Ah - ruminate away. I am all about reflection informing oh-so-many things… including thinking… Warmly, Lisa
On Oct 19, 2014, at 5:03 PM, Daniel Mezick <[email protected]> wrote: > Wow Lisa, > > I am very grateful for your detailed reply to my 4 questions, and for your > kind invitation. Thank you! > > I receive and accept your kind invite. But before I act, I plan to ruminate > on your thoughtful send. > > Regards, > Daniel > > On 10/19/14 7:39 PM, Lisa Heft - wrote: >> Hi, folks - Daniel it’s hard for me to stay in these email streams for >> immediate back-and-forth because my life and client task work does not >> always allow that - but I wanted to ‘dip my toe’ in and say I echo what >> Michael H and Chris and others say about it not in my experience being >> anything about public or private, organizational or community, existing >> community or temporary one, or any of that. It’s about thoughtful pre-work, >> appropriate documentation design, selecting the right process (tool for the >> job), doing good full-form Open Space, and other things very specific to >> each client (sponsor / host / convenor / however we wish to name them) and >> each situation or need. >> >> We’ve had earlier conversations on this list about what is the minimum for >> what is Open Space, and our other conversations (though you could see it >> differently / that’s welcome) tend to find: >> - host / client / sponsor / coordinator / convenor - usually useful if it is >> not the facilitator >> - facilitator though it does not have to be one that is ‘professional’ or >> uses this way of naming themselves >> - opening circle >> - agenda co-creation (without a facilitator’s ‘helping’, merging, >> synthesizing, the group voting, etc. - all ideas welcome and on the agenda) >> - explanation of 4 principles and law (some people use the 5th principle, >> some do not, either works), butterfly, bumblebee (for some, also ‘be >> prepared to be surprised’, for some people, not) >> - these guidelines / invitations above - about how participants might choose >> to be - are usually helpful on visual / posters >> - multiple discussion areas around (ideally) a great big room, (ideally but >> different people have different opinions) over multiple session times >> - closing circle for reflection and comments >> - ideally, some form of documentation so folks can see / learn across all >> the groups, not just the ones they were able to get to >> >> Okay now here is where I would like to invite you to imagine that each >> situation is different, when it comes to documentation. I would like to >> invite you to release a measurement of what is ‘timely’ and what is ‘late’ >> proceedings. Assuming thoughtful discussions have happened in the pre-work, >> appropriate documentation is designed, and this is (ideally) custom for each >> event / organization / community / situation / need / context. >> There are some conversations which inform us (facilitator and client) that >> it is absolutely appropriate to have a full book-like, full-on narrative of >> all the conversations that happened-sort-of-style-of Book of Proceedings. >> And reasons to either turn it around overnight - right there in the event - >> or reasons to on-purpose, delay dissemination to actually leverage the >> momentum of the event, include reflective thinkers taking more time for >> their notes (not just the quick-responders), help people rest and integrate >> their experience before looking back at their ‘data’ to learn about the >> knowledge shared across all the groups, and so on. Reasons to say >> ‘everything in by x:00 and we won’t be helping you remember that - whoever >> is in by then is in’ - and reasons to interact with each convenor and >> notes-taker post-event to ask if the’d like to add or refine or complete or >> add things. Each need / situation appropriate to the context, culture, use >> of information post-event, and so on. Sometimes documentation is appropriate >> as a list of who raised what topic, and that is all. Sometimes it’s about >> action and next steps. Sometimes it’s just about knowledge-sharing without >> the need for next steps. And so on. Whether organization or community, >> public or private, conference or planning meeting, issue or >> experience-sharing. >> >> Then there is the ‘sponsor commitment to follow through’ - which is nice (in >> those particular instances when that was appropriate to the situation) but >> not always necessary, in my experience. People do amazing things and (as >> someone mentioned) not always measurable to the eye, ‘by 5:00’, post >> meeting, for us to see. People do the work whether approval happens, if they >> want to. They stay with an organization or leave it to follow their passion, >> if they discovered their passion and voice in the Open Space event. They >> find ways around. They decide not to. So yes - in an organization, it’s >> always nice when the sponsor commits, when pre-work conversations help the >> sponsor think in advance, perhaps even create the mechanisms that support >> follow-up and post-event sustainability. When really thoughtful pre-work >> discussions inform whether action or next steps *are* needed and possible >> *after THIS* event - or are unrealistic / unsupportable, in reality. Or are >> better discerned and articulated after reflecting on the patterns and >> learnings of this event, even perhaps after more work is done identifying >> resources or champions or partners and such, and where the Open Space is >> part of a *chain* of meetings / actions / steps / reflections / and so on >> over time. >> >> And to me? It’s not about the process, that part. That part is universal to >> any facilitation process that engages group wisdom and diverse voices. >> >> Here I go swimming away back into my life and client work but I do like >> dipping in now and then ;o) >> >> As always, thanks for inviting the question, Dan, and I look forward to >> hearing, as always, what others think and have experienced… >> >> Lisa >> >> On Oct 17, 2014, at 11:38 AM, Daniel Mezick via OSList >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Michael, >>> >>> I'm confused now, and so I believe I am about to learn something new >>> here... I'll know by your answers to these questions: >>> >>> What are the minimum essentials of Open Space structure? For example, are >>> the following elements necessary at all? >>> >>> Sponsor >>> Theme >>> Invitation in advance, referring to Theme >>> Opening Circle >>> Facilitator >>> Explanation of the 1Law/ 5Principles >>> Posters >>> Closing Circle >>> Timely Proceedings >>> Sponsor commitment to follow though on Proceedings >>> >>> If these are not essential to structure, why not? If so, why so? >>> >>> Thanks for your help! Very Eager to hear your (hopefully detailed) answers! >>> >>> Daniel >>>
_______________________________________________ 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
