Harrison wrote So am I anti-convergence? Absolutely not -- but I find that the useful criteria are "context and need." And both change with circumstances. So what's right? It all depends.
Of course, one solution to the whole dilemma is that "we" (whoever "we" is) offer some sort of formal certification in OST. But then we would have to enforce it -- and spend a lot of time bringing the perpetrators of malignant Open Space to the bar of justice. Actually, I would choose to spend my time opening good space, and let the folks make their choice. At the end of the day I suspect that Open Space (Technology) needs lots of Open Space -- and it will survive -- or not.************************************************************************ ************************************************************************ Harrison, I smiled. I know how you feel about certification and I of course feel the same way. And certification doesn't imply competence and so on. And the words of certification, I have found, mean different things in different cultures. Nevertheless, as I think about this and put my own energies into both doing as much good OST work as I can and taking many people through learning journeys to wrestle with this Open Space Technology, I also wonder if there couldn't be something that when a client hires Open Space Technology, that this is actually what he/she gets. I don't see the solution to this coming from linear thinking and tried and true but ineffective means such as certification. What I was grasping for came out of what I think of as a tradition of a medicine man or medicine woman mentoring someone to learn their art and then taking them through an initiation/ritual to show the sacredness of the honor and privilege and responsibility now bestowed. OST, well done, is sacred work. I am opening space here, if anyone is interested in wondering, creating, and being quite divergent in thinking about this question that I am raising that I think is a valid one. So, let's go from a "given" that says no certification, no judge, etc etc etc and see if there is any interest in exploring this question of maintaining enough "duplicability" of the "prototype" that is Open Space Technology, that we are doing something important to maintain its credibility. When I am handed a recipe for a cake by a trusted friend, I assume she tells me all of the ingredients so that I can duplicate her creation. After I've duplicated it several times, I may choose to use "fat free" ingredients instead of the original recipe. This is fine. I at least made my decision from a sound starting point. Likewise with OST, I think we owe it to people who are learning to share the whole recipe. And if we are doing an OST event that is not including the whole recipe, that we acknowledge this with words, so that we paint a word picture of other things that are possible. I think I have the ingredients. Which means, when I am doing an Open Space Technology meeting inside of an organization, and the topic is about the future, I would choose the ingredients that include a form of convergence and intentional action planning. If I am doing an Open Space Technology meeting, where people are invited for their own learning, maybe because they intend to write a book and come to do research, I would not build in convergence and may in fact not even build in the taking of reports for a book of proceedings. I would however, acknowledge these decisions to the group so that they know that there is other potential with OST. I would not want people leaving the OST meeting that was done without reports, computers, convergence, maybe even no walking the circle --going out and repeating exactly this and thinking it was OST with all of the deliverables that we list. I see part of the answer lying in the story we tell of what OST is, in all of its glory when we have a gathering of people. I think far too many people are not getting the full story and then the spread of OST comes from an incomplete recipe. I would like to see if collectively we have any wisdom about this. Maybe I am the only one concerned about this. So be it. For me, whenever I do an OST meeting, I tell the story of what it is with all of its ingredients when action planning and fine attention to detail are needed. We might not do it that way at that meeting, because the need is different. And I have a handout describing OST. I do this because I want to promote OST in the world by sharing the whole recipe. Birgitt Birgitt Williams Make Genuine Contact! Dalar Associates: organizational effectiveness consultants Striving for Success? Ready to exceed your expectations? Contact us for consulting services, training, conference and meeting facilitation, and keynote speaking. www.openspacetechnology.com Harrison Harrison Owen 7808 River Falls Drive Potomac, MD 20854 USA phone 301-469-9269 fax 301-983-9314 Summer Phone 207-763-3261 Summer Address 189 Beaucaire Ave. Camden, ME 04843 website www.mindspring.com/~owenhh Open Space Institute website www.openspaceworld.org
