Re: [OSList] Critical Testing
Hi John The next step would probably to identify some purpose in form of a research questions. What is it that we are looking for, so that we can start to think about what to measure. On Friday, 21 November 2014, John Baxter via OSList oslist@lists.openspacetech.org wrote: Hi Kari I like your intent, but I hear you when you say you fear it may be far too difficult. Do you have any thoughts on viable first steps? (Beyond the immediate step of sharing intent to see what comes of it!) I am thinking of what in startup language is 'minimum viable product'. Cheers *John Baxter* *Cocreation Consultant CoCreate Adelaide Facilitator* jsbaxter.com.au http://www.jsbaxter.com.au/ | CoCreateADL.com 0405 447 829 | @jsbaxter_ http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_ *Thank you to everyone who came, helped or spread the good word about City Grill!* *Summary and links: cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/ http://cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/* On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Kári Gunnarsson oslist@lists.openspacetech.org wrote: There is an invitation to some scientific rigor for our beloved technology. I propose we accept this invitation as a communal effort. An idea for a trial design would be to collect survey data where the nuances of the lived experiences would be teased out, survey data collected by cooperation among our grand Institutes and access given to unaffiliated researchers to collect some understandings and make their own conclusions in publishable science papers. It will probably be far too difficult, even impossible the task of building of such survey database along with the standardized questioners. And the time to build it was sometime long ago, we are long past out do time. There is urgency to this task. But do we have to do it? Well, is there a real need for this approach? I think we can host this endeavor, even try to find a design that allows for a Double-blinded rigor. My vision is that we design standardize and publish a survey that we then allow events to use to collect data for us, data that we then give to researchers where they can use it for their publishing needs. There is also the Pandora’s Box of issues and opportunities. It looks like it is a topic ripe for an open space, be prepared to be surprised. The new late majority folks are going for the theme of „participatory processes“ and request an overview over the landscape. It is the new gathering pole and open space is central for me in this arena as it is less controlling that other processes. Perhaps tour rigor should be part of a broader sense of analyses under the more general heading of participatory processes. But perhaps when we look at Open Space, then we must use the same type of analyses as when we look at research approaches, like when we look at the difference on Double-blinded procedure done by WHR Rivers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._R._Rivers and earlier research procedures. A resent story on time to think, two weeks ago I facilitated a short 3 hour open space for a local branch of a political on their internal operations. There were also a lot of other things happening before and after the conversation part of the program, some football fans even disappeared during the open space to see the ongoing game. Personally I was happy that we had the lunch before the open space, I took some time for reflection and thinking about the possible dream future and topics that make us show up for the work. Then reflection and lunch was served, a lot of chatter during the soup lunch, then back to the introduction of principles … “Whatever happens is the only thing that could have, be prepared to be surprised!”… democracy of the feet / the law of mobility, the bugs and what they give us. Then brake for topics. … It was short time and a lot of conflict of attention by the sponsors for the other parts of the day program, but it worked out well. The passion for work and the freedom of this technology opened for topics and responsibility that had previously been submerged by the tyranny of long speeches and lectures. Give a little time and then open up some space, works each time given the preconditions. In openness, Kári the group coach ___ 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 ___ 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
Re: [OSList] Critical Testing
HI I think you could look at work on capability/functionings… Sen and Agency… personal and Collective Bandura… as a starting point for a survey around participation in OS. Best Karl Karl Royle Head of Enterprise and Commercial Development Centre for Development and Applied Research in Education Faculty of Education Health and Wellbeing Walsall Campus Gorway Road WS1 3BD Skype Karlr61 Twitter @karlroyle Web: wlv.academia.edu/KarlRoyle Phone 01902323006 Mobile 07815416698 Certified Scrum Master [cid:1B3A35AB-029C-4EE8-AAF0-F016B4C8FE5B] From: Kári Gunnarsson via OSList oslist@lists.openspacetech.orgmailto:oslist@lists.openspacetech.org Reply-To: Kári Gunnarsson kari.gunnars...@simnet.ismailto:kari.gunnars...@simnet.is, World wide Open Space Technology email list oslist@lists.openspacetech.orgmailto:oslist@lists.openspacetech.org Date: Monday, 24 November 2014 11:23 To: John Baxter j...@jsbaxter.com.aumailto:j...@jsbaxter.com.au, World wide Open Space Technology email list oslist@lists.openspacetech.orgmailto:oslist@lists.openspacetech.org Subject: Re: [OSList] Critical Testing Hi John The next step would probably to identify some purpose in form of a research questions. What is it that we are looking for, so that we can start to think about what to measure. On Friday, 21 November 2014, John Baxter via OSList oslist@lists.openspacetech.orgmailto:oslist@lists.openspacetech.org wrote: Hi Kari I like your intent, but I hear you when you say you fear it may be far too difficult. Do you have any thoughts on viable first steps? (Beyond the immediate step of sharing intent to see what comes of it!) I am thinking of what in startup language is 'minimum viable product'. Cheers John Baxter Cocreation Consultant CoCreate Adelaide Facilitator jsbaxter.com.auhttp://www.jsbaxter.com.au/ | CoCreateADL.comhttp://CoCreateADL.com 0405 447 829 | @jsbaxter_http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_ Thank you to everyone who came, helped or spread the good word about City Grill! Summary and links: cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/http://cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/ On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Kári Gunnarsson oslist@lists.openspacetech.org wrote: There is an invitation to some scientific rigor for our beloved technology. I propose we accept this invitation as a communal effort. An idea for a trial design would be to collect survey data where the nuances of the lived experiences would be teased out, survey data collected by cooperation among our grand Institutes and access given to unaffiliated researchers to collect some understandings and make their own conclusions in publishable science papers. It will probably be far too difficult, even impossible the task of building of such survey database along with the standardized questioners. And the time to build it was sometime long ago, we are long past out do time. There is urgency to this task. But do we have to do it? Well, is there a real need for this approach? I think we can host this endeavor, even try to find a design that allows for a Double-blinded rigor. My vision is that we design standardize and publish a survey that we then allow events to use to collect data for us, data that we then give to researchers where they can use it for their publishing needs. There is also the Pandora’s Box of issues and opportunities. It looks like it is a topic ripe for an open space, be prepared to be surprised. The new late majority folks are going for the theme of „participatory processes“ and request an overview over the landscape. It is the new gathering pole and open space is central for me in this arena as it is less controlling that other processes. Perhaps tour rigor should be part of a broader sense of analyses under the more general heading of participatory processes. But perhaps when we look at Open Space, then we must use the same type of analyses as when we look at research approaches, like when we look at the difference on Double-blinded procedure done by WHR Rivers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._R._Rivers and earlier research procedures. A resent story on time to think, two weeks ago I facilitated a short 3 hour open space for a local branch of a political on their internal operations. There were also a lot of other things happening before and after the conversation part of the program, some football fans even disappeared during the open space to see the ongoing game. Personally I was happy that we had the lunch before the open space, I took some time for reflection and thinking about the possible dream future and topics that make us show up for the work. Then reflection and lunch was served, a lot of chatter during the soup lunch, then back to the introduction of principles … “Whatever happens is the only thing that could have, be prepared to be surprised!”… democracy of the feet / the law of mobility, the bugs and what they give us. Then brake for topics. … It was short time
Re: [OSList] Critical Testing
Hi John The next step would probably to identify some purpose in form of a research questions. What is it that we are looking for, so that we can start to think about what to measure. On Friday, 21 November 2014, John Baxter via OSList oslist@lists.openspacetech.org wrote: Hi Kari I like your intent, but I hear you when you say you fear it may be far too difficult. Do you have any thoughts on viable first steps? (Beyond the immediate step of sharing intent to see what comes of it!) I am thinking of what in startup language is 'minimum viable product'. Cheers *John Baxter* *Cocreation Consultant CoCreate Adelaide Facilitator* jsbaxter.com.au http://www.jsbaxter.com.au/ | CoCreateADL.com 0405 447 829 | @jsbaxter_ http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_ *Thank you to everyone who came, helped or spread the good word about City Grill!* *Summary and links: cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/ http://cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/* On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Kári Gunnarsson oslist@lists.openspacetech.org wrote: There is an invitation to some scientific rigor for our beloved technology. I propose we accept this invitation as a communal effort. An idea for a trial design would be to collect survey data where the nuances of the lived experiences would be teased out, survey data collected by cooperation among our grand Institutes and access given to unaffiliated researchers to collect some understandings and make their own conclusions in publishable science papers. It will probably be far too difficult, even impossible the task of building of such survey database along with the standardized questioners. And the time to build it was sometime long ago, we are long past out do time. There is urgency to this task. But do we have to do it? Well, is there a real need for this approach? I think we can host this endeavor, even try to find a design that allows for a Double-blinded rigor. My vision is that we design standardize and publish a survey that we then allow events to use to collect data for us, data that we then give to researchers where they can use it for their publishing needs. There is also the Pandora’s Box of issues and opportunities. It looks like it is a topic ripe for an open space, be prepared to be surprised. The new late majority folks are going for the theme of „participatory processes“ and request an overview over the landscape. It is the new gathering pole and open space is central for me in this arena as it is less controlling that other processes. Perhaps tour rigor should be part of a broader sense of analyses under the more general heading of participatory processes. But perhaps when we look at Open Space, then we must use the same type of analyses as when we look at research approaches, like when we look at the difference on Double-blinded procedure done by WHR Rivers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._R._Rivers and earlier research procedures. A resent story on time to think, two weeks ago I facilitated a short 3 hour open space for a local branch of a political on their internal operations. There were also a lot of other things happening before and after the conversation part of the program, some football fans even disappeared during the open space to see the ongoing game. Personally I was happy that we had the lunch before the open space, I took some time for reflection and thinking about the possible dream future and topics that make us show up for the work. Then reflection and lunch was served, a lot of chatter during the soup lunch, then back to the introduction of principles … “Whatever happens is the only thing that could have, be prepared to be surprised!”… democracy of the feet / the law of mobility, the bugs and what they give us. Then brake for topics. … It was short time and a lot of conflict of attention by the sponsors for the other parts of the day program, but it worked out well. The passion for work and the freedom of this technology opened for topics and responsibility that had previously been submerged by the tyranny of long speeches and lectures. Give a little time and then open up some space, works each time given the preconditions. In openness, Kári the group coach ___ 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 ___ 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
Re: [OSList] Critical Testing
HI I think you could look at work on capability/functionings… Sen and Agency… personal and Collective Bandura… as a starting point for a survey around participation in OS. Best Karl Karl Royle Head of Enterprise and Commercial Development Centre for Development and Applied Research in Education Faculty of Education Health and Wellbeing Walsall Campus Gorway Road WS1 3BD Skype Karlr61 Twitter @karlroyle Web: wlv.academia.edu/KarlRoyle Phone 01902323006 Mobile 07815416698 Certified Scrum Master [cid:1B3A35AB-029C-4EE8-AAF0-F016B4C8FE5B] From: Kári Gunnarsson via OSList oslist@lists.openspacetech.orgmailto:oslist@lists.openspacetech.org Reply-To: Kári Gunnarsson kari.gunnars...@simnet.ismailto:kari.gunnars...@simnet.is, World wide Open Space Technology email list oslist@lists.openspacetech.orgmailto:oslist@lists.openspacetech.org Date: Monday, 24 November 2014 11:23 To: John Baxter j...@jsbaxter.com.aumailto:j...@jsbaxter.com.au, World wide Open Space Technology email list oslist@lists.openspacetech.orgmailto:oslist@lists.openspacetech.org Subject: Re: [OSList] Critical Testing Hi John The next step would probably to identify some purpose in form of a research questions. What is it that we are looking for, so that we can start to think about what to measure. On Friday, 21 November 2014, John Baxter via OSList oslist@lists.openspacetech.orgmailto:oslist@lists.openspacetech.org wrote: Hi Kari I like your intent, but I hear you when you say you fear it may be far too difficult. Do you have any thoughts on viable first steps? (Beyond the immediate step of sharing intent to see what comes of it!) I am thinking of what in startup language is 'minimum viable product'. Cheers John Baxter Cocreation Consultant CoCreate Adelaide Facilitator jsbaxter.com.auhttp://www.jsbaxter.com.au/ | CoCreateADL.comhttp://CoCreateADL.com 0405 447 829 | @jsbaxter_http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_ Thank you to everyone who came, helped or spread the good word about City Grill! Summary and links: cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/http://cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/ On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Kári Gunnarsson oslist@lists.openspacetech.org wrote: There is an invitation to some scientific rigor for our beloved technology. I propose we accept this invitation as a communal effort. An idea for a trial design would be to collect survey data where the nuances of the lived experiences would be teased out, survey data collected by cooperation among our grand Institutes and access given to unaffiliated researchers to collect some understandings and make their own conclusions in publishable science papers. It will probably be far too difficult, even impossible the task of building of such survey database along with the standardized questioners. And the time to build it was sometime long ago, we are long past out do time. There is urgency to this task. But do we have to do it? Well, is there a real need for this approach? I think we can host this endeavor, even try to find a design that allows for a Double-blinded rigor. My vision is that we design standardize and publish a survey that we then allow events to use to collect data for us, data that we then give to researchers where they can use it for their publishing needs. There is also the Pandora’s Box of issues and opportunities. It looks like it is a topic ripe for an open space, be prepared to be surprised. The new late majority folks are going for the theme of „participatory processes“ and request an overview over the landscape. It is the new gathering pole and open space is central for me in this arena as it is less controlling that other processes. Perhaps tour rigor should be part of a broader sense of analyses under the more general heading of participatory processes. But perhaps when we look at Open Space, then we must use the same type of analyses as when we look at research approaches, like when we look at the difference on Double-blinded procedure done by WHR Rivers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._R._Rivers and earlier research procedures. A resent story on time to think, two weeks ago I facilitated a short 3 hour open space for a local branch of a political on their internal operations. There were also a lot of other things happening before and after the conversation part of the program, some football fans even disappeared during the open space to see the ongoing game. Personally I was happy that we had the lunch before the open space, I took some time for reflection and thinking about the possible dream future and topics that make us show up for the work. Then reflection and lunch was served, a lot of chatter during the soup lunch, then back to the introduction of principles … “Whatever happens is the only thing that could have, be prepared to be surprised!”… democracy of the feet / the law of mobility, the bugs and what they give us. Then brake for topics. … It was short time
Re: [OSList] Critical Testing
Hi John The next step would probably to identify some purpose in form of a research questions. What is it that we are looking for, so that we can start to think about what to measure. On Friday, 21 November 2014, John Baxter via OSList oslist@lists.openspacetech.org wrote: Hi Kari I like your intent, but I hear you when you say you fear it may be far too difficult. Do you have any thoughts on viable first steps? (Beyond the immediate step of sharing intent to see what comes of it!) I am thinking of what in startup language is 'minimum viable product'. Cheers *John Baxter* *Cocreation Consultant CoCreate Adelaide Facilitator* jsbaxter.com.au http://www.jsbaxter.com.au/ | CoCreateADL.com 0405 447 829 | @jsbaxter_ http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_ *Thank you to everyone who came, helped or spread the good word about City Grill!* *Summary and links: cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/ http://cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/* On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Kári Gunnarsson oslist@lists.openspacetech.org wrote: There is an invitation to some scientific rigor for our beloved technology. I propose we accept this invitation as a communal effort. An idea for a trial design would be to collect survey data where the nuances of the lived experiences would be teased out, survey data collected by cooperation among our grand Institutes and access given to unaffiliated researchers to collect some understandings and make their own conclusions in publishable science papers. It will probably be far too difficult, even impossible the task of building of such survey database along with the standardized questioners. And the time to build it was sometime long ago, we are long past out do time. There is urgency to this task. But do we have to do it? Well, is there a real need for this approach? I think we can host this endeavor, even try to find a design that allows for a Double-blinded rigor. My vision is that we design standardize and publish a survey that we then allow events to use to collect data for us, data that we then give to researchers where they can use it for their publishing needs. There is also the Pandora’s Box of issues and opportunities. It looks like it is a topic ripe for an open space, be prepared to be surprised. The new late majority folks are going for the theme of „participatory processes“ and request an overview over the landscape. It is the new gathering pole and open space is central for me in this arena as it is less controlling that other processes. Perhaps tour rigor should be part of a broader sense of analyses under the more general heading of participatory processes. But perhaps when we look at Open Space, then we must use the same type of analyses as when we look at research approaches, like when we look at the difference on Double-blinded procedure done by WHR Rivers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._R._Rivers and earlier research procedures. A resent story on time to think, two weeks ago I facilitated a short 3 hour open space for a local branch of a political on their internal operations. There were also a lot of other things happening before and after the conversation part of the program, some football fans even disappeared during the open space to see the ongoing game. Personally I was happy that we had the lunch before the open space, I took some time for reflection and thinking about the possible dream future and topics that make us show up for the work. Then reflection and lunch was served, a lot of chatter during the soup lunch, then back to the introduction of principles … “Whatever happens is the only thing that could have, be prepared to be surprised!”… democracy of the feet / the law of mobility, the bugs and what they give us. Then brake for topics. … It was short time and a lot of conflict of attention by the sponsors for the other parts of the day program, but it worked out well. The passion for work and the freedom of this technology opened for topics and responsibility that had previously been submerged by the tyranny of long speeches and lectures. Give a little time and then open up some space, works each time given the preconditions. In openness, Kári the group coach ___ 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 ___ 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
Re: [OSList] Critical Testing
HI I think you could look at work on capability/functionings… Sen and Agency… personal and Collective Bandura… as a starting point for a survey around participation in OS. Best Karl Karl Royle Head of Enterprise and Commercial Development Centre for Development and Applied Research in Education Faculty of Education Health and Wellbeing Walsall Campus Gorway Road WS1 3BD Skype Karlr61 Twitter @karlroyle Web: wlv.academia.edu/KarlRoyle Phone 01902323006 Mobile 07815416698 Certified Scrum Master [cid:1B3A35AB-029C-4EE8-AAF0-F016B4C8FE5B] From: Kári Gunnarsson via OSList oslist@lists.openspacetech.orgmailto:oslist@lists.openspacetech.org Reply-To: Kári Gunnarsson kari.gunnars...@simnet.ismailto:kari.gunnars...@simnet.is, World wide Open Space Technology email list oslist@lists.openspacetech.orgmailto:oslist@lists.openspacetech.org Date: Monday, 24 November 2014 11:23 To: John Baxter j...@jsbaxter.com.aumailto:j...@jsbaxter.com.au, World wide Open Space Technology email list oslist@lists.openspacetech.orgmailto:oslist@lists.openspacetech.org Subject: Re: [OSList] Critical Testing Hi John The next step would probably to identify some purpose in form of a research questions. What is it that we are looking for, so that we can start to think about what to measure. On Friday, 21 November 2014, John Baxter via OSList oslist@lists.openspacetech.orgmailto:oslist@lists.openspacetech.org wrote: Hi Kari I like your intent, but I hear you when you say you fear it may be far too difficult. Do you have any thoughts on viable first steps? (Beyond the immediate step of sharing intent to see what comes of it!) I am thinking of what in startup language is 'minimum viable product'. Cheers John Baxter Cocreation Consultant CoCreate Adelaide Facilitator jsbaxter.com.auhttp://www.jsbaxter.com.au/ | CoCreateADL.comhttp://CoCreateADL.com 0405 447 829 | @jsbaxter_http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_ Thank you to everyone who came, helped or spread the good word about City Grill! Summary and links: cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/http://cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/ On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Kári Gunnarsson oslist@lists.openspacetech.org wrote: There is an invitation to some scientific rigor for our beloved technology. I propose we accept this invitation as a communal effort. An idea for a trial design would be to collect survey data where the nuances of the lived experiences would be teased out, survey data collected by cooperation among our grand Institutes and access given to unaffiliated researchers to collect some understandings and make their own conclusions in publishable science papers. It will probably be far too difficult, even impossible the task of building of such survey database along with the standardized questioners. And the time to build it was sometime long ago, we are long past out do time. There is urgency to this task. But do we have to do it? Well, is there a real need for this approach? I think we can host this endeavor, even try to find a design that allows for a Double-blinded rigor. My vision is that we design standardize and publish a survey that we then allow events to use to collect data for us, data that we then give to researchers where they can use it for their publishing needs. There is also the Pandora’s Box of issues and opportunities. It looks like it is a topic ripe for an open space, be prepared to be surprised. The new late majority folks are going for the theme of „participatory processes“ and request an overview over the landscape. It is the new gathering pole and open space is central for me in this arena as it is less controlling that other processes. Perhaps tour rigor should be part of a broader sense of analyses under the more general heading of participatory processes. But perhaps when we look at Open Space, then we must use the same type of analyses as when we look at research approaches, like when we look at the difference on Double-blinded procedure done by WHR Rivers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._R._Rivers and earlier research procedures. A resent story on time to think, two weeks ago I facilitated a short 3 hour open space for a local branch of a political on their internal operations. There were also a lot of other things happening before and after the conversation part of the program, some football fans even disappeared during the open space to see the ongoing game. Personally I was happy that we had the lunch before the open space, I took some time for reflection and thinking about the possible dream future and topics that make us show up for the work. Then reflection and lunch was served, a lot of chatter during the soup lunch, then back to the introduction of principles … “Whatever happens is the only thing that could have, be prepared to be surprised!”… democracy of the feet / the law of mobility, the bugs and what they give us. Then brake for topics. … It was short time
[OSList] Critical Testing
There is an invitation to some scientific rigor for our beloved technology. I propose we accept this invitation as a communal effort. An idea for a trial design would be to collect survey data where the nuances of the lived experiences would be teased out, survey data collected by cooperation among our grand Institutes and access given to unaffiliated researchers to collect some understandings and make their own conclusions in publishable science papers. It will probably be far too difficult, even impossible the task of building of such survey database along with the standardized questioners. And the time to build it was sometime long ago, we are long past out do time. There is urgency to this task. But do we have to do it? Well, is there a real need for this approach? I think we can host this endeavor, even try to find a design that allows for a Double-blinded rigor. My vision is that we design standardize and publish a survey that we then allow events to use to collect data for us, data that we then give to researchers where they can use it for their publishing needs. There is also the Pandora’s Box of issues and opportunities. It looks like it is a topic ripe for an open space, be prepared to be surprised. The new late majority folks are going for the theme of „participatory processes“ and request an overview over the landscape. It is the new gathering pole and open space is central for me in this arena as it is less controlling that other processes. Perhaps tour rigor should be part of a broader sense of analyses under the more general heading of participatory processes. But perhaps when we look at Open Space, then we must use the same type of analyses as when we look at research approaches, like when we look at the difference on Double-blinded procedure done by WHR Rivers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._R._Rivers and earlier research procedures. A resent story on time to think, two weeks ago I facilitated a short 3 hour open space for a local branch of a political on their internal operations. There were also a lot of other things happening before and after the conversation part of the program, some football fans even disappeared during the open space to see the ongoing game. Personally I was happy that we had the lunch before the open space, I took some time for reflection and thinking about the possible dream future and topics that make us show up for the work. Then reflection and lunch was served, a lot of chatter during the soup lunch, then back to the introduction of principles … “Whatever happens is the only thing that could have, be prepared to be surprised!”… democracy of the feet / the law of mobility, the bugs and what they give us. Then brake for topics. … It was short time and a lot of conflict of attention by the sponsors for the other parts of the day program, but it worked out well. The passion for work and the freedom of this technology opened for topics and responsibility that had previously been submerged by the tyranny of long speeches and lectures. Give a little time and then open up some space, works each time given the preconditions. In openness, Kári the group coach ___ 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
Re: [OSList] Critical Testing
Hi Kári, Thank you for making your proposals. They are very interesting! Daniel On 11/20/14 6:34 AM, Kári Gunnarsson via OSList wrote: There is an invitation to some scientific rigor for our beloved technology. I propose we accept this invitation as a communal effort. An idea for a trial design would be to collect survey data where the nuances of the lived experiences would be teased out, survey data collected by cooperation among our grand Institutes and access given to unaffiliated researchers to collect some understandings and make their own conclusions in publishable science papers. It will probably be far too difficult, even impossible the task of building of such survey database along with the standardized questioners. And the time to build it was sometime long ago, we are long past out do time. There is urgency to this task. But do we have to do it? Well, is there a real need for this approach? I think we can host this endeavor, even try to find a design that allows for a Double-blinded rigor. My vision is that we design standardize and publish a survey that we then allow events to use to collect data for us, data that we then give to researchers where they can use it for their publishing needs. There is also the Pandora's Box of issues and opportunities. It looks like it is a topic ripe for an open space, be prepared to be surprised. The new late majority folks are going for the theme of participatory processes and request an overview over the landscape. It is the new gathering pole and open space is central for me in this arena as it is less controlling that other processes. Perhaps tour rigor should be part of a broader sense of analyses under the more general heading of participatory processes. But perhaps when we look at Open Space, then we must use the same type of analyses as when we look at research approaches, like when we look at the difference on Double-blinded procedure done by WHR Rivers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._R._Rivers and earlier research procedures. A resent story on time to think, two weeks ago I facilitated a short 3 hour open space for a local branch of a political on their internal operations. There were also a lot of other things happening before and after the conversation part of the program, some football fans even disappeared during the open space to see the ongoing game. Personally I was happy that we had the lunch before the open space, I took some time for reflection and thinking about the possible dream future and topics that make us show up for the work. Then reflection and lunch was served, a lot of chatter during the soup lunch, then back to the introduction of principles ... Whatever happens is the only thing that could have, be prepared to be surprised!... democracy of the feet / the law of mobility, the bugs and what they give us. Then brake for topics. ... It was short time and a lot of conflict of attention by the sponsors for the other parts of the day program, but it worked out well. The passion for work and the freedom of this technology opened for topics and responsibility that had previously been submerged by the tyranny of long speeches and lectures. Give a little time and then open up some space, works each time given the preconditions. In openness, Kári the group coach ___ 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 -- 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 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
Re: [OSList] Critical Testing
Hi Daniel You are welcome. My tiered English was not at it best in the first post, but I hope the spellchecker managed to make my writing readable. Well there is always the purpose of the occasion and how it plays out. I would now be interested how different participatory processes work for individuals and compare it to Belbin team roles or the personality psychology of the five scales: Cautious-inventive; Organized-careless; Energetic-reserved; Analytical-compassionate; and Confident-nervous. But what to measure for is of-course up to the purpose of our survey. What would be our next step in this topic offering. In openness, Kári the group coach On 20 November 2014 14:06, Daniel Mezick via OSList oslist@lists.openspacetech.org wrote: Hi Kári, Thank you for making your proposals. They are very interesting! Daniel On 11/20/14 6:34 AM, Kári Gunnarsson via OSList wrote: There is an invitation to some scientific rigor for our beloved technology. I propose we accept this invitation as a communal effort. An idea for a trial design would be to collect survey data where the nuances of the lived experiences would be teased out, survey data collected by cooperation among our grand Institutes and access given to unaffiliated researchers to collect some understandings and make their own conclusions in publishable science papers. It will probably be far too difficult, even impossible the task of building of such survey database along with the standardized questioners. And the time to build it was sometime long ago, we are long past out do time. There is urgency to this task. But do we have to do it? Well, is there a real need for this approach? I think we can host this endeavor, even try to find a design that allows for a Double-blinded rigor. My vision is that we design standardize and publish a survey that we then allow events to use to collect data for us, data that we then give to researchers where they can use it for their publishing needs. There is also the Pandora’s Box of issues and opportunities. It looks like it is a topic ripe for an open space, be prepared to be surprised. The new late majority folks are going for the theme of „participatory processes“ and request an overview over the landscape. It is the new gathering pole and open space is central for me in this arena as it is less controlling that other processes. Perhaps tour rigor should be part of a broader sense of analyses under the more general heading of participatory processes. But perhaps when we look at Open Space, then we must use the same type of analyses as when we look at research approaches, like when we look at the difference on Double-blinded procedure done by WHR Rivers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._R._Rivers and earlier research procedures. A resent story on time to think, two weeks ago I facilitated a short 3 hour open space for a local branch of a political on their internal operations. There were also a lot of other things happening before and after the conversation part of the program, some football fans even disappeared during the open space to see the ongoing game. Personally I was happy that we had the lunch before the open space, I took some time for reflection and thinking about the possible dream future and topics that make us show up for the work. Then reflection and lunch was served, a lot of chatter during the soup lunch, then back to the introduction of principles … “Whatever happens is the only thing that could have, be prepared to be surprised!”… democracy of the feet / the law of mobility, the bugs and what they give us. Then brake for topics. … It was short time and a lot of conflict of attention by the sponsors for the other parts of the day program, but it worked out well. The passion for work and the freedom of this technology opened for topics and responsibility that had previously been submerged by the tyranny of long speeches and lectures. Give a little time and then open up some space, works each time given the preconditions. In openness, Kári the group coach ___ 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 -- 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.
Re: [OSList] Critical Testing
Hi Kari I like your intent, but I hear you when you say you fear it may be far too difficult. Do you have any thoughts on viable first steps? (Beyond the immediate step of sharing intent to see what comes of it!) I am thinking of what in startup language is 'minimum viable product'. Cheers *John Baxter* *Cocreation Consultant CoCreate Adelaide Facilitator* jsbaxter.com.au http://www.jsbaxter.com.au/ | CoCreateADL.com 0405 447 829 | @jsbaxter_ http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_ *Thank you to everyone who came, helped or spread the good word about City Grill!* *Summary and links: cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/ http://cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/* On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Kári Gunnarsson oslist@lists.openspacetech.org wrote: There is an invitation to some scientific rigor for our beloved technology. I propose we accept this invitation as a communal effort. An idea for a trial design would be to collect survey data where the nuances of the lived experiences would be teased out, survey data collected by cooperation among our grand Institutes and access given to unaffiliated researchers to collect some understandings and make their own conclusions in publishable science papers. It will probably be far too difficult, even impossible the task of building of such survey database along with the standardized questioners. And the time to build it was sometime long ago, we are long past out do time. There is urgency to this task. But do we have to do it? Well, is there a real need for this approach? I think we can host this endeavor, even try to find a design that allows for a Double-blinded rigor. My vision is that we design standardize and publish a survey that we then allow events to use to collect data for us, data that we then give to researchers where they can use it for their publishing needs. There is also the Pandora’s Box of issues and opportunities. It looks like it is a topic ripe for an open space, be prepared to be surprised. The new late majority folks are going for the theme of „participatory processes“ and request an overview over the landscape. It is the new gathering pole and open space is central for me in this arena as it is less controlling that other processes. Perhaps tour rigor should be part of a broader sense of analyses under the more general heading of participatory processes. But perhaps when we look at Open Space, then we must use the same type of analyses as when we look at research approaches, like when we look at the difference on Double-blinded procedure done by WHR Rivers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._R._Rivers and earlier research procedures. A resent story on time to think, two weeks ago I facilitated a short 3 hour open space for a local branch of a political on their internal operations. There were also a lot of other things happening before and after the conversation part of the program, some football fans even disappeared during the open space to see the ongoing game. Personally I was happy that we had the lunch before the open space, I took some time for reflection and thinking about the possible dream future and topics that make us show up for the work. Then reflection and lunch was served, a lot of chatter during the soup lunch, then back to the introduction of principles … “Whatever happens is the only thing that could have, be prepared to be surprised!”… democracy of the feet / the law of mobility, the bugs and what they give us. Then brake for topics. … It was short time and a lot of conflict of attention by the sponsors for the other parts of the day program, but it worked out well. The passion for work and the freedom of this technology opened for topics and responsibility that had previously been submerged by the tyranny of long speeches and lectures. Give a little time and then open up some space, works each time given the preconditions. In openness, Kári the group coach ___ 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 ___ 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
[OSList] Critical Testing
There is an invitation to some scientific rigor for our beloved technology. I propose we accept this invitation as a communal effort. An idea for a trial design would be to collect survey data where the nuances of the lived experiences would be teased out, survey data collected by cooperation among our grand Institutes and access given to unaffiliated researchers to collect some understandings and make their own conclusions in publishable science papers. It will probably be far too difficult, even impossible the task of building of such survey database along with the standardized questioners. And the time to build it was sometime long ago, we are long past out do time. There is urgency to this task. But do we have to do it? Well, is there a real need for this approach? I think we can host this endeavor, even try to find a design that allows for a Double-blinded rigor. My vision is that we design standardize and publish a survey that we then allow events to use to collect data for us, data that we then give to researchers where they can use it for their publishing needs. There is also the Pandora’s Box of issues and opportunities. It looks like it is a topic ripe for an open space, be prepared to be surprised. The new late majority folks are going for the theme of „participatory processes“ and request an overview over the landscape. It is the new gathering pole and open space is central for me in this arena as it is less controlling that other processes. Perhaps tour rigor should be part of a broader sense of analyses under the more general heading of participatory processes. But perhaps when we look at Open Space, then we must use the same type of analyses as when we look at research approaches, like when we look at the difference on Double-blinded procedure done by WHR Rivers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._R._Rivers and earlier research procedures. A resent story on time to think, two weeks ago I facilitated a short 3 hour open space for a local branch of a political on their internal operations. There were also a lot of other things happening before and after the conversation part of the program, some football fans even disappeared during the open space to see the ongoing game. Personally I was happy that we had the lunch before the open space, I took some time for reflection and thinking about the possible dream future and topics that make us show up for the work. Then reflection and lunch was served, a lot of chatter during the soup lunch, then back to the introduction of principles … “Whatever happens is the only thing that could have, be prepared to be surprised!”… democracy of the feet / the law of mobility, the bugs and what they give us. Then brake for topics. … It was short time and a lot of conflict of attention by the sponsors for the other parts of the day program, but it worked out well. The passion for work and the freedom of this technology opened for topics and responsibility that had previously been submerged by the tyranny of long speeches and lectures. Give a little time and then open up some space, works each time given the preconditions. In openness, Kári the group coach ___ 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
Re: [OSList] Critical Testing
Hi Kári, Thank you for making your proposals. They are very interesting! Daniel On 11/20/14 6:34 AM, Kári Gunnarsson via OSList wrote: There is an invitation to some scientific rigor for our beloved technology. I propose we accept this invitation as a communal effort. An idea for a trial design would be to collect survey data where the nuances of the lived experiences would be teased out, survey data collected by cooperation among our grand Institutes and access given to unaffiliated researchers to collect some understandings and make their own conclusions in publishable science papers. It will probably be far too difficult, even impossible the task of building of such survey database along with the standardized questioners. And the time to build it was sometime long ago, we are long past out do time. There is urgency to this task. But do we have to do it? Well, is there a real need for this approach? I think we can host this endeavor, even try to find a design that allows for a Double-blinded rigor. My vision is that we design standardize and publish a survey that we then allow events to use to collect data for us, data that we then give to researchers where they can use it for their publishing needs. There is also the Pandora's Box of issues and opportunities. It looks like it is a topic ripe for an open space, be prepared to be surprised. The new late majority folks are going for the theme of participatory processes and request an overview over the landscape. It is the new gathering pole and open space is central for me in this arena as it is less controlling that other processes. Perhaps tour rigor should be part of a broader sense of analyses under the more general heading of participatory processes. But perhaps when we look at Open Space, then we must use the same type of analyses as when we look at research approaches, like when we look at the difference on Double-blinded procedure done by WHR Rivers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._R._Rivers and earlier research procedures. A resent story on time to think, two weeks ago I facilitated a short 3 hour open space for a local branch of a political on their internal operations. There were also a lot of other things happening before and after the conversation part of the program, some football fans even disappeared during the open space to see the ongoing game. Personally I was happy that we had the lunch before the open space, I took some time for reflection and thinking about the possible dream future and topics that make us show up for the work. Then reflection and lunch was served, a lot of chatter during the soup lunch, then back to the introduction of principles ... Whatever happens is the only thing that could have, be prepared to be surprised!... democracy of the feet / the law of mobility, the bugs and what they give us. Then brake for topics. ... It was short time and a lot of conflict of attention by the sponsors for the other parts of the day program, but it worked out well. The passion for work and the freedom of this technology opened for topics and responsibility that had previously been submerged by the tyranny of long speeches and lectures. Give a little time and then open up some space, works each time given the preconditions. In openness, Kári the group coach ___ 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 -- 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 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
Re: [OSList] Critical Testing
Hi Daniel You are welcome. My tiered English was not at it best in the first post, but I hope the spellchecker managed to make my writing readable. Well there is always the purpose of the occasion and how it plays out. I would now be interested how different participatory processes work for individuals and compare it to Belbin team roles or the personality psychology of the five scales: Cautious-inventive; Organized-careless; Energetic-reserved; Analytical-compassionate; and Confident-nervous. But what to measure for is of-course up to the purpose of our survey. What would be our next step in this topic offering. In openness, Kári the group coach On 20 November 2014 14:06, Daniel Mezick via OSList oslist@lists.openspacetech.org wrote: Hi Kári, Thank you for making your proposals. They are very interesting! Daniel On 11/20/14 6:34 AM, Kári Gunnarsson via OSList wrote: There is an invitation to some scientific rigor for our beloved technology. I propose we accept this invitation as a communal effort. An idea for a trial design would be to collect survey data where the nuances of the lived experiences would be teased out, survey data collected by cooperation among our grand Institutes and access given to unaffiliated researchers to collect some understandings and make their own conclusions in publishable science papers. It will probably be far too difficult, even impossible the task of building of such survey database along with the standardized questioners. And the time to build it was sometime long ago, we are long past out do time. There is urgency to this task. But do we have to do it? Well, is there a real need for this approach? I think we can host this endeavor, even try to find a design that allows for a Double-blinded rigor. My vision is that we design standardize and publish a survey that we then allow events to use to collect data for us, data that we then give to researchers where they can use it for their publishing needs. There is also the Pandora’s Box of issues and opportunities. It looks like it is a topic ripe for an open space, be prepared to be surprised. The new late majority folks are going for the theme of „participatory processes“ and request an overview over the landscape. It is the new gathering pole and open space is central for me in this arena as it is less controlling that other processes. Perhaps tour rigor should be part of a broader sense of analyses under the more general heading of participatory processes. But perhaps when we look at Open Space, then we must use the same type of analyses as when we look at research approaches, like when we look at the difference on Double-blinded procedure done by WHR Rivers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._R._Rivers and earlier research procedures. A resent story on time to think, two weeks ago I facilitated a short 3 hour open space for a local branch of a political on their internal operations. There were also a lot of other things happening before and after the conversation part of the program, some football fans even disappeared during the open space to see the ongoing game. Personally I was happy that we had the lunch before the open space, I took some time for reflection and thinking about the possible dream future and topics that make us show up for the work. Then reflection and lunch was served, a lot of chatter during the soup lunch, then back to the introduction of principles … “Whatever happens is the only thing that could have, be prepared to be surprised!”… democracy of the feet / the law of mobility, the bugs and what they give us. Then brake for topics. … It was short time and a lot of conflict of attention by the sponsors for the other parts of the day program, but it worked out well. The passion for work and the freedom of this technology opened for topics and responsibility that had previously been submerged by the tyranny of long speeches and lectures. Give a little time and then open up some space, works each time given the preconditions. In openness, Kári the group coach ___ 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 -- 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.
Re: [OSList] Critical Testing
Hi Kari I like your intent, but I hear you when you say you fear it may be far too difficult. Do you have any thoughts on viable first steps? (Beyond the immediate step of sharing intent to see what comes of it!) I am thinking of what in startup language is 'minimum viable product'. Cheers *John Baxter* *Cocreation Consultant CoCreate Adelaide Facilitator* jsbaxter.com.au http://www.jsbaxter.com.au/ | CoCreateADL.com 0405 447 829 | @jsbaxter_ http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_ *Thank you to everyone who came, helped or spread the good word about City Grill!* *Summary and links: cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/ http://cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/* On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Kári Gunnarsson oslist@lists.openspacetech.org wrote: There is an invitation to some scientific rigor for our beloved technology. I propose we accept this invitation as a communal effort. An idea for a trial design would be to collect survey data where the nuances of the lived experiences would be teased out, survey data collected by cooperation among our grand Institutes and access given to unaffiliated researchers to collect some understandings and make their own conclusions in publishable science papers. It will probably be far too difficult, even impossible the task of building of such survey database along with the standardized questioners. And the time to build it was sometime long ago, we are long past out do time. There is urgency to this task. But do we have to do it? Well, is there a real need for this approach? I think we can host this endeavor, even try to find a design that allows for a Double-blinded rigor. My vision is that we design standardize and publish a survey that we then allow events to use to collect data for us, data that we then give to researchers where they can use it for their publishing needs. There is also the Pandora’s Box of issues and opportunities. It looks like it is a topic ripe for an open space, be prepared to be surprised. The new late majority folks are going for the theme of „participatory processes“ and request an overview over the landscape. It is the new gathering pole and open space is central for me in this arena as it is less controlling that other processes. Perhaps tour rigor should be part of a broader sense of analyses under the more general heading of participatory processes. But perhaps when we look at Open Space, then we must use the same type of analyses as when we look at research approaches, like when we look at the difference on Double-blinded procedure done by WHR Rivers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._R._Rivers and earlier research procedures. A resent story on time to think, two weeks ago I facilitated a short 3 hour open space for a local branch of a political on their internal operations. There were also a lot of other things happening before and after the conversation part of the program, some football fans even disappeared during the open space to see the ongoing game. Personally I was happy that we had the lunch before the open space, I took some time for reflection and thinking about the possible dream future and topics that make us show up for the work. Then reflection and lunch was served, a lot of chatter during the soup lunch, then back to the introduction of principles … “Whatever happens is the only thing that could have, be prepared to be surprised!”… democracy of the feet / the law of mobility, the bugs and what they give us. Then brake for topics. … It was short time and a lot of conflict of attention by the sponsors for the other parts of the day program, but it worked out well. The passion for work and the freedom of this technology opened for topics and responsibility that had previously been submerged by the tyranny of long speeches and lectures. Give a little time and then open up some space, works each time given the preconditions. In openness, Kári the group coach ___ 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 ___ 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
[OSList] Critical Testing
There is an invitation to some scientific rigor for our beloved technology. I propose we accept this invitation as a communal effort. An idea for a trial design would be to collect survey data where the nuances of the lived experiences would be teased out, survey data collected by cooperation among our grand Institutes and access given to unaffiliated researchers to collect some understandings and make their own conclusions in publishable science papers. It will probably be far too difficult, even impossible the task of building of such survey database along with the standardized questioners. And the time to build it was sometime long ago, we are long past out do time. There is urgency to this task. But do we have to do it? Well, is there a real need for this approach? I think we can host this endeavor, even try to find a design that allows for a Double-blinded rigor. My vision is that we design standardize and publish a survey that we then allow events to use to collect data for us, data that we then give to researchers where they can use it for their publishing needs. There is also the Pandora’s Box of issues and opportunities. It looks like it is a topic ripe for an open space, be prepared to be surprised. The new late majority folks are going for the theme of „participatory processes“ and request an overview over the landscape. It is the new gathering pole and open space is central for me in this arena as it is less controlling that other processes. Perhaps tour rigor should be part of a broader sense of analyses under the more general heading of participatory processes. But perhaps when we look at Open Space, then we must use the same type of analyses as when we look at research approaches, like when we look at the difference on Double-blinded procedure done by WHR Rivers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._R._Rivers and earlier research procedures. A resent story on time to think, two weeks ago I facilitated a short 3 hour open space for a local branch of a political on their internal operations. There were also a lot of other things happening before and after the conversation part of the program, some football fans even disappeared during the open space to see the ongoing game. Personally I was happy that we had the lunch before the open space, I took some time for reflection and thinking about the possible dream future and topics that make us show up for the work. Then reflection and lunch was served, a lot of chatter during the soup lunch, then back to the introduction of principles … “Whatever happens is the only thing that could have, be prepared to be surprised!”… democracy of the feet / the law of mobility, the bugs and what they give us. Then brake for topics. … It was short time and a lot of conflict of attention by the sponsors for the other parts of the day program, but it worked out well. The passion for work and the freedom of this technology opened for topics and responsibility that had previously been submerged by the tyranny of long speeches and lectures. Give a little time and then open up some space, works each time given the preconditions. In openness, Kári the group coach ___ 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
Re: [OSList] Critical Testing
Hi Kári, Thank you for making your proposals. They are very interesting! Daniel On 11/20/14 6:34 AM, Kári Gunnarsson via OSList wrote: There is an invitation to some scientific rigor for our beloved technology. I propose we accept this invitation as a communal effort. An idea for a trial design would be to collect survey data where the nuances of the lived experiences would be teased out, survey data collected by cooperation among our grand Institutes and access given to unaffiliated researchers to collect some understandings and make their own conclusions in publishable science papers. It will probably be far too difficult, even impossible the task of building of such survey database along with the standardized questioners. And the time to build it was sometime long ago, we are long past out do time. There is urgency to this task. But do we have to do it? Well, is there a real need for this approach? I think we can host this endeavor, even try to find a design that allows for a Double-blinded rigor. My vision is that we design standardize and publish a survey that we then allow events to use to collect data for us, data that we then give to researchers where they can use it for their publishing needs. There is also the Pandora's Box of issues and opportunities. It looks like it is a topic ripe for an open space, be prepared to be surprised. The new late majority folks are going for the theme of participatory processes and request an overview over the landscape. It is the new gathering pole and open space is central for me in this arena as it is less controlling that other processes. Perhaps tour rigor should be part of a broader sense of analyses under the more general heading of participatory processes. But perhaps when we look at Open Space, then we must use the same type of analyses as when we look at research approaches, like when we look at the difference on Double-blinded procedure done by WHR Rivers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._R._Rivers and earlier research procedures. A resent story on time to think, two weeks ago I facilitated a short 3 hour open space for a local branch of a political on their internal operations. There were also a lot of other things happening before and after the conversation part of the program, some football fans even disappeared during the open space to see the ongoing game. Personally I was happy that we had the lunch before the open space, I took some time for reflection and thinking about the possible dream future and topics that make us show up for the work. Then reflection and lunch was served, a lot of chatter during the soup lunch, then back to the introduction of principles ... Whatever happens is the only thing that could have, be prepared to be surprised!... democracy of the feet / the law of mobility, the bugs and what they give us. Then brake for topics. ... It was short time and a lot of conflict of attention by the sponsors for the other parts of the day program, but it worked out well. The passion for work and the freedom of this technology opened for topics and responsibility that had previously been submerged by the tyranny of long speeches and lectures. Give a little time and then open up some space, works each time given the preconditions. In openness, Kári the group coach ___ 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 -- 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 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
Re: [OSList] Critical Testing
Hi Daniel You are welcome. My tiered English was not at it best in the first post, but I hope the spellchecker managed to make my writing readable. Well there is always the purpose of the occasion and how it plays out. I would now be interested how different participatory processes work for individuals and compare it to Belbin team roles or the personality psychology of the five scales: Cautious-inventive; Organized-careless; Energetic-reserved; Analytical-compassionate; and Confident-nervous. But what to measure for is of-course up to the purpose of our survey. What would be our next step in this topic offering. In openness, Kári the group coach On 20 November 2014 14:06, Daniel Mezick via OSList oslist@lists.openspacetech.org wrote: Hi Kári, Thank you for making your proposals. They are very interesting! Daniel On 11/20/14 6:34 AM, Kári Gunnarsson via OSList wrote: There is an invitation to some scientific rigor for our beloved technology. I propose we accept this invitation as a communal effort. An idea for a trial design would be to collect survey data where the nuances of the lived experiences would be teased out, survey data collected by cooperation among our grand Institutes and access given to unaffiliated researchers to collect some understandings and make their own conclusions in publishable science papers. It will probably be far too difficult, even impossible the task of building of such survey database along with the standardized questioners. And the time to build it was sometime long ago, we are long past out do time. There is urgency to this task. But do we have to do it? Well, is there a real need for this approach? I think we can host this endeavor, even try to find a design that allows for a Double-blinded rigor. My vision is that we design standardize and publish a survey that we then allow events to use to collect data for us, data that we then give to researchers where they can use it for their publishing needs. There is also the Pandora’s Box of issues and opportunities. It looks like it is a topic ripe for an open space, be prepared to be surprised. The new late majority folks are going for the theme of „participatory processes“ and request an overview over the landscape. It is the new gathering pole and open space is central for me in this arena as it is less controlling that other processes. Perhaps tour rigor should be part of a broader sense of analyses under the more general heading of participatory processes. But perhaps when we look at Open Space, then we must use the same type of analyses as when we look at research approaches, like when we look at the difference on Double-blinded procedure done by WHR Rivers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._R._Rivers and earlier research procedures. A resent story on time to think, two weeks ago I facilitated a short 3 hour open space for a local branch of a political on their internal operations. There were also a lot of other things happening before and after the conversation part of the program, some football fans even disappeared during the open space to see the ongoing game. Personally I was happy that we had the lunch before the open space, I took some time for reflection and thinking about the possible dream future and topics that make us show up for the work. Then reflection and lunch was served, a lot of chatter during the soup lunch, then back to the introduction of principles … “Whatever happens is the only thing that could have, be prepared to be surprised!”… democracy of the feet / the law of mobility, the bugs and what they give us. Then brake for topics. … It was short time and a lot of conflict of attention by the sponsors for the other parts of the day program, but it worked out well. The passion for work and the freedom of this technology opened for topics and responsibility that had previously been submerged by the tyranny of long speeches and lectures. Give a little time and then open up some space, works each time given the preconditions. In openness, Kári the group coach ___ 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 -- 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.
Re: [OSList] Critical Testing
Hi Kari I like your intent, but I hear you when you say you fear it may be far too difficult. Do you have any thoughts on viable first steps? (Beyond the immediate step of sharing intent to see what comes of it!) I am thinking of what in startup language is 'minimum viable product'. Cheers *John Baxter* *Cocreation Consultant CoCreate Adelaide Facilitator* jsbaxter.com.au http://www.jsbaxter.com.au/ | CoCreateADL.com 0405 447 829 | @jsbaxter_ http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_ *Thank you to everyone who came, helped or spread the good word about City Grill!* *Summary and links: cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/ http://cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/* On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Kári Gunnarsson oslist@lists.openspacetech.org wrote: There is an invitation to some scientific rigor for our beloved technology. I propose we accept this invitation as a communal effort. An idea for a trial design would be to collect survey data where the nuances of the lived experiences would be teased out, survey data collected by cooperation among our grand Institutes and access given to unaffiliated researchers to collect some understandings and make their own conclusions in publishable science papers. It will probably be far too difficult, even impossible the task of building of such survey database along with the standardized questioners. And the time to build it was sometime long ago, we are long past out do time. There is urgency to this task. But do we have to do it? Well, is there a real need for this approach? I think we can host this endeavor, even try to find a design that allows for a Double-blinded rigor. My vision is that we design standardize and publish a survey that we then allow events to use to collect data for us, data that we then give to researchers where they can use it for their publishing needs. There is also the Pandora’s Box of issues and opportunities. It looks like it is a topic ripe for an open space, be prepared to be surprised. The new late majority folks are going for the theme of „participatory processes“ and request an overview over the landscape. It is the new gathering pole and open space is central for me in this arena as it is less controlling that other processes. Perhaps tour rigor should be part of a broader sense of analyses under the more general heading of participatory processes. But perhaps when we look at Open Space, then we must use the same type of analyses as when we look at research approaches, like when we look at the difference on Double-blinded procedure done by WHR Rivers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._R._Rivers and earlier research procedures. A resent story on time to think, two weeks ago I facilitated a short 3 hour open space for a local branch of a political on their internal operations. There were also a lot of other things happening before and after the conversation part of the program, some football fans even disappeared during the open space to see the ongoing game. Personally I was happy that we had the lunch before the open space, I took some time for reflection and thinking about the possible dream future and topics that make us show up for the work. Then reflection and lunch was served, a lot of chatter during the soup lunch, then back to the introduction of principles … “Whatever happens is the only thing that could have, be prepared to be surprised!”… democracy of the feet / the law of mobility, the bugs and what they give us. Then brake for topics. … It was short time and a lot of conflict of attention by the sponsors for the other parts of the day program, but it worked out well. The passion for work and the freedom of this technology opened for topics and responsibility that had previously been submerged by the tyranny of long speeches and lectures. Give a little time and then open up some space, works each time given the preconditions. In openness, Kári the group coach ___ 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 ___ 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
