I don't think you need to be so qualified, Paul; 3.) All "all statements" are *positively* self limiting.
But then if I gather correctly, it's all a joke anyway. So from that vantage point... what do we do now? *John Baxter* *CoCreate Adelaide Facilitator, Director of Realise consultancy* CoCreateADL.com <http://cocreateadl.com/localgov%E2%80%8B> | jsbaxter.com.au <http://www.jsbaxter.com.au/> 0405 447 829 | @jsbaxter_ <http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_> *City Grill— An Election Forum More Magnificent Than Any Ever Seen <http://citygrill.eventbrite.com.au>!, Saturday 18 October 2014Connect with your candidates, get your voice heard by joining with others in your community, and Influence the future of the city* On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 8:59 AM, paul levy via OSList < [email protected]> wrote: > Of course ! It's the wonderful irony of "all" statements. > > Paul > > > > > On 16 Oct 2014, at 22:43, Daniel Mezick via OSList < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Including this one? > > On 10/16/14 2:15 PM, paul levy via OSList wrote: > > I'd just venture to add a third to Harrison's first two... > > 1) All Systems are Open. 2) All Systems are self organizing. > > And 3. All "all statements" are possibly self-limiting > > Best regards > > Paul Levy > > > On Thursday, 16 October 2014, Harrison Owen via OSList < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> John – Thank you, Thank you for all the rich stuff! Sort of a Tidal >> Wave, but that’s when it gets fun, albeit a tad difficult to keep track of >> the sundry bits and pieces J >> >> >> >> Picking Just One: “But I can't get past the feeling that *there are >> lots of barriers to the openness of space, and to self organisation*.” >> Absolutely. And if we were to put that into the language of the trade >> (Complexity Theorists and the like) we would be talking about “system >> constraints.” But as I understand it, that does not mean that Self >> Organization is no longer operative. And in fact the System Constraints are >> part and parcel of the process, a very important part. I think it goes >> something like this – >> >> >> >> I have found myself coming to two conclusions, or better yet >> observations. 1) All Systems are Open. 2) All Systems are self organizing. >> >> >> >> As Open Systems, we, in all permutations of our “us-ness” – businesses, >> countries, families, planets, etc) are open to, and impacted by, all other >> systems. Sometimes a lot, and sometimes a little, but in our cosmos there >> is no safe, protected place. Everything is related to everything else, and >> we are no exception. If true, this has a number of implications. First of >> all the environment in which we exist is so complex, fast moving and >> inter-connected we can’t even think at that level. Secondly, what you can’t >> even think about, you can’t control. So the notion that somebody is >> actually “in charge/in control” is not just a silly idea, it is delusional. >> 3) System preservation/growth depends on our ability to navigate this >> environment. And it is a good news/bad news situation. Sometimes the >> impacts drive us in new and creative directions, and open up new >> opportunities which are ours if we respond appropriately. At other times >> the impacts drive us to the wall, and it’s Game over. Another word is >> Death. If this story is in any ways valid, it would seem like Mission >> Impossible. And yet this story has seemingly been going on for 13.7 Billion >> years and we are still here to complain about it. How could that be? >> >> >> >> All Systems are Self Organizing – Self Organization is in fact the >> mechanism whereby we navigate the environment, and all systems do it, I >> think. And when they stop doing it, they disappear. Self Organization is >> not the product of some CEO or executive committee. After all, they really >> haven’t been around for all that long. Self Organization is the product of >> the total system in all of its aspects and bits and pieces. How all that >> works has been a matter of stunning discovery over the past 40 years or so. >> I doubt we have it all right, but I do think we may have the major elements >> of understanding in place. The outline goes something like this – a) Steady >> State b) Chaos c) A bifurcation to either dissipation (poof) or >> reconstitution at new and higher levels of order. Of course you have to >> fill in a lot of the blanks, and there is a massive literature attempting >> to do just that. But I do believe we have enough to get started with some >> basic observations. It really is a Whole System affair, in which all >> elements must work together, and no element has an *a priori* claim to >> centrality. In a business this could mean that the dumb question of an >> intern could just open the doors for the future. You just don’t know. But >> you do know that an organization’s future directly relates to its capacity >> to bring total system assets to bear on emergent challenges and >> opportunities quickly and effectively. It is always tempting to try and >> “hedge the bet” with some plan, policy or procedure, but it worthwhile >> noting that the tighter (more constraining) the plan, the greater the >> likelihood of failure. It’s not that the plan was bad... but unfortunately >> the challenge or opportunity came from a different direction, and all our >> eggs were in one basket – the wrong one. >> >> >> >> So we have a very existential question – How do we assure sufficient room >> (dare I say Space?) so that the infinite elements of any organization may >> quickly and effectively align to meet new challenges and opportunities – >> recognizing in advance that we can never know what will be required? >> >> >> >> Open Space Technology is just a bit player in all of this, but good old >> OST can be useful none the less both as a natural laboratory to explore >> what is going on, and also as an effective intervention to encourage the >> appearance of the elemental power of self organization, particularly when >> it seems blocked and constrained. There are no guarantees of course, and >> it may well be that The Organization’s time is now: Game Over. But the >> chances of renewal are pretty good, at least that has been my experience. >> And no matter what, the magic sauce is not OST – but the power of self >> organization. So you could say, just as a way of speaking, “It’s all Open >> Space.” But that’s just a joke, son. >> >> >> >> Harrison >> >> >> >> >> >> Winter Address >> >> 7808 River Falls Drive >> >> Potomac, MD 20854 >> >> 301-365-2093 >> >> >> >> Summer Address >> >> 189 Beaucaire Ave. >> >> Camden, ME 04843 >> >> 207-763-3261 >> >> >> >> Websites >> >> www.openspaceworld.com <http://%20www.openspaceworld.com> >> >> www.ho-image.com >> >> OSLIST To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives >> of OSLIST Go to: >> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org >> >> >> >> *From:* OSList [mailto:[email protected]] *On >> Behalf Of *John Baxter via OSList >> *Sent:* Thursday, October 16, 2014 2:57 AM >> *To:* Harrison Owen >> *Cc:* World wide Open Space Technology email list >> *Subject:* Re: [OSList] Authority Distribution in Open Space >> >> >> >> I have knots about empowerment, and the ubiquitous openness of space. >> These knots are about to inspire a rant. >> >> >> >> These knots, I should start with, are not entirely the result of this >> present discussion thread - it is just this discussion that prompts me to >> speak. >> >> >> >> I think I understand Harrison, if you suggest that self-organisation is >> more common than we realise... if not ubiquitous, omnipresent, then at >> least that we can fruitfully challenge the assumption that formal and >> top-down organisation dominates how things get done. >> >> >> >> But I can't get past the feeling that *there are lots of barriers to the >> openness of space, and to self organisation*. Everywhere and all the >> time. In my recent work, mental barriers by all involved about authority >> and role relationships. My personal barriers around trying too hard to >> "empower". My client's patronising assumptions about the "capacity" and >> "maturity" of "the sector". Information asymmetries. >> >> >> >> So I get really conflicted when anyone starts saying "well space is open >> all the time" (implication: 'so chill out cos there's nothing you need to >> do'). >> >> >> >> I am also conflicted about stepping back from the goal of empowerment, as >> if everybody else needs to just step into open space and take >> responsibility. >> >> >> >> Yes - many people don't realise the power that they have. (In my last >> project; nobody seemed to quite buy into the fact that *they could >> directly author the document that they were trying to influence*.) >> >> >> >> But it is also patronising to suggest that empowerment lies in just >> helping people to see how powerful they are... because many people >> *don't* have the power that we or they might like. To suggest that >> people have the power and just don't use it... that effectively blames them >> for their situation, and washes our hands of responsibility. >> >> >> >> The biggest barrier to group change I see time and time again is >> authority figures who believe others need to change, not themselves. (Most >> commonly, that their employees need to "be empowered", and that they need >> to manage a culture change program to get there... or better yet, that HR >> needs to manage the change program, while we are busy getting the real work >> done.) >> >> >> >> I don't pretend that empowerment is something that can be done to other >> people (patronising), but I do firmly believe that we all first need to >> look to ourselves and what we need to do to play our role making such a >> future possible. And, in fact, that *this is all that we can ever do*. >> >> >> >> Maybe the wisdom in what you say Harrison is that we do this by focusing >> on respect first, as a productive way to enable empowerment. >> >> >> >> Maybe I am picking on the wrong things and have misunderstood them, and I >> apologise if I have been critical. But I also see a lot of things said >> that make me uncomfortable, that knot me up. Again, most of these things >> are from my memory, not the present discussion. While my memory might not >> be the best, I'm sure it is based on something. >> >> >> >> Thank you all for your patience and for being in this discussion >> >> >> >> >> *John Baxter* >> >> ***Co****Create Adelaide Facilitator, Director of Realise consultancy* >> >> CoCreateADL.com <http://cocreateadl.com/localgov%E2%80%8B> | >> jsbaxter.com.au <http://www.jsbaxter.com.au/> >> >> 0405 447 829 >> >> | >> >> @jsbaxter_ <http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_> >> >> >> >> *City Grill— An Election Forum More Magnificent Than Any Ever Seen >> <http://citygrill.eventbrite.com.au>!* >> *, Saturday 18 October 2014 Connect with your candidates, get your voice >> heard by joining with others in your community, and Influence the future of >> the city* >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 6:06 AM, Harrison Owen <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> John -- I’m rather curious what you meant by “The overall project was >> more complicated than OST?” My confusion comes in part from my experience >> that complexity is actually an essential precondition for OST, or more >> exactly the effective operation of self organization. The essential >> pre-conditions as I have experienced the are: A Real business issue >> (something that people really care about). High levels of complexity such >> that no single person or group has a prayer of figuring it out. High levels >> of diversity in terms of people and points of view. Lots of passion and >> conflict. And a decision time of yesterday (urgency). Given these 5 >> conditions, self organization in the more formal setting of OST or as a >> natural occurrence just seems to happen... unless...And this may be the >> point of problem... It is arbitrarily constrained... which usually means >> that somebody already has the plan/program/design and they are just looking >> for buy-in or (worst case) they are simply trying to sugar coat the pill, >> and make it seem like the folks are creating something, when in fact the >> cake is already baked. >> >> >> >> A clue to the dilemma may be in the phrase, “I struggled to help the >> client (the funding body) to really 'empower'...” I know we talk a lot >> about empowerment, but I have come to the conclusion that it is really a >> red herring, and most painfully so in those situations where you actually >> try to do it. Sounds odd, I guess, but think about it. If I empower >> you...you are in my power. And the more I try to empower you the worse it >> gets. Real empowerment, in my book, is not an act that we (or somebody) do, >> but an acknowledgement of a pre-existing condition...you are powerful. Of >> course I might encourage you a bit to be as powerful as you are, but it is >> not something I can give you. You must claim it for yourself. Strange as it >> may seem, I find the notion of “empowerment” to be just the opposite of >> that fundament of effective working relationships (or any relationship) >> RESPECT. And I suspect that it is precisely here that the fickle finger of >> fate is pointing to the critical issue. >> >> >> >> Another word that fits in here for me is “Patronizing.” Everything may >> sound super nice, and all the proper and correct words may be spoken, but >> if the implication is that the folks (participants) really do not have the >> competence or ability to deal with the issues, it is fairly predictable >> that they will not bother to try. Or if they “try” it will be pretty much >> of a pro forma situation. Sound familiar? >> >> >> >> Harrison >> >> >> >> Winter Address >> >> 7808 River Falls Drive >> >> Potomac, MD 20854 >> >> 301-365-2093 >> >> >> >> Summer Address >> >> 189 Beaucaire Ave. >> >> Camden, ME 04843 >> >> 207-763-3261 >> >> >> >> Websites >> >> www.openspaceworld.com <http://%20www.openspaceworld.com> >> >> www.ho-image.com >> >> OSLIST To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives >> of OSLIST Go to: >> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org >> >> >> >> *From:* OSList [mailto:[email protected]] *On >> Behalf Of *John Baxter via OSList >> *Sent:* Monday, October 13, 2014 2:41 AM >> *To:* Daniel Mezick >> *Cc:* World wide Open Space Technology email list >> *Subject:* Re: [OSList] Authority Distribution in Open Space >> >> >> >> Hi Daniel. Thanks for your considered response. >> >> >> >> I will try to keep my response in line with the topic.... but expect it >> may meander. >> >> >> >> The OST day I was preparing for has since come and gone. >> >> I decided in the end to least give OST a crack and see what happened. >> >> >> >> It didn't go very well; but it also went well enough (vis overall project >> goals, and client expectations), so I don't feel so bad about it... even if >> I had personally envisaged more. >> >> >> >> I am not one to worry about the cannon... which means sometimes I break >> things, as I did this time. There was still an (informal) sponsor, the one >> that sent the invites. They just did not have a presence on the day. >> Thank you Daniel as you did make me think critically about the strength of >> my role as host. I think I dealt with that through my introduction to the >> day; and as it turns out the authority to host was not an issue. >> >> >> >> But as it turns out, that was not really the biggest challenge! >> >> >> >> The main lessons I took away about what contributed to the average result: >> >> >> >> *There needs to be clear, compelling shared work.* >> >> The overall project was more complicated than OST, so it wasn't clear >> what turning up actually meant, and I think many did not turn up on the >> basis of wanting to resolve a shared challenge (the work), as you might >> expect for OST. In straight OST terms, you could say this was an issue of >> invitation, but really it was many things. >> >> >> >> So the group was interesting. They had the heart, but not the will. >> They were committed, but without ownership of the result. I've seen this a >> lot in the community engagement field, but nowhere that I have used (or >> seen) OST. >> >> >> >> I thought about this a lot, I thought it might have been about the >> invitation and self-selection; but at the end of the day I think it comes >> down to the sense of (and invitation in to) shared work. >> >> >> >> *It is super hard to dissolve ingrained power and authority relationships >> in the short term. These can't be sidestepped by an external facilitator.* >> >> >> >> I struggled to help the client (the funding body) to really 'empower'. >> They talked about it and genuinely want to, but old habits and mental >> models don't change overnight. They really struggled to push beyond >> managing the process as superiours (to a set of subordinate participants). >> This is 'empowerment' within a patriarchal system, and it doesn't work. It >> felt very yucky at times. >> >> >> >> A curious side effect of this partriarchal 'empowerment' was an >> unwillingness to be clear about the work ("we want to be open and let them >> lead the process" they would say... I got the client to agree that *the*y >> were >> clearly the leaders, but we didn't quite work out how to put that into >> practice). >> >> >> >> Over the course of the engagement, we all took baby steps together that >> invest in their (/our) capacity to really work together in future. They >> learned a LOT in a short period of time, and so did I, but it was too >> short. By the end of the project I had the client calling me up to ask how >> they could reword things so they didn't reflect a control response. : ) >> That was good, but obviously if they need me for this then there is some >> way to go. And different client reps had different levels of self >> reflection. >> >> >> >> Hosting an isolated OST workshop against this grain was very ambitious, >> it was always going to be, no matter how we conducted ourselves. >> >> >> >> And perhaps 20% were very proactive, and led the bulk of the work that >> occurred... they saved the day! >> >> But the length of the OST was not enough for this leadership to really be >> contagious and precipitate a productive culture. >> >> >> >> *Or in other words: we struggled to free up authorisation to be more >> dynamic* >> >> Reading your blog post Daniel, the idea of dynamic authorisation would >> have been very useful earlier in the project. Another way of looking at >> the project: we struggled to free the space of ingrained authority to >> enable dynamic authorisation. >> >> >> >> >> >> There were lots of other insights into how we could have done it >> differently, but to me these were the fundamental stumbling blocks for us. >> >> >> >> Still, they were not too big, and I'm pleased we made a good start. >> >> My favourite feedback was "thank you, this was the first time I have been >> part of genuine engagement in more than a decade in the sector" : ) >> >> >> >> Next time, we will do better. >> >> >> >> >> *John Baxter* >> >> ***Co****Create Adelaide Facilitator, Director of Realise consultancy* >> >> CoCreateADL.com <http://cocreateadl.com/localgov%E2%80%8B> | >> jsbaxter.com.au <http://www.jsbaxter.com.au/> >> >> 0405 447 829 <0405%20447%20829> >> >> | >> >> @jsbaxter_ <http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_> >> >> >> >> *City Grill— An Election Forum More Magnificent Than Any Ever Seen >> <http://citygrill.eventbrite.com.au>!* >> *, Saturday 18 October 2014 Connect with your candidates, get your voice >> heard by joining with others in your community, and Influence the future of >> the city* >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 12:07 AM, Daniel Mezick <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Hi John, >> >> Yours is a very interesting story. >> >> You say: >> >> >> >> >> *"...To be honest I am not sure how I need to deal with this, though my >> strategy is to accept the authority for hosting the space in the next >> workshop, obsolving the department of their responsibility to manage the >> day." "...I don't think it is feasible for the obvious authority candidates >> hosting something genuinely participatory. The relevant director has said >> she doesn't want to speak formally and become The Authority for the day, a >> position I agree with."* >> >> >> >> >> >> In the situation as described, it sounds like the org is the very >> earliest stages of moving in a direction of more >> open/participatory/inviting. >> >> Do you agree with this assessment? >> >> >> >> If this assessment is correct, based on what you describe, I would >> probably avoid attempting Open Space in the canonical form whatsoever (as >> described in the OST GUIDE) because the Sponsor role is vacant. >> Unoccupied. And so, by my reckoning, if I understand you right, a true Open >> Space event isn't even possible, because the essential OST-Sponsor-role is >> in fact not willingly occupied by anyone with enough authority to play that >> essential role well. >> >> What's clear is that someone who could function as OST-Sponsor is >> currently unwilling to do so. And so I might try a "taster" or "demo" event >> instead, where the goal is to *learn about Open Space in general*, and >> do a *little* bit of "real" work too. Especially if the allotted time a >> mere 1/2 day, I am even more inclined to strongly favor this re-framing of >> the stated goals. >> >> So the primary and stated goal for the "taster" is learning about OST. >> Another goal for a short event might be to see who shows up >> super-interested in the art of Facilitation, and then offer to mentor those >> who do self-select by showing interest. In this manner some Facilitation >> capacity is developed inside the org, to help with current meetings and >> processes. Introducing Facilitation into typical meetings is a easy and >> effective "culture hack". >> >> >> >> For me, the total unwillingness of an obvious candidate to occupy the >> Sponsor role is a huge warning signal to slow down, pause, or even stop. >> >> Lots of people here have more experience than me, and might be willing to >> lend you some of their expertise regarding the authority dynamics of >> Facilitating an OST event with the essential OST-Sponsor-role completely >> vacant >> >> >> >> Kind Regards, >> Daniel >> >> >> >> On 9/28/14 11:30 PM, John Baxter wrote: >> >> I am navigating some challenging authority dynamics in a project at the >> moment. >> >> >> >> I was brought in a week out from the first of three forums, and asked to >> 'facilitate a codesign process' which was at that stage a black box (with >> many hidden expectations) scheduled into that event (1 hour before lunch >> and 1 hour afterwards). >> >> >> >> It's a long journey, but you can imagine how my role has changed as I >> prepare for the third forum which I am hosting in Open Space. >> >> >> >> The overall process is an engagement between a government department and >> their funded agencies. The most obvious direct power dynamics are obvious, >> the effective power and authority dynamics are much more complex (though >> predictable). >> >> >> >> Department staff have authority challenges as much as the agencies. They >> are trying so hard to be 'neutral' and 'non controlling' that they are >> effectively reinforcing their own authority positions (which often have >> little real correlation to the power, knowledge etc that they imagine them >> to). >> >> >> >> To be honest I am not sure how I need to deal with this, though my >> strategy is to accept the authority for hosting the space in the next >> workshop, obsolving the department of their responsibility to manage the >> day. >> >> >> >> It has been interesting to watch push back so far from agency reps who >> are committed to participating, who are genuinely engaged, but are playing >> to an us-them tension that is getting in the way of the shared work (and >> serves them no good ends except protecting them from their own >> responsibility). Stand-offishness is gradually being resolved, though some >> pockets are holding firm. >> >> >> >> I am crossing my fingers for WS3 that we can traverse these and get into >> Open Space without being pushed off the bridge by the reactionary tension; >> and that once on the other side, the department reps can embrace Open Space >> and take responsibility for their role. >> >> >> >> We will get across *as long as I have the authority* to host the space >> for them. >> >> >> >> I don't think it is feasible for the obvious authority candidates hosting >> something genuinely participatory. The relevant director has said she >> doesn't want to speak formally and become The Authority for the day, a >> position I agree with. >> >> >> >> But it does leave something of a shell, where I am crossing my fingers >> that our time together thus far affords me the authority to host that space. >> >> >> >> I think we are ready. I am bringing my harness and floaties just in case. >> >> >> >> >> *John Baxter* >> >> * CoCreate Adelaide Facilitator, Director of Realise consultancy* >> >> CoCreateADL.com <http://cocreateadl.com/localgov%E2%80%8B> | >> jsbaxter.com.au <http://www.jsbaxter.com.au/> >> >> 0405 447 829 >> >> | >> >> @jsbaxter_ <http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_> >> >> >> >> *City Grill— An Election Forum More Magnificent Than Any Ever Seen >> <http://citygrill.eventbrite.com.au>*, Saturday 18 October 2014 >> Influence your city by building relationships and joining voices with >> others in your community >> >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Daniel Mezick via OSList < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi Harrison, >> >> So interesting how the Law of 2 Feet authorizes me, and every other >> member of an OST event, to go anywhere we may want to go. >> >> Without asking anyone else for any kind of "permission"... >> >> >> Reminds me of this past June, being in Camden with you, and Ethelyn, and >> Harold, and friends... when we were standing on the porch of that Camden >> restaurant... waiting for everyone to arrive, and assemble for dinner... >> >> And as we wait, I notice there is this convenient-looking, alternate >> entry-door... into the dining area. >> >> And I say: "Hmm...I wonder if we are authorized to use that door." >> >> And you say: >> >> "We're authorized to go Anywhere we want to go." >> >> ...and I like that. >> >> Daniel >> >> >> Picture of that place: >> https://twitter.com/DanielMezick/status/483054326265692161 >> See also: >> https://twitter.com/danielgullo/status/483434622009999360 >> >> >> <mime-attachment.png> >> >> On 9/25/14 4:58 PM, Harrison Owen wrote: >> >> Daniel... You really did it! I think. Your language comes from a place >> I don’t know... which is to say that I probably wouldn’t say what you say >> in the way that you do (duh). BUT when I run my “translator” it comes out >> sounding pretty good! So... I can’t help with the questions you have >> raised. Actually I think you are doing pretty well on your own, and >> (hopefully) will incite others to a similarly riotous performance. Thanks! >> >> >> >> Harrison >> >> >> >> Winter Address >> >> 7808 River Falls Drive >> >> Potomac, MD 20854 >> >> 301-365-2093 >> >> >> >> Summer Address >> >> 189 Beaucaire Ave. >> >> Camden, ME 04843 >> >> 207-763-3261 >> >> >> >> Websites >> >> www.openspaceworld.com <http://%20www.openspaceworld.com> >> >> www.ho-image.com >> >> OSLIST To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives >> of OSLIST Go to: >> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org >> >> >> >> *From:* OSList [mailto:[email protected]] *On >> Behalf Of *Daniel Mezick via OSList >> *Sent:* Thursday, September 25, 2014 9:39 AM >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* [OSList] Authority Distribution in Open Space >> >> >> >> Greetings to All, >> >> For the past several years I have attended conferences of the Group >> Relations community, and encouraged others to do the same. I've studied >> their literature, and harvested some important learning as a result. One of >> the things I have come to understand a little bit better is the role of >> "authority dynamics" in self-organizing social systems. >> >> Link: >> www.akriceinstitute.org >> >> Over the past several years I've been using Open Space with intent to >> improve the results of my work in helping companies implement Agile ideas >> in their organizations. We do an initial Open Space, then the folks get >> about 3 months to play with Agile (we carefully use the word >> "experimentation" with management,) then we do another Open Space after >> that, to inspect what just happened across the enterprise. The initial and >> subsequent Open Space events form a "safe" container or field in which the >> members can *learn*... as they explore how to *improve* together by >> *experimenting* with new practices, and see if they actually work. I >> call the process Open Agile Adoption. >> >> Link: >> OpenAgileAdoption.com >> >> This seems to work pretty good. It seems to "take the air out of" most of >> the fear, most of the anxiety and most of the worry that is created. The >> key aspect is *consent*: absolutely no one is forced to do anything they >> are unwilling to do. No one is *coerced* to *comply*. Everyone is >> instead respectfully *invited* to help *write* the story, and be a >> *character* in the story...of the contemplated process change. Open >> Agile Adoption encourages a spirit of experimentation and play. >> >> The spirit of Open Space is the spirit of freedom. Isn't it? In the OST >> community, we discuss and talk a lot about self-organization, >> self-management and self-governance. The Agile community also talks about >> these ideas a lot. >> >> So I have some questions. What is really going on during >> self-organization in a social system? What are the steps? What information >> is being sent and received? >From whom, and by whom? Is the information >> about *authority* important? How important? Can a social system self >> organize without regard to who has the right to do what work? *How do >> decisions that affect others get made in a self-organizing system?* >> >> Who decides about *who decides*? How important is the process of >> *authorization* in a self-organizing system? Is self-organization in >> large part the process of dynamic authorization (and *de-authorization*) >> in real time? >> >> What *is *authorization? Can self-organization occur without the sending >> and receiving of authorization data by and between the members? >> >> Is Bruce Tuckman's forming/storming/performing/adjourning actually >> decomposing the *dynamics of authorization* inside a social system? >> >> The essay below attempts to answer some of these difficult questions. I'd >> love your thoughts on it. Will you give it a look? >> >> >> Essay: Authority Distribution in Open Space >> http://newtechusa.net/agile/authority-distribution-in-open-space/ >> >> >> >> 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. >> >> >> >> -- >> >> 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
