Re: [OSList] OSList Digest, Vol 82, Issue 3 re: conflict, conflict resolution, avoidance and Open Space

[Birgitt Williams via OSList]

Hi Chris,
I am with you about the containerto be as big and open as possible. I
am less enamored with 'constraints'. When I am in a playground, a container
that I agree to step into, I am making informed consent to be present.
However, I don't feel constraints and truly the rebel in my nature, upon
feeling my freedom was constrained, would exit...quickly.

Having been invited into a container, a particular playground that gives me
a sense of what I am saying 'yes' to, I can then choose what I want to
participate in and what I don't. So, I show up and am fully present, ready
to follow what has heart and meaning, ready to speak my truth ( hopefully
without judgment), and ready to let go as needed (thank you Angeles Arrien
for these beautiful laws of Spirit).

The law of two feet assists me in conflict resolution. I provide the same
for others when I am facilitating, trusting that each person will do what
they need to. I am not on the same page as Harrison in that I don't see
grand results for conflict resolution by self organizing...without the
container for the informed consent.

I also have learned that what people refer to as 'conflict' is not
conflict, it doesn't have the anger energy of conflict, rather, it is
resentment. My recent blog post 'is borrowed anger affecting your
organization?'  talks a
bit about the difference.

I have learned that there is no common definition or conceptual construct
of what 'conflict resolution' is including in the concept of how long the
'resolution' is to last.
Re-solution implies that there was once a solution and it is a state that
can be reached again...and then life happens.

I have learned, that there is no common agreement to the form and essence
of what Open Space Technology is. It is akin to 'opening space' and there
are so many ways of opening space that OST is only a slice of that big
picture. This makes it tough to research anything in realtion to 'what OST
does, what OST does not do'. Hence, we do not have the kind of research
that some would liketoo many variables.

as to the question of whether the Law of Two Feet enables avoidance of
conflict resolution, it is the wrong question for me. The question that
could be of better service is 'is it possible to resolve conflict without
the Law of Two Feet/the Law of Mobility? I think not.

Blessings,
Birgitt

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 4:41 AM Andrew Rixon via OSList <
oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:

> Great to hear from you Rob... and yes indeed - maybe those in Melbourne -
> anyone who cares to - might let me know of their interest in a Yum Cha...
>
> I can do the usual organisings once we find a suitable day...
>
> Please send me an email off-list and I can co-ordinate.
>
> Warm regards,
> Andrew
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 5:46 PM, R Chaffe via OSList <
> oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:
>
>> Chris
>> Yes we do miss our dear friend yet our very conversation draws the
>> essence of our being with Fr Brian so he lives in us and our
>> conversations.  So as we are potentially drawn into conflict we also can
>> open our space and give room for Brian and so many others to join us.
>>
>> You may recall the experiments where rat colonies are given no boundaries
>> and an abundance of food then either the space or the food become
>> restricted to the point that the participants attack each other as they
>> seek to survive.  Somewhere on the continuum there is a pint where the
>> observer may say conflict begins.
>>
>> What have we learnt?  We might say that conflict is a condition that is
>> resident in all and depending on the “importance” to the individual of the
>> environment/conditions etc and their ability to survive.
>>
>> When we invite others to join our conversation how they respond will
>> greatly depend on the importance  of the conversation is to them, we might
>> call it passion and in our terms passion is moderated by responsibility so
>> we have a new issue responsibility!  Responsibility to who or what?
>>
>> Consequently we define boundaries some may be stated others may be
>> unwritten rules that are the community norms.  One way to express
>> dissatisfaction with a conversation is to withdraw, the law of mobility (my
>> paraplegia heightens my awareness of the privilege of walking).
>>
>> Peter Sandman says that effective conflict resolution happens when the
>> risks and the level of outrage are balanced.  He has been involved in some
>> of the worlds greatest man made disasters, a hot bed of conflict.  So what
>> happens when the situation is right for the possibility of resolution?
>> Someone issues an invitation and regardless of if they follow the “rules”
>> they open the space.
>>
>> Conflict may be expressed both by outrage or hazard.  I believe that this
>> may be a simplistic way of seeing the world/system around us yet it gives
>> us a pathway to understanding why people come and why people go, it depends
>> on how they 

Re: [OSList] OSList Digest, Vol 82, Issue 3 re: conflict, conflict resolution, avoidance and Open Space

[Harrison Owen via OSList]

Chris – No question that the approaches you mention (Mediation on a job and 
litigation as well as restorative practice (conflict resolution circles) – can 
be effective. But my question is always what is the least amount you have to do 
in order to achieve the maximum result. I recognize this to be a judgment call 
and experiences do differ – but over the years I have never found any situation 
where I thought I could have done better than the group itself, following its 
own inner working (self organization). Truthfully I am always in awe of their 
accomplishment, and so thankful that it wasn’t left to me and whatever process. 

 

Harrison

 

From: OSList [mailto:oslist-boun...@lists.openspacetech.org] On Behalf Of Chris 
Corrigan via OSList
Sent: Sunday, February 4, 2018 11:39 PM
To: World wide Open Space Technology email list
Cc: Chris Corrigan; christopher macrae; oslist-requ...@lists.openspacetech.org
Subject: Re: [OSList] OSList Digest, Vol 82, Issue 3 re: conflict, conflict 
resolution, avoidance and Open Space

 

I’ve been really enjoying this conversation. 

 

I have indeed been part of conflict resolutions where there was constrained 
space to move. Mediation on a job and litigation as well as restorative 
practice (conflict resolution circles). I believe that working with constraints 
is a high art of leadership.  And even in Open Space there are still 
constraints.  I certainly just advocate for being honest about what those are. 
We can have governing constraints (like rules, i.e. the meeting will end at 
5pm) and enablisgin constraints, like the principles and the law of two feet.  
But nothing ever happens without a container.

 

So given that, how we work with constraints and build a container matters.  I 
have run Open Spaces where there were fewer degrees of freedom than others (of 
course participants could always call whatever conversation they wanted to, but 
the management of the organization got to define areas they could resource and 
act on).

 

The original question was about Dave Snowden’s criticism of how the law of two 
feet operates in spaces where conflict is important. This can mean any kind 
situation where a group of people needs to hear a contrary point of view in 
order to act wisely.  In many places these days, folks just walk away from 
people who’s opinions they find odious.  This kind of conflict avoidance 
creates massive division and “echo chamber’ behaviour.  Even calling an open 
space meeting is a kind of narrowing of the constraints and degrees of freedom 
such that people need to encounter one another.  

 

For innovation work, testing, criticizing and breaking new ideas is an 
invaluable part of the creative process.  Working away on one’s own without 
dissenting points of view can create something that is vulnerable to the myriad 
blind spots that we operate from.  

 

Conflict is not a bad thing. Working well with time and space as constraints 
helps us to collectively move through it.  Sometimes that means opening up that 
time and space and sometimes it means narrowing it down.  

 

I also miss Father Brian in these kinds of conversations.  I suspect he’d say 
something like “it’s all good” and then give a little wink and a smile.  

 

Chris





On Feb 4, 2018, at 12:04 PM, Birgitt Williams via OSList 
<oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:

 

Dear Colleagues,

I am interested in questions, and how people get wrapped up in answering a 
question, without first giving some discernment to whether or not it is the 
right question. Oh...I miss Fr. Brian Bainbridge when I get to thinking like 
thishe would have been a great one to have this conversation with. As I 
understand it, the question was stated as one to look at whether Open Space 
assisted in avoidance of conflict.

 

My question, the one that I believe is more to the heart of the matter is 'have 
you ever been part of successful movement with conflict resolution when the 
space wasn't open?'. 

 

For any conflict, inter-personal, intra-personal, larger scale, conflict 
doesn't have successful movement if there is no space for the movement, no 
space for the re-framing.that is needed for healing. Conflict is not in short 
supply in this world. Let us use any processes that we can to be of service to 
our fellow humans to move beyond the stuck energies of conflict. 

 

Blessings,

Birgitt

 

 

On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 12:50 PM christopher macrae via OSList 
<oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:

3 comments which may sound contradictory and reveal my own need to action learn

 

1 harrisons' books eg practice of peace explain that an intention of Open Space 
is to free people who are all trapped by the same conflict to move beyond it - 
creating more space than top-down rules  or historiic cultural misunderstanding 
had previously allowed - this always seems to me to be what is happening 
provided the facilitator is experienced

 

2 however what happens when people a

Re: [OSList] OSList Digest, Vol 82, Issue 3 re: conflict, conflict resolution, avoidance and Open Space

[Andrew Rixon via OSList]

Great to hear from you Rob... and yes indeed - maybe those in Melbourne -
anyone who cares to - might let me know of their interest in a Yum Cha...

I can do the usual organisings once we find a suitable day...

Please send me an email off-list and I can co-ordinate.

Warm regards,
Andrew

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 5:46 PM, R Chaffe via OSList <
oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:

> Chris
> Yes we do miss our dear friend yet our very conversation draws the essence
> of our being with Fr Brian so he lives in us and our conversations.  So as
> we are potentially drawn into conflict we also can open our space and give
> room for Brian and so many others to join us.
>
> You may recall the experiments where rat colonies are given no boundaries
> and an abundance of food then either the space or the food become
> restricted to the point that the participants attack each other as they
> seek to survive.  Somewhere on the continuum there is a pint where the
> observer may say conflict begins.
>
> What have we learnt?  We might say that conflict is a condition that is
> resident in all and depending on the “importance” to the individual of the
> environment/conditions etc and their ability to survive.
>
> When we invite others to join our conversation how they respond will
> greatly depend on the importance  of the conversation is to them, we might
> call it passion and in our terms passion is moderated by responsibility so
> we have a new issue responsibility!  Responsibility to who or what?
>
> Consequently we define boundaries some may be stated others may be
> unwritten rules that are the community norms.  One way to express
> dissatisfaction with a conversation is to withdraw, the law of mobility (my
> paraplegia heightens my awareness of the privilege of walking).
>
> Peter Sandman says that effective conflict resolution happens when the
> risks and the level of outrage are balanced.  He has been involved in some
> of the worlds greatest man made disasters, a hot bed of conflict.  So what
> happens when the situation is right for the possibility of resolution?
> Someone issues an invitation and regardless of if they follow the “rules”
> they open the space.
>
> Conflict may be expressed both by outrage or hazard.  I believe that this
> may be a simplistic way of seeing the world/system around us yet it gives
> us a pathway to understanding why people come and why people go, it depends
> on how they see themselves in the system and how it might impact on their
> survival (our friend Maslow and others all point to survival as the issue
> that will provoke greatest interest).
>
> Resolution of conflict begins with the ability to listen to the other
> point of view.  We can say our ability to stop and give space to ourselves
> and others.
>
> Opening space, creating space, seeing space is about stopping.  It is
> about breathing in harmony with those around us.  It is about holding back
> the “walls of the rat colony” for a moment so that we can think and listen
> to others. Open Space technology is one way we can do this as a process.
> The space must be created to allow us to hear, to let new ideas to grow, to
> explore the whys, what’s etc
>
> As Fr Brian seeks out another red he prompts us to to the same and that is
> to live to the fullest each moment we have and there are times to get
> involved and times to walk away, times to just sit and times for
> enthusiastic engagement with others.  It mostly depends on the space we
> need at moment.
> We could explore Fr Brian’s relationship with his authorities and how that
> conflict was managed but that is for another day.
>
> Regards
> Robert
>
> PS Andrew and others please find time later this month for some YumCha in
> memory of our dear friend.  I will be undergoing further treatment so
> cannot join you in person.
>
>
> On 5 Feb 2018, at 3:38 pm, Chris Corrigan via OSList <
> oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:
>
> I’ve been really enjoying this conversation.
>
> I have indeed been part of conflict resolutions where there was
> constrained space to move. Mediation on a job and litigation as well as
> restorative practice (conflict resolution circles). I believe that working
> with constraints is a high art of leadership.  And even in Open Space there
> are still constraints.  I certainly just advocate for being honest about
> what those are. We can have governing constraints (like rules, i.e. the
> meeting will end at 5pm) and enablisgin constraints, like the principles
> and the law of two feet.  But nothing ever happens without a container.
>
> So given that, how we work with constraints and build a container
> matters.  I have run Open Spaces where there were fewer degrees of freedom
> than others (of course participants could always call whatever conversation
> they wanted to, but the management of the organization got to define areas
> they could resource and act on).
>
> The original question was about Dave Snowden’s criticism of how the law of
> 

Re: [OSList] OSList Digest, Vol 82, Issue 3 re: conflict, conflict resolution, avoidance and Open Space

[R Chaffe via OSList]

Chris
Yes we do miss our dear friend yet our very conversation draws the essence of 
our being with Fr Brian so he lives in us and our conversations.  So as we are 
potentially drawn into conflict we also can open our space and give room for 
Brian and so many others to join us.  

You may recall the experiments where rat colonies are given no boundaries and 
an abundance of food then either the space or the food become restricted to the 
point that the participants attack each other as they seek to survive.  
Somewhere on the continuum there is a pint where the observer may say conflict 
begins.  

What have we learnt?  We might say that conflict is a condition that is 
resident in all and depending on the “importance” to the individual of the 
environment/conditions etc and their ability to survive. 

When we invite others to join our conversation how they respond will greatly 
depend on the importance  of the conversation is to them, we might call it 
passion and in our terms passion is moderated by responsibility so we have a 
new issue responsibility!  Responsibility to who or what?  

Consequently we define boundaries some may be stated others may be unwritten 
rules that are the community norms.  One way to express dissatisfaction with a 
conversation is to withdraw, the law of mobility (my paraplegia heightens my 
awareness of the privilege of walking).

Peter Sandman says that effective conflict resolution happens when the risks 
and the level of outrage are balanced.  He has been involved in some of the 
worlds greatest man made disasters, a hot bed of conflict.  So what happens 
when the situation is right for the possibility of resolution?  Someone issues 
an invitation and regardless of if they follow the “rules” they open the space. 
  

Conflict may be expressed both by outrage or hazard.  I believe that this may 
be a simplistic way of seeing the world/system around us yet it gives us a 
pathway to understanding why people come and why people go, it depends on how 
they see themselves in the system and how it might impact on their survival 
(our friend Maslow and others all point to survival as the issue that will 
provoke greatest interest).

Resolution of conflict begins with the ability to listen to the other point of 
view.  We can say our ability to stop and give space to ourselves and others.   

Opening space, creating space, seeing space is about stopping.  It is about 
breathing in harmony with those around us.  It is about holding back the “walls 
of the rat colony” for a moment so that we can think and listen to others. Open 
Space technology is one way we can do this as a process.  The space must be 
created to allow us to hear, to let new ideas to grow, to explore the whys, 
what’s etc

As Fr Brian seeks out another red he prompts us to to the same and that is to 
live to the fullest each moment we have and there are times to get involved and 
times to walk away, times to just sit and times for enthusiastic engagement 
with others.  It mostly depends on the space we need at moment.
We could explore Fr Brian’s relationship with his authorities and how that 
conflict was managed but that is for another day.

Regards
Robert

PS Andrew and others please find time later this month for some YumCha in 
memory of our dear friend.  I will be undergoing further treatment so cannot 
join you in person.


> On 5 Feb 2018, at 3:38 pm, Chris Corrigan via OSList 
>  wrote:
> 
> I’ve been really enjoying this conversation. 
> 
> I have indeed been part of conflict resolutions where there was constrained 
> space to move. Mediation on a job and litigation as well as restorative 
> practice (conflict resolution circles). I believe that working with 
> constraints is a high art of leadership.  And even in Open Space there are 
> still constraints.  I certainly just advocate for being honest about what 
> those are. We can have governing constraints (like rules, i.e. the meeting 
> will end at 5pm) and enablisgin constraints, like the principles and the law 
> of two feet.  But nothing ever happens without a container.
> 
> So given that, how we work with constraints and build a container matters.  I 
> have run Open Spaces where there were fewer degrees of freedom than others 
> (of course participants could always call whatever conversation they wanted 
> to, but the management of the organization got to define areas they could 
> resource and act on).
> 
> The original question was about Dave Snowden’s criticism of how the law of 
> two feet operates in spaces where conflict is important. This can mean any 
> kind situation where a group of people needs to hear a contrary point of view 
> in order to act wisely.  In many places these days, folks just walk away from 
> people who’s opinions they find odious.  This kind of conflict avoidance 
> creates massive division and “echo chamber’ behaviour.  Even calling an open 
> space meeting is a kind of narrowing of 

Re: [OSList] OSList Digest, Vol 82, Issue 3 re: conflict, conflict resolution, avoidance and Open Space

[Chris Corrigan via OSList]

I’ve been really enjoying this conversation. 

I have indeed been part of conflict resolutions where there was constrained 
space to move. Mediation on a job and litigation as well as restorative 
practice (conflict resolution circles). I believe that working with constraints 
is a high art of leadership.  And even in Open Space there are still 
constraints.  I certainly just advocate for being honest about what those are. 
We can have governing constraints (like rules, i.e. the meeting will end at 
5pm) and enablisgin constraints, like the principles and the law of two feet.  
But nothing ever happens without a container.

So given that, how we work with constraints and build a container matters.  I 
have run Open Spaces where there were fewer degrees of freedom than others (of 
course participants could always call whatever conversation they wanted to, but 
the management of the organization got to define areas they could resource and 
act on).

The original question was about Dave Snowden’s criticism of how the law of two 
feet operates in spaces where conflict is important. This can mean any kind 
situation where a group of people needs to hear a contrary point of view in 
order to act wisely.  In many places these days, folks just walk away from 
people who’s opinions they find odious.  This kind of conflict avoidance 
creates massive division and “echo chamber’ behaviour.  Even calling an open 
space meeting is a kind of narrowing of the constraints and degrees of freedom 
such that people need to encounter one another.  

For innovation work, testing, criticizing and breaking new ideas is an 
invaluable part of the creative process.  Working away on one’s own without 
dissenting points of view can create something that is vulnerable to the myriad 
blind spots that we operate from. 

Conflict is not a bad thing. Working well with time and space as constraints 
helps us to collectively move through it.  Sometimes that means opening up that 
time and space and sometimes it means narrowing it down.  

I also miss Father Brian in these kinds of conversations.  I suspect he’d say 
something like “it’s all good” and then give a little wink and a smile.  

Chris

> On Feb 4, 2018, at 12:04 PM, Birgitt Williams via OSList 
>  wrote:
> 
> Dear Colleagues,
> I am interested in questions, and how people get wrapped up in answering a 
> question, without first giving some discernment to whether or not it is the 
> right question. Oh...I miss Fr. Brian Bainbridge when I get to thinking like 
> thishe would have been a great one to have this conversation with. As I 
> understand it, the question was stated as one to look at whether Open Space 
> assisted in avoidance of conflict.
> 
> My question, the one that I believe is more to the heart of the matter is 
> 'have you ever been part of successful movement with conflict resolution when 
> the space wasn't open?'. 
> 
> For any conflict, inter-personal, intra-personal, larger scale, conflict 
> doesn't have successful movement if there is no space for the movement, no 
> space for the re-framing.that is needed for healing. Conflict is not in short 
> supply in this world. Let us use any processes that we can to be of service 
> to our fellow humans to move beyond the stuck energies of conflict. 
> 
> Blessings,
> Birgitt
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 12:50 PM christopher macrae via OSList 
> > 
> wrote:
> 3 comments which may sound contradictory and reveal my own need to action 
> learn
> 
> 1 harrisons' books eg practice of peace explain that an intention of Open 
> Space is to free people who are all trapped by the same conflict to move 
> beyond it - creating more space than top-down rules  or historiic cultural 
> misunderstanding had previously allowed - this always seems to me to be what 
> is happening provided the facilitator is experienced
> 
> 2 however what happens when people are no longer together in the space; are 
> actions and post conflict innovations unstoppable?; here what bothers me is 
> that there is no complete database of success stories- or if there is please 
> given us one bookmark; i mean something that is an updating index not just 
> this listing - a "good food guide" review format to open space so to speak
> 
> 3 i wonder if anyone has experienced deep democracy which i believe was 
> innovated by myrna lewis in south africa- this starts with a somewhat 
> different process purpose ; it aims to identify opposng sides and then get 
> them to debate what  with all their energy but no violence what is  their 
> absolute minimum demands in a proposed solution which will make them unite 
> with the other sides
> 
> while 3 sounds a valid idea frankly it puts even more burden of the 
> faciltator (or indeed the spirit of the space) and who actually sponsored the 
> event - the very few deep democracies I have participated in did 

Re: [OSList] OSList Digest, Vol 82, Issue 3 re: conflict, conflict resolution, avoidance and Open Space

[Birgitt Williams via OSList]

Dear Colleagues,
I am interested in questions, and how people get wrapped up in answering a
question, without first giving some discernment to whether or not it is the
right question. Oh...I miss Fr. Brian Bainbridge when I get to thinking
like thishe would have been a great one to have this conversation with.
As I understand it, the question was stated as one to look at whether Open
Space assisted in avoidance of conflict.

My question, the one that I believe is more to the heart of the matter is
'have you ever been part of successful movement with conflict resolution
when the space wasn't open?'.

For any conflict, inter-personal, intra-personal, larger scale, conflict
doesn't have successful movement if there is no space for the movement, no
space for the re-framing.that is needed for healing. Conflict is not in
short supply in this world. Let us use any processes that we can to be of
service to our fellow humans to move beyond the stuck energies of conflict.

Blessings,
Birgitt



On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 12:50 PM christopher macrae via OSList <
oslist@lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:

> 3 comments which may sound contradictory and reveal my own need to action
> learn
>
> 1 harrisons' books eg practice of peace explain that an intention of Open
> Space is to free people who are all trapped by the same conflict to move
> beyond it - creating more space than top-down rules  or historiic cultural
> misunderstanding had previously allowed - this always seems to me to be
> what is happening provided the facilitator is experienced
>
> 2 however what happens when people are no longer together in the space;
> are actions and post conflict innovations unstoppable?; here what bothers
> me is that there is no complete database of success stories- or if there is
> please given us one bookmark; i mean something that is an updating index
> not just this listing - a "good food guide" review format to open space so
> to speak
>
> 3 i wonder if anyone has experienced deep democracy which i believe was
> innovated by myrna lewis in south africa- this starts with a somewhat
> different process purpose ; it aims to identify opposng sides and then get
> them to debate what  with all their energy but no violence what is  their
> absolute minimum demands in a proposed solution which will make them unite
> with the other sides
>
> while 3 sounds a valid idea frankly it puts even more burden of the
> faciltator (or indeed the spirit of the space) and who actually sponsored
> the event - the very few deep democracies I have participated in did not
> have outcomes that i trusted even though I was there more as an observer
> than one of the interested partners
>
> just my 3 cents worth ; ultimately the catch 22 seems to me to be that
> unless hehre is already enough community to be the sponsor , the after-the
> space motivations of the sponoir come back into play- so how one deals with
> that is what I dont understand?
>
> chris macrae www.BRI.school
>
> Who's fanning Chinese solutions to sustainability:1) by country,2) valu...
>
> ?http://www.chinathanks.com/1977;>Entrepreneurial World's
> Greatest CASE : CHINA 2017-1977 worldwide...
> 
>
>
> >
> > On 30 January 2018 at 23:07, Daniel Mezick via OSList <
> oslist@lists.openspacetech.org >
> wrote:
> > I am hearing this pointed criticism from some quarters: That OST
> actually encourages conflict-avoidance via the Law of 2 Feet. In other
> words, people who need to be resolving conflict (or at least discussing it)
> can just avoid the touchy topic... and each other.
> >
> > Could this actually be true? If not why not?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Daniel Mezick
> > Culture Strategist. Author. Keynoter.
> > (203) 915 7248 <(203)%20915-7248>. Bio. 
> Blog.  Twitter. <
> https://twitter.com/DanielMezick>
> > Book: The Culture Game. 
> > Book: The OpenSpace Agility Handbook. <
> http://www.amazon.com/OpenSpace-Agility-Handbook-Daniel-Mezick/dp/0984875336>
>
> >
> > ___
> > OSList mailing list
> > To post send emails to OSList@lists.openspacetech.org  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 <
> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org>
> > Past archives can be viewed here: 
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/oslist@lists.openspacetech.org
> 
> >
> > ___
> > OSList mailing list
> > To post send emails to OSList@lists.openspacetech.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to oslist-le...@lists.openspacetech.org
> > To subscribe or manage 

Re: [OSList] OSList Digest, Vol 82, Issue 3

[christopher macrae via OSList]

 3 comments which may sound contradictory and reveal my own need to action learn
1 harrisons' books eg practice of peace explain that an intention of Open Space 
is to free people who are all trapped by the same conflict to move beyond it - 
creating more space than top-down rules  or historiic cultural misunderstanding 
had previously allowed - this always seems to me to be what is happening 
provided the facilitator is experienced
2 however what happens when people are no longer together in the space; are 
actions and post conflict innovations unstoppable?; here what bothers me is 
that there is no complete database of success stories- or if there is please 
given us one bookmark; i mean something that is an updating index not just this 
listing - a "good food guide" review format to open space so to speak
3 i wonder if anyone has experienced deep democracy which i believe was 
innovated by myrna lewis in south africa- this starts with a somewhat different 
process purpose ; it aims to identify opposng sides and then get them to debate 
what  with all their energy but no violence what is  their absolute minimum 
demands in a proposed solution which will make them unite with the other sides
while 3 sounds a valid idea frankly it puts even more burden of the faciltator 
(or indeed the spirit of the space) and who actually sponsored the event - the 
very few deep democracies I have participated in did not have outcomes that i 
trusted even though I was there more as an observer than one of the interested 
partners
just my 3 cents worth ; ultimately the catch 22 seems to me to be that unless 
hehre is already enough community to be the sponsor , the after-the space 
motivations of the sponoir come back into play- so how one deals with that is 
what I dont understand?
chris macrae www.BRI.school

| 
| 
| 
|  |  |

 |

 |
| 
|  | 
Who's fanning Chinese solutions to sustainability:1) by country,2) valu...

?http://www.chinathanks.com/1977;>Entrepreneurial World's Greatest 
CASE : CHINA 2017-1977 worldwide...
 |

 |

 |



> 
> On 30 January 2018 at 23:07, Daniel Mezick via OSList 
> > 
> wrote:
> I am hearing this pointed criticism from some quarters: That OST actually 
> encourages conflict-avoidance via the Law of 2 Feet. In other words, people 
> who need to be resolving conflict (or at least discussing it) can just avoid 
> the touchy topic... and each other. 
> 
> Could this actually be true? If not why not? 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Daniel Mezick
> Culture Strategist. Author. Keynoter.
> (203) 915 7248. Bio.  Blog. 
>  Twitter.  
> Book: The Culture Game.  
> Book: The OpenSpace Agility Handbook. 
> 
>  
> 
> ___
> OSList mailing list
> To post send emails to OSList@lists.openspacetech.org 
> 
> To unsubscribe send an email to oslist-le...@lists.openspacetech.org 
> 
> To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org 
> 
> Past archives can be viewed here: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/oslist@lists.openspacetech.org 
> 
> 
> ___
> OSList mailing list
> To post send emails to OSList@lists.openspacetech.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to oslist-le...@lists.openspacetech.org
> To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
> Past archives can be viewed here: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/oslist@lists.openspacetech.org

-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 


--

Subject: Digest Footer

___
OSList mailing list
To post send emails to OSList@lists.openspacetech.org
To unsubscribe send an email to oslist-le...@lists.openspacetech.org
To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
Past archives can be viewed here: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/oslist@lists.openspacetech.org

--

End of OSList Digest, Vol 82, Issue 3
*
  ___
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