Dan – Your Sponsor Properties are intriguing. My first-take
response would be, Sure. All are useful. And the same could be
said for having any party. After all, who would want to go to a
party when there is nowhere to go, nothing to consume
(resources), and the party itself is contrary to all regulations?
End of report. Full stop!
But is it? If so a whole mess of teenagers, Gen-X’s, what have
you, would be very surprised. My experience aligns with theirs.
When there’s a will (desire/care), there’s almost inevitably a
way. Somehow the space clears, the consumables manifest, and who
cares about the regulations. A fellow parent once said in jest
that the fastest way to insure a massive neighborhood teen
blowout was 1) Restrict all likely participants to their
bedrooms. 2) Remove any and all possible “consumables,” and 3)
Issue a proclamation that the Party Can’t Happen. That’s not a
joke son. But of course such behavior could never happen in a
well managed, bureaucratic organization. Right?
Maybe. But my organizational experience suggests a rather
different conclusion. I spent some 10 years in the (US) Federal
Health Care establishment, mostly the NIH (National Institutes of
Health), which most folks at the time (1970-1980) would describe
as hugely bureaucratic and generally well managed. I can’t give
you a totally accurate account, but I venture to guess that
something like 50% of all the “program initiatives” I was
involved with occurred without “official” sponsorship, with
little to no resources, and no time or space allocated going in.
In one situation where we were working to spell out something
called “Competence Based Re-licensure” for physicians – which was
about as popular as a skunk at a garden party – we worked
together for better than a year, involved a broad base of
experts (including the past Director of NIH), and produced a
product which is still having influence today. At the conclusion
of our efforts, the Director of NIH came to me and asked what the
budget had been. My response: “I don’t know sir. We never found one.”
Doubtless that is just the aberrant behavior of HH Owen. But if
so, that marvelous creative source of innovation, The Skunk
Works, could never have happened. I think Tom Peters named the
critter, but anybody involved with the creation of new products
and who honestly describes how they happened, will recognize the
beast. The poster child, of course is the “Post-it” from 3M. If
you listen to the voice of 3M today, you might think that the new
product arose from a careful plan, richly resourced, and fully
blessed by the corporate powers that be. Nothing could be further
from the truth. Post-its was actually the product of a small
motley crew, with virtually no resources, except those they could
“borrow,” often operating in secret to avoid corporate censure.
But what does all this have to do with Open Space? Nothing, I
guess. And everything, I do believe. Obviously Open Space as a
formal entity (sit in circle...) had nothing to do with any of
the above. It didn’t exist. On the other hand if we understand
OST simply to be an intentional invitation to maximize the
ongoing process of Self Organization – the basics are already in
place and fully operational, as has been the case for 13.7
billion years. I have found it very worthwhile to consider the
operation of naturally occurring “Open Space” as a guide to our
own efforts with OST. And there is a lot to consider, but in the
area of “sponsorship” it would seem that what Dan has suggested
may well be true, but is by no means the whole story. In a word,
there is a lot more than meets the eye. I think.
Harrison
Winter Address
7808 River Falls Drive
Potomac, MD 20854
301-365-2093 <tel:301-365-2093>
Summer Address
189 Beaucaire Ave.
Camden, ME 04843
207-763-3261 <tel:207-763-3261>
Websites
www.openspaceworld.com <http://%20www.openspaceworld.com>
www.ho-image.com <http://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:* Wednesday, October 15, 2014 8:37 AM
*To:* [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [OSList] Authority Distribution in Open Space
Hi Harrison,
Thanks for your rich reply and explanation of the role of
[empowerment].
Question:
Is is true that if we have the 5 preconditions as you describe,
do we still need the following to have an effective OST event?
(Note I am assuming a private (not a public-conference-type OST
event...)
Sponsor Properties:
1. A Sponsor who has permission from the org, to allocate some
of the org's scarce capital, to pay for the event expenses;
2. A Sponsor who has permission from the org, to invite people
to spend a day if they so choose, by accepting the invite;
3. A Sponsor who has permission from the org, and is /willing/
and able to "keep it open", with all the issues "on the table"
with no issues "off limits" as described on page 20 of the GUIDE;
4. A Sponsor who has permission from the org, and is /willing/ to:
a) Represent to the people that the Sponsor's plan is to
immediately act the (as yet unknown) Proceedings and (drum roll
here...)
b) ...actually follow through and act on the issues that
appear in the Proceedings, immediately following the event.
If the Sponsor is missing even one of these properties, is it
advised to proceed at all?
Daniel
