Hi Jeff,
I like the way you put it into words. I think you are right, some people won't
stay very long there if that does not suit what they want and as you say it, it
was a good way to make things more visible. And people might better see now
what's true there. So that's good! :)
I wish that I could have had some more preparation or follow up with them, so
that there could be a more inclusive way to form this new group and indeed some
reflexion about leadership. But that was not the deal...
When you write : "It doesn't surprise me that there was desire to narrow and
focus the discourse rather than expand it at this developmental stage." Do you
mean by that that you view it as a normal general first step for a forming
group?
In my experience, the beginning is not an easy time for a group... because
people can be at very different places. Some of them know pretty clearly what
they want, how they want to go there or at least want to take action, while
some others want to cocreate it and can support more chaos and don't want to
act so quickly.
Thanks for your insights,
Anne-Béatrice
On Sunday, February 1, 2015 1:02 AM, Jeff Aitken <[email protected]>
wrote:
Hi Anne-Béatrice
>From my perspective you responded perfectly and I don't see it affecting the
>combining that took place. You might have given a reason why combining is not
>always a good idea, as some of us have suggested here. But I am not so sure
>that what we say has that much impact on what people decide to do. We can be
>careful and skillful and then we have to let it go.
People learn a lot in open space, because both 'content' and 'process' are
raised to awareness. In reflecting on their experience I bet that people feel
more aware of what's true in that group and its leadership and how they want to
continue their involvement. And this kind of learning is valuable in a new
organization.
In that sense the freedom of open space is always with us, and OST makes it
more visible and tangible.
Using Adizes' old developmental framework, OST is often used after an
organization moves past its 'prime' into bureaucracy that may no longer serve,
and needs some space to open up structures and return to prime. But on the path
toward prime in a new organization, OST can help in creating appropriate
structures to support the purpose of the organization. At least in theory : )
It doesn't surprise me that there was desire to narrow and focus the discourse
rather than expand it at this developmental stage. But if people are invited
and feel left out they won't want to play much longer.
As a consultant to the sponsor, one could try to prepare the sponsor beforehand
for the best use of open space in turning loose the creativity of the gathered
people for the task at hand; and try to reflect with them afterward on
learnings about leadership in open space. (My gratitude to Larry Peterson for
that language.) But this is a bigger contract than just facilitating a meeting.
I'm curious if this resonates, and wonder about the experiences of others in
new organizations.
Jeff
-------- Original message --------
From: Anne-Béatrice Duparc via OSList
Date:01/31/2015 2:23 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [OSList] Combining sessions - a slight change of title
Hi,
I want to share with you how my first OS went relating to the combination of
topics. So the OS only lasted 3h30, we had around 25 people and two sessions.
16 subjects were raised.
During the intro someone asked how to do when one wants to attend several
subjects. I answered that there were several solutions : they could move from
one to the other, they could ask the conveners of two sessions if they were ok
to combine them, or could just choose the one they felt more inclined to go to.
I have the impression that something went a bit wrong in the way I answered...
because there was a lot of combinations... and I really think far too much. It
ended up that even 4 sessions were combined together and that a group of around
15 people gathered in it. That's not the number of people gathering that matter
so much, but the fact that the man who was the sponsor of the event (not a
formal one, but still the one who made the event happen) was kind of acting
like the chief, wanted to achieve really specific results, talking a lot, while
half people did not speak.
And having read a feedback about what has happened since the OS and talked with
a friend of mine who is part of the group, I have the impression that this OS
has been kind of an alibi, a participative process that has finally ended up in
supporting only some specific concrete actions that were important for a few
people in the group and that they already wanted to happen before the OS. I
feel a bit disappointed and not so at ease with that, as if I had helped in
some way to that "manipulation".
I have the feeling now that the available time was too short for people to
really accept to be free from their agenda (or the one of others) and enter the
freedom of open space or that OS was not the appropriate thing to do with this
forming group...
Anne-Béatrice
_______________________________________________
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
