I meant to type whether they are far from or close to equilibrium !!! Sent from my iPad
On Sep 20, 2011, at 6:55 PM, David Osborne <[email protected]> wrote: > I think Open Space will work wether the share Oscar from equilibrium or close > to equilibrium as I suspect is born out by the thousands of successful > examples. It seems to me the critical ingredients in boteh these situations > are; is there enough diversity present and is there enough passion/caring/ > energy present in the space. > > David > > Sent from my iPad > > On Sep 19, 2011, at 1:45 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
_______________________________________________ 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
