How @ -- "how captivating is y/our organization?" Or: "what would make us want to work together forever?"
> On Oct 5, 2015, at 10:42 AM, Michael Herman via OSList > <oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote: > > > "There can be no river unless the mountain spring makes a sacred promise to > > the sea." > > wow! > > years ago, when i wrote about the "inviting organization," based on my own > translation of ken wilber into org terms, i suggested the strategic question > that currently mattered was "how inviting is your organization?" this went > one step beyond what fast company magazine had just hailed in a cover story > as the next great strategic question. i also offered a guess that the NEXT > next question would be "how light is your organization." > > you took me first to electrons, paul, with velocity and position. then i > remembered "how light is..." particle and wave. and as i've mentioned > before, it's not that either structure or flow is more important than the > other -- it's the going back and forth that strengthens organization. > > > > > > > -- > > Michael Herman > Michael Herman Associates > http://MichaelHerman.com > http://OpenSpaceWorld.org > > >> On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 12:11 PM, paul levy <p...@cats3000.net> wrote: >> I rather like the saying "Trying to understand yourself is like trying to >> bite your own teeth." >> >> The statement "Structure is s figment of our imagination" is simply a >> structured statement. >> >> Indeed all advocacy is at least temporary structure. >> >> And no less beautiful for that. >> >> Saying it's all flow is another structure statement. By advocating it is >> true it becomes a truth structure. >> >> Ho hum. So it goes. >> >> "There can be no river unless the mountain spring makes a sacred promise to >> the sea." >> >> Warm wishes >> >> Paul Levy >> >> >>> On Sunday, 4 October 2015, Harrison Owen via OSList >>> <oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> 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:oslist-boun...@lists.openspacetech.org] 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://OpenSpaceWorld.org >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 1:47 PM, JL Walker via OSList >>> <oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> 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:oslist-boun...@lists.openspacetech.org] 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 >>> >>> For more resources and learning opportunities, visit >>> www.DiaPraxis.com >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 9:26 AM, Daniel Mezick via OSList >>> <oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Daniel >>> http://www.OpenSpaceAgility.com/about >>> http://www.DanielMezick.com >>> 203 915 7248 >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OSList mailing list >>> To post send emails to OSList@lists.openspacetech.org >>> To unsubscribe send an email to oslist-le...@lists.openspacetech.org >>> 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/oslist@lists.openspacetech.org >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OSList mailing list >>> To post send emails to OSList@lists.openspacetech.org >>> To unsubscribe send an email to oslist-le...@lists.openspacetech.org >>> 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/oslist@lists.openspacetech.org >>> > > _______________________________________________ > OSList mailing list > To post send emails to OSList@lists.openspacetech.org > To unsubscribe send an email to oslist-le...@lists.openspacetech.org > 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/oslist@lists.openspacetech.org
_______________________________________________ OSList mailing list To post send emails to OSList@lists.openspacetech.org To unsubscribe send an email to oslist-le...@lists.openspacetech.org 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/oslist@lists.openspacetech.org
