Harrison, Having just cautioned that people might have a struggle if we mention Spirit on the website, and I don't disagree with that, I am sure your usual sense of humour has kicked in here when you say that the new title of your coming book has shifted from "Organization for a New Millennium: Self-Organization at Work." to -- "Spirit in Organizations -- Opening Space for Inspired Performance." I am still lobbying you to simply call it the Open Space Organization. This is simpler. Then people who really are passionate about the current concepts of self organization can get excited when they get to that part, and others who get excited about Spirit can get excited about that part, and those who know that the two are really about the same thing can also get fulfilled. You have tackled a hard subject and done an excellent job, final edit not withstanding. I just think your book is really about the Open Space Organization and none of us really knows why it works. I think we can say that we observe self organizing within the context of the Open Space event. I think we can say that there are moments of self organizing within the Open Space Organization. I think too that we have seen inspired performance. I am not sure that inspired performance and the self organizing system are one and the same. Although both and are elements of some bigger unknown mystery. Of life. How's that for lobbying :-)?
Warmest regards, Birgitt Birgitt Bolton of Dalar Associates www.openspacetechnology.com 55 Ravina Cres., Ancaster, Ontario, Canada L9G 2E8 phone: 905-648-5775 fax: 905-648-2262 -----Original Message----- From: OSLIST [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Harrison Owen Sent: Sunday, August 22, 1999 8:39 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Self-organizing systems At 11:10 AM 8/20/1999 -0400, you wrote: >I noticed that my previous message got cut off. Spirit at work maybe? >Anyway I have attached the rest of the message. > >>>I need to think more on the notion of self-organizing systems and how I >would define them before I can contribute significantly. What my experience >tells me is that people at this point in evolution do need a framework >around which to organize. It starts with purpose, leadership and vision and >is bounded by the givens or rules within which people organize. Open space >gives people the appropriate structure and minimal rules that enable them to >achieve amazing things with minimal intervention by others. Leadership is >present in everyone in the meeting, but leadership gets the ball rolling >too. Is this a self-organizing system? Would people self-organize without >the givens, purpose etc. I have seen miserable failures where people have >been expected to "self-organize" but have either not enough information to >move ahead or there is too much control exerted. Are there degrees of >self-organizing systems? How is this different from self-directed? The >synonyms for self as a modifier are: of one's self, by one's self, by one's >own effort, alone or individual. Perhaps self is not the right word, >because it is inherently the whole that works together. Is the self the >system? I will read other responses with interest. *************************************************************************** The critical thing about self-organizing systems (and also Open Space, I think) is that there is very little to be done, and a lot of being required. The "being" in this case has to do with the quality of the environment, the system and the inter-action between the two. When this quality (pre-conditions) is right -- organization (self-organization) occurs. When it ain't right -- it doesn't make any difference how hard anybody tries -- somehow the act never gets together. Stuart Kauffman, when talking about biological systems tells us that there are a small number of essential preconditions. 1) a safe nutrient environment. 2) High levels of diversity, and potential complexity. 3) A search for fitness (I would say something like -- drive to become better) 4) Sparse prior connections. 5) It is all at the edge of chaos. Given these conditions, the system just snaps together. You may notice a certain similarity between what Kauffman said, and what I have said over the years in terms of when to use Open Space -- in any critical situation characterized by high levels of diversity in terms of the participants, high levels of complexity in terms of the issues, lots of potential or actual conflict, with a decision tome of yesterday. There is no historical connection, for I had been saying what I said years before I ever knew of Kauffman. So you can imaging my surprise and pleasure when I read his work. It was not about "proving" Open Space -- which hardly requires any proof. But it certainly was a giant Ahaaa for me. Suddenly the most pestiferous question that I always had about Open Space (Why does it work anyhow?) had a clear and elegant answer. Open Space worked because the initial conditions were established in which self-organization takes place. At some level I guess I had always known this -- for self-organizing systems have fascinated me since folks first started talking about the in the late 70's... But there it was in a nice neat package. I love it. Anyhow if anybody wants more on all this -- the literature in now getting pretty huge. And you might also be interested in several papers that I have written that appeared in The ODN Practitioner, and also the Journal of the World Business Academy. Both of these are on my website (see below) in the section marked "Papers." And, if I can ever get through the agony of the final edit -- My whole story on the subject will appear in my next book had a working title, "Organization for a New Millennium: Self-Organization at Work." But I rather like my new title -- "Spirit in Organizations -- Opening Space for Inspired Performance." Harrison Harrison Owen 7808 River Falls Drive Potomac, MD 20854 USA Summer address: 189 Beaucaire Ave. RR Box 4248 Camden, ME 04843 Website www.tmn.com/~owen Phone 301-469-9269 Fax 301-983-9314 Maine Phone 207-763-3261
