seems important to distinguish between open space as the "cause" of
disequilibrium and open space technology as one way of inviting people in
the system to deal with it?


--

Michael Herman
Michael Herman Associates
312-280-7838 (mobile)

http://MichaelHerman.com
http://ManorNeighbors.com
http://OpenSpaceWorld.org





On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 12:45 PM, John Watkins <[email protected]> wrote:

> Great questions, Michael!
>
> I think when I am feeling optimistic (most of the time) I see OST as
> creating one of those "far from equilibrium states" that Prigogine and
> Stengers talk about as enabling new orders to emerge; however, in less
> sanguine times, I could also imagine OST as just a "subsystem fluctuation"
> enabling larger system stability.  But I think that most of our larger
> systems these days are exhibiting something like either disequilibrium or
> bifurcation points, so maybe OST is able to restructure the system
> architecture so fundamentally that a new order could emerge.  Weick talks
> about that restructuring of the system architecture in order to change the
> "flows" of energy in the system.  I think Bateson referred to one kind of
> larger system disequilibrium as an "uptight system," where at least one of
> the "variables" is "pinned" at its upper or lower limits of its range of
> flexibility, resulting in that rigidity rippling through the whole system.
> Rigid systems change more easily, but not usually in a very pretty way:
>  chaotic bursts, turbulence, tumbling into chaos, new orders emerging
> spontaneously...
>
> John
>
> On Sep 19, 2011, at 10:24 AM, Michael Herman wrote:
>
> yes, thanks, john.  and... where does os practice drop into either of
> these?  in bateson terms, it seems open space meetings would be an
> alternative state that organizations are unconsciously working to prevent?
> how does something like working in an open space way become part of the
> equilbrium state that is then automatically preserved by continually
> returning from anything that's alternative to that way of being in
> organization?  in lemke terms, there seems a place for operating in open
> space, but will it always require what sounds like a crisis, choice-point to
> be helpful?  how does working in an open space way become normal in systems
> that are storied in this way?  m
>
>
>
> --
>
> Michael Herman
> Michael Herman Associates
> 312-280-7838 (mobile)
>
> http://MichaelHerman.com
> http://ManorNeighbors.com
> http://OpenSpaceWorld.org
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 12:06 PM, John Watkins <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Michael,
>>
>> I think Gregory Bateson addressed the question of equilibrium most
>> eloquently a long time ago in his great book, Steps to an Ecology of Mind!
>>  And I've seen some great analysis of it in Jay Lemke's book, Textual
>> Politics.  Let's see if I can find the relevant quotes...
>>
>> Bateson: Systems “…maintain a dynamic equilibrium or steady state…
>> [through] maximiz[ing] the chances against the maximization of any single
>> simple variable” (124).  “The steady state is maintained by continual
>> nonprogressive change” (125).  What Bateson noticed was that allowable
>> levels of fluctuations in some subset of a larger system were used to create
>> relative stability in the larger system, but that those fluctuations never
>> led to fundamental shifts in the architecture of the system, as they
>> continually shifted out of and then returned to a kind of dynamic
>> equilibrium.   It is a “corrective action… brought about by [the
>> awareness of] difference” (Bateson, 1972:381).  A social system “…does
>> not elect the steady state; it prevents itself from staying in any
>> alternative state” (381). Or, “[T]he constancy and survival of some
>> larger system is maintained by changes in the constituent subsystem”
>> (Bateson, 1972:339).
>>
>> Lemke calls that a “meta-stable non-equilibrium” (Lemke, 1995:11).  He
>> goes on to argue that as social systems develop, they become more ordered
>> and differentiated, increasingly complex, and as such, demonstrate
>> irreversibility.  At some point, in various layers of their hierarchy
>> (hierarchy in systems theory is not the same as hierarchy of authority or
>> knowledge, e.g., bureaucracy; it is a concept of scale, in scope, time, or
>> space), open, complex systems begin to demonstrate non-symmetry, or the
>> possibility of bifurcation (branching, “choice” points), due to the
>> amplified, interacting oscillations of various sub-systems.  Bifurcation
>> in larger systems can enable larger out-of-equilibrium fluctuations in, or
>> unpredictable interactions between, sub-systems to result in evolutionary,
>> or adaptive, change in the larger system...
>>
>> Does this help?
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 19, 2011, at 9:36 AM, Michael Herman wrote:
>>
>> i want to echo florian's appreciation for your story, john, thank you.
>> and i have a question about "equilibrium."
>>
>> in financial markets, gene fama won a nobel prize for his theory of
>> "efficient" markets, suggesting that markets always reflected all current
>> information, immediately returning to "equilbrium" after every news release,
>> so that above-normal returns were not possible.  many now question or
>> dismiss this.
>>
>> so, in a world that is always moving, what does the theory you described
>> so nicely have to say about equilibrium?  does it then lead into questions
>> about locality and "self" ...the department might be in equilibrium but the
>> company is falling apart, or vice versa... so the boundaries of the "self"
>> that is being invited to organize or re-organize really matter.
>>
>> mostly i'm just wondering if you can say more to map the open systems,
>> thermodynamics, and esp equilibrium story to what we have all seen happening
>> in organizations and open spaces.  is "equilibrium" the same as "normal?"
>>
>> m
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Michael Herman
>> Michael Herman Associates
>> 312-280-7838 (mobile)
>>
>> http://MichaelHerman.com
>> http://ManorNeighbors.com
>> http://OpenSpaceWorld.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OSList mailing list
>> To post send emails to [email protected]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>> To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
>> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> OSList mailing list
> To post send emails to [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OSList mailing list
> To post send emails to [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
>
>
_______________________________________________
OSList mailing list
To post send emails to [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org

Reply via email to