Peg and Harrison, Reflecting on the AI and OS discussion concerning facilitation, I believe that when we facilitate AI, we create space when we are "facilitator as learner". Just as we do in a system when we are "leader as learner". Respectfully, Bruce Principal B. Halliday Consulting Inc. "connecting as human beings first to co-create preferred futures" +++++++ Bruce Halliday 403-777-2364 Senior Consultant Garth Toombs & Associates Inc., Alberta Division, Verity Filion Inc. Canada Lee Hecht Harrison, Global Partner www.garthtoombs.com www.lhh.com
----- Original Message ----- From: Harrison Owen To: [email protected] Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 7:06 AM Subject: Re: OS and AI At 04:08 PM 4/24/01 -0700, Peg Holman Wrote: To me that means that given enough time in healthy conditions (and OS creates healthy conditions), people begin to focus on life giving forces. They do this without all the OD-like complications of AI's 4-D cycle. Having said that, I LOVE the transformative effect I've observed AI can have when people experience an AI interview. So when the time is short or a client isn't ready to start with OS, I introduce AI. I sit very much with the question about AI that Harrison applied when experimenting with OS: what is one less thing to do and have the experience be whole? For me, the 4-D methodology puts the facilitator too much in charge. I want to see the philosophy and practice of AI flourish but without all the fuss. When the appropriate situation arises, I would like to try doing an appreciative interview and then move directly into opening space. Peggy Peg raises an interesting and delicate point -- the relationship between OS and AI (to which I would add the whole spectrum of interventions out there ie Dialogue, Cafe, Community Building etc). I will be the first to say that I have learned much from each of these, and respect their authors/creators profoundly. I also have to say that in my experience groups operating in Open Space naturally manifest precisely the same behaviors as these approaches seek to achieve -- all without apparent intention or direct intervention from a facilitator. So I am left with the question, why do formally what seems to appear naturally, especially when the formal intervention requires a lot more work? And there is a deeper concern. When a group experiences Dialogue, appreciation of each other, community... in the context of a facilitated session, there is a natural tendency to assume that the "facilitator did it" -- and further -- a repeat of those experiences will require the services of a trained facilitator expert in those particular approaches. In a word the group is, at some significant level, dis-empowered. They are likely to think that what is a natural phenomenon can only occur as a result of direct intervention from an outside source. Such thoughts/feelings may make the facilitators feel better, as also the client/sponsor who may think that such powerful experiences should only be encouraged under strict guidance. After all it could get out of control. But I think all of that is to deprive a group of its natural heritage. Good for the facilitator, good for the client/sponsor -- bad for the group. I also take Peg's point about the group/sponsor being "ready" for Open Space. Some are, and some apparently aren't. But is this really true? Phrasing the issue in this way makes it seem that when we "do" an Open Space, we actually bring something to a group that it did not have before. I find myself looking at things rather differently. From where I sit, all groups exist in open space whether they like it or not. So it is not about bringing something new -- but recognizing what is. Put rather more directly, I think what happens in Open Space is that we just recognize the open space of our lives. Nothing new, just a blinding flash of the obvious. So somehow, talking about being "ready" misses the point -- we are all ready (already) there. At this point, I think we may be getting close to what I take to be the heart of the matter. All of us at some point have spoken fondly, and sometimes longingly of that wonderful thing -- The Open Space Organization, as if it were something that we might achieve or create. Indeed, some of us (myself included) have spent a lot of time and energy thinking about how we might do just that. But what is the Open Space Organization? Doubtless we could produce a long list of qualities and characteristics -- which might then lead to a disciplined and "effort-full" process to install such a thing. But in doing all that, I think we miss the central and critical point. We already are Open Space Organizations. It remains only to do intentionally what we are already doing. To be intentionally what we already are. And what is "it" that we already are? My answer is -- we are Complex Adaptive Systems! Or in other words self-organizing systems. That is all there is. Now to be sure there are more than a few folks who actually think they did the organizing, and then at great effort are responsible to keep things organized... Anyhow, I find it useful to just keep opening space, and the rest will pretty much take care of itself. Lazy, narrow minded... perhaps. But it seems to work. Harrison Harrison Owen 7808 River Falls Drive Potomac, MD 20854 USA phone 301-469-9269 fax 301-983-9314 Open Space Training www.openspaceworld.com Open Space Institute www.openspaceworld.org Personal website www.mindspring.com/~owenhh [email protected] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of [email protected] Visit: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
