Harrisson: THis is your next book not a email message! I need some time to read it beceuse it is interesting! Thank you, you keep sharing your ideas with so much inspiring ideas! Adriana
2014-02-04 Harrison Owen <[email protected]>: > Go well, My Friend! > > > > ho > > > > Harrison Owen > > 7808 River Falls Dr. > > Potomac, MD 20854 > > USA > > > > 189 Beaucaire Ave. (summer) > > Camden, Maine 04843 > > > > Phone 301-365-2093 > > (summer) 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 > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Elwin and Joan > *Sent:* Tuesday, February 04, 2014 3:54 PM > *To:* World wide Open Space Technology email list > *Subject:* Re: [OSList] Management and Organization > > > > I'm 8 hours from Opening Space with just such a classical command and > control organization here in Sarajevo. > > I've read your thread twice Harrison and here I go! > > Always more than grateful, > > Elwin Guild > Future Development International > > > > > > On Tuesday, February 4, 2014 9:42 PM, Suzanne Daigle <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Oh Harrison, how I love this bunch of words that you put out there... I > don't want to comment on any of them. In the same way that I always work > myself into a box if I explain too much and boy do I ever get myself into > tight and uncomfortable places. Instead I just want to invite and invite > and invite in whatever way will seem to strike the right chord with the > conditions of Open Space being there. > > Thank you for encouraging me/us to continue to "nudge" and to "be > patient". I am way better at the first than the second. > > > > from ... > "the fundamental understanding of "organization" remains unchanged > (predesigned structure and controls with Leaders/Managers in charge) and > the new effort is to enable "leaders (to) move toward approaches that > support greater and greater self-organization." Tactically I can certainly > understand the approach, but what if organization is fundamentally, > essentially, in *totality *- Self Organizing?" > > to... > "nor can I resist the compulsion to share the experience in whatever way > with whomsoever might show up. I think the bottom line may come down to: > Move slowly with empathy, and be prepared to wait." > > and finally... > "I will do the Open Space in order to introduce anomaly... one more nudge > towards Paradigm Shift. > > > > I know full well that I can't shift paradigms for people. The same is true > of Transformation, which has a lot to do with paradigm shift. Both will > happen all by themselves...or not. But I can and will nudge when given the > opportunity. After that it is all about waiting..." > > > > Suzanne > > > > On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Harrison Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello David O. and David S. I've re-titled to give the thread a new name > if only because I think it is headed in some new directions with hopefully > a long and useful discussion in prospect. > > > > This discussion may get a little difficult as we attempt to define and > understand the words we are using, "Management," for example. I had in mind > the more common garden variety of Management's role in organizations. As > Wikipedia (that source of all useful information) notes, "Despite the move > toward workplace democracy, command-and-control organization structures > remain commonplace as *de facto* organization structure." (Wikipedia). > Back in the old days a common definition of a good manager was one who, > "Makes the plan, manages to the plan, and meets the plan." And we all know > how that was supposed to be done. Single word: Control. Lots of Command and > Control. > > > > David has moved in new, interesting and effective directions saying, "What > I have found is that as I'm able to share the conditions that support > self-organization and how they can be integrated into individuals > leadership approach that the leaders move toward approaches that support > greater and greater self-organization." > > > > I applaud the effort, but it seems to me it may be rather a half step. If > I hear David's words correctly, the fundamental understanding of > "organization" remains unchanged (predesigned structure and controls with > Leaders/Managers in charge) and the new effort is to enable "leaders (to) > move toward approaches that support greater and greater self-organization." > Tactically I can certainly understand the approach, but what if > organization is fundamentally, essentially, in totality - Self Organizing? > If that is the situation, "greater and greater self organization" makes > little sense for a very simple reason. It is all self organizing to begin > with! But I guess that is just splitting hairs, and for sure the heart is > moving in the right direction. > > > > The revolutionary in me (and yes there is some of that J) would dearly > love to shake the organizational world by the scruff of the neck saying > something like, Move on, Wake up! You just can't get there from here. And > for a certainty, such an approach would have no chance of success. There > needs to be a change in view, I am sure -- but forced change, were it even > possible, falls back on the old way which wasn't effective then and won't > work now. And there is another way which unfortunately requires some > patient waiting. But we may not have to wait that long. > > > > It is a very common lament -- that, "things just aren't working." What > "things" and the nature of their dysfunction are often left unsaid, but the > universal uneasiness is pretty clear. To date, the usual response has been > to do more and more of what we've always done, but maybe with a different > name (Quality Circles, Process Re-Engineering, Dialogue, maybe even AGILE > when mandated etc.). The results have not been inspiring. Some would even > include Open Space Technology as a new tool. But I don't think that works > either if the intent is to fix the old system. > > > > As the lament continues, some strange things are happening. Every now and > again something actually WORKS! And it works even when the plans are > busted, the leadership is incompetent, the environment sour and > threatening. Who knows how or why - but it worked. The Brits usually call > this Muddling Through, which is what happens when everything goes a > different way than it was supposed to - but it all turns out fine. Phew! > > > > There is another name for this strange phenomenon. Anomaly. Anomaly > literally means being outside the law (lawless) from the Greek *a*(without) > *nomos* (law). Anomalies cause one to scratch the head in wonder...How > on earth could THAT happen? Most often, we just pass them by with a > dismissive, "weird!" I think that is a mistake. > > > > Peter Vaill, an old friend and colleague, had a knack for seriously > noticing anomalies. He observed that some organizations performed at levels > of excellence that definitely blew away the competition. He called them > High Performing Systems. The problem was, these systems broke all the rules > of how organizations were supposed to work. As a Professor of Management, > Peter could be accused of a flawed effort because instead of attempting to > analyze how they worked, Peter contented himself with a delightful > description of what they did, which he captured in a short paper (1977*), > The Behavioral Characteristics of High Performing Systems*. I say > delightful because he wrote in a totally colloquial fashion, and definitely > not in the style of Academe, even though he was the (then) Dean of the > Business School at George Washington University. > > > > Writing almost 10 years before Open Space Technology, Peter seems > prescient, for his "Behavioral Characteristics" are a perfect description > of the common behavior at every Open Space I have ever seen. Taking a tall > leap in logic, I have argued (Wave Rider) that the link between Peter's > High Performing Systems, and what we have experienced in Open Space is the > phenomenon of self organization. Or put somewhat differently, High > Performing Systems are well functioning self organizing systems. And in > function and effect they are definitely anomalous for according to the > accepted wisdom, they simply could not happen or do what they do! > > > > On the subject of Anomaly and the importance of same, the work of Thomas > Kuhn comes to mind. Author of, "The Structures of Scientific Revolutions," > Kuhn gave us that wonderful concept, "paradigm," as in Paradigm Shift. As > an historian of Science, Kuhn describes how the scientific world grew in > wisdom and stature, passing through several understandings of the nature of > things, on the way to new (and presumably better) ones. That passage he > called, Paradigm Shifts. According to his story, the scientific or learned > community held a certain view of reality for a period of time, which worked > very well, and seemed to explain most, if not all, of the phenomenon of > their experience. This view (paradigm) was taken as The Truth, and defended > with ferocity. For example, everybody "knew" at one time that the Earth was > the center of everything and those who disagreed were considered heretics, > and often dispatched. Galileo, for instance. Then funny little anomalies > began to show up as people observed the heavens. If the anomalies were not > an illusion then Earth centeredness was false - which everybody knew must > be wrong, insanity, or worse. But the anomalies refused to go away, which > made people more and more uncomfortable, to say nothing of angry. Then one > shinning day the view shifted. Same old heavens as before but seen with > totally new eyes. Paradigm shift. Very powerful and never comfortable. > > > > This brief sojourn into the History of Science can be helpful to our > present concerns, I think, for we are facing a very similar situation in > our understanding of organizations, as well as management. The traditional > understanding of organization, and therefore management, has been around > for a long time. As with all paradigms, it is taken to be The Truth, and > those who challenge will inevitably be subject to dismissal at the > beginning, changing to discomfort, and perhaps ending with anger. The > reason is very simple. The investments in this particular paradigm are > enormous, and include ways of life, ways of making a living, and for some, > life itself. Messing with all of that cannot be done lightly. > > > > And yet the anomalies persist. Some are quite subtle and are perceived > only as a growing sense that "things are not working as we expected." > However, when the system/organization seems broken, it is clear that we > must fix it and we think we know how. If the organizational process is > screwy, then obviously we need Process Re-Engineering. But it didn't work. > We try harder and harder, doing variants of what we've always done, and > (surprisingly) we get what we've always got. But hope springs eternal, and > someday we will find The Fix. Or so it says in all the books. Maybe. > > > > Other anomalies are not so subtle. Open Space Technology is such an > anomaly. I believe it to be true that Open Space violates virtually all > principles and practices of traditional organizational theory and > management practice. To the extent that it (OS) works as we have > experienced it working - much if not all of current practice is called into > question. My view is doubtless biased, but some 20 years ago, a senior > official from the American Society for Training and Development (pardon the > repeat) seemingly had the same impression when he told me, after hearing > what happened in Open Space, "Harrison, if what you say is true, then 99% > of what we are currently do does not need to be done." I would have been > greatly relieved had I been able to argue with him. But I couldn't. I can't. > > > > So David(s) - where does that leave us? Discretion might dictate picking > up our toys and going home. Others might suggest heading for the > barricades. Personally I don't think either possibility is very useful. I > simply cannot deny what I have experienced in Open Space, nor can I resist > the compulsion to share the experience in whatever way with whomsoever > might show up. I think the bottom line may come down to: Move slowly with > empathy, and be prepared to wait. > > > > And what would that mean for us and what we do...? At a practical level, > it could mean something like this. Let's suppose that the Management of a > very traditional Organization shows up on our doorstep. They are concerned > that organizational function is dismal, the people seem to dislike each > other and what they are doing, and profits have disappeared. The request is > simple: Help! Somewhere they heard about Open Space and believe (hope) it > could fix their system, or at least make a start. > > > > It sounds like a marvelous opportunity, and a natural response would be, > YES! At least that would be my response. All the essential preconditions > for OS seem to be in place (real issue, complexity, etc) - BUT ... There > are some issues to consider. First, if by "fixing their system" the client > means that the "traditional Organization" is going to be put back together > as it once was, that is a real problem, I think. The reason is simple - the > root of their problems is precisely the system (understanding of > organization) they were working under. Make it even stronger. Were I to > design a system that would maximize separation and alienation, minimize > creativity and collaboration - I don't think I could do any better than the > system they were operating under. Fixing, or restoring that system would > only compound their misery. Secondly, Doing an Open Space in that > organization is quite likely to increase the general dissatisfaction with > how things are done. As one senior executive from a very traditional > organization said to me following an Open Space we did, "You have ruined me > for work in this place. I am not sure whether to thank you or hate you." > Talk about being caught on the horns of a dilemma! If fully successful with > my task (opening space), I will have failed the clients' primary > expectations (fixing the system) and simultaneously raised the level > employee dissatisfaction. > > > > All true, I think. And I would still do the Open Space, but my reasons > could cause some problems unless very carefully explained, and that > explanation itself is problematical. At one level I will do the Open Space > because I know that it will enable people to be more comfortable, powerful, > sure of themselves. That's the easy part. But at another level I will do > the Open Space in order to introduce anomaly... one more nudge towards > Paradigm Shift. > > > > I know full well that I can't shift paradigms for people. The same is true > of Transformation, which has a lot to do with paradigm shift. Both will > happen all by themselves...or not. But I can and will nudge when given the > opportunity. After that it is all about waiting... > > > > So what do you think about all that? > > > > Harrison > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Harrison Owen > > 7808 River Falls Dr. > > Potomac, MD 20854 > > USA > > > > 189 Beaucaire Ave. (summer) > > Camden, Maine 04843 > > > > Phone 301-365-2093 > > (summer) 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 > > > > *From:* [email protected] [ > mailto:[email protected]<[email protected]>] > *On Behalf Of *David Osborne > *Sent:* Monday, February 03, 2014 9:47 AM > *To:* World wide Open Space Technology email list > *Subject:* Re: [OSList] Trust > > > > I'm not sure I agree OS fails as a management tool.....Self-Organization > has become the lens I look at all my work as an individual who supports > groups and organizations in change and in my leadership and management > development work. It's not an either / or for me os works or doesn't work > as a management tool. > > > > Leadership is simply supporting an organization in moving toward its > goals. The invitation in OS is the goal or issue that people care about. > What I have found is that as I'm able to share the conditions that support > self-organization and how they can be integrated into individuals > leadership approach that the leaders move toward approaches that support > greater and greater self-organization. This is not top-down, traditional > leadership or management. As you propose in Wave-Rider Harrison, I believe > the principles of OS / self-organization can be integrated as a leadership > approach with great results. > > > > David > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 8:57 AM, Harrison Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > > David - I would totally agree that OS "utterly fails as a management > tool." Then again I think that OS shares this fate/condition with all other > "management tools," at least as I understand "management" and "tool" in the > context of enabling effective human performance. And thereby hang the > beginning of a long and useful discussion, I think. > > > > ho > > > > Harrison Owen > > 7808 River Falls Dr. > > Potomac, MD 20854 > > USA > > > > 189 Beaucaire Ave. (summer) > > Camden, Maine 04843 > > > > Phone 301-365-2093 > > (summer) 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 > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *David stevenson > *Sent:* Monday, February 03, 2014 1:51 AM > *To:* World wide Open Space Technology email list > *Subject:* Re: [OSList] Trust > > > > Ho indeed Harrison! OpenSpace opens space for freedom of spirit and heart, > choice and the weaving of our fates and destinies with that of our > world, it does not achieve complience and so, at least to the extent that > people are to be managed... > > On Saturday, February 1, 2014, Harrison Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Brendan said: "And in my view , all germinating from that initial transfer > of trust between mentor and sponsor" Right on! I don't think it makes a bit > of difference how elegantly one "does" the Open Space. It is really all > about TRUST. When I said that anybody with a good heart and good mind can > "do it," that is just a long winded way of saying what I've always found to > be true. Expertise is interesting. Integrity and Trust are essential. A new > comer to the OS world, opening space for the very first time, muffing some > lines, and forgetting others - can do every bit as well as a 20 year > veteran. The coin of the realm is Integrity, authenticity, trust. But none > of that should be news, for that trio is the bedrock of all positive human > encounter, I think. Which may just be another way of pointing out that OS > is not some special process we do, it is just life lived well. Or something. > > > > ho > > > > > > Harrison Owen > > 7808 River Falls Dr. > > Potomac, MD 20854 > > USA > > > > 189 Beaucaire Ave. (summer) > > Camden, Maine 04843 > > > > Phone 301-365-2093 > > (summer) 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 > > > > *From:* [email protected] [ > mailto:[email protected]<[email protected]>] > *On Behalf Of *Brendan McKeague > *Sent:* Saturday, February 01, 2014 12:57 AM > *To:* World wide Open Space Technology email list > *Subject:* Re: [OSList] Sponsor PreWork Conversation (long) > > > > A very interesting question Chuni Li... > > > > The sponsor was being mentored by one of my colleagues in our local Open > Space community of practice (Wave Riders) who suggested to him that OS was > the right method/model for the task at hand. As his coach (the formal role > as perceived by the organisation), my colleague encouraged the sponsor to > get in touch with me to avoid any perceived conflict of interest. The > sponsor researched OS for himself first and then engaged me to provide the > specialist knowledge....Harrison often says that anyone with a good heart > and head can open space - and I agree - while at the same time, I > acknowledge that 'Open Space wisdom' is often helpful, if not necessary, in > situations of increased complexity and potential conflict. > > > > After his initial attraction to OS in theory, and as part of his research, > the sponsor then ran a mini Open Space within his own jurisdiction to see > how it worked in reality - he wished to speak from his lived experience > when engaging with his higher-uppers. He also watched a few of the growing > library of YouTube clips that are so wonderful for educating potential > sponsors. > > > > Now totally convinced, the transfer of trust was complete at various > levels....trusting the process (OST works) AND trusting the facilitator > (who was aligned with the essence of OST - i.e living in it) AND trusting > that both facilitator and process were 'fit-for-purpose' in this context. > > > > And in my view , all germinating from that initial transfer of trust > between mentor and sponsor > > > > Hope this story helps > > > > Cheers Brendan > > > > > > > > On 31/01/2014, at 1:10 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > > > Thank you Brendan for taking the time to organize and share this > information - so precious and such a generous gift! > > > > I am curious about the sponsor who "put his neck out" to make the event > happen. > > Had he experienced OST before? Did you have to "convince" him? What made > him willing to "jump through the hoops?" Was it the OST process or was it > you that he trusted? > > > > Chuni Li > > New Jersey > > > > *From:* Brendan Mc > > > > -- > David Stevenson > Sent from Gmail Mobile > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > > -- > > David Osborne > > [image: http://www.change-fusion.com/ChangeFusionLogo.jpg] > > www.change-fusion.com | [email protected] | 703.939.1777 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > -- > > Suzanne Daigle > Open Space Facilitator > NuFocus Strategic Group > > FL 941-359-8877 > Cell: 203-722-2009 > www.nufocusgroup.com > [email protected] > twitter @suzannedaigle > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Adriana Díaz-Berrio Ph.D. CRHA (514) 739 2268 www.diazberrio.com
_______________________________________________ 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
