BM Thinking Out Loud

Our group used the methodology of Harrison Owen to conduct an abbreviated Open Space Technology intervention experience in class. The theme of this event was ‘Outrageous Leadership’. Our goal was to give the group the flavor of Open Space, as well as to bring about a more personal understanding of the process and its effect.

As is always the case, the experience of teaching others and demonstrating the concepts of this change strategy served to bring about a deeper level of understanding. Even though each of us in the presenting group were responsible for different aspects of the process, being part of the discussions, organizing, and planning enabled me to interact and grapple with the concept personally, intellectually, and physically.  As Jane Vella (1999) teaches, when learners have the opportunity to interact with the information and apply it in some situation, learning takes place.

                Owen’s (2008) explanation of the creation of Open Space shows that this strategy was developed out of a struggle to make learning meaningful, as well as to actively and personally involve learners. The structure of this large group intervention is also very simple and built on intuitive social behaviors which are easily understood. The use of labels and signs around the room created an easily followed explanation of the process.  The fact that they remained in place and visible throughout the event enabled participants to refer to them as needed, which helped to construct and organize new learning. 

Having participants begin in a circle to remove barriers of status and rank encourages mutual respect and creates an environment where everyone’s ideas matter. In our experience, this arrangement seemed a little uncomfortable for some in the beginning, however I attribute that to the uniqueness of the situation and the fact that as students we are used to the comfort of a desk or table creating our own individual space, in some way representing our independence from others. Our group did warm up to the arrangement and was able to talk and share freely.

Perhaps the best consequence of this method is that it creates the necessity for groups to be self organizing and fosters self-directed learning. Participants are given the responsibility for their own learning and are in a position in which they need input from and interaction with others. Dialogue is the medium through which learning takes place in Open Space and meaning is created both corporately and individually as ideas and perspectives are shared, reevaluated, and formed.

The concept of Open Space is built on bringing the whole system in the room (or at least representing the whole system among the participants) and creating a forum for people to interact and discover meaning together. In an actual event, participants must be volunteers, have a passion about the theme, as well as a stake in the outcome of the process. The issue must be a real business issue with no known solution. This requirement creates the need for dialogue and for participants to work together to share and understand everyone’s perspective and needs.

In this experiential Open Space event, everyone did have some passion around leadership, as we were all in similar graduate studies and are all employed in organizations where we either are leaders or have leaders which impact our daily lives. The ‘business need’ for which we were working was the larger concept of leadership, what it is, and what is could be. While it took a few minutes for people to begin to respond, we did have a good number of people volunteer to take responsibility for their ideas and sign up to convene meetings. 

When the group went to the market place to sign up for meetings there seemed to be one or two topics which generated the most interest. As in real Open Space events, we also had a couple of topics for which there were no takers. Our small group conversations were few, but each group seemed to have in depth, constructive discussions.  We did not have any butterflies or bumble bees emerge, however this is probably due to the abbreviated nature of the event. I suspect that if we had a larger group of participants and more realistic time frames there would have been a few of each in the room.

The participants in this event did go to the ‘newsroom’ and record their discussions and recommendations which enabled the whole group to have access to everyone’s thinking. As this was a sample event, there were not many ‘next steps’ in the recommendations that could be owned by anyone. However, reading the ideas that came out of the discussions can inspire further thinking, knowledge construction, and possibly some future action toward those recommendations.

Actual Open Space events would last for three days and would most likely involve a greater number of people. There would generally be a greater diversity of participants and points of view, which is what gives this intervention strategy energy. Even given our limited number, I believe our participants were able to experience the general atmosphere of such an event.

One of the activities that our group conducted in the subsequent debrief session was to have participants compare and contrast their Future Search experience with the Open Space experience. This led to good conversations about the appropriateness of each strategy, as well as similarities and differences. It was pointed out that Future Search has more structure and is probably easier to ‘sell’ to organizational leadership than Open Space, which has less structure. However, neither strategy can offer any conclusions as to what the final outcome will be, as they are both driven by the interests and ideas of the participants. The group also discussed the future-state orientation of Future Search, as opposed to the participant led agenda of Open Search which could lead almost anywhere.

During the debrief meeting we talked about the possibility of using parts of the Open Space structure in meetings. This is an interesting idea and one that has also been discussed in some of the literature. Our group also discussed the possibility of using Open Space virtually. There were ideas on both sides of this issue. Some felt that it could be adapted in this way and others felt that not being able to interact in person might take away from the ability to read body language and other social cues that help communicate so much more that just spoken words.

I learned a great deal through this experience and I believe that it was also valuable for the entire class. I certainly have begun thinking about ways both Future Search and Open Space could be used in my own organization. Our next large group intervention strategy event was Appreciative Inquiry. To date, we have only had the in class sample experience. After we have the debrief session in class next week I will add my impressions and ideas about that change strategy as well.