----------
> From: Lindfield, Michael J <[email protected]>
> To: '[email protected]'
> Subject: RE: An OSI Policy Question
> Date: Thursday, March 27, 1997 9:29 AM
>
> Greetings Peggy,
>
> Thanks for opening up this question to the OS community. I believe that
> the question of 'trading services for membership' is really part of a
> larger question that each of us faces daily: namely, what constitutes
> "right circulation of energy" within the system called Life.
>
> I believe that this is the responsibility of the individual and that
> part of learning to treat each other as equal partners in this
> collective adventure is to allow each person to choose for themselves.
> This does not mean that no one else is part of the conversation. I
> believe that this whole question of how we manage this Open Space system
> and ensure that sustenance is circulated to all parts of its body is an
> open conversation and our responsibility. My point is that as we
> practice what it means to live as individuals in a group setting and
> learn the lessons of inter-dependence, this particular issue offers us a
> wonderful opportunity for personal choice. It would certainly allow us
> to demonstrate the values and principles of OS in action - 'embodiment'
> is the realization of the ideal.
>
> I would sum up the challenge in front of us in these words - "How shall
> we best create and sustain the spirit and practice of OS in service to
> our communities?"
>
> So let's do it! Let's allow individuals to make choices and if after 6
> months we notice that the OS system is not being nourished then it would
> be timely to communicate that fact and have us all respond
> appropriately.
>
> Take care and thanks for all your good work.
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>
> "Bid me run and I will strive for things impossible" (Shakespeare)
>
> Michael Lindfield
> Organization Development Consultant
>
> The Boeing Company
> P.O. Box 3707, MS 7A-25,
> Seattle, WA 98124-2207, USA
>
> 206-865-2255 (Office/Voice Mail) 206-865-4851 (FAX)
> [email protected]
>
> >----------
> >From: Open Space Institute[SMTP:[email protected]]
> >Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 1997 7:45 PM
> >To: Multiple recipients of list OSLIST
> >Subject: An OSI Policy Question
> >
> >I recently had a question come up that in traditional organizations
would
> >be made by the people who control questions of policy. It raised the
> >question for me of who is the "right" audience for this kind of question
in
> >the Open Space Institute(s)*? So, I am going to try an experiment. I
am
> >going to put out the question with the intention of holding a discussion
> >and "meta-discussion." The discussion is on the question (don't worry,
> >I'll state it in a moment!) and the "meta-discussion" is on who do you
> >think SHOULD be making this sort of decision.
> >
> >Soooo... here's the story. Several situations have arisen of late where
> >people who are making significant contribution to OS are asking, "can I
> >trade service for membership?" One example is one of the people who
> >sponsors OST training. Another is the person who is re-developing the
web
> >site. So what do you think? Should we trade service for membership?
If
> >so, who/how do we decide when it's enough service to merit membership?
> >
> >And the meta-question: is this an appropriate topic for a group like
this
> >-- interested parties, some of whom who have become members, others not.
> >Is it a question for members only? Or is it a question for an OSI
board?
> >
> >(A parenthetical note: as I've been mulling the role of the OSI board of
> >late, the thing I've come to that makes most sense to me is its primary
> >task is to hold space: to be fully present and totally invisible.)
> >
> >My hope is that this will be a useful discussion not only for OSI but
for
> >anyone rethinking questions of power, authority and governance.
> >
> >Peg Holman
> >
> >* I'm using a plural as a reminder that there are currently two OSI
> >entities established with different governance structures: the OSI of
> >Canada which I believe is guided by a steering committee and the Open
Space
> >Institute which is incorporated as a non-profit in the US. By law, that
> >means the OSI (in the US) has a board.
> >
