Peggy, Thank you for the gift of this story. When you have time, I would appreciate hearing your reflections about whether you think you would have had the same experiences if you werent in the dual role of both sponsor and facilitator. It seems to me that, at the level of energy, it would have been difficult to dissociate from some attachment to outcome as the sponsor and this could have been felt by participants when you were facilitator. I am also mulling over the learning you refer to in terms of co-creating rather than a defensive stand. For me, co-creating the bigger design of the event seems like what you did and did well. The event might or might not have ended up with an OST meeting as a part of it. However, I feel that the facilitator co-creating in the OST itself could end up closing space and so I would like to hear more from you regarding this. With appreciation for the learnings you are sharing, Birgitt Birgitt Williams
-----Original Message----- From: OSLIST [mailto:osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu] On Behalf Of Peggy Holman Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 12:02 AM To: osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu Subject: Breaking Open (long) During the last week of June, I hosted what turned out to be the most personally challenging work Ive done in a very long time. In fact, Id say it broke me open, in a difficult but valuable way. The primary gift was a move from a defensive stand around Open Space to a co-creative stand. Ill say more about what this means and how I got there by sharing the story of what it was like to hold space for Philanthropy, Love, and Evolution (also known as the Philanthropy Salon). My intent is not so much to share the story of the conference, but rather, the story of facilitating the conference. To begin at the beginning the signs that this would be different were there right from the start. You know that thing about every group saying, were different?, well, based on my experience, transformational philanthropy philanthropy intended to make a substantive difference in how systems (e.g., health care, education, media, etc.) themselves work really is different! But, that shall unfold . The idea for the gathering was born in May, 2005, when Michael Dowd, Tom Atlee, and I hosted the first Evolutionary Salon. At the end of the gathering, one of our agreements was to host some strategic conversations, bringing an evolutionary world view (Ill share some background on this in another posting) to different high leverage fields. We decided to start with philanthropists. In September, 2005, we each reached out to people we knew in the field to ask their counsel on how best to reach this audience. On a conference call, we were met with enthusiastic support. People jumped in, saying we should do x, lets try y in other words rather than telling us what WE needed to do, our counselors enlisted themselves in the work! Seemed like an auspicious beginning, as they agreed to become our planning group. Over the next few weeks, we drafted an invitation and identified the well-respected, well-networked leaders in the field of transformational philanthropy. Our planning team thought it looked great until they realized that the invitations would be coming from them. Suddenly, it wasnt quite right. We went back to the drawing board, getting clearer about the purpose of the gathering. We wrote another invitation and were met with another stepping back. Hmmm .I wondered, is there a pattern here? On our next call, I asked about this approach-avoid pattern. I was clear to come from a place of curiosity and non-attachment. After some self-reflection, people acknowledged this as a cultural characteristic (understandable when, as one said, everyone has an opinion on the best way you should spend your money). Still, it was something of a turning point. The next version of the invitation took and inviting began in earnest. It was slow at the beginning, but as it became the place to be, we ultimately reached the capacity of our facility with just the sort of mix of folks we had envisioned coming together. As the date grew closer, I had my second cultural surprise: more participants contacted me with opinions and requests about how the gathering should be designed than Ive ever experienced before. In retrospect, I can describe some of the other cultural characteristics that I believe were at play. First, most of these folks spend their professional lives in facilitated conversations. They are VERY sophisticated about process. And since transformational philanthropy has something of a spiritual aspect to it, most of them have done deep personal work. Many were used to processes that took them into spaces of intimate, collective connection. Some of the participants I talked with before the gathering were familiar with Open Space, and didnt think much of it (more on this in another posting). Secondly, though sophisticated, I found some odd blind spots. My hunch is that this is a group of people, who are among the powerful that many have trouble speaking truth to (as in speaking truth to power). I suspect they may be sheltered from the uncomfortable or the difficult even if that isnt their preference. Finally, while the facilitator is ALWAYS in service to the group, most groups unconsciously cede their power to the facilitator. This is a group that fully understands that the facilitator serves at their pleasure. Again, this didnt truly come clear to me until the meeting itself. >From the half-dozen or so conversations I had with participants prior to the gathering, there were two issues that were most clearly expressed: the need to go deep and the need for agreements so that there was a sense of safety for marginalized voices. (Thanks to one of the planning group, we had a wonderful mix of people of color and youth present.) As is often the case when working with people who want to fill the space with planned processes, I was highly protective of the space. Tom described me as a mama bear. As I started to appreciate the demands of this group, I was glad to have some highly skilled partners for the hosting: Thomas Hurley, Juanita Brown and Tom Atlee. As we began discussing specifics, they made it clear that they would do their best to support me. Though it was not the design that they would have used given a clean slate, they were there to make it work. I made the choice that we would not begin in Open Space for several reasons: * Our experiences of the 2nd and 3rd salons made it clear that we needed to set some context with the evolutionary story. * There were enough participants that I knew were hostile to Open Space that I wanted to start with something more familiar to them (BTW, as I checked into it, several had experienced multiple day OS gatherings with OS practitioners that I respected, so it wasnt a case of inexperienced support) * My hosting partners had gifts to contribute to the mix * I had sufficient clues to know I was dealing with a culture that I didnt understand. Since I was working with people who were familiar with the culture, I knew I needed to trust their counsel. (The planning stretched us all as we made room for each others very different beliefs about facilitation.) We had the luxury of time - an evening, and 4.5 days. We agreed that before going into Open Space, we had two pre-requisites: go deep creating a strong sense of intimacy and community, and ground people in the evolutionary story (a lesson from the second and third evolutionary salons) so that when we opened the space, we would go broad from depth. I was actually quite excited by this, suspecting that with the diverse mix of people present, that deep connection would increase the likelihood for breakthrough. On the issue of agreements, I argued that this would work itself out in the Open Space, so we didnt take it on directly. The first evening, people introduced themselves by taking a courageous love name. (This was inspired by two sources: the etymology of philanthropy loving humanity (or more loosely, loving service); and something wed done at Spirited Work one season. Wed chosen warrior names. In the spirit of a broader understanding of philanthropy, rather than warrior names, people took a courageous love name. Mine, which I have used since taking it as my warrior name at Spirited Work, is Standing Still in the Fire. Little did I know that I would have quite the opportunity to live into my name! Following this step into intimacy, what was supposed to be a 60 minute presentation on evolution by a cosmologist, ran way over. While it contained beautiful animations of galaxies from the Hubble, there was enough technical information and it was late enough at night, that it turned out not to be the inspiring introduction to the story of evolution that we had expected. (Something that Juanita and Thomas had been VERY concerned about.) When it was over, I said to Thomas, that while I knew he would find no satisfaction in it, he had been right about not doing the presentation in the evening.) Following this mixed beginning, Juanita, Thomas, Tom, and I met and concluded that we should re-think our plans for the next day. The location of the gathering, Gold Lake, is very special land. Traditionally a gathering place for Native American tribes to put aside their weapons and meet in peace, this land and its native populations were ravaged by settlers when gold was found nearby. Its current stewards are working to honor and restore its special energy to support efforts that heal and transform the world. We began the first full day by offering some reflective questions to people and sent them out to connect with the land and each other, using the questions as they wished. When they returned, Juanita was to host a World Café intended to begin connecting philanthropy and evolution. As she introduced the question for the café, one of the young people, Evon, a man who had been chief of his Alaskan tribe, spoke. He was respectful and articulate and named his discomfort with evolution, a term which wed incorporated into the question being used for the café. More than this discomfort, he was raising the question of safe space (remember that pre-conference warning that we needed to create agreements? I hadnt counted on this being an issue before the space was opened!). Juanita handled the situation with grace, ultimately handing the leadership to Evon and a partner with whom he worked, angel to create safe space. We moved back into a council circle and they led a circle in which people could say whatever they felt they needed to say for the space to be open for their voices. While this was frustrating to those who wanted to get to the content (and they voiced this), it seemed to accomplish its purpose. When Juanita, Thomas, Tom and I met after this circle, we agreed it was time to open the space. One other factor now entered the situation for me. We were at 8,500 feet of elevation. I discovered that I couldnt get more than 3 hours of sleep each night. And Im an 8-hour-a-night kind of person. I was well aware of being far less centered than I usually am when opening space. Tuesday morning, I opened the space. Something occurred that has never happened to me in the 12 years of space holding. The group rebelled. They were quite adamant that they wanted to stay together until they had a common grounding in both the state of transformational philanthropy and an understanding of the evolutionary story. I said that all they needed to do was post the sessions and it would be clear by how people negotiated at the agenda wall and how they used their two feet if they all wanted to stay together. They rejected this; I stepped back and watched as a debate ensued over whether to do a fish bowl, a world café, or some other form to handle their desire to stay together. As I witnessed this, I was mostly marveling over the passion of this group as it clearly took charge of its needs. After about 45 minutes, the group fragmented into lots of small conversations. At that point, I made the one choice that in retrospect, I see as my attachment to things. It was an impulse based in my Spirited Work culture I got up, asked for silence, said Id ring a bell and when they came out of silence, they would know what to do. When the sound of the bell just ended, one of the participants, who was sitting directly across from me, looked straight at me and said they were doing just fine, thank you and that my ringing of the bell was completely out of order. I felt seared by his words. I was standing still in the fire and I got cooked. Shortly after that, another participant said that he thought they should do what I had suggested post their sessions and see what people were interested in. And thats what they did. Vindication of sorts. They did stay as a group for the afternoon, with two powerful sessions, one on how the field of transformational philanthropy had evolved, followed by a session that finally provided some insight into what the evolutionary world view had to offer to philanthropy. That evening, one of the participants hosted an extraordinary storytelling session that took people into very intimate connection with each other. The design was simple: Tell a story of personal transformation. People had 3-4 minutes for their stories. A bell was sounded at 3 minutes and again at 4 minutes. There was a talking object, so whoever wished to speak could do so when they were ready to tell their story. It took 2 days before most folks talked to me. I realized that in process work terms, Id played an important role, making it completely clear who was in charge - them. I was basically fine with what had taken place, still, it was definitely took some deep breathing to be at peace with it all. I spent much of the time over the rest of the gathering making amends with the people who had called me before the gathering, letting them know that I realized that I needed to work with them in a co-creative way rather than simply defending the space. As an example of what I mean by this, on the last day of the OS, one of the participants approached me with a common request in multiple day Open Spaces they wanted people to say more than a title for their sessions so that they had a better understanding of what the sessions were about. My traditional stance for this is to encourage them to talk to the convener to find out more. This time, when we began the morning postings, I named the request and the tension the more time describing sessions, the less time to be in them. I said they were adults and could make their choices knowing this was the tradeoff. I felt this honored the request and the space. It seemed to work. This is how I am thinking about what it means to be co-creative: Identify what, if any, tensions exist between the request and keeping the space open and then work with the requester to create a response that respects both. By the end of the conference, a number of the participants talked about it as a landmark event. When Michael, Tom and I had discussed our desire for this gathering before it began, that had been our highest aspiration. No matter how personally challenging it was, the outcome was all that I could have wanted and more. Unlike most Open Spaces, I actually wrote a report: HYPERLINK "http://www.co-intelligence.org/PhilanthropyES2006.html"http://www.co-in telligence.org/PhilanthropyES2006.html Stay tuned for: * The perceptions of Open Space by some of the folks I met * The evolutionary world view (as offered in the context of its relationship to conversation) BTW, one other cultural characteristic of philanthropists they live their lives as butterflies, holding many, many private sessions. ________________________________ Peggy Holman The Open Circle Company 15347 SE 49th Place Bellevue, WA 98006 (425) 746-6274 HYPERLINK "http://www.opencirclecompany.com"www.opencirclecompany.com For pre-orders with a 20% discount on the new edition of The Change Handbook, go to: HYPERLINK "http://www.bkconnection.com/ChangeHandbook"www.bkconnection.com/ChangeH andbook "An angel told me that the only way to step into the fire and not get burnt, is to become the fire". -- Drew Dellinger * * ========================================================== osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu ------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.5/425 - Release Date: 8/22/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.5/425 - Release Date: 8/22/2006 * * ========================================================== osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu ------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
