> >>         West Palm Beach, Fla., Feb. 10.
> >>         Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe with President Trump in
> >>         West Palm Beach, Fla., Feb. 10. PHOTO: ASSOCIATED PRESS
> >>         <https://www.wsj.com/articles/other-peoples-babies-1490050955>
> >>         By
> >>         BRET STEPHENS
> >>         March 20, 2017 7:02 p.m. ET
> >>         786 COMMENTS
> >>         <https://www.wsj.com/articles/other-peoples-babies-
> 1490050955#livefyre-toggle-SB10780801779306074119304583034393448048174>
> >>
> >>         /Tokyo/
> >>
> >>         Japan is an excellent place to test the proposition that
> >>         countries do better with low levels of immigration. In a land
> >>         of 127 million people, there are just over two million foreign
> >>         residents, and only a third of them are here for the long
> >>         term. The number of illegal immigrants, which peaked at a
> >>         modest 300,000 in the early 1990s, is down by 80%.
> >>
> >>         As for refugees, in 2016, Tokyo entertained 10,000 requests
> >>         <http://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20170211/p2g/00m/0dm/
> 008000c> for
> >>         asylum. It accepted a grand total of 28. Steve Bannon would
> smile.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>         The result, say immigration restrictionists, is plain to see.
> >>         Japan’s crime and drug-use rates are famously low. Life
> >>         expectancy is famously high. Japanese students put their
> >>         American peers to shame on international tests. The
> >>         unemployment rate clocks in at 3.1%. All this is supposed to
> >>         be a function of a homogenous society with a high degree of
> >>         cultural cohesion—the antithesis of cacophonous, multiethnic
> >>         America.
> >>
> >>         Just one problem: The Japanese have lost their appetite for
> >>         reproduction. To steal a line from Steve King, the GOP
> >>         congressman from Iowa, the only way they can save their
> >>         civilization is with “somebody else’s babies.”
> >>
> >>         Japan’s population shrank by nearly a million between 2010 and
> >>         2015, the first absolute decline since census-taking began in
> >>         the 1920s. On current trend
> >>         <http://www.ipss.go.jp/site-ad/index_english/esuikei/
> gh2401e.asp> the
> >>         population will fall to 97 million by the middle of the
> >>         century. Barely 10% of Japanese will be children. The rest of
> >>         the population will divide almost evenly between working-age
> >>         adults and the elderly.
> >>
> >>         Imagine yourself as a 35-year-old Japanese salary man. You can
> >>         expect that an ever-larger share of your paycheck will go to
> >>         the government to fund the pensions and health care of your
> >>         parents—who, at 70, can reasonably expect to live another 10
> >>         or 15 years, and who aren’t likely to vote for politicians
> >>         promising to strip their entitlements.
> >>
> >>         Being Japanese, you were raised to make financial sacrifices
> >>         for your elders, even if it means not having children of your
> >>         own. Besides, it’s hard to want children with the economy in
> >>         such bad shape. As Morgan Stanley
> >>         <http://quotes.wsj.com/MS>’s Ruchir Sharma has noted
> >>         <https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/world/2016-02-15/
> demographics-stagnation>,
> >>         lousy demographics mean a lousy economy: The average rate of
> >>         GDP growth in countries with shrinking working-age populations
> >>         is only 1.5%. In 2016, Japan’s growth rate was 1%—and that was
> >>         a relatively good year by recent standards.
> >>
> >>         What if the government paid you to have babies? Alas, along
> >>         with millions of your countrymen, you suffer from what the
> >>         Japanese call
> >>         <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/young-
> people-japan-stopped-having-sex> “celibacy
> >>         syndrome” and aren’t interested in sex, never mind
> >>         procreation. You’re also unhappy: In 2016, Japan ranked 53rd
> >>         on the U.N.’s World Happiness Report, a notch above Kazakhstan
> >>         but below El Salvador and Uzbekistan.
> >>
> >>         So Japan is in trouble, and the government knows it. Prime
> >>         Minister Shinzo Abe has tinkered with formulas to bring in
> >>         lower-skilled temporary workers for housecleaning and farm
> >>         jobs, and he has promoted various tax breaks and subsidies to
> >>         ease the burden of raising children and caring for aging
> parents.
> >>
> >>         But whatever their other benefits, “pro-family” policies won’t
> >>         reverse the demographic trend. Only large-scale immigration
> >>         can do that, and the Japanese won’t countenance it. The flip
> >>         side of cohesion is exclusion. The consequence of exclusion is
> >>         decline.
> >>
> >>         Which brings us back to Mr. King and the U.S. immigration
> >>         debates. A decade ago, America’s fertility rate, at 2.12
> >>         children for every woman, was just above the replacement rate.
> >>         That meant there could be modest population growth without
> >>         immigration. But the fertility rate has since fallen: It’s now
> >>         below replacement and at an all-time low
> >>         <http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2016/06/07/behind-
> the-ongoing-u-s-baby-bust-in-5-charts/>.
> >>
> >>         Without immigration, our demographic destiny would become
> >>         Japanese. But our culture wouldn’t, leaving us with the worst
> >>         of both worlds: economic stagnation without social stability.
> >>         Multiethnic America would tear itself to pieces fighting over
> >>         redistribution rights to the shrinking national pie.
> >>
> >>         This doesn’t have to be our fate. Though it may be news to Mr.
> >>         King, immigrants aren’t a threat to American civilization.
> >>         They are our civilization—bearers of a forward-looking notion
> >>         of identity based on what people wish to become, not who they
> >>         once were. Among those immigrants are 30% of all American
> >>         Nobel Prize winners and the founders of 90 of our Fortune 500
> >>         companies—a figure that more than doubles when you include
> >>         companies founded by the children of immigrants. If
> >>         immigration means change, it forces dynamism. America is
> >>         literally unimaginable without it.
> >>
> >>         Every virtue has its defect and vice versa. The Japanese are
> >>         in the process of discovering that the social values that once
> >>         helped launch their development—loyalty, self-sacrifice,
> >>         harmony—now inhibit it. Americans may need reminding that the
> >>         culture of openness about which conservatives so often
> >>         complain is our abiding strength. Openness to different ideas,
> >>         foreign goods and new people. And their babies—who, whatever
> >>         else Mr. King might think, are also made in God’s image.
> >>
> >>         /Write [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>./
> >>
> >>
> >>         On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 8:10 AM, Bryan Behrenshausen
> >>         <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >>
> >>             ### Editor's Note ###
> >>
> >>             Hi, friends! It's been another exciting, whirlwind week
> >>             here in OpenOrg
> >>             Land. Yesterday, we announced the next book in the Open
> >>             Organization
> >>             book series—this one devoted to open principles in the IT
> >>             organization.
> >>             We're building it the open source way, and (if you missed
> the
> >>             announcement) you can see the links below for more details
> >>             about getting
> >>             involved.
> >>
> >>             Today we're publishing the second half of Ajinkya Pawar's
> >>             two-part
> >>             series on open agencies. In this article, Ajinkya lays out
> >>             a concrete
> >>             and specific plan for creating the agency of the future.
> >>
> >>             –B
> >>
> >>             ### New Today ###
> >>
> >>             Ajinkya Pawar: What does an ad agency's source code look
> like?
> >>
> >>             https://opensource.com/open-organization/17/3/how-build-
> open-ad-agency
> >>             <https://opensource.com/open-organization/17/3/how-build-
> open-ad-agency>
> >>
> >>             red.ht/2o855Xy <http://red.ht/2o855Xy>
> >>
> >>             Sample social media:
> >>
> >>             If an ad agency is to go open source, then what's its
> >>             source code?
> >>             @thejinxedone red.ht/2o855Xy <http://red.ht/2o855Xy>
> >>             #TheOpenOrg
> >>
> >>             .@thejinxedone explains exactly how to build an open ad
> >>             agency. What are
> >>             you waiting for? red.ht/2o855Xy <http://red.ht/2o855Xy>
> >>             #TheOpenOrg
> >>
> >>             .@thejinxedone with five benefits to turning your ad
> >>             agency into
> >>             #TheOpenOrg: red.ht/2o855Xy <http://red.ht/2o855Xy>
> >>
> >>
> >>             ### Previously Published ###
> >>
> >>             Bryan Behrenshausen: "Help us write the next IT culture
> book"
> >>
> >>             https://opensource.com/open-organization/17/3/announcing-
> it-culture-book
> >>             <https://opensource.com/open-organization/17/3/announcing-
> it-culture-book>
> >>
> >>             red.ht/2nmnfYB <http://red.ht/2nmnfYB>
> >>
> >>             First day page views: 157
> >>
> >>             Sample social media:
> >>
> >>             Help us  write the next great book on IT culture—in the
> open:
> >>             red.ht/2nmnfYB <http://red.ht/2nmnfYB> #TheOpenOrg
> >>
> >>             We're writing a book at the intersection of #TheOpenOrg
> >>             and #IT culture.
> >>             You can help: red.ht/2nmnfYB <http://red.ht/2nmnfYB>
> >>
> >>             The next book in #TheOpenOrg book series is under active
> >>             development.
> >>             Pull requests welcome: red.ht/2nmnfYB <
> http://red.ht/2nmnfYB>
> >>
> >>             =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> >>
> >>             Simon Phipps: "7 ways to discuss legal matters with an
> >>             open community"
> >>
> >>             https://opensource.com/open-organization/17/3/legal-
> matters-community
> >>             <https://opensource.com/open-organization/17/3/legal-
> matters-community>
> >>
> >>             First day page views: 131
> >>
> >>             ### Site Stats ###
> >>
> >>             Page views yesterday: 753
> >>             Total page views for the month: 12,213
> >>             Page views from newsletter: 106
> >>
> >>             Leaders Manual downloads: 5
> >>             Leaders Manual downloads for the month: 71
> >>
> >>             Catalyst-In-Chief downloads: 4
> >>             Total Catalyst-In-Chief downloads for the month: 30
> >>
> >>             Field Guide downloads: 2
> >>             Total Field Guide downloads for the month: 37
> >>
> >>             ### Social Media Stats ###
> >>
> >>             @TheOpenOrg Twitter followers: 3,918 (+1)
> >>             @JWhitehurst Twitter followers: 15,204 (+2)
> >>             Facebook likes: 526 (+0)
> >>
> >>             ### Full Daily Stats ###
> >>
> >>             https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/
> 196RzNrhAiHRBcZHtrDYYKy0I9m8Bqa67K9OOPbDxuME/edit?pli=1#gid=46325027
> >>             <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/
> 196RzNrhAiHRBcZHtrDYYKy0I9m8Bqa67K9OOPbDxuME/edit?pli=1#gid=46325027>
> >>
> >>             _______________________________________________
> >>             Openorg-list mailing list
> >>             [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> >>             https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/openorg-list
> >>             <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/openorg-list>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>         --
> >>         */Brook Manville/**/
> >>         Principal, Brook Manville LLC/*
> >>
> >>         */http://www.brookmanville.com//*
> >>         /Twitter/ <https://twitter.com/> /@brookmanville
> >>         /
> >>         /blogging at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/brookmanville/
> >>         <http://www.forbes.com/sites/brookmanville/>/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>         _______________________________________________
> >>         Openorg-list mailing list
> >>         [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> >>         https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/openorg-list
> >>         <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/openorg-list>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>     --
> >>     Sam Knuth
> >>     Director, Customer Content Services
> >>     Red Hat, Inc
> >>     Mobile: +1 612-840-1785 <tel:(612)%20840-1785>
> >>     _______________________________________________
> >>     Openorg-list mailing list
> >>     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> >>     https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/openorg-list
> >>     <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/openorg-list>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sam Knuth
> > Director, Customer Content Services
> > Red Hat, Inc
> > Mobile: +1 612-840-1785
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Openorg-list mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/openorg-list
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openorg-list mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/openorg-list
>



-- 
*Brook Manville*
*Principal, Brook Manville LLC*

*http://www.brookmanville.com/ <http://www.brookmanville.com/>*
*Twitter* <https://twitter.com/>
*@brookmanville*
*blogging at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/brookmanville/
<http://www.forbes.com/sites/brookmanville/>*
_______________________________________________
Openorg-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/openorg-list

Reply via email to