Dear Harrison, it’s so funny I think I do really come from another generation - so sometimes I am not getting the point. I am such an Open Space native that I really don’t know what the whole conversation and struggles have been before and outside the OST approach. So I guess it’s weird for me to talk about OST as not having structure…
Dear Michael, just to mention, the tomato story comes from Ward Williams. I really like it too. In my leadership position in the Genuine Contact Co-Owners Group I and my colleagues struggle a lot with the questions: What structures are important for our maximum freedom and maximum choice? We want to be a Conscious Open Space Organisation (earlier this was the name, now we call it Genuine Contact Organisation - the essence is the same: an Organisation, based on the Open Space Principles) Right now we believe we need more clarification about roles and responsibilities in our organisation. Leaving it all up to self-orgaisazation is not always working. Some people work lots, others don’t know where to support. We are doing our best to understand this body, plant, ‘tomato’ we are and finding out what structures, agreements, roles and responsibilities we need in order to organically evolve. We are using the Medicine Wheel Tool to clarify the purpose of our tomato/organisation, our leadership values, our vision, whom we want to serve and who can support us, what action we need to take in order to fulfil the next steps and what structural changes or evolution we might need. I think following Ken Wilber in the Genuine Contact Co-Owners Group we are all more or less ‘green’ (after Ken Wieber I believe it means, we love equality and think everybody is the same) we have difficulties seeing the need to differentiate roles and responsibilities - and on the other hand we also are confronted with expectations from ourselves and others we cannot fulfil right now either. It’s a DANCE. What are your thoughts and ‘real' life experiences with structure? ...back to the philosophical perspective and the intangible art of structure. :) I guess DANCE itself has also a combination of structure and flow, right? Even rituals, seasons and breath are a combination of structure and flow… I assume I am moving out off the reality of 'either or’ and move into a reality of 'both and’. But hey, apart from all theory I believe it’s more important to remember: structure is pointless or badly designed if people have no energy, passion or desire to take action. In this case it might be worthwhile checkin in if the given structure is toxic, too much or simply unsexy. much Love Anna Caroline > On 04 Oct 2015, at 20:59, Harrison Owen via OSList > <[email protected]> wrote: > > “Everything is moving.” .... Michael -- I remember that moment very well. > And Dan, I’m not sure the context, etc, would help very much. But just for > the record the odd phrase popped out at one of the International Symposia on > Organization Transformation which happened to be taking place at a small > college south of Seattle. I have no idea why Ralph said what he did, and I’m > not sure Ralph did either. But then again a lot of marvelous stuff seems to > burst out with no obvious logic train. Indeed it may be that the lack of > logic train enables the thought? > > Whatever the genesis, the phrase wandered about my head for some time, quite > unattached, and it also happened that I was working my way slowly through one > of the masterpieces of 20th century western philosophy when a fuzzy > connection began to form. The work was that of Alfred North Whitehead, and > the title: “Process and Reality.” I’ve been through the book probably 4-5 > times, and I am frank to confess that I don’t think I really understand it. > But then again I’ve heard a number of people with much greater credentials, > tenure, etc – say the same thing. But I did get that it had something to do > with, “Everything is moving.” And the more I thought and read, the more I > felt that the good philosopher had made a small mistake on his title. It > shouldn’t be “Process and Reality,” but rather “Process is Reality.” > > Now, Anna Caroline we come to “structure,” or perhaps I should say the > fallacy of Structure? Yes I know – we’ve all been taught that structure is > the precursor, the “determinator” of everything. My face looks as it does > because of my bone structure. My life proceeds the way it does because of my > social structure. My business works as it does because of the organizational > structure. And of course, meetings happen the way they do because of meeting > structure, which apparently is the prime domain of “facilitators.” And even > if we hadn’t been “taught” all this, the primacy of structure would appear to > be blatantly obvious – as plain as the nose on your face. > > Unfortunately, it does seem to turn out that sometimes the blatantly obvious > is not necessarily so. For example just looking at things it is pretty clear > that the world is flat, or at the least bumpy flat. And any fool can see that > we are the center of it all – Sun, moon, and stars whiz around us. But when > we think about it, as we have been doing for the last 500-600 years, the > obvious isn’t so obvious. > > It is reasonable to ask what would start to make us think differently – to > the point that we begin to question the obvious, and even come to see things > in a different way? Taking a leap, I will suggest that it all begins with the > perception of anomaly. Things just don’t make sense. Our eyes tell us one > thing... but???? And then we start making up stories to explain the > apparently unexplainable. We imagine different ways of looking at things so > that the nonsensical makes sense. Some of those stories get pretty strange, > but if they actually work – that is to say, help us to see in new and useful > ways – that’s great! > > There is, of course, a proper term for the activity I have been describing. > It is called Theory Building. And for whatever it is worth, “theory” comes > from the Greek “theorein” – to see. In a word, theories are ways of looking > at things – likely stories you might say. > > Now, at long last (too long?) we come to the odd story I was starting to > tell, to the effect that Structure is only a figment of our imagination, a > flash frame of a moment gone by. Interesting, and helpful under some > circumstances... but always partial and in a sense illusory. What’s “really” > happening is all flow. Everything is moving – That’s Ralph’s story, and I > guess it is mine too. > > So how did I get to such a weird condition? It was all about anomaly – more > particularly, the anomaly of Open Space. Everything that I had ever learned > told me that it could not work. Unfortunately it did (work) – and not just > once, but every time, hundreds of thousands of times. Something was > definitely weird. It seemed to me that I had to re-consider all those things > I thought I had learned, beginning with the basics... such things as > Structure. > > Common sense would say that Open Space works because we somehow created a > structure that enabled it to work. That’s the way things get done, or so I > had been taught. But that’s not the way things happened in Open Space. > Structure emerged along the way and only momentarily. Worse yet it > (structure) seemed to have little to do with the obvious power, connections, > creativity.... all of which created structures, and passed them by. And > actually it always seemed to me that the “structures” I “saw” existed only > because I wanted to see them – or perhaps that I “should” see them. But they > were only momentary wisps, figments – never to be mistaken for what was > really going on. Or so I’ve been thinking. > > Harrison > > > > > > > From: OSList [mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Michael Herman > via OSList > Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2015 6:31 PM > To: JL Walker; World wide Open Space Technology email list > Subject: Re: [OSList] The Tyranny of Structurelessness > > you remind me, harrison, of one morning news session years ago, somewhere, > probably OT... where ralph copleman walked to the center of the circle and > announced, all serious and mischievous at the same time, "it's all moving!" > > then put the stick down and went back to his seat. > > > -- > > Michael Herman > Michael Herman Associates > http://MichaelHerman.com <http://michaelherman.com/> > http://OpenSpaceWorld.org <http://openspaceworld.org/> > > On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 1:47 PM, JL Walker via OSList > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > wrote: > I was thinking that maybe the antidote to the eventual tyranny of > structurelessness is to open space, again and again, until true democracy can > emerge. > > Juan Luis > > De: OSList [mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>] En nombre de Rosa > Zubizarreta via OSList > Enviado el: sábado, 03 de octubre de 2015 12:19 > Para: Daniel Mezick; World wide Open Space Technology email list > Asunto: Re: [OSList] The Tyranny of Structurelessness > > Hi Daniel, > > Yes, this is a key piece... I see it as very similar in some ways to what Ken > Wilber wrote later, > about the "shadow side of the green meme". (Each meme has its own shadow, as > well as its own gift...) > > So, I love "green". I love circles, I love non-hierarchy, etc. > And, part of the "shadow side of the green meme" is how ideologically > anti-structure it can become... > to the point where some people may not even agree that OST does, in fact, > offer a very simple and effective structure. > > By way contrast, think of a situation where group of people (who don't know > about OST, and/or, who are having a power struggle around "which process to > use", and/or.... ) might easily spending a whole weekend arguing about "how > to self-organize ourselves"... with a great deal more pain and frustration > and a great deal less value. > > whereas, instead, IF someone knows about OST, and, a clear invitation has > been extended, and, there is enough trust/suspension of disbelief so that > participants are willing to enter into that format, > > then, we end up with a very simple and elegant structure that allows people > to self-organize beautifully.... > > at least that's how i see it! :-) > > with all best wishes, > > Rosa > > > > Rosa Zubizarreta > Developing Participatory and Co-intelligent Leadership > Author of From Conflict to Creative Collaboration > <http://www.conflict2creativity.com/> > For more resources and learning opportunities, visit > www.DiaPraxis.com <http://www.diapraxis.com/> > > On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 9:26 AM, Daniel Mezick via OSList > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > wrote: > THE TYRANNY of STRUCTURELESSNESS > by Jo Freeman aka Joreen > > I find this essay extremely interesting. I hope you do, too. > > > > Here is a pertinent quote, from the essay: > "...the idea of "structurelessness" does not prevent the formation of > informal structures, only formal ones." > > > Circa 1970. Context: the women's movement. Quick summary of the main points: > from the essay... > > During the years in which the women's liberation movement has been taking > shape, a great emphasis has been placed on what are called leaderless, > structureless groups as the main -- if not sole -- organizational form of the > movement. > The idea of "structurelessness," however, has moved from a healthy counter to > those tendencies, to becoming a goddess in its own right. > Contrary to what we would like to believe, there is no such thing as a > structureless group. > This means that to strive for a structureless group is as useful, and as > deceptive, as to aim at an "objective" news story, "value-free" social > science, or a "free" economy. A "laissez faire" group is about as realistic > as a "laissez faire" society; the idea becomes a smokescreen for the strong > or the lucky to establish unquestioned hegemony over others. > This hegemony can be so easily established because the idea of > "structurelessness" does not prevent the formation of informal structures, > only formal ones. > For everyone to have the opportunity to be involved in a given group and to > participate in its activities, the structure must be explicit, not implicit. > It is this informal structure, particularly in Unstructured groups, which > forms the basis for elites. > > > Just in case you have not yet encountered the full text of this essay, here > it is: > > THE TYRANNY of STRUCTURELESSNESS > by Jo Freeman aka Joreen > http://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm > <http://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm> > > > > Regards, > Daniel > http://www.OpenSpaceAgility.com/about <http://www.openspaceagility.com/about> > http://www.DanielMezick.com <http://www.danielmezick.com/> > 203 915 7248 <tel:203%20915%207248> > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > <http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org> > Past archives can be viewed here: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] > <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]> > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > <http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org> > Past archives can be viewed here: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] > <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]> > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > <http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org> > Past archives can be viewed here: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] > <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]> Anna Caroline Türk m:+49 176 2487 2254 <tel:+49 176 2487 2254> | e:[email protected] www. <http://www.annacarolinetuerk.com/>TruthCircles.com | s: AnnaCarolineTuerk <http://www.facebook.com/AnnaCarolineTuerk>
_______________________________________________ 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]
