Re: [OSList] action reflection learning track for leaders who have experienced OST in their organizations

[Thomas Perret via OSList]

Dear Birgitt,

Thank you! Also for the illustrating example. 

Kind regards,
Thomas

___

All is possible together

> On 23 Jul 2019, at 1.09, Birgitt Williams via OSList 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hi Thomas,
> you asked about responsibility and accountability and my perspective 
> regarding the two.
> 
> I understand that the distinction between these two is not made in some 
> cultures/countries, with both being combined  as 'responsibility'. In my 
> perspective, this is not as helpful as making a distinction between the 
> two...the words and associated concepts.
> 
> I can be responsible for rolling out a new project inclusive of the 
> communications plan, engagement of people to work on the project, and 
> positioning the project as an important priority. This can be written in my 
> contract, defining my role.
> 
> But how well did I do this, how am I holding myself accountable for doing the 
> job, well, and within the spirit of intent of the job? Do I hold myself 
> accountable to myself? Am I accountable to a team? Am I accountable via a 
> hierarchy?  This is the other side of the coin of externally viewed 
> performance management. I want my contracts to have an agreement about how 
> accountability is to be carried out.
> 
> Let me relate this back to an OST meeting. The OST meeting is complete, a 
> closing circle has taken place, people are invited to come the following day 
> for a different process to formulate priorities, themes, initial plan of 
> action. Champions for the action items are identified, maybe self identified. 
> Agreement is reached that the champions for the actions will go ahead with 
> what has been agreed upon, and the next meeting of the 'circle of the whole' 
> is scheduled for three months into the future. It is stated that at that 
> time, the champions will take responsibility for reporting on progress and 
> agree that they are accountable to the circle of the whole for 1. progress or 
> 2. being able to state clearly what the barriers are that get in the way of 
> progress.
> 
> Birgitt
> 
> Birgitt Williams
> Supporting Next Level Leadership "Leading So People Will Lead"
> Author, Senior Consultant, President Dalar International Consultancy, Inc
> Founder Genuine Contact Program
> Co-owner Genuine Contact Group, LLC
> Founder Extraordinary Leadership Network
> 
> Learn with us for your skill and capacity development for leading and working 
> in the new leadership paradigm "Leading So People Will Lead"
> 
> Upcoming learning module: Working with Open Space Technology. Three different 
> learning options to learn a process for facilitating meetings that engage the 
> people. Self-Study + One-to-One Mentoring + Mentoring Circle; Self-Study + 
> Real-Time Workshop + Mentoring Circle; and Self-Study + Real-Time Workshop + 
> One-to-One Mentoring + Mentoring Circle with real time workshop dates three 
> consecutive Fridays from 9am to 12:30pm EST on October 18, 25, and November 
> 1st.
> 
> PO Box 19373, Raleigh, NC, USA 27613
> Phone: 01-919-522-7750
> 
> 
>> On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 6:39 AM Thomas Perret via OSList 
>>  wrote:
>> Birgitt,
>> 
>> Thank you for your reply and your thoughts. The conversation format worked 
>> smoothly for me, even added a level of depth I would say.
>> 
>> I am fascinated by accountability/responsibility and how things shift with 
>> it. 
>> 
>> One question came up there: I’m not sure about the difference between 
>> accountability and responsibility – will you tell me how you see it?
>> 
>> Kind regards,
>> Thomas
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>> On 21 Jul 2019, at 3.33, Birgitt Williams via OSList 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Dear Thomas,
>>> Thank you for your thoughtful reply. 
>>> 
>>> You raised the following points/question and I am responding to this "One 
>>> thing came to mind from a managers perspective. I think of a challenge 
>>> regarding legal responsibility for the assets. If it’s my company, I take 
>>> the risk by myself. If I am hired as manager for a company owned by someone 
>>> else and thinking about self-management, I feel unsure about giving away 
>>> decision-making power while remaining legally responsible. I would like to 
>>> have the owners in on that conversation."
>>> 
>>> Your concern about accountability for assets is similar to the dominant 
>>> concern that comes up for senior leaders. It is always the senior leader 
>>> that is held accountable for the performance of the organization and thus 
>>> the concern raised is inclusive of the concern about assets...it is about 
>>> the reality that their is personal accountability for performance. 
>>> 
>>> Following, I am writing as though we were having a conversation. I am not 
>>> certain how this will come across in email format. I invite you to imagine 
>>> that these are my replies within a conversation.
>>> 
>>> The senior leader makes strategic choices, with or without the involvement 
>>> of the owners of the company, or in the case of the non-profit, with or 
>>> without the 

Re: [OSList] action reflection learning track for leaders who have experienced OST in their organizations

[R Chaffe via OSList]

Thanks Birgitt,
I think it is called maturity- that is the process of redefining the 
boundaries.  The “sigmoid “ curve or organisational performance show us that as 
we accelerate and broaden our “givens” the organisation needs to invigorate 
itself lest it slide into a comfort zone chocked by its own inability to 
explore the “risky” areas of newness.  “Who stole my cheese?” Is a short 
exploration of some options open to those who have “plenty of cheese”.  Toyota 
seem to have done a good job in this area since the 1950s.

“There is always something”.  The wonder of actively working in complex systems.

Regards
Rob

> On 23 Jul 2019, at 9:59 am, Birgitt Williams  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Rob,
> I appreciate your emphasis on the 'givens' for an OST meeting. I was thinking 
> about your wisdom of the step by step process that is needed in an 
> organization. This relates to my experience of helping the organization 
> practice and develop its capacity for working with OST...and as you refer to, 
> as a way of life.
> 
> I wish to add one observation. The original space that is open continues to 
> emerge. The 'givens' need to be updated regularly including asking 'is this 
> really a given?'. The givens thus evolve, as does the capacity for working in 
> a culture of leadership...and leading a culture of leadership.
> 
> Birgitt
> 
> 
> 
> Birgitt Williams
> Supporting Next Level Leadership "Leading So People Will Lead"
> Author, Senior Consultant, President Dalar International Consultancy, Inc
> Founder Genuine Contact Program
> Co-owner Genuine Contact Group, LLC
> Founder Extraordinary Leadership Network
> 
> Learn with us for your skill and capacity development for leading and working 
> in the new leadership paradigm "Leading So People Will Lead"
> 
> Upcoming learning module: Working with Open Space Technology. Three different 
> learning options to learn a process for facilitating meetings that engage the 
> people. Self-Study + One-to-One Mentoring + Mentoring Circle; Self-Study + 
> Real-Time Workshop + Mentoring Circle; and Self-Study + Real-Time Workshop + 
> One-to-One Mentoring + Mentoring Circle with real time workshop dates three 
> consecutive Fridays from 9am to 12:30pm EST on October 18, 25, and November 
> 1st.
> 
> PO Box 19373, Raleigh, NC, USA 27613
> Phone: 01-919-522-7750
> 
> 
>> On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 10:20 PM R Chaffe  wrote:
>> Brigitte and Thomas,
>> In negotiations leading to the opening of space it is vital that the 
>> “givens” or “boundaries” are defined based on the authority of the manager 
>> to set things within their control/responsibility.  Failing to do this 
>> results in a disaster for all involved.
>> 
>> The governance issues arise when people step outside their level or area of 
>> responsibility and accountability.
>> 
>> “We” do this all the time as we train our children to take responsibility 
>> for getting tasks done.  Toddlers “wash up” the wooden and plastic toys and 
>> step by step they graduate to managing the fine Chrystal and Chinaware.   
>> 
>> Enterprises are the same they need to learn how to work with Open Space so 
>> that at all times all the participants are aware of the level of 
>> delegation/responsibility they have and are accountable for.   It is a step 
>> by step process not an event, it moves from a process to a “way of being” by 
>> the way the outputs are implemented.
>> 
>> When every person takes responsibility for their share of governance and 
>> action then we have the whole organism working together for success.  The 
>> best part is that the “local networks” are primed to support collaboration 
>> and synergy based on success for all.
>> 
>> Regards
>> Rob
>> 
>>> On 21 Jul 2019, at 10:33 am, Birgitt Williams via OSList 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Dear Thomas,
>>> Thank you for your thoughtful reply. 
>>> 
>>> You raised the following points/question and I am responding to this "One 
>>> thing came to mind from a managers perspective. I think of a challenge 
>>> regarding legal responsibility for the assets. If it’s my company, I take 
>>> the risk by myself. If I am hired as manager for a company owned by someone 
>>> else and thinking about self-management, I feel unsure about giving away 
>>> decision-making power while remaining legally responsible. I would like to 
>>> have the owners in on that conversation."
>>> 
>>> Your concern about accountability for assets is similar to the dominant 
>>> concern that comes up for senior leaders. It is always the senior leader 
>>> that is held accountable for the performance of the organization and thus 
>>> the concern raised is inclusive of the concern about assets...it is about 
>>> the reality that their is personal accountability for performance. 
>>> 
>>> Following, I am writing as though we were having a conversation. I am not 
>>> certain how this will come across in email format. I invite you to imagine 
>>> that these are my replies within a conversation.
>>> 
>>> The senior 

Re: [OSList] action reflection learning track for leaders who have experienced OST in their organizations

[Birgitt Williams via OSList]

Hi Rob,
I appreciate your emphasis on the 'givens' for an OST meeting. I was
thinking about your wisdom of the step by step process that is needed in an
organization. This relates to my experience of helping the organization
practice and develop its capacity for working with OST...and as you refer
to, as a way of life.

I wish to add one observation. The original space that is open continues to
emerge. The 'givens' need to be updated regularly including asking 'is this
really a given?'. The givens thus evolve, as does the capacity for working
in a culture of leadership...and leading a culture of leadership.

Birgitt



*Birgitt Williams*
*Supporting Next Level Leadership "Leading So People Will Lead"*
Author, Senior Consultant, President Dalar International Consultancy, Inc

Founder Genuine Contact Program

Co-owner Genuine Contact Group, LLC

Founder Extraordinary Leadership Network


*Learn with us for your skill and capacity development for leading and
working in the new leadership paradigm "Leading So People Will Lead"*

Upcoming learning module: Working with Open Space Technology
.
Three different learning options to learn a process for facilitating
meetings that engage the people. Self-Study + One-to-One Mentoring +
Mentoring Circle; Self-Study + Real-Time Workshop + Mentoring Circle;
and Self-Study
+ Real-Time Workshop + One-to-One Mentoring + Mentoring Circle with real
time workshop dates three consecutive Fridays from 9am to 12:30pm EST on
October 18, 25, and November 1st.

PO Box 19373, Raleigh, NC, USA 27613
Phone: 01-919-522-7750


On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 10:20 PM R Chaffe  wrote:

> Brigitte and Thomas,
> In negotiations leading to the opening of space it is vital that the
> “givens” or “boundaries” are defined based on the authority of the manager
> to set things within their control/responsibility.  Failing to do this
> results in a disaster for all involved.
>
> The governance issues arise when people step outside their level or area
> of responsibility and accountability.
>
> “We” do this all the time as we train our children to take responsibility
> for getting tasks done.  Toddlers “wash up” the wooden and plastic toys and
> step by step they graduate to managing the fine Chrystal and Chinaware.
>
> Enterprises are the same they need to learn how to work with Open Space so
> that at all times all the participants are aware of the level of
> delegation/responsibility they have and are accountable for.   It is a step
> by step process not an event, it moves from a process to a “way of being”
> by the way the outputs are implemented.
>
> When every person takes responsibility for their share of governance and
> action then we have the whole organism working together for success.  The
> best part is that the “local networks” are primed to support collaboration
> and synergy based on success for all.
>
> Regards
> Rob
>
> On 21 Jul 2019, at 10:33 am, Birgitt Williams via OSList <
> oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:
>
> Dear Thomas,
> Thank you for your thoughtful reply.
>
> You raised the following points/question and I am responding to this "One
> thing came to mind from a managers perspective. I think of a challenge
> regarding legal responsibility for the assets. If it’s my company, I take
> the risk by myself. If I am hired as manager for a company owned by someone
> else and thinking about self-management, I feel unsure about giving away
> decision-making power while remaining legally responsible. I would like to
> have the owners in on that conversation."
>
> Your concern about accountability for assets is similar to the dominant
> concern that comes up for senior leaders. It is always the senior leader
> that is held accountable for the performance of the organization and thus
> the concern raised is inclusive of the concern about assets...it is about
> the reality that their is personal accountability for performance.
>
> Following, I am writing as though we were having a conversation. I am not
> certain how this will come across in email format. I invite you to imagine
> that these are my replies within a conversation.
>
> The senior leader makes strategic choices, with or without the involvement
> of the owners of the company, or in the case of the non-profit, with or
> without the Board of Directors.  If including the Board of Directors or
> owners, I suggest presenting this as a strategy that you are recommending
> to accomplish a particular business goal ie: increasing employee
> engagement, increasing the health and well being of the organization, or
> other.
>
> There is wisdom in keeping authority linked with responsibility and
> accountability. In my experience, when the question of sharing decision
> making comes up, it is 

Re: [OSList] action reflection learning track for leaders who have experienced OST in their organizations

[Birgitt Williams via OSList]

Hi Thomas,
you asked about responsibility and accountability and my perspective
regarding the two.

I understand that the distinction between these two is not made in some
cultures/countries, with both being combined  as 'responsibility'. In my
perspective, this is not as helpful as making a distinction between the
two...the words and associated concepts.

I can be responsible for rolling out a new project inclusive of the
communications plan, engagement of people to work on the project, and
positioning the project as an important priority. This can be written in my
contract, defining my role.

But how well did I do this, how am I holding myself accountable for doing
the job, well, and within the spirit of intent of the job? Do I hold myself
accountable to myself? Am I accountable to a team? Am I accountable via a
hierarchy?  This is the other side of the coin of externally viewed
performance management. I want my contracts to have an agreement about how
accountability is to be carried out.

Let me relate this back to an OST meeting. The OST meeting is complete, a
closing circle has taken place, people are invited to come the following
day for a different process to formulate priorities, themes, initial plan
of action. Champions for the action items are identified, maybe self
identified. Agreement is reached that the champions for the actions will go
ahead with what has been agreed upon, and the next meeting of the 'circle
of the whole' is scheduled for three months into the future. It is stated
that at that time, the champions will take responsibility for reporting on
progress and agree that they are accountable to the circle of the whole for
1. progress or 2. being able to state clearly what the barriers are that
get in the way of progress.

Birgitt

*Birgitt Williams*
*Supporting Next Level Leadership "Leading So People Will Lead"*
Author, Senior Consultant, President Dalar International Consultancy, Inc

Founder Genuine Contact Program

Co-owner Genuine Contact Group, LLC

Founder Extraordinary Leadership Network


*Learn with us for your skill and capacity development for leading and
working in the new leadership paradigm "Leading So People Will Lead"*

Upcoming learning module: Working with Open Space Technology
.
Three different learning options to learn a process for facilitating
meetings that engage the people. Self-Study + One-to-One Mentoring +
Mentoring Circle; Self-Study + Real-Time Workshop + Mentoring Circle;
and Self-Study
+ Real-Time Workshop + One-to-One Mentoring + Mentoring Circle with real
time workshop dates three consecutive Fridays from 9am to 12:30pm EST on
October 18, 25, and November 1st.

PO Box 19373, Raleigh, NC, USA 27613
Phone: 01-919-522-7750


On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 6:39 AM Thomas Perret via OSList <
oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:

> Birgitt,
>
> Thank you for your reply and your thoughts. The conversation format worked
> smoothly for me, even added a level of depth I would say.
>
> I am fascinated by accountability/responsibility and how things shift with
> it.
>
> One question came up there: I’m not sure about the difference between
> accountability and responsibility – will you tell me how you see it?
>
> Kind regards,
> Thomas
>
>
>
> On 21 Jul 2019, at 3.33, Birgitt Williams via OSList <
> oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:
>
> Dear Thomas,
> Thank you for your thoughtful reply.
>
> You raised the following points/question and I am responding to this "One
> thing came to mind from a managers perspective. I think of a challenge
> regarding legal responsibility for the assets. If it’s my company, I take
> the risk by myself. If I am hired as manager for a company owned by someone
> else and thinking about self-management, I feel unsure about giving away
> decision-making power while remaining legally responsible. I would like to
> have the owners in on that conversation."
>
> Your concern about accountability for assets is similar to the dominant
> concern that comes up for senior leaders. It is always the senior leader
> that is held accountable for the performance of the organization and thus
> the concern raised is inclusive of the concern about assets...it is about
> the reality that their is personal accountability for performance.
>
> Following, I am writing as though we were having a conversation. I am not
> certain how this will come across in email format. I invite you to imagine
> that these are my replies within a conversation.
>
> The senior leader makes strategic choices, with or without the involvement
> of the owners of the company, or in the case of the non-profit, with or
> without the Board of Directors.  If including the Board of Directors or
> owners, I suggest presenting this as a strategy 

Re: [OSList] action reflection learning track for leaders who have experienced OST in their organizations

[Thomas Perret via OSList]

Thanks Paul!

I would love to hear managers and “normal-workers-turned-managers” talk about 
their experiences and milestones in overcoming. 

Kind regards,
Thomas


> On 21 Jul 2019, at 5.19, R Chaffe via OSList  
> wrote:
> 
> Brigitte and Thomas,
> In negotiations leading to the opening of space it is vital that the “givens” 
> or “boundaries” are defined based on the authority of the manager to set 
> things within their control/responsibility.  Failing to do this results in a 
> disaster for all involved.
> 
> The governance issues arise when people step outside their level or area of 
> responsibility and accountability.
> 
> “We” do this all the time as we train our children to take responsibility for 
> getting tasks done.  Toddlers “wash up” the wooden and plastic toys and step 
> by step they graduate to managing the fine Chrystal and Chinaware.   
> 
> Enterprises are the same they need to learn how to work with Open Space so 
> that at all times all the participants are aware of the level of 
> delegation/responsibility they have and are accountable for.   It is a step 
> by step process not an event, it moves from a process to a “way of being” by 
> the way the outputs are implemented.
> 
> When every person takes responsibility for their share of governance and 
> action then we have the whole organism working together for success.  The 
> best part is that the “local networks” are primed to support collaboration 
> and synergy based on success for all.
> 
> Regards
> Rob
> 
> On 21 Jul 2019, at 10:33 am, Birgitt Williams via OSList 
> mailto:oslist@lists.openspacetech.org>> 
> wrote:
> 
>> Dear Thomas,
>> Thank you for your thoughtful reply. 
>> 
>> You raised the following points/question and I am responding to this "One 
>> thing came to mind from a managers perspective. I think of a challenge 
>> regarding legal responsibility for the assets. If it’s my company, I take 
>> the risk by myself. If I am hired as manager for a company owned by someone 
>> else and thinking about self-management, I feel unsure about giving away 
>> decision-making power while remaining legally responsible. I would like to 
>> have the owners in on that conversation."
>> 
>> Your concern about accountability for assets is similar to the dominant 
>> concern that comes up for senior leaders. It is always the senior leader 
>> that is held accountable for the performance of the organization and thus 
>> the concern raised is inclusive of the concern about assets...it is about 
>> the reality that their is personal accountability for performance. 
>> 
>> Following, I am writing as though we were having a conversation. I am not 
>> certain how this will come across in email format. I invite you to imagine 
>> that these are my replies within a conversation.
>> 
>> The senior leader makes strategic choices, with or without the involvement 
>> of the owners of the company, or in the case of the non-profit, with or 
>> without the Board of Directors.  If including the Board of Directors or 
>> owners, I suggest presenting this as a strategy that you are recommending to 
>> accomplish a particular business goal ie: increasing employee engagement, 
>> increasing the health and well being of the organization, or other. 
>> 
>> There is wisdom in keeping authority linked with responsibility and 
>> accountability. In my experience, when the question of sharing decision 
>> making comes up, it is helpful to consider this triumvirate of 
>> authority/responsibility/accountability including whether the authority and 
>> accountability can be linked appropriately with whoever already has 
>> responsibility for various aspects of the organization. It starts to make 
>> sense to distribute the authority and accountability to achieve alignment 
>> with responsibility. In our geographic area we have a wisdom that says 'it 
>> is a fools errand to take on responsibility if you don't have the authority 
>> to go with it to get the job done'.
>> 
>> Okay, if we are this far along in the discussion and the thinking/reflecting 
>> about this topic, you may be saying "Birgitt, I get all of that. Yet i still 
>> feel nervous about sharing the decision making and what we have discussed 
>> doesn't really help me".
>> 
>> I would then introduce the concept of "givens" to you. It is the job of the 
>> senior leader to determine the "givens" or non-negotiables that the senior 
>> leader has decided upon. Working at the "givens" is one side of the task of 
>> figuring out how much freedom you are giving the people within which to be 
>> creative, innovative, and make decisions. As one Director said to me "in my 
>> decades of career, getting honest with myself about the givens has been the 
>> hardest work I have ever done. And now that it is done, and the givens are 
>> communicated, and everyone is figuring out what they now have authority and 
>> freedom for, this is amazing. My only regret is that I didn't do this sooner 
>> in my 

Re: [OSList] action reflection learning track for leaders who have experienced OST in their organizations

[Thomas Perret via OSList]

Birgitt,

Thank you for your reply and your thoughts. The conversation format worked 
smoothly for me, even added a level of depth I would say.

I am fascinated by accountability/responsibility and how things shift with it. 

One question came up there: I’m not sure about the difference between 
accountability and responsibility – will you tell me how you see it?

Kind regards,
Thomas

 

> On 21 Jul 2019, at 3.33, Birgitt Williams via OSList 
>  wrote:
> 
> Dear Thomas,
> Thank you for your thoughtful reply. 
> 
> You raised the following points/question and I am responding to this "One 
> thing came to mind from a managers perspective. I think of a challenge 
> regarding legal responsibility for the assets. If it’s my company, I take the 
> risk by myself. If I am hired as manager for a company owned by someone else 
> and thinking about self-management, I feel unsure about giving away 
> decision-making power while remaining legally responsible. I would like to 
> have the owners in on that conversation."
> 
> Your concern about accountability for assets is similar to the dominant 
> concern that comes up for senior leaders. It is always the senior leader that 
> is held accountable for the performance of the organization and thus the 
> concern raised is inclusive of the concern about assets...it is about the 
> reality that their is personal accountability for performance. 
> 
> Following, I am writing as though we were having a conversation. I am not 
> certain how this will come across in email format. I invite you to imagine 
> that these are my replies within a conversation.
> 
> The senior leader makes strategic choices, with or without the involvement of 
> the owners of the company, or in the case of the non-profit, with or without 
> the Board of Directors.  If including the Board of Directors or owners, I 
> suggest presenting this as a strategy that you are recommending to accomplish 
> a particular business goal ie: increasing employee engagement, increasing the 
> health and well being of the organization, or other. 
> 
> There is wisdom in keeping authority linked with responsibility and 
> accountability. In my experience, when the question of sharing decision 
> making comes up, it is helpful to consider this triumvirate of 
> authority/responsibility/accountability including whether the authority and 
> accountability can be linked appropriately with whoever already has 
> responsibility for various aspects of the organization. It starts to make 
> sense to distribute the authority and accountability to achieve alignment 
> with responsibility. In our geographic area we have a wisdom that says 'it is 
> a fools errand to take on responsibility if you don't have the authority to 
> go with it to get the job done'.
> 
> Okay, if we are this far along in the discussion and the thinking/reflecting 
> about this topic, you may be saying "Birgitt, I get all of that. Yet i still 
> feel nervous about sharing the decision making and what we have discussed 
> doesn't really help me".
> 
> I would then introduce the concept of "givens" to you. It is the job of the 
> senior leader to determine the "givens" or non-negotiables that the senior 
> leader has decided upon. Working at the "givens" is one side of the task of 
> figuring out how much freedom you are giving the people within which to be 
> creative, innovative, and make decisions. As one Director said to me "in my 
> decades of career, getting honest with myself about the givens has been the 
> hardest work I have ever done. And now that it is done, and the givens are 
> communicated, and everyone is figuring out what they now have authority and 
> freedom for, this is amazing. My only regret is that I didn't do this sooner 
> in my career. When I defined the givens, for the first time I defined the 
> space within which I truly want the people to be free to be their best. I can 
> be accountable for our performance within this frame of 'givens' and the 
> clarity about the space I have opened up in my organization."
> 
> Thomas, this is the best I can do to describe the ways forward beyond the 
> tension created about sharing decision making. I am not on the same page as 
> some of the others on this list about self organized systems. I experience 
> value in having formal leaders, and in having appropriate hierarchy to 
> getting the job done. I am very passionate about leadership that supports a 
> culture of leadership. 
> 
> kind regards,
> Birgitt
> 
> 
> 
> Birgitt Williams
> Supporting Next Level Leadership "Leading So People Will Lead"
> Author, Senior Consultant, President Dalar International Consultancy, Inc 
> 
> Founder Genuine Contact Program 
> 
> Co-owner Genuine Contact Group, LLC 
> 
> Founder Extraordinary Leadership Network 
> 
> 
> Learn 

Re: [OSList] action reflection learning track for leaders who have experienced OST in their organizations

[R Chaffe via OSList]

Brigitte and Thomas,
In negotiations leading to the opening of space it is vital that the “givens” 
or “boundaries” are defined based on the authority of the manager to set things 
within their control/responsibility.  Failing to do this results in a disaster 
for all involved.

The governance issues arise when people step outside their level or area of 
responsibility and accountability.

“We” do this all the time as we train our children to take responsibility for 
getting tasks done.  Toddlers “wash up” the wooden and plastic toys and step by 
step they graduate to managing the fine Chrystal and Chinaware.   

Enterprises are the same they need to learn how to work with Open Space so that 
at all times all the participants are aware of the level of 
delegation/responsibility they have and are accountable for.   It is a step by 
step process not an event, it moves from a process to a “way of being” by the 
way the outputs are implemented.

When every person takes responsibility for their share of governance and action 
then we have the whole organism working together for success.  The best part is 
that the “local networks” are primed to support collaboration and synergy based 
on success for all.

Regards
Rob

> On 21 Jul 2019, at 10:33 am, Birgitt Williams via OSList 
>  wrote:
> 
> Dear Thomas,
> Thank you for your thoughtful reply. 
> 
> You raised the following points/question and I am responding to this "One 
> thing came to mind from a managers perspective. I think of a challenge 
> regarding legal responsibility for the assets. If it’s my company, I take the 
> risk by myself. If I am hired as manager for a company owned by someone else 
> and thinking about self-management, I feel unsure about giving away 
> decision-making power while remaining legally responsible. I would like to 
> have the owners in on that conversation."
> 
> Your concern about accountability for assets is similar to the dominant 
> concern that comes up for senior leaders. It is always the senior leader that 
> is held accountable for the performance of the organization and thus the 
> concern raised is inclusive of the concern about assets...it is about the 
> reality that their is personal accountability for performance. 
> 
> Following, I am writing as though we were having a conversation. I am not 
> certain how this will come across in email format. I invite you to imagine 
> that these are my replies within a conversation.
> 
> The senior leader makes strategic choices, with or without the involvement of 
> the owners of the company, or in the case of the non-profit, with or without 
> the Board of Directors.  If including the Board of Directors or owners, I 
> suggest presenting this as a strategy that you are recommending to accomplish 
> a particular business goal ie: increasing employee engagement, increasing the 
> health and well being of the organization, or other. 
> 
> There is wisdom in keeping authority linked with responsibility and 
> accountability. In my experience, when the question of sharing decision 
> making comes up, it is helpful to consider this triumvirate of 
> authority/responsibility/accountability including whether the authority and 
> accountability can be linked appropriately with whoever already has 
> responsibility for various aspects of the organization. It starts to make 
> sense to distribute the authority and accountability to achieve alignment 
> with responsibility. In our geographic area we have a wisdom that says 'it is 
> a fools errand to take on responsibility if you don't have the authority to 
> go with it to get the job done'.
> 
> Okay, if we are this far along in the discussion and the thinking/reflecting 
> about this topic, you may be saying "Birgitt, I get all of that. Yet i still 
> feel nervous about sharing the decision making and what we have discussed 
> doesn't really help me".
> 
> I would then introduce the concept of "givens" to you. It is the job of the 
> senior leader to determine the "givens" or non-negotiables that the senior 
> leader has decided upon. Working at the "givens" is one side of the task of 
> figuring out how much freedom you are giving the people within which to be 
> creative, innovative, and make decisions. As one Director said to me "in my 
> decades of career, getting honest with myself about the givens has been the 
> hardest work I have ever done. And now that it is done, and the givens are 
> communicated, and everyone is figuring out what they now have authority and 
> freedom for, this is amazing. My only regret is that I didn't do this sooner 
> in my career. When I defined the givens, for the first time I defined the 
> space within which I truly want the people to be free to be their best. I can 
> be accountable for our performance within this frame of 'givens' and the 
> clarity about the space I have opened up in my organization."
> 
> Thomas, this is the best I can do to describe the ways forward beyond the 
> tension 

Re: [OSList] action reflection learning track for leaders who have experienced OST in their organizations

[Birgitt Williams via OSList]

Dear Thomas,
Thank you for your thoughtful reply.

You raised the following points/question and I am responding to this "One
thing came to mind from a managers perspective. I think of a challenge
regarding legal responsibility for the assets. If it’s my company, I take
the risk by myself. If I am hired as manager for a company owned by someone
else and thinking about self-management, I feel unsure about giving away
decision-making power while remaining legally responsible. I would like to
have the owners in on that conversation."

Your concern about accountability for assets is similar to the dominant
concern that comes up for senior leaders. It is always the senior leader
that is held accountable for the performance of the organization and thus
the concern raised is inclusive of the concern about assets...it is about
the reality that their is personal accountability for performance.

Following, I am writing as though we were having a conversation. I am not
certain how this will come across in email format. I invite you to imagine
that these are my replies within a conversation.

The senior leader makes strategic choices, with or without the involvement
of the owners of the company, or in the case of the non-profit, with or
without the Board of Directors.  If including the Board of Directors or
owners, I suggest presenting this as a strategy that you are recommending
to accomplish a particular business goal ie: increasing employee
engagement, increasing the health and well being of the organization, or
other.

There is wisdom in keeping authority linked with responsibility and
accountability. In my experience, when the question of sharing decision
making comes up, it is helpful to consider this triumvirate of
authority/responsibility/accountability including whether the authority and
accountability can be linked appropriately with whoever already has
responsibility for various aspects of the organization. It starts to make
sense to distribute the authority and accountability to achieve alignment
with responsibility. In our geographic area we have a wisdom that says 'it
is a fools errand to take on responsibility if you don't have the authority
to go with it to get the job done'.

Okay, if we are this far along in the discussion and the
thinking/reflecting about this topic, you may be saying "Birgitt, I get all
of that. Yet i still feel nervous about sharing the decision making and
what we have discussed doesn't really help me".

I would then introduce the concept of "givens" to you. It is the job of the
senior leader to determine the "givens" or non-negotiables that the senior
leader has decided upon. Working at the "givens" is one side of the task of
figuring out how much freedom you are giving the people within which to be
creative, innovative, and make decisions. As one Director said to me "in my
decades of career, getting honest with myself about the givens has been the
hardest work I have ever done. And now that it is done, and the givens are
communicated, and everyone is figuring out what they now have authority and
freedom for, this is amazing. My only regret is that I didn't do this
sooner in my career. When I defined the givens, for the first time I
defined the space within which I truly want the people to be free to be
their best. I can be accountable for our performance within this frame of
'givens' and the clarity about the space I have opened up in my
organization."

Thomas, this is the best I can do to describe the ways forward beyond the
tension created about sharing decision making. I am not on the same page as
some of the others on this list about self organized systems. I experience
value in having formal leaders, and in having appropriate hierarchy to
getting the job done. I am very passionate about leadership that supports a
culture of leadership.

kind regards,
Birgitt



*Birgitt Williams*
*Supporting Next Level Leadership "Leading So People Will Lead"*
Author, Senior Consultant, President Dalar International Consultancy, Inc

Founder Genuine Contact Program

Co-owner Genuine Contact Group, LLC

Founder Extraordinary Leadership Network


*Learn with us for your skill and capacity development for leading and
working in the new leadership paradigm "Leading So People Will Lead"*

Upcoming learning module: Working with Open Space Technology
.
Three different learning options to learn a process for facilitating
meetings that engage the people. Self-Study + One-to-One Mentoring +
Mentoring Circle; Self-Study + Real-Time Workshop + Mentoring Circle;
and Self-Study
+ Real-Time Workshop + One-to-One Mentoring + Mentoring Circle with real
time workshop dates three consecutive Fridays from 9am to 12:30pm EST on
October 18, 25, and November 1st.

PO 

Re: [OSList] action reflection learning track for leaders who have experienced OST in their organizations

[Thomas Perret via OSList]

Birgitt,

This seems spot on regarding lasting change, I liked it a lot.

"The answer has consistently been about the leadership capacity of the 
leadership team to lead an organization of people who are engaged in the ways 
that were visible in the OST meeting. This is a vulnerable conversation to be 
having and I feel a lot of respect for the leaders and the discussion.”

I read your whole mail aloud to a friend and this part touched me especially.

One thing came to mind from a managers perspective. I think of a challenge 
regarding legal responsibility for the assets. If it’s my company, I take the 
risk by myself. If I am hired as manager for a company owned by someone else 
and thinking about self-management, I feel unsure about giving away 
decision-making power while remaining legally responsible. I would like to have 
the owners in on that conversation.

Has something like this come up for you? If yes, will you say something about 
it?

Kindly,
Thomas Perret



The answer has consistently been about the leadership capacity of the 
leadership team to lead an organization of people who are engaged in the ways 
that were visible in the OST meeting. This is a vulnerable conversation to be 
having and I feel a lot of respect for the leaders and the discussion. 

> On 19 Jul 2019, at 4.07, Birgitt Williams via OSList 
>  wrote:
> 
> Dear friends and colleagues in Open Space,
> When you facilitate an OST meeting in an organization, it is the formal 
> leader who opens the space inside his/her organization for this meeting to 
> take place. Whether the leader feels well versed in what OST is or is simply 
> going along with something that has been recommended, that person has an 
> experience that is also a big opportunity...for the single leader and/or the 
> leadership team.
> 
> If you also recognize the wonderful opportunity in front of this leader as 
> you have discussions with the leader and leadership team, you may be 
> interested in the five self study modules that our team is calling our Next 
> Level Leadership learning track 
> . The 
> five modules are designed for just such a leader to go through in a self 
> study mode to encourage some of the thinking that is important to lead an 
> organization within the new leadership paradigm within which OST fits 
> "Leading So People Will Lead". 
> 
> Since 1992 I have been fascinated by what happens when formal leaders 
> including leadership teams sponsor and experience an Open Space Technology 
> meeting in their workplace. There are a few different story lines that 
> emerged. First, it is important to share with you that within how we teach 
> about Working with Open Space Technology in our Genuine Contact program, we 
> encourage facilitators of the OST meeting to have a 'debrief meeting' with 
> these leaders (the sponsors). The questions we ask in the debrief meeting are 
> kept simple and are intended for heightening learning from the shared 
> experience of having been in an OST meeting. Yes, simple action-reflection 
> learning. 
> 
> In my experience, OST always works. And always, the quality and quantity of 
> outcomes surpasses all expectations. So...that is part of what is reflected 
> on during the debrief meeting. Within an OST meeting, there is always the 
> experience of leadership popping up by just about everyone; people stating 
> that they experience a shared vision during the meeting; a real sense of 
> community with good communication throughout; and self management within the 
> container created. This is also discussed in the debrief meeting. Then comes 
> the question that for me is of utmost importance. Here it is "During the OST 
> meeting, you experienced exceptional performance by the people who 
> participated as you have just discussed. If you are not getting that 
> exceptional performance every day, would you like to?".
> 
> Silence is the first response.
> The second response is "no, this is not our daily experience"
> Then comes the discussion of "we want this in our daily experience BUT we are 
> not ready". I reply "you say you want exceptional performance. Your people 
> have shown you within the OST meeting that they are capable of exceptional 
> performance already. If you are not having this exceptional performance on a 
> daily lived basis and you want it, what is it you are not ready for?"
> 
> The answer has consistently been about the leadership capacity of the 
> leadership team to lead an organization of people who are engaged in the ways 
> that were visible in the OST meeting. This is a vulnerable conversation to be 
> having and I feel a lot of respect for the leaders and the discussion. 
> 
> My personal favorite outcome of the discussion is the leader (leadership 
> team) expressing an interest in developing personal and group leadership 
> capacity so that they can successfully lead an organization with a 
> participatory 

[OSList] action reflection learning track for leaders who have experienced OST in their organizations

[Birgitt Williams via OSList]

Dear friends and colleagues in Open Space,
When you facilitate an OST meeting in an organization, it is the formal
leader who opens the space inside his/her organization for this meeting to
take place. Whether the leader feels well versed in what OST is or is
simply going along with something that has been recommended, that person
has an experience that is also a big opportunity...for the single leader
and/or the leadership team.

If you also recognize the wonderful opportunity in front of this leader as
you have discussions with the leader and leadership team, you may be
interested in the five self study modules that our team is calling our Next
Level Leadership learning track
. The
five modules are designed for just such a leader to go through in a self
study mode to encourage some of the thinking that is important to lead an
organization within the new leadership paradigm within which OST fits
"Leading So People Will Lead".

Since 1992 I have been fascinated by what happens when formal leaders
including leadership teams sponsor and experience an Open Space Technology
meeting in their workplace. There are a few different story lines that
emerged. First, it is important to share with you that within how we teach
about Working with Open Space Technology in our Genuine Contact program, we
encourage facilitators of the OST meeting to have a 'debrief meeting' with
these leaders (the sponsors). The questions we ask in the debrief meeting
are kept simple and are intended for heightening learning from the shared
experience of having been in an OST meeting. Yes, simple action-reflection
learning.

In my experience, OST always works. And always, the quality and quantity of
outcomes surpasses all expectations. So...that is part of what is reflected
on during the debrief meeting. Within an OST meeting, there is always the
experience of leadership popping up by just about everyone; people stating
that they experience a shared vision during the meeting; a real sense of
community with good communication throughout; and self management within
the container created. This is also discussed in the debrief meeting. Then
comes the question that for me is of utmost importance. Here it is "During
the OST meeting, you experienced exceptional performance by the people who
participated as you have just discussed. If you are not getting that
exceptional performance every day, would you like to?".

Silence is the first response.
The second response is "no, this is not our daily experience"
Then comes the discussion of "we want this in our daily experience BUT we
are not ready". I reply "you say you want exceptional performance. Your
people have shown you within the OST meeting that they are capable of
exceptional performance already. If you are not having this exceptional
performance on a daily lived basis and you want it, what is it you are not
ready for?"

The answer has consistently been about the leadership capacity of the
leadership team to lead an organization of people who are engaged in the
ways that were visible in the OST meeting. This is a vulnerable
conversation to be having and I feel a lot of respect for the leaders and
the discussion.

My personal favorite outcome of the discussion is the leader (leadership
team) expressing an interest in developing personal and group leadership
capacity so that they can successfully lead an organization with a
participatory architecture along the same lines as the participatory
architecture of the OST meeting.

Initially I proceeded with these leaders by teaching them how to work with
OST to get the most harvest out of an OST meeting and to structure their
organization to allow as much freedom and choice as possible. I realized
that something was missing. I had jumped ahead too quickly. Just because
the leader (leadership team) stated willingness, there are steps to take
between that stated willingness and feeling ready and engaged in thinking
and working in a more expanded concept of leadership.

Now  when those leaders (leadership teams)  say they are willing to lead
their organizations as a culture of leadership, the kind of culture that
needs a participatory architecture with lots of use of OST meetingswe
have them go through what we call our Next Level Leadership learning track
.
They can do these five modules as self study with lots of reflection about
their thoughts about leadership...and then have a one to one (or group)
mentoring session to have a conversation about what they are thinking
regarding leadership.

Placing this learning track in their hands assists them with discernment
about leading for the leadership paradigm of "Leading So People Will Lead";
assists them in readiness and developing a plan for their readiness; and
assists them with engaging in the development needed for what is a very
challenging leadership