That is so well put Pernilla... For a few years now I have holding the question around whether OST has a cultural bias to it...
I have spoken to other OST facilitators and all have felt that it doesn't... However my interpretation of events gives me a feeling that yes OST doesn't however when the room is configured a certain way cultural bias does show up... and so do we look at that in the pre-work design or not... because that is where we can influence the conditions of an open space, once it starts then "whatever happens..." Smiles Bhav... On 25 January 2014 00:33, Pernilla Luttropp <[email protected]> wrote: > I so enjoy reading about your different perspectives on > "self-organisation", most of them makes perfect sense to me. > > Still, when I have a room full of > men/white/adults/heterosexuals/professionals - pick the majority of your > choice - and one or maybe two single voices of > women/black/youngsters/homosexuals/amateurs, where the tool for contact is > spoken and written words, often well formulated on what is considered > "relevant" for the group, I feel uncomfortable. > That doesn't necessarily mean that I as the facilitator need to fix > anything and there is always the opportunity for the minority to leave the > room. But I still feel uncomfortable. I've seen that "natural" behaviour > in a group many times; the majority either ignores the minority or makes a > big thing out of their "otherness". The minority don't get to be > individuals, just representatives. And the individuals in the majority > group easily become an unreflected "we", very comfortable in what is > considered to be "normal". To me that's another > "natural-or-it's-been-around-forever" behaviour. And I'm not comfortable > when I see it being reproduced over and over again. When someone from the > minority brings this up with me, I usually remind them of their two feet. > But it makes me sad to see them leave the room. Something else could have > happened and I was there, both as a human fellow being and a facilitator, > feeling uncomfortable. > > But feeling uncomfortable isn't necessarily bad, there's movement in that > feeling. And I'm not sure it has to be fixed. But I'd like to hear if > anyone else shares this feeling and your thoughts on it. > > Pernilla > from Sweden > > > Den 2014-01-23 21:55, skrev "Michael Herman" <[email protected]>: > > well, i've managed to catch up on quite a heap of oslist emails without > typing even one peep, but here i am at the last message of the last thread > and i can't resist chiming in, if only to help make sense of all this for > myself... > > > david said along the way something about holding space for coherence. i > think we hold the space for both coherence and fragmentation. we never > really know which one will come up more strongly, or when. both are just > stories or labels or guesses we wrap around the aggregation of a the > various two-feet decisions that participants make and make and make all > through an event. > > in this way, what we're really holding space for is individuals' right or > opportunity to choose for themselves. we can invite them to come together > and be quiet, but some linger in side conversations in hallways or > corners. sometimes everyone lingers, and evening news happens later than > we thought. sometimes we suggest that morning news is over at 9:30 and the > circle lasts until 10, because many people choose to stay in the circle > together. it's always the sum of everyone deciding at once. > > if anyone would try to control this, invade the space of individual > choosing, sometimes the best we can do is leave the room, as harrison has > described many times, modeling a choice. in that case it's pointing to > fragmentation in the face of an attempt to force coherence. > > anyway, the other question that caught my eye was christine's something > about how to help organization stay healthy and alive. it reminded me of a > quote i carried in my wallet for about 10 years or so, from francisco > varela (a scientist, among other things): "if a living system is > unhealthy, the way to make it more healthy is to reconnect it with more of > itself." > > stories and invitations and questions (are these really different or > separable?) seem to be a very common way to connect, and then truth must be > what bubbles up in the spaces, between the words, as harold mentioned, and > between the people, between the breakouts and the plenaries, and so on that > peggy described in the physical movements. > > so i think where i end up here is that self-organization is already always > happening because everyone is always moving and deciding, and the "big" > decisions in any "organization" can only ever be the high peaks, visible > from some distance, that sit atop the many many individual moves and > choices, piled up over any length of time. > > so maybe stories are the words we wrap around piles of choices, and > organizations show up as the people who choose to wrap themselves around > various stories? > > michael h > > > > -- > > Michael Herman > Michael Herman Associates > 312-280-7838 (mobile) > > http://MichaelHerman.com > http://OpenSpaceWorld.org > > > > On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 7:11 AM, Daniel Mezick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Yes, and play is fun. Play is invigorating. Play brings action. Play > brings movement. Life is action. Life is movement! > > An entertaining example of play ... action and movement from some > surprising players, in open space: > > http://youtu.be/Iqmba7npY8g > > "Let us play"... > > > > > > On 1/11/14 3:03 PM, Harold Shinsato wrote: > > > > > Harrison, > > I was going to ask you to say more about "High Play", but it was easy to > learn more about your ideas here with a quick google search. From > http://www.openspaceworld.com/Opening%20Space%20for%20The%20Question.htm. > The emphasis is mine. > > > High Play denotes the manner in which the people involved approach their > task – playfully. Quite often play is understood to be a trivial incidental > compared to the real business of living. I think this is a profound error. > Play for me may be the most serious (important) of our many undertakings. > The importance of play derives from the fact that when we experience > reality in different and unexpected ways, *we seek to understand (develop > knowledge about) our new experience by telling likely stories, or in more > formal terms, creating theories*. We take the available evidence, > combined with our prior experience and try to construct reasonable > explanations for the newly observed phenomenon. Almost inevitably our first > attempts are flawed, and it is often the case that there are as many > theories (stories) as people telling them. If everybody treats their > version as the “gospel truth” it is not long before the dead hand of dogma > descends, and the search for understanding degenerates into a fight amongst > ideologues. On the other hand, when people treat their new adventure in a > playful fashion, there may well be serious competition, but there is also > deep respect for the “opponents,” and a real joy in the game. In Open Space > it is very common to see the game of knowledge building played with real > skill and enjoyment – even by people who have never done anything like that > before. > > > I really like the presence of "real joy in the game" of finding the best > likely stories (theories). I also love the value you express for "deep > respect for the 'opponents'". > > Game on! > > Harold > > > On 1/11/14 11:58 AM, Harrison Owen wrote: > > > > > > > Harold – I like your last line, “If we can hold our theories in the same > fashion as "a likely story", maybe we'll start being able to tell better > stories (theories).” Actually, my words for this are High Play. I’ve found > that good theory building is best done playfully, which does not make it a > trivial activity, but it does guard against dogmatism. Good theory, > playfully created, and playfully held is always open to revision – or just > plain discard. > > > > Harrison > > > > > > > > Harrison Owen > > 7808 River Falls Dr. > > Potomac, MD 20854 > > USA > > > > 189 Beaucaire Ave. (summer) > > Camden, Maine 04843 > > > > Phone 301-365-2093 <tel:301-365-2093> > > (summer) 207-763-3261 <tel:207-763-3261> > > > > www.openspaceworld.com <http://www.openspaceworld.com%20> > > www.ho-image.com <http://www.ho-image.com%20> (Personal Website) > > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of > OSLIST Go to: > http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org < > http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org> > > > > > > > > *From:* [email protected] [ > mailto:[email protected]<[email protected]>] > *On Behalf Of *Harold Shinsato > *Sent:* Friday, January 10, 2014 7:55 PM > *To:* World wide Open Space Technology email list > *Subject:* Re: [OSList] From linkedin today > > > > > > > > Harrison, > > It seemed like you were having a problem with understanding when you > wrote the following: > > "When I was confronted with what was happening in Open Space (25 years > ago) it made absolutely no sense to me at all. And what makes no sense does > not lend itself to understanding. I “knew,” as did everybody else of my > age, background and training – that what seemed to be taking place in Open > Space simply could not happen. Organization was something that we created, > managed, and controlled." > > There are so many theoretical frameworks that have begun to embody the > more adaptive systems thinking required maybe not to fully understand, but > to start to improve our models of organization not something as something > we impose - but something that we can nurture, cultivate, or just open > ourselves to experience. > > It seems like this thread has been about understanding self-organization. > I love that you brought something from Quantum Mechanics that "somebody's > formulation was good, but not crazy enough to be true." This reminds me of > the Tao Te Ching. The Tao that can be spoken is not the true Tao. > > It reminds me a lot of what you wrote in Spirit, and which you mentioned > in your TED talk. Story tellers don't tell the truth. But in the story, > truth emerges. Probably between the words. > > If we can hold our theories in the same fashion as "a likely story", > maybe we'll start being able to tell better stories (theories). > > Harold > > On 1/10/14 5:08 PM, Harrison Owen wrote: > > > > > Harold – I have no problem with “understanding.” Good and useful > enterprise. Question is: Understanding of what? And in what frame or > context. I think we have come to a point where we “understand” J that > there are multiple logics, each appropriate to different senses of reality. > Newtonian Physics really does work. AND Quantum Mechanics was/is crazy. In > fact one of the framers of Quantum Mechanics (Heisenberg I think) remarked > that that somebody’s formulation was good, but not crazy enough to be true. > Or something. I think we may be at a similar paradigm/shift point. We’ll > see how it all turn out. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
