Dan, You ask great questions!
My take: like most of life, authorization is more nuanced than your statement below. Like you, I believe everyone has 100% equivalent authorization AND they also carry the imprinting of habits, context, self-talk, existing relationships, and more that influence how they show up. Some will experience themselves as having 100% authorization, some will test that assumption, others will observe and reserve judgment, and every other flavor in between. I have observed that with repeated use, people seem to experience an increasing sense of self-authorization. More take responsibility for what they love not just in Open Space but in life. I know of no practice that lays the groundwork better for increasing self-authorization in social systems. from sunny (at last) Seattle, Peggy _________________________________ Peggy Holman Executive Director Journalism that Matters 15347 SE 49th Place Bellevue, WA 98006 425-746-6274 www.journalismthatmatters.net www.peggyholman.com Twitter: @peggyholman JTM Twitter: @JTMStream Enjoy the award winning Engaging Emergence: Turning Upheaval into Opportunity Check out my series on what's emerging in the news & information ecosystem On Mar 31, 2014, at 7:06 AM, Daniel Mezick <[email protected]> wrote: > This is very helpful for helping me understand your thinking. Thanks for > sending the rich detail and disclosure. > > I am stuck. I continue to hold the belief that (quoting myself here...) > > "Everyone...Sponsor included, has 100% equivalent authorization (100% > equivalent "right to do work" in the Open Space) as of the moment of opening > of the Bulletin Board and/or the opening of the Marketplace." > > I wonder: if this is NOT actually true, how can the space be said to be truly > open? I wonder who has more "right to do work" than anyone else... as of the > opening of the Bulletin Board, and/or the opening of the Marketplace, in > an Open Space meeting. > > Maybe there is no equivalence of authorization whatsoever in Open Space, and > I am simply barking up the wrong tree. > > Daniel > > > > On 3/31/14 9:41 AM, Michael M Pannwitz wrote: >> Dear Dan, >> as mostly, there is none or very little detailed thinking behind me >> expressing the idea, that authority does not disappear just because an >> os-event is taking place, and there is no levelling of authority, which I >> assume you meant, when using the expression "equal standing". >> >> This is all observation and experience, data I have taken in. In my world, >> thats pretty important and utterly valid even if the stuff I observe might >> be seen completely different by other observers. >> >> Looking at myself, I have lots of authority of the kind that sort of oozes >> out of me when standing in a circle, looking every one in the eye, even if >> there are thousands and asking them to look around, at the person to the >> right and to the left of them, behind them, at the other side of the >> circcle, all the time slowly walking around the circle... after I have done >> that twice everyone is smiling, looking, focusing on each other away from >> me... and then my authority shifts as I say nothing about open space but >> talk about the facts of life (the principles) etc... and later I move in the >> authority of invisibilty and presence... >> >> I am not sure what happens to the participants but I have no data that would >> indicate them reaching equal standing as far as authority is concerned or >> that others will ignore the different kinds and levels of authority that is >> associated with others representing those, regardless of whether just >> assumed or in fact fact. >> >> There have been experiential settings in which I have participated, such as >> the desert game where the folks claiming to be authorities on how to survive >> in a desert lead the group to certain death, or Tavistock Laboratories where >> participants, me included, even though we had all the space and freedom we >> wanted to take, used their various authorities in intricate manners to >> re-create exactly the kinds of organisational strutures they came from. So, >> authorities are simply a fact of life, more or less useful, especially if >> adaptable in the face of surprises. >> >> What I do find very interesting, is your quest investigating >> my thinking! I have pretty much given up investigating my own thinking, let >> alone that of others. Seems to me that the only thing that works for my >> passion to have the forces of selforganisation do their thing (expanding >> time and space, if that is at all possible) is to concentrate on the things >> I can somehow control: set up a circle of chairs, etc. >> >> Have a great day >> mmp >> >> On 30.03.2014 16:17, Daniel Mezick wrote: >>> Michael, >>> >>> I am asking for help. May I investigate your thinking? >>> "...there is no such thing as an equal standing in authority terms." >>> Will you expose your detailed thinking behind your expression of this >>> one idea? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 3/30/14 8:34 AM, Michael M Pannwitz wrote: >>>> Dear Dan and everyone, >>>> here are some bits from my experience: >>>> >>>> ---When I get a call or an email from someone asking me to facilitate >>>> an ost-event I tell them to please arrange a "contact" meeting that >>>> needs to be attended also by the person that will have the authority >>>> to say yes or no at the end (usually the person that would pay my >>>> fee). The purpose of the contact meeting is for the sponsor to find >>>> out, whether the prerequisites for an OST event are sufficiently in >>>> place. This meeting takes 60 to 90 minutes, no fee charged. >>>> This process has nothing to do with OST, its simply what is needed for >>>> any kind of intervention of any kind of man-made organisation that is >>>> embarking on such a venture. >>>> >>>> ---Participants in an OST event do not leave the authority bestowed on >>>> them in the wardrobe, there is no such thing as an equal standing in >>>> authority terms. What does happen is that folks differently bestowed >>>> with authority will, in contrast to what they usually do, follow more >>>> freely their "passion and responsibility" which, it seems, in some way >>>> increases their non-bestowed authority... the expanded space for the >>>> forces of selforganisation, the real motor in an OST event, seems to >>>> have this effect. Everyone, all participants, fully well know the >>>> limitations that they will have to deal with "back in the asylum" when >>>> they follow their passion... and very often they are amazingly elegant >>>> and cunning in seeing their project through (responsible). That is why >>>> I encourage the folks in charge not to make any kind of promises >>>> regarding what they will do to encourage projects emerging from the >>>> ost event. Participants will get the conditions in place to see their >>>> projects through. >>>> >>>> ---Yes, again my experience, coercion, control and such do shut down >>>> open space, not completely though: I have seen the force in a dormant >>>> stage and becoming quite alive when the conditions are right >>>> (prerequisites in place)... isn't it our experience that big CONTROL >>>> seems to shut down just about anything? In OST events I have actually >>>> seen efforts of BiG control being met by counter-activity (this is >>>> sometimes the effect of facilitator intervention when a space-invader >>>> tries his stuff or, and even more effective, the "group" grappling >>>> with space invasion/attempts at control... these observations I have >>>> made when there is a really burning business issue and absolutely >>>> nobody has the foggiest idea regarding the solution, least the folks >>>> with "authority". >>>> >>>> I really impress myself with your passion, Daniel. Maybe because I >>>> also have been trying to refine my understanding, find precise >>>> language, get my hands onto, etc. what it is that happens in os-events >>>> or even in os-organisations. In my os-facilitator-career, I have >>>> increasingly given up trying to understand it and focus more on what I >>>> see happening... which has increased my faible for stories. By now, I >>>> know that stories are fact, right, my facts. >>>> >>>> Have a great Sunday, >>>> cheers >>>> mmp >>>> >>>> >>>> On 30.03.2014 13:45, Daniel Mezick wrote: >>>>> Hi Michael, Everyone, >>>>> >>>>> I'm sorry there are coercive mandates happening in Berlin, and that you >>>>> have to experience them. >>>>> >>>>> Regarding the Sponsor for an OST meeting, >>>>> I am saying that I believe this person must have enough formal authority >>>>> ("sufficient+1") to be able to actually arrange, budget and convene the >>>>> meeting. And that the authority that the Sponsor holds is conferred to >>>>> him or her by the organization. Is this true in OST? >>>>> >>>>> Regarding the Participants, >>>>> I am saying that I believe that after the Marketplace opens, the >>>>> intention and in fact the reality of OST is that everyone has an equal >>>>> standing in authority terms. At the start, no one person or group has >>>>> any more authorization to act than any other person, regardless of their >>>>> formally authorized role in the organization. Is this true in OST? >>>>> >>>>> For the record, I am not at all in favor of mandates. I am allergic to >>>>> them. I believe mandates and other forms of coercion strongly discourage >>>>> self-organization by the imposition of external authority over the >>>>> person or group. Self-organization is impossible in scenarios where >>>>> individuals and groups are not free to choose. Is this true in OST? >>>>> >>>>> This places out routinely EVERY SINGLE DAY in Agile adoptions. Formally >>>>> authorized leadership imposes Agile practices on teams while at the same >>>>> time encouraging teams to "self-organize". I for one have seldom if ever >>>>> seen it actually work that way. >>>>> >>>>> And so I have my questions about authority in Open Space. >>>>> >>>>> I'm not being cute here: I'm hoping someone can help me break/refine my >>>>> model of OST as it pertains to formal and informal authority, in the >>>>> Open Space. I'm trying to use more precise language to explain what I >>>>> think is going on in OST. In my view, the 1 Law and the 5 Principles >>>>> make it clear everyone has equal informal authorization in OST, >>>>> regardless of their formal title. I some ways the formal titles are >>>>> suspended, as the space is held open for inquiry and dialogue. >>>>> >>>>> This is my current belief. I asking for help in determining if this >>>>> belief is close to truth. >>>>> >>>>> Related Links: >>>>> http://newtechusa.net/agile/authority-and-power/ >>>>> http://newtechusa.net/agile/authority-explained/ >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Daniel >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 3/30/14 5:23 AM, Michael M Pannwitz wrote: >>>>>> Dear Dan, Jamie and Paul, >>>>>> is there a new (5th or 6th) principle emerging? >>>>>> Such as: >>>>>> "Whoever is authorized is the right people?" >>>>>> Or >>>>>> "Whoever is mandated is the right people?" >>>>>> >>>>>> Or is there a new prerequisite for the unfolding of the forces of >>>>>> selforganisation in sight? >>>>>> In addition to the 4,5 or 6 that we are often concerned about? >>>>>> Such as: >>>>>> "High level of authorisation" >>>>>> or >>>>>> "High level of mandation" (Palines for mandate, have a look at this >>>>>> link >>>>>>> http://de.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Mandation >>>>>> >>>>>> Or are these thoughts simply a manifestation of "old-paradigm", >>>>>> remnants of the realm of control? >>>>>> >>>>>> Control? Wasn't that the effort to shut down selforganisation towards >>>>>> zero? >>>>>> >>>>>> Heavy stuff for a sundrenched Sunday morning in Berlin where I and the >>>>>> entire population (including dogs and cats and other pets kept in >>>>>> human housing) are suffering from having been robbed of an hours time >>>>>> by authorities that are mandated to do such stuff. >>>>>> >>>>>> Oh yes, before I forget, there was the notion that "passion and >>>>>> responsibility" is all that is needed for "authorisation" (with the >>>>>> nagging suspicion that folks driven by passion and responsibility and >>>>>> even taking action under those influences walk through the walls and >>>>>> obstacles set up by those authorized to raise them as if they were >>>>>> thin air). >>>>>> >>>>>> Greetings from Berlin >>>>>> mmp >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 29.03.2014 21:57, Daniel Mezick wrote: >>>>>>> I am asking for help. Will you help me clarify my thinking? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm wondering if 100% equivalence in authorization for all >>>>>>> participants >>>>>>> is actually a key/defining characteristic of any genuine and authentic >>>>>>> Open Space event... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> First things first. Definitions: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Authority: The right to do specific work >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Authorization: The conferring of authority >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Formal Authority: Authorization conferred from the formal organization >>>>>>> to a person. Example: "the CEO". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Informal Authority: Authorization conferred from peers, colleagues and >>>>>>> co-workers. Example: "emergent leadership". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Now let's get into it. I currently think, and believe, that: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. For an Open Space event inside an organization, the Sponsor must >>>>>>> occupy a role with substantial formal authorization, definitely more >>>>>>> than enough to actually authorize that OST event. The higher the level >>>>>>> of formal authorization of the Sponsor, the better it is for the event >>>>>>> overall. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2. The Sponsor authorizes the participants- the "invitees"-- to meet >>>>>>> together, and do the specific work of exploring and investigating the >>>>>>> Theme. This "authorized work" is done in "authorized space"...in that >>>>>>> specific place, for a specific period of time. The Sponsor explicitly >>>>>>> authorizes all of the above and conveys this message after they stand >>>>>>> up, and before they sit down, at the opening. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2. The Facilitator is formally authorized by the Sponsor to do the >>>>>>> specific work of OST event. Absent this authorization, the Facilitator >>>>>>> has no standing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 3. This is the big one: Everyone else, Sponsor included, has 100% >>>>>>> equivalent authorization (100% equivalent "right to do work") as of >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> moment of opening of the Bulletin Board and/or the opening of the >>>>>>> Marketplace. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 4. As the event progresses, authorization dynamics are in play. These >>>>>>> "informal authorization" dynamics occur continuously throughout the >>>>>>> day >>>>>>> in real time, moment by moment. Those who experience net increases in >>>>>>> levels of informal authorization as of the end of the meeting have >>>>>>> membership in the "emergent leadership" group. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am very interested in what experienced folks think about the >>>>>>> validity >>>>>>> of the assertion in (3) above. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ex the Facilitator, does everyone else actually have 100% equivalent >>>>>>> authorization in an OST meeting? Why or why not? >>>>>>> Is this 100% equivalence of authorization actually a key/defining >>>>>>> characteristic of any genuine and authentic Open Space event? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for any insight you may be able to provide, and >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Kind Regards, >>>>>>> Daniel >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Daniel Mezick, President >>>>>>> >>>>>>> New Technology Solutions Inc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (203) 915 7248 (cell) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Bio <http://newtechusa.net/dan-mezick/>. Blog >>>>>>> <http://newtechusa.net/blog/>. Twitter >>>>>>> <http://twitter.com/#%21/danmezick/>. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Examine my new book:The Culture Game >>>>>>> <http://newtechusa.net/about/the-culture-game-book/>: Tools for the >>>>>>> Agile Manager. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Explore Agile Team Training >>>>>>> <http://newtechusa.net/services/agile-scrum-training/> and Coaching. >>>>>>> <http://newtechusa.net/services/agile-scrum-coaching/> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Explore the Agile Boston >>>>>>> <http://newtechusa.net//user-groups/ma/>Community. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> Daniel Mezick, President >>>>> >>>>> New Technology Solutions Inc. >>>>> >>>>> (203) 915 7248 (cell) >>>>> >>>>> Bio <http://newtechusa.net/dan-mezick/>. Blog >>>>> <http://newtechusa.net/blog/>. Twitter >>>>> <http://twitter.com/#%21/danmezick/>. >>>>> >>>>> Examine my new book:The Culture Game >>>>> <http://newtechusa.net/about/the-culture-game-book/>: Tools for the >>>>> Agile Manager. >>>>> >>>>> Explore Agile Team Training >>>>> <http://newtechusa.net/services/agile-scrum-training/> and Coaching. >>>>> <http://newtechusa.net/services/agile-scrum-coaching/> >>>>> >>>>> Explore the Agile Boston >>>>> <http://newtechusa.net//user-groups/ma/>Community. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Daniel Mezick, President >>> >>> New Technology Solutions Inc. >>> >>> (203) 915 7248 (cell) >>> >>> Bio <http://newtechusa.net/dan-mezick/>. Blog >>> <http://newtechusa.net/blog/>. Twitter >>> <http://twitter.com/#%21/danmezick/>. >>> >>> Examine my new book:The Culture Game >>> <http://newtechusa.net/about/the-culture-game-book/>: Tools for the >>> Agile Manager. >>> >>> Explore Agile Team Training >>> <http://newtechusa.net/services/agile-scrum-training/> and Coaching. >>> <http://newtechusa.net/services/agile-scrum-coaching/> >>> >>> Explore the Agile Boston <http://newtechusa.net//user-groups/ma/>Community. >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> > > -- > Daniel Mezick, President > New Technology Solutions Inc. > (203) 915 7248 (cell) > Bio. Blog. Twitter. > Examine my new book: The Culture Game : Tools for the Agile Manager. > Explore Agile Team Training and Coaching. > Explore the Agile Boston Community. > _______________________________________________ > 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
