Jon -- I think you "OD Intuition" is working splendidly. The strategy proposed by "the opposition" is pretty obvious. They want you to create a management team which they can control (overtly or covertly). But you must understand, as I am sure you do understand, that this is an argument you can never win. So don't argue -- Do! What I mean is don't get all philosophical, focus on program and practicality. Specifically -- identify the concrete programmatic needs/opportunities which involve everybody -- and open space, after space, after space. Keep moving. Fast!! And each time you Open Space, drive towards action. Create a website where action plans can be displayed, conversations continued, and concrete results (presuming there are some) celebrated. This really all about transparency. If you keep everything public (not hidden in some "management committee") folks will quickly see what is working and/or not -- and who is doing what, or not.
I had essentially the same situation you are facing (I think) some 30 years ago. My responsibility was to implement a (US) Congressional mandate requiring the divisions of a very large federal (health) agency to collaboratively pursue some new program directions that they had never seen as part of their mission -- and had no desire to change. I had no budget, no (official authority) and I was essentially brand new to the agency. My advisors told me that I must immediately get some budget, claim authority and force the action. I knew that would be ineffective -- but more to the point -- suicidal. Instead I moved fast, usually below the radar and opened programmatic spaces that challenged and excited people. As soon as the action would start and take some definitive form I got out of the way. At the end of the first year and a half, we had something like 100 million dollars of other people's money committed to the new collaborative program. Now some 30 years later, the whole thing has become essentially a new discipline with departments in most medical schools, a journal, and a professional society. But you got to keep moving, open space, and get out of the way. Harrison -----Original Message----- From: OSLIST [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jon Harvey Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 6:44 PM To: [email protected] Subject: needing some advice Hi all I have a new job - where my role is to coordinate the collaboration of a number of independent but connected agencies - they share a common concern but are geographically distinct. But they (and the public they serve) would greatly benefit from closer working between them - either by creating new joint functions or harmonising their existing operations. This can and will increase effectiveness and efficiency. At the moment - I have no team as such beyond a very capable PA and a chap who has been allocated to me - on a temporary basis. I am three weeks into this new role. I see my role as helping to create the conditions into which these sovereign agencies (with some very forceful people at their helm) feel able and trustful enough so that they cede some of their autonomy and establish some new (arms length) business units. To date (before my arrival) - a number of business cases had been produced for taking this strategy forward. My dilemma is this (and your perspectives would be helpful): I am getting pressure from one (and one other) of the more 'pushy' agencies to recruit and establish a programme management team that would (in effect) wrest control of these embryonic collaboration projects away from the agencies themselves and place it under the mantle of the regional programme team. The argument being that only with this level of 'support' and 'drive' would the projects come to fruition. My OD bones are telling me otherwise - as I think I want to keep the space open - and have the ownership of the projects resting very firmly with the agencies themselves - in other words I think they have to own their own collaboration initiatives (not the central / regional team). So am I wrong to sticking with my OD intuition? If not - what should be my arguments for going for a more facilitative / hands off and slimmer team - that works in an open and OD way? (We have a critical meeting next week - and I fear there will be attempts to bounce me into the more directive programme team model - before I have had the chance to test the water some more - as the other agencies may also be thinking the same....) It's is a bit complex I know - and I know I have also talked in some oblique code for the sake of confidentiality (I am afraid) - but your insights would be valuable. I can't think of a bunch of wiser kindred people than you lot on the OST listserv - who might be able to offer me some helpful / cogent / challenging advice... In advance - thanks. Jon * * ========================================================== [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 * * ========================================================== [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
