Re: [OSList] MUST READS for a facilitator

[Alan Halford via OSList]

 Peggy Holman’s book, "Engaging Emergence”

Take care
Alan

Alan Halford & Associates
Open Space Technology Aficionados
Mediation and Conflict Transformation
Facilitators

www.alanhalford.com.au 
0421 475 252
skype: alanhalford




On 24 Feb 2017, at 3:45 pm, Agnieszka Wawrzyniak  wrote:

Hi, 

apart of all Harrison's books, what would you recommend as a must read for a 
facilitator?

Greets from Poland
Agnieszka

___
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] MUST READS for a facilitator

[Agnieszka Wawrzyniak via OSList]

Hi,

apart of all Harrison's books, what would you recommend as a must read for
a facilitator?

Greets from Poland
Agnieszka
___
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

Re: [OSList] Research OST

[David Osborne via OSList]

Skye,

Your what it."*What if we are all ordering ourselves to feel more and
more whole coherence towards creating greatest coherence of the whole?" *
had an immediate resonates with me and makes intuitive sense.

David


*David R. Osborne*
Organization and Leadership Development

6402 Arlington Blvd., Suite 1120, Falls Church, VA 22042
703-939-1777   |   dosbo...@change-fusion.com 
  |   change-fusion.com

On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 6:29 PM, Skye Hirst  wrote:

> Oh dear me, I'm jumping in.I wrote this poem today as I consider the
> living processes, one of which is self-ordering using an inherent value
> intelligence discovered by Robert S. Hartman years ago.
>
> So from this wide-angle lens on the subject of self-organization...   One
> needs a different kind of knowing beyond words and numbers as measurement,
> I suggest,  we need go beyond the observing of parts and  "things"  or
> arti-facts.  How do we see process?   it's more a coherence knowing by
> which we sense our self-organizing way, an infinitely complex process,  i
> suspect, but   I offer for your consideringWhat if we are all ordering
> ourselves to feel more and more whole coherence towards creating greatest
> coherence of the whole? I'm way out here,  but I do welcome company in the
> exploration.
>
> Can you see Living Process?
>
> “Sensing it” might be more accurately the pointer
>
> What happened when you were 3 years old,
>
> Can stay an awareness “sign” till woman grown
>
> An act by other can infect you
>
> As you remember smells and feelings
>
> In your body-knowing of good, or ill.
>
> Such senses shape in you,
>
> You decide,
>
>  This works, that doesn’t,
>
> You come to value or disvalue one “kind” of person, more than another
>
> The ways, the acts of tenderness, or disregard
>
> A relating relationship becomes habit by repeated choosing
>
> Because “effective” in some living way
>
> You feel excitement, anticipation for such again,
>
> Or dread, it might be repeated, take note to avoid.
>
> A mindful moment can reveal
>
> Such kaleidoscope realities
>
> Woven throughout your living acts and actions
>
>  Informing little girl continuously till woman grown
>
> Contrasts butt up against one another
>
> These living acts, with results, and consequences,
>
> Require evaluating, comparing qualities you name “good”
>
> Choosing again and again
>
> What works, what doesn’t
>
> Seeing, sensing living, becoming, evolving, emerging
>
> Nothing fixed in relations of relating,
>
> These acts and their results
>
> Keep creating in you
>
> A felt-sensing reality view,
>
> Moment on moment
>
> Forming functions of how to live
>
> In this moment and the next.
>
> Choosing acts of good, or ill
>
> Or some measure in between
>
> This is good, less good or bad,
>
> Repeat or stop
>
> Like soup in the making
>
> You keep adding, referencing,
>
> Sensing your way
>
>  All acts, all relations of relations,
>
> Seeking
>
> A wholeness knowing,
>
> A "never-will-be-againness."
>
> Wondering at it all,
>
> Or not,
>
> Or some measure in-between.
>
> Do you “sense” what I mean?
>
>
>
>
>
> Skye Hirst,  2/23/17
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 5:21 PM, David Osborne via OSList <
> oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:
>
>> I find the concept of researching self-organization in human systems to
>> prove that it happens intriguing and I have no idea how one would approach
>> it since it's all self-organizing and I'm not sure the human perspective of
>> working / not working etc applies.
>>
>> As I first read one off the posts I thought it's kind of like proving
>> fire isthen I realized hey.there is a combustion point ...things
>> that accelerate of diminish fires...ways to start them etc etc.
>>
>> I think a second part of the challenge is that self-organizing is like
>> gravity or electro magnetics in that it is invisible and we don't have a
>> way of measuring it that I know of.
>>
>> These are my rambling musings and I'm interested in others perspectives.
>>
>> Best to all,
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>> *David R. Osborne*
>> Organization and Leadership Development
>>
>> 6402 Arlington Blvd., Suite 1120, Falls Church, VA 22042
>> 703-939-1777 <(703)%20939-1777>   |   dosbo...@change-fusion.com
>>    |   change-fusion.com
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 4:36 PM, Royle, Karl via OSList <
>> oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I don’t think you can prove self organization but you could look at ….
>>> if this is done in this way then results are.. kind of thing…. And you
>>> could see if OS improves efficacy of groups and individuals, which it
>>> probably certainly does (in the moment)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From: *OSList  on behalf of
>>> Birgitt Williams via OSList 
>>> *Reply-To: *Birgitt Williams , World
>>> wide Open Space Technology email list 

Re: [OSList] Research OST

[Skye Hirst via OSList]

Oh dear me, I'm jumping in.I wrote this poem today as I consider the
living processes, one of which is self-ordering using an inherent value
intelligence discovered by Robert S. Hartman years ago.

So from this wide-angle lens on the subject of self-organization...   One
needs a different kind of knowing beyond words and numbers as measurement,
I suggest,  we need go beyond the observing of parts and  "things"  or
arti-facts.  How do we see process?   it's more a coherence knowing by
which we sense our self-organizing way, an infinitely complex process,  i
suspect, but   I offer for your consideringWhat if we are all ordering
ourselves to feel more and more whole coherence towards creating greatest
coherence of the whole? I'm way out here,  but I do welcome company in the
exploration.

Can you see Living Process?

“Sensing it” might be more accurately the pointer

What happened when you were 3 years old,

Can stay an awareness “sign” till woman grown

An act by other can infect you

As you remember smells and feelings

In your body-knowing of good, or ill.

Such senses shape in you,

You decide,

 This works, that doesn’t,

You come to value or disvalue one “kind” of person, more than another

The ways, the acts of tenderness, or disregard

A relating relationship becomes habit by repeated choosing

Because “effective” in some living way

You feel excitement, anticipation for such again,

Or dread, it might be repeated, take note to avoid.

A mindful moment can reveal

Such kaleidoscope realities

Woven throughout your living acts and actions

 Informing little girl continuously till woman grown

Contrasts butt up against one another

These living acts, with results, and consequences,

Require evaluating, comparing qualities you name “good”

Choosing again and again

What works, what doesn’t

Seeing, sensing living, becoming, evolving, emerging

Nothing fixed in relations of relating,

These acts and their results

Keep creating in you

A felt-sensing reality view,

Moment on moment

Forming functions of how to live

In this moment and the next.

Choosing acts of good, or ill

Or some measure in between

This is good, less good or bad,

Repeat or stop

Like soup in the making

You keep adding, referencing,

Sensing your way

 All acts, all relations of relations,

Seeking

A wholeness knowing,

A "never-will-be-againness."

Wondering at it all,

Or not,

Or some measure in-between.

Do you “sense” what I mean?





Skye Hirst,  2/23/17





On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 5:21 PM, David Osborne via OSList <
oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:

> I find the concept of researching self-organization in human systems to
> prove that it happens intriguing and I have no idea how one would approach
> it since it's all self-organizing and I'm not sure the human perspective of
> working / not working etc applies.
>
> As I first read one off the posts I thought it's kind of like proving fire
> isthen I realized hey.there is a combustion point ...things that
> accelerate of diminish fires...ways to start them etc etc.
>
> I think a second part of the challenge is that self-organizing is like
> gravity or electro magnetics in that it is invisible and we don't have a
> way of measuring it that I know of.
>
> These are my rambling musings and I'm interested in others perspectives.
>
> Best to all,
>
> David
>
>
> *David R. Osborne*
> Organization and Leadership Development
>
> 6402 Arlington Blvd., Suite 1120, Falls Church, VA 22042
> 703-939-1777 <(703)%20939-1777>   |   dosbo...@change-fusion.com
>    |   change-fusion.com
>
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 4:36 PM, Royle, Karl via OSList <
> oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:
>
>> I don’t think you can prove self organization but you could look at …. if
>> this is done in this way then results are.. kind of thing…. And you could
>> see if OS improves efficacy of groups and individuals, which it probably
>> certainly does (in the moment)
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *OSList  on behalf of
>> Birgitt Williams via OSList 
>> *Reply-To: *Birgitt Williams , World
>> wide Open Space Technology email list 
>> *Date: *Thursday, 23 February 2017 at 21:30
>> *To: *World wide Open Space Technology email list <
>> oslist@lists.openspacetech.org>
>> *Subject: *Re: [OSList] Research OST
>>
>>
>>
>> Harrison---the point I was making is about research. If the research is
>> based on going down the path of proving self organization, it is not as
>> valuable to making the case for OST as OST works! It simply works, is
>> useful, creates results.
>>
>>
>>
>> Birgitt
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 4:16 PM Harrison Owen  wrote:
>>
>> Birgitt – I guess we differ. Proving that self organization works is
>> about as useful as proving that oxygen works for breathing. Seems to. And
>> are there other things going 

Re: [OSList] Research OST

[Royle, Karl via OSList]

I don’t think you can prove self organization but you could look at …. if this 
is done in this way then results are.. kind of thing…. And you could see if OS 
improves efficacy of groups and individuals, which it probably certainly does 
(in the moment)

From: OSList  on behalf of Birgitt 
Williams via OSList 
Reply-To: Birgitt Williams , World wide Open 
Space Technology email list 
Date: Thursday, 23 February 2017 at 21:30
To: World wide Open Space Technology email list 
Subject: Re: [OSList] Research OST

Harrison---the point I was making is about research. If the research is based 
on going down the path of proving self organization, it is not as valuable to 
making the case for OST as OST works! It simply works, is useful, creates 
results.

Birgitt
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 4:16 PM Harrison Owen 
> wrote:
Birgitt – I guess we differ. Proving that self organization works is about as 
useful as proving that oxygen works for breathing. Seems to. And are there 
other things going on in Open Space apart from self organization? Absolutely. 
Or perhaps not at all. Just life.

ho

Winter Address
7808 River Falls Dr.
Potomac, MD 20854
301-365-2093

Summer Address
189 Beaucauire Ave
Camden, ME 04843
207 763-3261

Websites
www.openspaceworld.com
www.ho-image.com

From: OSList 
[mailto:oslist-boun...@lists.openspacetech.org]
 On Behalf Of Birgitt Williams via OSList
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 3:28 PM

To: World wide Open Space Technology email list
Subject: Re: [OSList] Research OST

Great summary Harrison of what is OST and what is not OST. it is a significant 
challenge to find what is actually an OST meeting. One of the reasons I created 
our workshop Working With OST is to make that distinction very clear to all who 
participate with us. OST facilitated well requires understanding the essence of 
what is created...and never as the facilitator violating that essence. People 
have referred to me as a 'purist' and that is fine by me. I believe in OST just 
as you created it. I do not believe in the variations having the same outcomes. 
When something is added before OST or after OST, they are not OST...and helping 
a group of people be absolutely clear when the actual OST begins and when it 
ends is part of what we are very careful about.

We have developed a complimentary method, Whole Person Process Facilitation, to 
use when OST is not the right method...and yet is based on as little 
intervention as possible, and creating 'maximum choice, maximum freedom' to the 
degree possible. Unfortunately, after the meetings, people will say 'we want 
another one of those open space meetings. They feel that the space is open and 
like to refer to it that way. I cannot do anything about this conclusion that 
people make, and it is not OST.

I also think that a disservice was done when OST was being looked at from the 
lens of 'self organizing', one lens that applies certainly, and not the only 
one...and in my perspective a rather limited one. The reason I say this is a 
disservice is that too much effort was spent proving that self organizing 
works, instead of proving through research and other means, that OST works.

Having a clean hypothesis about OST as a useful, productive method that 
achieves incredible results is more valuable that proving it works for some 
particular reason.

My two cents on the subject,
Birgitt

On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 12:05 PM Harrison Owen via OSList 
> wrote:
One of the questions I find myself asking of various "researchers," -- What,
exactly, are you looking at?

Open Space has wandered and permutated globally, and taken 30+ years doing
that. So lots of times the "Open Space" people say they are looking at
(researching) has nothing to do with anything that I might call OST.
Needless to say I don't own, but I did coin the phrase -- and arguably, I've
spent more time fussing with OST than anybody else. Alternatives,
Variations, Permutations are not wrong, bad, or immoral -- but are not OST.
And in research "facts" do matter. Despite our current (US) administration.
So for me, if you a going to do research on Open Space Technology (OST) --
it  really needs to be done "by the book." The Book being, "Open Space
Technology: A User's Guide 3rd Edition (Berrett- Koehler, 2008)" I might
consider that the "Lab Book."

The experimental procedure is clearly laid out.

The "event" will be convened around an issue people seriously care about
(Real issue - not pretend, made up, chosen at random).

All participants will come in response to a Real Invitation. One they can

Re: [OSList] Research OST

[Royle, Karl via OSList]

I think, if you want to research it at all, you should be looking at effects on 
people and organisations.

And, I think there is something about pattern recognition in the modus operandi 
of OS and there is certainly something about personal and collective agency and 
self efficacy. Bandura

That is where I would look.. I also might apply a standard evaluation of formal 
training to it as a framework for analysis… maybe Kirkpatrick

Did you like it
Did you learn anything
Has it changed your behavior
Has it impacted wider/ reach and ownership

But as each instance of OS is unique you might want to do this as case studies… 
collect them together and then do a cross case analysis.

This is all doable and easy to do ☺

Best Karl
From: OSList  on behalf of Harrison 
Owen via OSList 
Reply-To: Harrison Owen , World wide Open Space Technology 
email list 
Date: Thursday, 23 February 2017 at 21:16
To: 'Birgitt Williams' , 'World wide Open Space 
Technology email list' 
Subject: Re: [OSList] Research OST

Birgitt – I guess we differ. Proving that self organization works is about as 
useful as proving that oxygen works for breathing. Seems to. And are there 
other things going on in Open Space apart from self organization? Absolutely. 
Or perhaps not at all. Just life.

ho

Winter Address
7808 River Falls Dr.
Potomac, MD 20854
301-365-2093

Summer Address
189 Beaucauire Ave
Camden, ME 04843
207 763-3261

Websites
www.openspaceworld.com
www.ho-image.com

From: OSList [mailto:oslist-boun...@lists.openspacetech.org] On Behalf Of 
Birgitt Williams via OSList
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 3:28 PM
To: World wide Open Space Technology email list
Subject: Re: [OSList] Research OST

Great summary Harrison of what is OST and what is not OST. it is a significant 
challenge to find what is actually an OST meeting. One of the reasons I created 
our workshop Working With OST is to make that distinction very clear to all who 
participate with us. OST facilitated well requires understanding the essence of 
what is created...and never as the facilitator violating that essence. People 
have referred to me as a 'purist' and that is fine by me. I believe in OST just 
as you created it. I do not believe in the variations having the same outcomes. 
When something is added before OST or after OST, they are not OST...and helping 
a group of people be absolutely clear when the actual OST begins and when it 
ends is part of what we are very careful about.

We have developed a complimentary method, Whole Person Process Facilitation, to 
use when OST is not the right method...and yet is based on as little 
intervention as possible, and creating 'maximum choice, maximum freedom' to the 
degree possible. Unfortunately, after the meetings, people will say 'we want 
another one of those open space meetings. They feel that the space is open and 
like to refer to it that way. I cannot do anything about this conclusion that 
people make, and it is not OST.

I also think that a disservice was done when OST was being looked at from the 
lens of 'self organizing', one lens that applies certainly, and not the only 
one...and in my perspective a rather limited one. The reason I say this is a 
disservice is that too much effort was spent proving that self organizing 
works, instead of proving through research and other means, that OST works.

Having a clean hypothesis about OST as a useful, productive method that 
achieves incredible results is more valuable that proving it works for some 
particular reason.

My two cents on the subject,
Birgitt

On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 12:05 PM Harrison Owen via OSList 
> wrote:
One of the questions I find myself asking of various "researchers," -- What,
exactly, are you looking at?

Open Space has wandered and permutated globally, and taken 30+ years doing
that. So lots of times the "Open Space" people say they are looking at
(researching) has nothing to do with anything that I might call OST.
Needless to say I don't own, but I did coin the phrase -- and arguably, I've
spent more time fussing with OST than anybody else. Alternatives,
Variations, Permutations are not wrong, bad, or immoral -- but are not OST.
And in research "facts" do matter. Despite our current (US) administration.
So for me, if you a going to do research on Open Space Technology (OST) --
it  really needs to be done "by the book." The Book being, "Open Space
Technology: A User's Guide 3rd Edition (Berrett- Koehler, 2008)" I might
consider that the "Lab Book."

The experimental procedure is clearly laid out.

The "event" will be convened around an issue people seriously care about
(Real issue - not pretend, made up, chosen at random).

All participants will come in response to a Real Invitation. 

Re: [OSList] Research OST

[Birgitt Williams via OSList]

Harrison---the point I was making is about research. If the research is
based on going down the path of proving self organization, it is not as
valuable to making the case for OST as OST works! It simply works, is
useful, creates results.

Birgitt

On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 4:16 PM Harrison Owen  wrote:

> Birgitt – I guess we differ. Proving that self organization works is about
> as useful as proving that oxygen works for breathing. Seems to. And are
> there other things going on in Open Space apart from self organization?
> Absolutely. Or perhaps not at all. Just life.
>
>
>
> ho
>
>
>
> Winter Address
>
> 7808 River Falls Dr.
>
> Potomac, MD 20854
>
> 301-365-2093 <(301)%20365-2093>
>
>
>
> Summer Address
>
> 189 Beaucauire Ave
>
> Camden, ME 04843
>
> 207 763-3261 <(207)%20763-3261>
>
>
>
> Websites
>
> www.openspaceworld.com
>
> www.ho-image.com
>
>
>
> *From:* OSList [mailto:oslist-boun...@lists.openspacetech.org] *On Behalf
> Of *Birgitt Williams via OSList
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 23, 2017 3:28 PM
>
>
> *To:* World wide Open Space Technology email list
>
> *Subject:* Re: [OSList] Research OST
>
>
>
> Great summary Harrison of what is OST and what is not OST. it is a
> significant challenge to find what is actually an OST meeting. One of the
> reasons I created our workshop Working With OST is to make that distinction
> very clear to all who participate with us. OST facilitated well requires
> understanding the essence of what is created...and never as the facilitator
> violating that essence. People have referred to me as a 'purist' and that
> is fine by me. I believe in OST just as you created it. I do not believe in
> the variations having the same outcomes. When something is added before OST
> or after OST, they are not OST...and helping a group of people be
> absolutely clear when the actual OST begins and when it ends is part of
> what we are very careful about.
>
>
>
> We have developed a complimentary method, Whole Person Process
> Facilitation, to use when OST is not the right method...and yet is based on
> as little intervention as possible, and creating 'maximum choice, maximum
> freedom' to the degree possible. Unfortunately, after the meetings, people
> will say 'we want another one of those open space meetings. They feel that
> the space is open and like to refer to it that way. I cannot do anything
> about this conclusion that people make, and it is not OST.
>
>
>
> I also think that a disservice was done when OST was being looked at from
> the lens of 'self organizing', one lens that applies certainly, and not the
> only one...and in my perspective a rather limited one. The reason I say
> this is a disservice is that too much effort was spent proving that self
> organizing works, instead of proving through research and other means, that
> OST works.
>
>
>
> Having a clean hypothesis about OST as a useful, productive method that
> achieves incredible results is more valuable that proving it works for some
> particular reason.
>
>
>
> My two cents on the subject,
>
> Birgitt
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 12:05 PM Harrison Owen via OSList <
> oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:
>
> One of the questions I find myself asking of various "researchers," --
> What,
> exactly, are you looking at?
>
> Open Space has wandered and permutated globally, and taken 30+ years doing
> that. So lots of times the "Open Space" people say they are looking at
> (researching) has nothing to do with anything that I might call OST.
> Needless to say I don't own, but I did coin the phrase -- and arguably,
> I've
> spent more time fussing with OST than anybody else. Alternatives,
> Variations, Permutations are not wrong, bad, or immoral -- but are not OST.
> And in research "facts" do matter. Despite our current (US) administration.
> So for me, if you a going to do research on Open Space Technology (OST) --
> it  really needs to be done "by the book." The Book being, "Open Space
> Technology: A User's Guide 3rd Edition (Berrett- Koehler, 2008)" I might
> consider that the "Lab Book."
>
> The experimental procedure is clearly laid out.
>
> The "event" will be convened around an issue people seriously care about
> (Real issue - not pretend, made up, chosen at random).
>
> All participants will come in response to a Real Invitation. One they can
> refuse. No coercion. All are present because they choose to be there.
>
> Once present, participants will be invited to sit in a circle, create a
> bulletin board of the issues they care about, and the open a market place
> to
> make/confirm the times and places of meeting.
>
> The Facilitator will be present only at the beginning (1st 15 min.) and
> appear again only at the end (of the day or program). In other words, The
> facilitator will NEVER intervene. NEVER. Picking up coffee cups is
> appropriate. Otherwise, being "present and invisible" -- is the rule.
>
> Anything else... "Variants, Twists, Tweaks -- whatever ... is not OST.
> Could

Re: [OSList] Research OST

[Harrison Owen via OSList]

Birgitt – I guess we differ. Proving that self organization works is about as 
useful as proving that oxygen works for breathing. Seems to. And are there 
other things going on in Open Space apart from self organization? Absolutely. 
Or perhaps not at all. Just life.

 

ho

 

Winter Address

7808 River Falls Dr.

Potomac, MD 20854

301-365-2093

 

Summer Address

189 Beaucauire Ave

Camden, ME 04843

207 763-3261

 

Websites

www.openspaceworld.com

www.ho-image.com

 

From: OSList [mailto:oslist-boun...@lists.openspacetech.org] On Behalf Of 
Birgitt Williams via OSList
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 3:28 PM
To: World wide Open Space Technology email list
Subject: Re: [OSList] Research OST

 

Great summary Harrison of what is OST and what is not OST. it is a significant 
challenge to find what is actually an OST meeting. One of the reasons I created 
our workshop Working With OST is to make that distinction very clear to all who 
participate with us. OST facilitated well requires understanding the essence of 
what is created...and never as the facilitator violating that essence. People 
have referred to me as a 'purist' and that is fine by me. I believe in OST just 
as you created it. I do not believe in the variations having the same outcomes. 
When something is added before OST or after OST, they are not OST...and helping 
a group of people be absolutely clear when the actual OST begins and when it 
ends is part of what we are very careful about.

 

We have developed a complimentary method, Whole Person Process Facilitation, to 
use when OST is not the right method...and yet is based on as little 
intervention as possible, and creating 'maximum choice, maximum freedom' to the 
degree possible. Unfortunately, after the meetings, people will say 'we want 
another one of those open space meetings. They feel that the space is open and 
like to refer to it that way. I cannot do anything about this conclusion that 
people make, and it is not OST.

 

I also think that a disservice was done when OST was being looked at from the 
lens of 'self organizing', one lens that applies certainly, and not the only 
one...and in my perspective a rather limited one. The reason I say this is a 
disservice is that too much effort was spent proving that self organizing 
works, instead of proving through research and other means, that OST works.

 

Having a clean hypothesis about OST as a useful, productive method that 
achieves incredible results is more valuable that proving it works for some 
particular reason.

 

My two cents on the subject,

Birgitt

 

On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 12:05 PM Harrison Owen via OSList 
 wrote:

One of the questions I find myself asking of various "researchers," -- What,
exactly, are you looking at?

Open Space has wandered and permutated globally, and taken 30+ years doing
that. So lots of times the "Open Space" people say they are looking at
(researching) has nothing to do with anything that I might call OST.
Needless to say I don't own, but I did coin the phrase -- and arguably, I've
spent more time fussing with OST than anybody else. Alternatives,
Variations, Permutations are not wrong, bad, or immoral -- but are not OST.
And in research "facts" do matter. Despite our current (US) administration.
So for me, if you a going to do research on Open Space Technology (OST) --
it  really needs to be done "by the book." The Book being, "Open Space
Technology: A User's Guide 3rd Edition (Berrett- Koehler, 2008)" I might
consider that the "Lab Book."

The experimental procedure is clearly laid out.

The "event" will be convened around an issue people seriously care about
(Real issue - not pretend, made up, chosen at random).

All participants will come in response to a Real Invitation. One they can
refuse. No coercion. All are present because they choose to be there.

Once present, participants will be invited to sit in a circle, create a
bulletin board of the issues they care about, and the open a market place to
make/confirm the times and places of meeting.

The Facilitator will be present only at the beginning (1st 15 min.) and
appear again only at the end (of the day or program). In other words, The
facilitator will NEVER intervene. NEVER. Picking up coffee cups is
appropriate. Otherwise, being "present and invisible" -- is the rule.

Anything else... "Variants, Twists, Tweaks -- whatever ... is not OST. Could
be great. May be fantastic. But it ain't OST.

And when it comes to "results" the "researcher" might check "Wave Rider:
Leadership for High Performance in a Self Organizing World." That would be
my best effort at a Final Report for the 30 year experiment. Which doesn't
make it perfect, right or anything special. But it might be a place to
start.

Harrison



Winter Address
7808 River Falls Dr.
Potomac, MD 20854
301-365-2093  

Summer Address
189 Beaucauire Ave
Camden, ME 04843
207 763-3261  

Websites

Re: [OSList] Research OST

[Birgitt Williams via OSList]

Great summary Harrison of what is OST and what is not OST. it is a
significant challenge to find what is actually an OST meeting. One of the
reasons I created our workshop Working With OST is to make that distinction
very clear to all who participate with us. OST facilitated well requires
understanding the essence of what is created...and never as the facilitator
violating that essence. People have referred to me as a 'purist' and that
is fine by me. I believe in OST just as you created it. I do not believe in
the variations having the same outcomes. When something is added before OST
or after OST, they are not OST...and helping a group of people be
absolutely clear when the actual OST begins and when it ends is part of
what we are very careful about.

We have developed a complimentary method, Whole Person Process
Facilitation, to use when OST is not the right method...and yet is based on
as little intervention as possible, and creating 'maximum choice, maximum
freedom' to the degree possible. Unfortunately, after the meetings, people
will say 'we want another one of those open space meetings. They feel that
the space is open and like to refer to it that way. I cannot do anything
about this conclusion that people make, and it is not OST.

I also think that a disservice was done when OST was being looked at from
the lens of 'self organizing', one lens that applies certainly, and not the
only one...and in my perspective a rather limited one. The reason I say
this is a disservice is that too much effort was spent proving that self
organizing works, instead of proving through research and other means, that
OST works.

Having a clean hypothesis about OST as a useful, productive method that
achieves incredible results is more valuable that proving it works for some
particular reason.

My two cents on the subject,
Birgitt

On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 12:05 PM Harrison Owen via OSList <
oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:

> One of the questions I find myself asking of various "researchers," --
> What,
> exactly, are you looking at?
>
> Open Space has wandered and permutated globally, and taken 30+ years doing
> that. So lots of times the "Open Space" people say they are looking at
> (researching) has nothing to do with anything that I might call OST.
> Needless to say I don't own, but I did coin the phrase -- and arguably,
> I've
> spent more time fussing with OST than anybody else. Alternatives,
> Variations, Permutations are not wrong, bad, or immoral -- but are not OST.
> And in research "facts" do matter. Despite our current (US) administration.
> So for me, if you a going to do research on Open Space Technology (OST) --
> it  really needs to be done "by the book." The Book being, "Open Space
> Technology: A User's Guide 3rd Edition (Berrett- Koehler, 2008)" I might
> consider that the "Lab Book."
>
> The experimental procedure is clearly laid out.
>
> The "event" will be convened around an issue people seriously care about
> (Real issue - not pretend, made up, chosen at random).
>
> All participants will come in response to a Real Invitation. One they can
> refuse. No coercion. All are present because they choose to be there.
>
> Once present, participants will be invited to sit in a circle, create a
> bulletin board of the issues they care about, and the open a market place
> to
> make/confirm the times and places of meeting.
>
> The Facilitator will be present only at the beginning (1st 15 min.) and
> appear again only at the end (of the day or program). In other words, The
> facilitator will NEVER intervene. NEVER. Picking up coffee cups is
> appropriate. Otherwise, being "present and invisible" -- is the rule.
>
> Anything else... "Variants, Twists, Tweaks -- whatever ... is not OST.
> Could
> be great. May be fantastic. But it ain't OST.
>
> And when it comes to "results" the "researcher" might check "Wave Rider:
> Leadership for High Performance in a Self Organizing World." That would be
> my best effort at a Final Report for the 30 year experiment. Which doesn't
> make it perfect, right or anything special. But it might be a place to
> start.
>
> Harrison
>
>
>
> Winter Address
> 7808 River Falls Dr.
> Potomac, MD 20854
> 301-365-2093 <(301)%20365-2093>
>
> Summer Address
> 189 Beaucauire Ave
> Camden, ME 04843
> 207 763-3261 <(207)%20763-3261>
>
> Websites
> www.openspaceworld.com
> www.ho-image.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: OSList [mailto:oslist-boun...@lists.openspacetech.org] On Behalf Of
> Hege Steinsland via OSList
> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 10:54 AM
> To: World wide Open Space Technology email list
> Subject: [OSList] Research OST
>
> Hello.
> I`m working on an article about the experience with OST in Norwegian work-
> places, in particular municipalities.
> I wonder if there are som kind of overview of earlier research on the
> field,
> published and unpublished
>
> Would be great :-)
>
> All the best
> Hege Steinsland
> ___
> 

Re: [OSList] Research OST

[Harrison Owen via OSList]

One of the questions I find myself asking of various "researchers," -- What,
exactly, are you looking at? 

Open Space has wandered and permutated globally, and taken 30+ years doing
that. So lots of times the "Open Space" people say they are looking at
(researching) has nothing to do with anything that I might call OST.
Needless to say I don't own, but I did coin the phrase -- and arguably, I've
spent more time fussing with OST than anybody else. Alternatives,
Variations, Permutations are not wrong, bad, or immoral -- but are not OST.
And in research "facts" do matter. Despite our current (US) administration.
So for me, if you a going to do research on Open Space Technology (OST) --
it  really needs to be done "by the book." The Book being, "Open Space
Technology: A User's Guide 3rd Edition (Berrett- Koehler, 2008)" I might
consider that the "Lab Book."

The experimental procedure is clearly laid out.

The "event" will be convened around an issue people seriously care about
(Real issue - not pretend, made up, chosen at random).

All participants will come in response to a Real Invitation. One they can
refuse. No coercion. All are present because they choose to be there.

Once present, participants will be invited to sit in a circle, create a
bulletin board of the issues they care about, and the open a market place to
make/confirm the times and places of meeting.

The Facilitator will be present only at the beginning (1st 15 min.) and
appear again only at the end (of the day or program). In other words, The
facilitator will NEVER intervene. NEVER. Picking up coffee cups is
appropriate. Otherwise, being "present and invisible" -- is the rule. 

Anything else... "Variants, Twists, Tweaks -- whatever ... is not OST. Could
be great. May be fantastic. But it ain't OST. 

And when it comes to "results" the "researcher" might check "Wave Rider:
Leadership for High Performance in a Self Organizing World." That would be
my best effort at a Final Report for the 30 year experiment. Which doesn't
make it perfect, right or anything special. But it might be a place to
start.

Harrison



Winter Address
7808 River Falls Dr.
Potomac, MD 20854
301-365-2093

Summer Address
189 Beaucauire Ave
Camden, ME 04843
207 763-3261

Websites
www.openspaceworld.com
www.ho-image.com

-Original Message-
From: OSList [mailto:oslist-boun...@lists.openspacetech.org] On Behalf Of
Hege Steinsland via OSList
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 10:54 AM
To: World wide Open Space Technology email list
Subject: [OSList] Research OST

Hello.
I`m working on an article about the experience with OST in Norwegian work-
places, in particular municipalities.
I wonder if there are som kind of overview of earlier research on the field,
published and unpublished 

Would be great :-)

All the best
Hege Steinsland
___
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

Re: [OSList] Research OST

[l33t...@gmail.com via OSList]

Hey all



A quick search found me these references.



Adelya Pavlova (2016) Peculiarities Of The Current State Of Top Management
Development And Training In Russia.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.395



Eddie Blass, and Peter Hayward (2015) Developing globally responsible
leaders: What role for business schools in the future?
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2014.12.008



Denis Couvet, and Anne-Caroline Prevot (2015) Citizen-science programs:
Towards transformative biodiversity governance.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2014.11.003



Alfonso Montuori (2011) Beyond postnormal times: The future of creativity
and the creativity of the future.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2010.10.013



Tippett, Handley, and Ravetz (2007) Meeting the challenges of sustainable
development—A conceptual appraisal of a new methodology for participatory
ecological planning. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2006.12.004



Brocklehurst, Hook, Bond, and  Goodwin (2005) Developing the public health
practitioner workforce in England: Lessons from theory and practice.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2005.08.012





With lots of love

Kári





On 23 February 2017 at 12:13, l33t...@gmail.com  wrote:

> Hey all
>
>
>
> So what has been happening in the past 10 years with academic research
> into the workings of open space and such things?
>
>
>
> This list here was compiled back in 2006 and I believe it is time to
> revisit it and see if there is some academic publications or other science
> that we should add to this list: http://openspaceworld.org/wp2/
> explore/open-space-research/
>
>
>
>
>
> With lots of love
>
> Kári
>
>
>
>
>
> On 22 February 2017 at 23:38, Harold Shinsato via OSList <
> oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Hege,
>>
>> I'm in correspondence with professor Emma Bell who is currently
>> researching Open Space in the context of the "Unconference" movement, and
>> she and her associate in the U.K. are doing some ongoing research in this
>> area. I have an early copy of their research. I'll let you know if there is
>> an update of when there will be something that can be shared more broadly.
>>
>> One book that might be interesting for academic research into Open Space
>> is the use of Game Theory to think about the value of circle processes. The
>> book is called Ratual Ritual: Culture, Coordination, and Common Knowledge,
>> by Michael Suk-Young Chwe who teaches game theory at the political science
>> department of UCLA. (Thank you to Daniel Mezick for finding this book!)
>>
>> https://www.amazon.com/Rational-Ritual-Culture-Coordination-
>> Knowledge/dp/0691114714
>>
>> Emma found that the research is limited for Open Space. But there is a
>> non-trivial amount that has been compiled by the community in the past
>> here:  http://openspaceworld.org/wp2/explore/open-space-research/
>>
>> Regards,
>> Harold
>>
>> On 2/22/17 8:54 AM, Hege Steinsland via OSList wrote:
>>
>> Hello.
>> I`m working on an article about the experience with OST in Norwegian work- 
>> places, in particular municipalities.
>> I wonder if there are som kind of overview of earlier research on the field, 
>> published and unpublished
>>
>> Would be great :-)
>>
>> All the best
>> Hege Steinsland
>> ___
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Harold Shinsato
>> har...@shinsato.com
>> http://shinsato.com
>> twitter: @hajush 
>>
>> ___
>> 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/os
>> l...@lists.openspacetech.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Ljúfar kveðjur
>
> Kári Gunnarsson
> (+354) 864 5189 <+354%20864%205189>
>



-- 

Ljúfar kveðjur

Kári Gunnarsson
(+354) 864 5189
___
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

Re: [OSList] Research OST

[l33t...@gmail.com via OSList]

Hey all



So what has been happening in the past 10 years with academic research into
the workings of open space and such things?



This list here was compiled back in 2006 and I believe it is time to
revisit it and see if there is some academic publications or other science
that we should add to this list:
http://openspaceworld.org/wp2/explore/open-space-research/





With lots of love

Kári





On 22 February 2017 at 23:38, Harold Shinsato via OSList <
oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:

> Hi Hege,
>
> I'm in correspondence with professor Emma Bell who is currently
> researching Open Space in the context of the "Unconference" movement, and
> she and her associate in the U.K. are doing some ongoing research in this
> area. I have an early copy of their research. I'll let you know if there is
> an update of when there will be something that can be shared more broadly.
>
> One book that might be interesting for academic research into Open Space
> is the use of Game Theory to think about the value of circle processes. The
> book is called Ratual Ritual: Culture, Coordination, and Common Knowledge,
> by Michael Suk-Young Chwe who teaches game theory at the political science
> department of UCLA. (Thank you to Daniel Mezick for finding this book!)
>
> https://www.amazon.com/Rational-Ritual-Culture-Coordination-Knowledge/dp/
> 0691114714
>
> Emma found that the research is limited for Open Space. But there is a
> non-trivial amount that has been compiled by the community in the past
> here:  http://openspaceworld.org/wp2/explore/open-space-research/
>
> Regards,
> Harold
>
> On 2/22/17 8:54 AM, Hege Steinsland via OSList wrote:
>
> Hello.
> I`m working on an article about the experience with OST in Norwegian work- 
> places, in particular municipalities.
> I wonder if there are som kind of overview of earlier research on the field, 
> published and unpublished
>
> Would be great :-)
>
> All the best
> Hege Steinsland
> ___
>
>
>
>
> --
> Harold Shinsato
> har...@shinsato.com
> http://shinsato.com
> twitter: @hajush 
>
> ___
> 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
>



-- 

Ljúfar kveðjur

Kári Gunnarsson
(+354) 864 5189
___
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