Harrison,
Thoughtful words - thank you.
I've talked too many times to count with my wife, OS partner, business
partner, amazing human being, Maureen McCarthy about: after two
days/rounds of OST (primarily conversation about passions and
responsibilities, then more focus and action around what to do now with
those p's and r's once we leave here; tipping our hat to non-convergence
as it has become to be known - thank you Michael and Chris for starting
that journey) to holding a third day/round asking the question:
Now that we've talked about what we are passionate about, and how we
plan to/are taking responsibility for our passions - what do we need to
stop doing or do less of in order to make space for the ideas and
passions we've just spent two days identifying and expressing?
In the old adage, "what's one more thing not to do" - thanks again
Harrison - lies a way to open more space outside of the "formally"
opened space. Maureen and I have struggled for years, often in
corporate land, about holding an Open Space, or facilitating meetings,
or teaching skills which result in more work for the participants not
less. So often when we come into a situation the organization is looking
to improve something, be more productive, and the organization ends up
layering the new foundations/ways of doing business/living we've
opened/held space for them to create on top of all the old things
they've been doing (things that have worked for them) for years. They're
working harder than before. We don't leave time for the organization to
decide an overall plan weaving the past - what we've always done because
in some way shape or form it works, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it.";
present - incredible passion and ideas and actions developed in 1, 2, or
3 short days of being in the moment; and future - now that we have
multiple ideas, some old, some new on the table, what is our shared
vision? how can we create it together?
I understand that the invitation to do what works and stop doing what
doesn't is implicit in the process of opening space, but we think it's
time to start making that invitation, "What's one more thing not to do?"
explicit not only in "formally" opened space but also in the open space
that we are all actually living in, every moment.
Having written all this, maybe the third day/round is started with the
invitation, "what is our shared vision? what do we need to stop doing to
make space for what we want to start doing? how do we honor what we will
stop doing, because it has served us? and, how do we walk forward and
create our future together?
I think this invitation begs the question asked earlier, "is OST simply
a half-way technology?" maybe this third invitation will help us to
break the self-created barrier that is the "formally" opened space that
exists in contrast to the idea that we are always in open space until we
impose our own boundaries and barriers on our lives.
What does everyone think about this?
With Grace and Love,
Zelle
************
Zelle Nelson
Engaging the Soul at Work/Know Place Like Home/State of Grace Document
www.stateofgracedocument.com
[email protected]
office - 828.693.0802
mobile - 847.951.7030
Ravenswood - Isle of Skye
2021 Greenville Hwy
Flat Rock, NC 28731
Harrison Owen wrote:
Zelle -- I think you have hit the nail precisely on the head. We need
all the help we can get when it come to being fully and productively
in the moment -- a clear witness to the ongoing power of self
organization. I think it also becomes clear that the task is also a
very simple one -- Just be in the moment. No learning, no technique
will get us there, and while all (AI, Dialogue etc) can be helpful in
terms of pointing us in the right direction, helping with first steps,
reminding us of what is important . . . At the end of the day you just
have to Do it. In my own experience, there comes a point when the
details and complexities of the techniques (approaches) stand in the
way of the experience. Case(s) in point were the several instances
when a colleague suggested doing a Dialogue in the midst of an Open
Space. Although I deeply respect the process and the thought/research
that lies behind it -- I also found the experience annoyingly
restrictive. Doubtless my annoyance arose from my innately prickly
personality -- but I found myself wondering why we were engaged in
this elaborate process when dialogue (small "d") was happening all
around us, all by itself. Don't talk about it, don't think about it,
don't "process it" -- just do it. I have had the same experience with
AI. There is absolutely no question that the insights and approach
embodied in AI can and does bring a group of people to some good
places they may never have visited before. But again -- when
difference is appreciated as a matter of course -- as often seems to
be the case in Open Space (self-organizing system) why not just
appreciate the appreciation?
My real hope in raising some the issues that I have was/is to open
some space beyond Open Space Technology, Appreciative Inquiry,
Dialogue, Community building and the like. If it is true that
difference is appreciated, deep conversation achieved, community
enlivened, etc -- all as the natural concomitant of a well functioning
self-organizing system -- how do we build on that? This is not so much
a matter of "doing a better Open Space" -- but rather doing better in
the open space of our lives. In "The Practice of Peace" I attempted to
use what I perceive to be the learnings from Open Space (start with
invitation, convene a circle, welcome passion and responsibility) as a
first approximation. But I think it is only that, a first
approximation. Where do we go from here?
Harrison
----- Original Message -----
From: Zelle Nelson <mailto:[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2004 6:25 PM
Subject: Re: the dark side of circle practices -- and related themes
some thoughts on our role as facilitator...
Harrison Owen wrote:
...And what about all those other great experiments -- Dialogue, Appreciative
Inquiry, Community Building, and I suppose "Circle practices" (although I am
not quite sure what they are)? Speaking just for my self -- I must say that
each of these have been profound teachers. From the practitioners of
Dialogue I have learned what intense and productive communication can be
like. From Appreciative Inquiry I have learned the incredible power of a
positive, appreciate approach to my fellow human beings. And from Scott Peck
and Co. I have learned much about the nature and function of effective human
community. Each of these has opened my eyes, sharpened my attention, and
raised my expectations in terms of what and how we can function at optimal
levels both individually and collectively. But my deepest learning occurs
when with open sharpened, eyes I see exactly the same things happening in
Open Space -- all by themselves, and all without the overt intervention of
some prescribed, facilitated process. I find my emerging conclusion to be
basically mind-blowing -- although some may take it to mean that I have
blown (lost) my mind. It seems to me that genuine dialogue, deep
appreciation of difference, and the manifestation of real community are all
the natural concomitants of any fully functional self-organizing system. If
this is true, the real focus should be on enabling/allowing the
self-organizing system (which we all are) to do what it alone can do --
rather than trying to "fix" apparent and real problems encountered along the
way with special interventions and added processes, as fascinating as those
processes and interventions might be. As I said, Don't fix it if it ain't
broke -- just make sure that "it" (good old self organizing system) has
plenty of time and space in which to breath.
Harrison
Zelle writes:
I'm oscillating between two prime pillars: 1) Learning and
adopting tools (Appreciative Inquiry, Dialog, etc.) to help us
interact ultimately in a state of grace*** 2) Living, being,
experiencing as our path to learning and as a way of life.
***sidebar*** Living in a State of Grace means coming from a place
where peace is our ultimate goal in any relationship rather than
striving to keep the status quo of a relationship at any cost.
When we hold onto our idea of a relationship at any cost we are
coming from a place of fear - fear of loss, fear of pain - Living
in a State of Grace does not mean we hold the relationship as a
sacred cow, but rather we hold the people involved as sacred. I
never want to see you walking down the street and feel I need to
cross over to the other side to avoid talking to you, whether we
agree on certain issues or not. To learn more about how to more
fully live in a State of Grace visit www.stateofgracedocument.com***
The way of being I hold is a paradox. In Open Space I can use the
tools I've learned towards better relationships with others and
myself. And I can practice being in Open Space, living as the
waves and tides of my internal and external world compel me to
move, act, speak, listen, and be. I seek to live by the principles
of Open Space, since I see the act of formally opening space as an
acknowledgment of what is already out there to be lived. I need
neither skills nor advanced training to take responsibility for
myself and my passions, yet in my experience, I more richly engage
in bountiful relationships when I utilize skills and tools which I
have been taught or have created to facilitate living the reality
of responsibility and passion.
To address what Harrison wrote:
"It seems to me that genuine dialogue, deep
appreciation of difference, and the manifestation of real community are all
the natural concomitants of any fully functional self-organizing system. If
this is true, the real focus should be on enabling/allowing the
self-organizing system (which we all are) to do what it alone can do --
rather than trying to "fix" apparent and real problems encountered along the
way with special interventions and added processes, as fascinating as those
processes and interventions might be."
Having learned many skills and tools which enable me to better
know how I wish to be in relationship with others has greatly
enhanced my ability to act and move within a "formally" - being in
circle, stating the law and principles, creating a marketplace of
ideas - opened space. I am more "fully functional" within a
"self-organizing system" because of the tools I have learned.
Leaving space open for others to learn techniques within the
bounds of a "formally" opened space, in my experience, can be
beneficial. Our challenge as facilitators of Open Space is to know
when to hold um and know when to fold um - know when to offer aid
in facilitating dynamically changing relationships and when to
simply hold space for each individual to find their own way and
their own learning. As I've seen from posts here and heard from
discussions with colleagues the ultimate path to knowing when to
do what comes full circle back to following our passion and our
responsibility on an individual basis as spirit arises.
When "formally" holding space I like to provide opportunities for
topics to be posted relevant to facilitating the resolution of the
questions addressed in the invitation, including opportunities for
learning tools and processes that foster fruitful relationships.
These opportunities must, in my opinion be as voluntary as the
other topics which arise. Often these opportunities are offered
outside of the "formally" opened space and are not a prerequisite
of being involved in an Open Space event.
In my experience once I "formally" open space I rarely do anything
but hold space and try to bounce back any attempts to bring me in
to facilitate a discussion, by saying something like, "This part
of the meeting is yours. You have the ability and the
responsibility to follow your own two feet and solve problems and
challenges on your own." Outside of "formally" opened space I tend
to still stay out of trying to "teach" something that I "know"
unless I am invited to do so.
In my experience tools and skills which help us to be more fully
present in dynamic relationships (Appreciative Inquiry, Dialogue,
State of Grace Documents, Byron Katie's Loving What Is) focus on
"enabling/allowing the self-organizing system (which we all are) to do what it alone
can do"
Do we need these tools to be and self-organize into active,
responsible, passionate bodies? - No. Do these tools enable and
allow self organizing systems to be more fulfilling, fruitful, and
rewarding? - In my experience, Yes. As long as these tools and
skills are not "required" as a ticket for admission into a
seemingly open space.
With Grace and Love,
Zelle
************
Zelle Nelson
Engaging the Soul at Work/Know Place Like Home/State of Grace
Document
www.stateofgracedocument.com
[email protected]
office - 828.693.0802
mobile - 847.951.7030
Ravenswood - Isle of Skye
2021 Greenville Hwy
Flat Rock, NC 28731
----- Original Message -----
From: "Artur Silva" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 1:00 PM
Subject: Re: the dark side of circle practices
--- chris macrae <[email protected]> wrote:
The process starts erring to absolute democracy of
everyone must have
equal time contributions to speak at each phase
(...) In other
word's the circle's communal harmony ... can
co-create such
deep love of nice
behaviours to each other that it misses the biggest
spiral out above our
communal thinking's common denominator
That's interesting, Chris.
I have been, at times, in situations like that one -
circles (or squares) where everyone must "be in
place", must "speak in his turn" and must have a "nice
behavior".
They call this democratic, but in fact it is a
dictatorship. In a democracy I can stay silent if I
want. When everyone is obliged to speak that is not
democratic. This can be a "rules' dictatorship"
(created by the rules previously defined,) a "leader's
dictatorship" (the leader(s) imposes that everyone
must speak), or even a more interesting type - a
"majority's dictatorship" (where the rule is created
at the moment by the majority).
Apart from claiming to be democratic, this type of
groups/sessions also claim that they are following
"good principles". The two I have heard more often are
"appreciation" (like in "appreciative inquiry") and
"dialog".
Democracy (and Open Space) are made of dialogs AND of
discussions. If one suppresses discussion and impose
dialog (as in "everyone must be nice to each other and
hear the other with appreciation") then there is no
democracy and no open space, I think.
Apart from the fact that there are some people that I
don't want to hear with appreciation (say, Bush, to
give only one example) the point is even more strange.
"Playing the appreciative game" (an expression I have
created just know) is only one form of "playing games"
- and that is the essence of Argyris and Schon's Model
1.
If, in a meeting or organization, one imposes dialog
and appreciation, then a close session or organization
will come to place.
Artur
PS: I never heard to call this "circle" and even less
Open Space. But I would not be too surprised if some
would call that. I have already referred to a
respectable group of practitioners of "Communities of
Practice", USA based, that not long ago claimed that
they had used "Open Space" (OST) in a meeting because:
- they assembled in a circle
- they gave participants the opportunity to ADD issues
to a large group of issues pre-prepared by the
organizers
- they divided the large group in small groups to
discuss those issues (by choice of the organizers, if
I recall well - but I recall well that there was no
reference to "the law" - people were not expected to
leave their group! That would not be considered
"appreciative" to the other group members, I
suspect...)
But don't worry about what some people do "in your
name", Harrison. You can always remember what some
have done (and are doing) in His name. And at least
about you I know that you exists - something I am not
prepared to say about the Other...
--
ÐÏ à¡± á
*
*
==========================================================
[email protected]
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of [email protected]:
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs:
http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
