Good discussion folks! Julie said: "I'm not convinced it always honors the group to stay out of the way. I'm willing to take that concept as a worthy and valuable starting assumption, but I think we also need to be open to the possibility that sometimes more active involvement is better than staying out of the way."
To me it is a "when" question. I have some things to offer groups by actively asking questions, getting them to examine their goals and assumptions. Becoming clear what the strategy is for doing an event or project. Engaging the follow-up strategy from an Open Space or other event. This is about enabling them to be clearer about what they want how they will pursue it. It is in the planning of an Open Space or other event. I help them get clear about the outcomes they seek -- that is different than my being attached to any particular outcome. There are some outcomes that I "like" better than others and if a client is headed in a direction I see as unethical, I choose not to be the guide. When I Open the Space, it is in relation to a theme, givens and set of commitments that have been determined by the sponsors. In my preparation and when I Open and Hold Space, I maximize my ability to "let go" of outcomes. (Practice helps.) For example, at a recent event sponsored by a Deputy Provincial Minister and a cross Government initiative with 3 levels of government present -- I was filling in. So I was not involved in the pre-work or the theme but it was well communicated to me. The turnout of both federal and municipal participants was much better than expected. So, that "audience" was not fully anticipated in the planning. (Although, that did not become clear until after it was over). So, the theme did not engage as many topics as had been hoped as it was aimed at a different group. The last session of the day had only one topic (for a group of 130). The sponsors came to me and said, "We are loosing momentum, people are leaving what can we do?" I did respond in the context of Open Space. I suggested that the sponsors talk the initiator of the last group, the person who put up the topice, about what she wanted and develop a strategy from there. It was their space and I encouraged them to self-organize a response to their concerns The leader of the group was a Federal Government staff who wanted to explore the broader next steps for this conversation. The sponsors encouraged all participants to join the discussion which became the "Next Steps" discussion for the whole event, led by an "outsider". The sponsors loved it as the commitment to the ongoing conversation came from the invitees. I then closed the space after that discussion. Even with the small number of groups the participants found the event useful, profound, relationship building in ways they would not have expected. I still had that niggle pass my brain and heart that the sponsors were going to be unhappy when they came to talk to me. I let it go and my attachment to particular outcomes -- be that the momentum or the content issues they were hoping to surface. And, it worked again. At the follow-up dinner, the sponsors were really proud of how they helped the self-organizing work beyond their expectations toward multi-jurisdictional commitment to their efforts. I certainly shared my perspectives on what had happened in the reflection and yes I did feel good that they were so excited by what had happened. Larry Larry Peterson Associates in Transformation Toronto, ON, Canada 416.653.4829 [email protected] www.spiritedorg.com * * ========================================================== [email protected] ------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of [email protected], Visit: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
