Dominique wrote: Sometimes, conflicts do arise during subgroup discussions in an OS event. It is certainly not a problem per se, since, in my experience, they often reveal areas of greater creative potential. Still, a question remains: how to best handle them in order to prevent escalation and allow the group to own and discuss the issues in a solution oriented manner? I had a case once where I felt obligated to intervene because the conversation was feeding on blame and getting increasingly aggressive. A subgroup came to discuss the issue of clans excluding others and disrupting the overall group effectiveness. Although my intervention went very well (the subgroup decided to discuss the issue with the entire group, which agreed, and we went on with a mediation process in the circle where I helped the group clarify issues around clans and developing solutions to prevent/heal the negative side effects of natural grouping within the larger group), I felt like we had stepped out of the OS process, burnt a lot of energy, and lost some of the creative power of the OS process.
Dominique -- thanks for raising this and I think your thoughts are leading edge! I agree with others, in my experience the group has always solved its own conflict. If anything, after working for years with rights-based legislation, etc., I love the fact that there is space for the real conflict to emerge. And, as a facilitator, I have had a few events such as Chris C. mentioned. In one, a Department of Fisheries and Oceans Officer (who was not actually invited -- filling in for someone else) and two First Nation's Chief's came face-to-face over an issue. In Eastern Canada there has been great tension between DFO, First Nation's communities, and Non-native Fishermen. The look to me was one of expectation, and as I was in the room at that time, I pointed to the Principles. They chose to stay with each other, sit and move through. At the end, the DFO Officer came up to one of the Chiefs and myself and said, "I never knew" -- that is all. As I have worked quite a bit in the area of discrimination, when I use OST quite often someone speaks from deep pain and I hear the statement just hang out there - it is a beautiful thing to watch -- you can almost see it in the air. And, rather than someone trying to "fix" it, everyone sits with the fact that it just is. THEN we move to new questions. Only once did a group choose to stop the OST meeting -- and it was, as Chris C, mentioned, an example of a group in such pain they could not find a way to speak to each other without blame and from pain. I wondered with this one -- for about a minute -- how I missed the deep conflict when I was working with the sponsoring group in setting up the theme and invitation. As I have experience in non-violent communication, I was invited back. I suggested another OST with a different theme -- issues and opportunities for a respectful working environment. Now that book of proceedings would have made a terrific book! As I've worked for years in restorative justice, I watched one group of Elders from mixed nations come to a conflict and they moved themselves outside into nature and used a healing circle approach and then came back when they were ready. I also noticed in your posting that you use the term "burnt a lot of energy" -- and I recognize the term. I watch groups who self-organize around creative problem solving often move through it quickly without that over-expending of energy! Judi * * ========================================================== [email protected] ------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of [email protected], Visit: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
