Hello Barry, Koos, Hege and All,
Hmmm, I wonder if the key issue in this situation (as described by Hege)
is this actually one:
[compulsion/imposition] *versus* [invitation]
Here is one way to express it, in given-when-then format:
Given:
* 10 meeting spaces
* 04 meeting times (meaning 10X4=40 sessions possible)
* 04 pre-defined topics occupying 04 of the 10-total meeting spaces in
all timeslots
* 100% opt-in participation
When:
* The event is happening
Then:
* Participants are free to fill up to (10 minus 04 equals 06) spaces,
across 04 meeting times = 24 sessions
Such a design implies a max of about 100 people, assuming the common
ratio of sessions-to-participants of about .2 to .3 (20 to 30 percent)
... yes and of course there are exceptions...
Illustration:
100 participants X .20 = about 20 anticipated sessions minimum
100 participants X .30 = about 30 anticipated sessions maximum
Now, no one actually knows what might happen, so we can guess instead.
Guessing based on experience indicates that this "reserve 4 spaces"
thing can work, as long as
* it's opt-in and
* there is no compulsion to attend, and
* there is no crowding out of likely sessions constructed in the usual
dynamic way
If more than 100 people are anticipated, then more times and/or spaces
probably need to be defined to accommodate "whatever happens."
And...
By definition, the design of Open Space prescribes [invitation] and is
repelled by and allergic to compulsion & imposition.
So, if the 4 "politician-approved" topics are opt-in to attend, there is
no compulsion. This seems reasonable and in alignment and supporting of
the spirit of Open Space. I wonder if strong suggestion in the
OST-invite (and/or at the Opening, in words from the Host) might be
experienced as something less than open, depending on the style, tone
and tempo of the delivery?
There is also want to examine this related link:
http://newtechusa.net/agile/on-persuasion/
On 8/7/15 7:36 AM, Barry Owen via OSList wrote:
Perhaps a format like BarCamp might be more suitable than Open Space?
That format allows for prescription of topics beforehand and offers
the participants the opportunity to request topics they want to learn
more about or are willing to lead discussions about. It is a
derivative of open space, and is not open space but its not a bad
format for people who are not willing to relinquish their control to
the degree that open space requires.
I think you are correct in your thinking that what they want is not
open space. So attempting to do open space with this group may be akin
to fitting a round peg in a square hole
This message has been sent from my mobile device and therefore may be
somewhat wonky.
Barry Owen
Real Estate Strategist
Principal Broker & Founder
Pareto Realty, LLC
102 Woodmont Blvd Ste 242
Nashville, TN 37205
615-568-2123
http://BarryOwensBlog.com
http://ParetoRealty.com
http://WhyJoinParetoRealty.com
twitter @barryowen @paretorealty
Instagram - barryo06 - ParetoRealty
Facebook
Linkedin
Pareto Realty is #NashvilleProud #HomeGrownRealEstate
On Aug 7, 2015 5:34 AM, "Koos de Heer via OSList"
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Dear Hege,
Filling the complete agenda beforehand is not something I would do
in Open Space. I do allow people to prepare topics beforehand if
they want to, but then these conveners have to put their topic on
the marketplace with all the others. For me, the power of Open
Space is in the present, in the now. The passion of the people at
that moment is what drives it. That moment when the invitation is
out and people come forward to write their topic on a piece of
paper is a very special moment, where the passion of NOW becomes
tangible. A pre-filled agenda does not fit in with that.
An interesting question of course is why they want to do it that
way. If only politicians can fill the agenda, then (at least in my
book) only the politicians can be participants. If they want the
people of the community to be participants, then everybody gets
the opportunity to fill the agenda together. If I understand yout
mail correctly, they want the community to participate but only
the politicians to create the agenda. There must be a reason for
that. Finding out that reason is important, because then you might
be able to show them that they are trying to take a long route to
their goal and that there may be a much better, more direct route.
Good luck
Koos
*Van:*OSList [mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>] *Namens *Hege
Steinsland via OSList
*Verzonden:* vrijdag 7 augustus 2015 11:56
*Aan:* World wide Open Space Technology email list
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
*Onderwerp:* [OSList] is OS apropriate to fill a structure
Dear list - colleague.
I´ve worked with Open Space on two occasions in the same
municipality, and they seem to enjoy and value it. I always work
with OS as a process with a pre meeting and a follow up meeting.
Now they have designed a new structure for how the politicians
should organize decision-making in order to let the politicians
govern more for real and have more interesting and meaningful
tasks. They want let the politicians be involved in filling the
structure with content, and want to use OS for this purpose.
My question:
Is this open enough for an OS meeting? Is the structure simply the
givens and the question « how do we serve our community the best
within this structure» or something like that?
Or do we work better with World Cafe or other tools in this situation?
Do you have experience or advices to give me?
I wonder...
All the best from
Hege
_______________________________________________
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
Past archives can be viewed here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
_______________________________________________
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
Past archives can be viewed here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
--
Daniel Mezick, President
New Technology Solutions Inc.
(203) 915 7248 (cell)
Bio <http://newtechusa.net/dan-mezick/>. Blog
<http://newtechusa.net/blog/>. Twitter <http://twitter.com/#%21/danmezick/>.
Examine my new book:The Culture Game
<http://newtechusa.net/about/the-culture-game-book/>: Tools for the
Agile Manager.
Explore Agile Team Training
<http://newtechusa.net/services/agile-scrum-training/> and Coaching.
<http://newtechusa.net/services/agile-scrum-coaching/>
Explore the Agile Boston <http://newtechusa.net//user-groups/ma/>Community.
_______________________________________________
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
Past archives can be viewed here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
