Thanks for adding in Kurt Lewin, Arno. I'm not sure I fully understand
his topological method. Would you say more about how you see it working?
The "privacy regulation model" from Altman is quite interesting.
I've seen some criticize Open Space as not being friendly to introverts
- yet as an introvert myself I found Open Space incredibly liberating
because it empowers me to regulate my interactions with the group - to
move towards privacy when I need it - including going for a walk alone
or taking a nap - and re-engaging when I feel motivated.
I also remember being fascinated at an Open Space with Harrison Owen -
the Leadership in a Self-Organizing World conference at the Sleeping
Lady resort in the mountains east of Seattle a few years ago - watching
these circles of very different intensity. As I was buzzing around, some
were inviting or relatively porous in letting in new participants.
Others circles had boundaries that seemed so intense it felt like I'd be
an intruder if I tried to enter. Different membrane constructions - all
self-organized. I also remember someone at that conference setting up a
more formal membrane that asked participants to come at the beginning
and not to leave. I didn't go, but it seemed to work and not harm the
other circles, even though the convener was in a sense "breaking" the
rules of open space and the Law of Two Feet. There were so many
professional facilitators at that conference - not all of them were big
fans of OST. I was a bit of a newbie back then. I spent a lot of time
being surprised!
Harold
On 4/8/14 2:42 AM, Arno Baltin wrote:
Dear All!
I like this discussion.
I wonder if this border topic could be visualized (for example with
something like Kurt Lewins initiated topological method). How to
represent visually the border...no border...wall...fence ... container
... around individual or group or both ... What forces drive people to
close or open the border. An example of descriptive approach here is
theprivacy regulation model
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_regulation_theory> from social
psychology (I. Altman and others) where the social subject is
regulating its border with environment trying to find equilibrium
(optimum) between isolation and crowding. The cell analogy is often
used in this context as the cell is defined by its border (membrane)
and the communications with its environment goes by and through this
border. In privacy regulation model the border is a means to develop
and keep subjects identity and integrity.
Be well!
Arno
**
2014-04-07 4:33 GMT+03:00 Michael Wood <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>:
Thanks, Harrison, for your response to my question on
'boundaries', particularly your paraphrasing of my question -
which was spot on. One thing I've taken from this brief
conversation is that although considering the boundaries can be
useful, we also need to accept that boundaries are never entirely
clear, always moving on a spectrum from clear to uncertain/murky
and if we, as a sponsor or facilitator, get overly bound up with
boundaries then we might have moved, once again, into being too
controlling.
Michael Wood
Perth, Western Australia
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 12:01:40 -0400
From: "Harrison Owen" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
To: "'World wide Open Space Technology email list'"
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [OSList] Open Space and boundaries
Message-ID: <000301cf4f56$00776480$01662d80$@net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
It has been common for us to speak of Containers and Boundaries as
somehow essential to Open Space. I can't quite find the place, but
I do remember saying something like that myself, as in, "The role
of the facilitator is to create the container..." It certainly
made sense at the time, but I always felt a little uncomfortable
with the image. Too mechanical, coercive... too something. And
Michael has brought the subject up again. "So...here we have a
situation where the 'boundaries' are actually in a state of
complex flux and uncertainty. The financial 'givens' are
ambiguous; there is no 'locum'
pastor in place because of legal uncertainties with the existing
pastor...etc." You might call it "messy boundaries" -- and he
raises the question whether one should press ahead with Open
Space, or wait until the "mess" is settled down. On the one hand,
Michael "hunches" that one should press on -- Open Space. But his
hesitation comes, I suspect, from the prior notion that fixed
boundaries/containers are necessary for an effective Open Space.
What to do?
Some thoughts (new ones for me): Containers are great for cooking
soup, but are unneeded and maybe even problematical in Open Space.
It is all about holding things together. In Open Space groups of
people come together to deal with their issues. At the very least
that would mean gathering in some common time/space, be that
physical or electronic. It would seem that this co-location could
be facilitated were some suitable "container" provided, presumably
by the sponsor/facilitator. This certainly makes sense, and as a
rough way of speaking, it seems to describe what is going on. But
as I think about it, I think we may be missing a most important
point. Coming together in Open Space happens because people care
to come. And they continue their connection as long as they care
to do so. (Law of two feet)
>From the "outside" it might look as if they were held in place by a
container, but that is illusory. The actual dynamics are
centripetal, the force is mutual attraction... people are "there"
because they care to be there and not because they are contained
by some external structure. In a word, we as facilitators really
don't do a thing, and creating a container is the least of what we
DON'T do. The people, from the beginning, do it all.
Of course, there are situations where groups come together under
orders, mandates, whatever. And they are definitely "contained."
It is also true that the tighter that container, the less likely
self organization will take place. If true, providing a container
is not only unnecessary but also destructive. In the name of
Opening space, we effectively close it. Or so I suspect it might
be. Just thinking...
Anyhow Michael, should my mental peregrinations lead anywhere
useful, it would seem that your "hunch" was spot on. Forget the
boundaries/container.
Just invite the space to open.
Harrison
Harrison Owen
7808 River Falls Dr.
Potomac, MD 20854
USA
189 Beaucaire Ave. (summer)
Camden, Maine 04843
Phone 301-365-2093
(summer) 207-763-3261
www.openspaceworld.com <http://www.openspaceworld.com>
www.ho-image.com <http://www.ho-image.com> (Personal Website)
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives
of OSLIST Go
to:http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
[mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of
Michael Wood
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 9:59 PM
To: '[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>'
Subject: [OSList] Open Space and boundaries
A Case Study....
One of the principles that I have generally worked with in Open
Space is helping the client get clear on the 'boundaries' of the
space that's being opened. For example, helping people who come
into the space to know 'what up for grabs here and what isn't?
What decisions have already been made?'
So picture this (purely hypothetical of course)....a church
community in which the pastor has (in many peoples' opinion) run
off the rails and the main church body is in the process of trying
to dismiss him; the church is in compete disarray and completely
conflict ridden, many people have left; the pastor who holds all
the keys, banking passwords; church telephone connections etc etc,
has taken legal advice and had hunkered down in the church owned
house where he continues to hold the reigns of power (via some of
his 'allies' in the church) despite not formally being the Pastor
of the church anymore....
So...here we have a situation where the 'boundaries' are actually
in a state of complex flux and uncertainty. The financial 'givens'
are ambiguous; there is no 'locum' pastor in place because of
legal uncertainties with the existing pastor...etc etc.
So in terms of 'Opening Space', do we wait a bit longer until some
of the legal boundaries are clarified, OR open space right away in
the midst of the mess....my hunch is the latter, but any thoughts
from anyone?
Cheers
Michael
_______________________________________________
OSList mailing list
To post send emails to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> To unsubscribe send an
email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
OSList mailing list
To post send emails to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> To unsubscribe send an
email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
End of OSList Digest, Vol 38, Issue 3
*************************************
_______________________________________________
OSList mailing list
To post send emails to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
To unsubscribe send an email to
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
_______________________________________________
OSList mailing list
To post send emails to [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
--
Harold Shinsato
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://shinsato.com
twitter: @hajush <http://twitter.com/hajush>
