| Contributed March 3, 1998 by Jody
Orr
Birgitt Bolton, Dalar
Associates
It has been said that Open Space as a technique for problem solving may be most effective in times of crisis. At such times, people may be best motivated to take responsibility for issues or challenges confronting an organization. Given the opportunities for synergetic energy provided in Open Space, remarkable solutions to significant problems can be generated quickly and in a way which encourages broad-based participation. Structures to support this problem-solving can be grown out of the Open Space, and resources hitherto undreamed of identified and mobilized to overcome the crisis. We want to share the story of one such crisis and the way in which Open Space provided a vehicle for problem solving which - in its initial stages (the story is still writing itself) - dramatically exceeded expectations. The story unfolded over the summer of 1996 at The Discovery Centre (in Ancaster, Ontario, Canada). While the story of The Discovery Centre is about Open Space as a creative force, it is also about two other issues.: the attempt to move beyond Open Space as a technology into Open Space as a way of organizational life and the particular challenges this holds out when the context in which space is opened is shaded by a strong entrepreneurial Spirit. We are both independent consultants. Birgitt works in the area of organizational development on her own or in energetic ad hoc partnerships. She is a passionate advocate for Open Space not only in her work but in her own life. Her experiences managing an organization in Open Space are documented in “Open Space in a Social Service Setting (Keeping the Spirit Alive)” (in Tales from Open Space, Harrison Owen: Abbott, 1995.) She has a much longer history working in and with Open Space than does Jody. Jody shares her work in organizational transformation and transformational leadership with a business partner, and is committed to the use of Open Space as a tool for releasing organizational and personal creativity. What brings us together is a longstanding friendship, parallel journeys in life and a commitment to exploring and experiencing Open Space as a way of being. We both became involved with The Discovery Centre in June, 1996. Birgitt
took on a formal leadership position in the Centre about mid-June, and
encouraged Jody’s participation in the process which was about to unfold.
The Discovery Centre: Movement into Crisis In 1995, emboldened by the vision of birthing and owning a dynamic centre for personal development, the healing arts and leadership development, Jim and Lynn invested in the lease of buildings and land from the Hamilton-Wentworth Conservation Authority in order to build The Discovery Centre. Planning to capitalize on Lynn’s already successful yoga practice in Ancaster, and with a good building on site only in need of upgrading , they went into the project knowing that they would have to build accommodation and a spa (without these amenities, they felt the Centre would not be financially viable). They developed a business plan based on the best case scenario, which assumed accommodation and spa in place and felt that, with full programming, they could build the Centre fairly quickly into a viable business concern. Using their own resources, they made significant investments in upgrading the existing buildings. At the same time, they attempted to secure a small business loan which would provide the support they required through the developmental period and construction of necessary additional facilities. The role of the land cannot be discounted in this story. The Discovery Centre nestles in the middle of steep hills and valleys carpeted by magnificent Carolinian forest managed and protected by the Conservation Authority. It is stunningly beautiful natural geography in the middle of a largely urban area, and the buildings, once operated as a church camp and then later as an Outdoor Education Centre, were built with a view to harmonizing with the land. For many who visit the Centre, there is an immediate awareness that the land here is special...some have termed it “sacred”. This setting, welded to the deep affection, loyalty and respect that people have for Jim and Lynn, contributes to the feeling held by many of those who participated in this story that the Centre is a very special place indeed. This setting also, however, poses significant challenges. It is enough of a distance from cities and towns in the area (the most immediate market) that most people require a car to get to it. Further, while existing buildings are significant resources, the lack of residential capacity means that programmes requiring or benefitting from overnight stays can not be developed as of yet. Finally, the very beauty of the land means that there are rigorous zoning bylaws and approval processes which, even if everything was approved, would take considerable time. By mid-June, 1996, the energizing vision held out by Jim and Lynn had become an increasingly difficult one to sustain in light of financial circumstances. Jim left his other work, devoting himself to The Discovery Centre. The drain on their personal finances was considerable. Attempts to secure the small business loan necessary to expand facilities were unsuccessful despite enormous time and energy put into the process. With this failure, the financial ability to pursue the vision had virtually disappeared. This focussing of energies on physical improvements and the attempt
to find secure financing, while critical to the establishment of the Centre,
meant that other sources of revenue - specifically, programming - had been
under-developed. By June, 1996, after one season of programming, only Lynn’s
yoga classes, a few classes in meditation, and one or two other specialized
one day classes were planned for the summer. The brochure for marketing
these few programmes for the summer season was late getting out to the
potential market. Revenue generated by these classes would not even keep
the Centre going for a month or two. Then it was likely Jim and Lynn would
have to close the Centre’s doors.
Open Space at the Discovery Centre: Seeking the Energy to Move Beyond Survival By June 14, it was clear to Jim and Lynn that the business was about to go under. For programme revenue to generate sufficient income in the fall and marketing efforts to be successful, a calendar of full programming would have to be ready for the end of July (six weeks). But there was no programme beyond that already offered (which could not support the Centre) and only a small window of time in which to generate a programme capable of financially salvaging the Centre. They also knew that programming alone was not enough and that other means of revenue generation were needed. On June 14, Birgitt encountered Jim and Lynn on a visit to the Centre. They shared their story with her and she indicated her interest in helping them make a last ditch effort to generate the programming necessary to keep the Centre alive. They invited her to assume leadership as their consultant then Executive Director, an invitation which she accepted for a few months to allow Lynn and Jim time to recoup their energies. The discussions around Birgitt’s decision to join her efforts with theirs were important for this story. Having shared her background with them - including her strong commitment to Open Space - she indicated to them that, if she was to take on the daunting task of attempting to develop and co-ordinate a fall programme, she would do so only on the condition that The Discovery Centre would explore and commit to operating on a day-to-day basis using an “Open Space management style” . After reading material on Open Space and further discussion with Birgitt, Jim and Lynn enthusiastically agreed, feeling that Open Space fit well with the concepts of wellness and personal development which characterized their vision of The Discovery Centre. Thus, the agreement was reached. Within a few days, Birgitt had done an assessment of the Centre and had checked in with several other people she thought might be interested in the Centre. She knew that in the immediate 2 or 3 weeks ahead she could do nothing to address the immediate financial shortfall created by the summer programme. She also knew that at this point it would take an enormous amount of energy in a very short time to develop a full autumn programme for marketing at the end of July. In her experience, the only process capable of delivering the kind of outcomes which were required was Open Space. On June 18, only four days after their first meeting, Birgitt proposed to Jim and Lynn that the Centre hold an Open Space event around the theme “what can we do to help the Centre grow/survive?” This event, to fit the tight time lines, would have to be organized in eight days. June 26 was the date chosen for this critical event. The timing for this event was highly problematic, since it coincided
with end of school events which could make it difficult for people with
children to attend, but the decision was made to go ahead. Invitations
were sent out to people on the mailing lists of the Centre and were circulated
by hand and telephone by friends of the Centre.
Working in Open Space On the evening of June 26th, more than 60 participants showed up for the Open Space event. Most participants had come with a strong sense of the specialness of the Centre, and, although most had never experienced Open Space before, like such events everywhere, as soon as the space was opened, the high levels of energy in the room became almost palpable. Lynn opened the evening, outlining the crisis and the hoped for outcome...a set of programmes which could not only save the Centre but help it grow. She also described a framework, developed by Birgitt working with Jim and Lynn, which described the “givens” or boundaries (i.e. purpose of the Centre, pathways for the Centre) in which the Open Space would operate that evening . Birgitt then opened and held the space for the remainder of the evening. The event was unique for those of us experienced with Open Space because of the delightful problems which were created. The event had been planned with 20 meeting spaces, but the number of issues generated demanded the creation of 12 spaces more. The resulting confusion in the “marketplace” was energizing and, with assistance, the additional meeting spaces were created. By the end of the evening, more than 30 issues were posted in the marketplace. Report back forms were provided to discussion groups which predefined categories for recording, thus capturing information which could be used to track programme development (for example, information regarding which pathway the programme idea fit, the resources which would be required, follow up strategy and contact names were all requested). Participants wishing a written report on the event were asked to self-address a large envelope which the Centre later used to send out reports. In the closing circle, the comments from participants were extremely positive. Words such as energized, hopeful and optimistic were repeated time and again. After the space was closed, participants were asked to consider four
unpaid job postings which had been developed earlier by Jim, Lynn and Birgitt.
These postings sought volunteers to take on significant co-ordination activities
at the Centre in exchange, should the Centre grow, for shares in the business.
Growing a Future out of Open Space: Leveraging the Centre Forward Follow up to the Open Space event began the very next day. The volunteer job postings were quickly filled (they included a fund raising co-ordinator and a programme co-ordinator). Reports from the discussion groups were reviewed, and contact people called to ascertain whether, indeed, a programme would/could be ready for the fall around the issue area the discussion group had explored. To ensure quality control as well as a fit with the philosophy of the Centre, each programme idea which began at the Open Space event was reviewed by Birgitt along with the individual or group planning the course or programme. This task was facilitated by the involvement of the new programme co-ordinator who assumed an important liaison and co-ordination function. Ongoing discussions with Jim and Lynn ensured their input into programme development as well. A deadline for written course and programme descriptions was set and, by and large, adhered to. By the end of July, over 40 programmes and courses had been developed, vetted, and approved for inclusion in the marketing material which was finally printed and mailed out by mid-August, only a little bit behind schedule. As well as this programming, other initiatives took place in keeping with The Discovery Centre as a wellness centre: a retail store, a mail order business, and a manufacturing business were birthed. Other groups, such as a leadership development group (in which Jody is actively involved) began work with intention to launch programmes for the winter session. It will be some time before we know whether The Discovery Centre has
moved through its financial and programming crisis to the point where it
is a viable business, but we do know that Open Space provided the opportunity
for there to be a success. Current (September, 1996) financial projections
have the Centre in a slight profit position by December 31st with a worst
case scenario of only 50% attendance at programmes.
Working as an Open Space Organization Birgitt’s original insistence that The Discovery Centre use an Open Space management style dictated that, from the beginning of her involvement, certain steps be taken . Given Jim’s and Lynn’s development of the original vision for the Centre and continuing commitment to operate it as a private business, these steps were unusual for a relatively small entrepreneurial setting. First, significant pieces of decision-making were spread widely throughout the organization with the recruitment of new unpaid staff and sudden infusion of new “faculty” and leaders for the evolving fall programme. Second, as programmes were developed, there was a strong message from the Centre that, where possible, all those originally involved in the Open Space event should be invited to individual programme planning sessions. In practice, this did occur in several cases. Third, on a day-to-day basis, it was agreed among Jim, Lynn and the staff, including Birgitt, that as issues arose they would be resolved in Open Space or in ways consistent with Open Space. As a result of these decisions, several things occurred. There remained at the Centre throughout the summer a strongly invigorating sense of creative Spirit amongst people involved in all phases of the Centre’s work. For many people involved in designing and delivering programmes for the fall, there was a significant amount of pulling new people in through ongoing invitation (while this sometimes extended timelines and made closure challenging in some instances, it also enhanced creativity and expanded ownership). On a day-to-day basis, there was some tension between the “letting go” required to operate in Open Space in an ongoing way and the entrepreneurial urge to be “hands-on”. Decision-making process and behaviour which would be traditionally viewed as appropriate no longer necessarily reflected the newly established “contract” between Jim, Lynn and the unpaid employees. Some of the rationale for and issues related to these observations are
examined in more detail below. The article concludes with some critical
questions which we believe need further exploration and documentation.
Comments and Observations a) Open Space and Creative Breakthrough As participants in and observers of the story of The Discovery Centre, our assessments and experiences of the strengths of Open Space were reaffirmed in relation to the June Open Space event. There is little doubt that the sheer urgency of the crisis i.e. impending closure, motivated and touched people, helping to make the creative programming breakthrough possible. But given little in the way of financial resources and a pressing set of timelines, it is unlikely - in our experience - that another methodology would have worked so effectively. Understanding and describing the creativity released and given life in Open Space has, from our perspective, become an increasingly important - and perhaps even urgent - task. We believe that the operating dynamics within Open Space have much to offer to the growing literature which explores approaches to releasing organizational creativity and growing change. Nowhere is this more true than in the growing field of large group interventions, a field dominated by methodologies of considerable elegance, some influenced by technology, and often with significant involvement - and sometimes direction - from the facilitator or the chief leader. What seems, on the surface, to distinguish Open Space from some other interventions is the appearance of chaos and the apparent low key involvement of the facilitator or chief leader. It looks simultaneously unorganized and easy. We know experientially, however, that Open Space, while characterized by dimensions of Spirit which are quite liberating, is a highly complex place in which to exist and that it demands finely tuned capacities within the facilitator/chief leader. Opening, and keeping space open and safe is a challenging task, appearances notwithstanding and, almost invariably, it results in highly creative outcomes. At a time when organizations are increasingly faced with crises and the need for fundamental change, assisting them to tap into their own (often latent) creativity becomes a critical task for organizational development specialists. It is, therefore, more than a mere academic exercise to challenge ourselves with the growth of a more intimate understanding of the dynamics, structure and theory of Open Space and of the facilitator’s role in Open Space. It is a task which promises an enhanced ability to present Open Space to organizations as a viable problem-solving option and to encourage a better informed practice of Open Space. Our own experience suggests strongly that Open Space operates at the most fundamental level as a self-organizing system. If true, then the practice of Open Space is a gateway to exploring a wide variety of issues such as those raised by Margaret Wheatley in her book Leadership and the New Science (for example, the dynamic tensions between and symbiosis of chaos and order, the roles of simplicity and fields, and “the characteristic of living systems to continuously renew themselves and to regulate this process in such a way that the integrity of their structure is maintained” Wheatley, p. 18]). For specialists interested in organizational change and development, critical questions can be posed which will assist in better clarifying the relative strengths and limitations of Open Space in relation to other large group interventions: - when looking at large group interventions, how do we distinguish between
“order” and “control”? how can we most effectively communicate this difference
to organizations? how can we support them as they struggle to make these
differences real?
The above is not, of course, an exhaustive list...it is only a beginning. We are looking forward to the dialogue which such questions invite. b) Managing in Ongoing Open Space: Challenges and Opportunities Of equal importance to us is that this particular story yields some tentative insights which are helpful in growing the debate around Open Space as a method in contrast to Open Space as a way of organizational life. Most of us with a commitment to Open Space have experienced the challenges which come with organizational life after the Open Space event. Any one of a number of factors can work against the long-term realization of Open Space effects so that the energy, openness, risk-taking and empowerment which characterized the event are slowly dissipated. In The Discovery Centre story, we saw a unique set of circumstances: an entrepreneurial couple committing to letting go in order to see their vision salvaged. In practice, this meant dispensing with traditional, entrepreneurial hands-on approaches, trusting process and learning to some extent to navigate in chaos. One of the problems that plagues those of us attempting to see and use Open Space in an ongoing way within a single organization is the struggle with fear when things get too chaotic. With fear tends to come the natural urge to move back into controlling behaviours. For those who consult to organizations, determining the degree to which management may - or may not - be prepared to modify its control after the Open Space event has become a serious issue. It is not surprising, therefore, that there were times when behaviours not consistent with an Open Space management style or even an Open Space decision-making style emerged within the Centre - in various locations and in various contexts - not just at the ownership level. In some cases, we have seen actions which suggest that some people view Open Space as a power vacuum into which they can step rather than as a very different manifestation of power. Having said this, it is also critical to point out that, to date, when this has occurred it has either been named and dealt with or extra vigilance in holding the space open has been developed. In the latter case, as Open Space practitioners are well aware, Open Space has an uncanny way of taking care of itself...if one is really committed to holding the space open. We both want to applaud Jim’s and Lynn’s commitment to learning how to work in Open Space...from our own experience, it is not an easy task. And we believe it is made more challenging in their situation because of the heavy personal investments - of all sorts - which they have made. We have two observations to make in this area. First, Open Space is an intellectually appealing way of being to many people, but finding it attractive - believing in it - and living in it are two fundamentally different problems. Living in Open Space is difficult to sustain. Our fear, the dominant culture, expectations of others, historical style, and other elements, often contribute to undoing our best intentions. Nevertheless, people committed to it keep on trying. In our experience, what may assist someone to commit to Open Space as a way of being (what others may see as a quixotic i.e. misguided, adventure) is a combination of commitment with a Spiritual base and support from people around you. In the first instance, one needs to move past intellect to Spirit (we have no easy answers here as we respect the uniqueness of individual journeys) . In the second instance, those committed to Open Space as a way of being require supportive networks both within and without the organization. In fact, in the past Birgitt has suggested that “...for an organization to sustain Spirit, supporting the “chief” to sustain his or her Spirit is the most essential ingredient” . Developing these networks of support, therefore, become critical. In the case of The Discovery Centre, we believe that the capacity of the Centre to generate a support network for Open Space practitioners may be critical. In the second case, power as it is conventionally understood is transformed
through Open Space. We believe that it often gives the appearance of weakness,
of chaos, of vulnerability when it is being offered as an organizational
way of being. Our experience is that this is not the reality. In fact,
when one is vigilant in holding open the space - and when one is supported
in doing so - we have found that the process does take care of itself.
It is sometimes time consuming, sometimes frustrating, but it almost invariably
works, and usually with results that are pleasantly surprising.
Next Chapters We do not know what the end of this particular story will be. As this is being written, The Discovery Centre is just moving into its fall programme schedule. A second Open Space event is planned for later this month (September), and we will await the results with considerable interest. However, it does seem to us that The Discovery Centre has provided an opportunity to identify some potentially critical points in relation to Open Space as a way of organizational life. A quick review of writings on Open Space indicates a fairly frequent tendency for Open Space to be viewed as a methodology to be applied on an episodic basis as opposed to an ongoing way of being and managing an organization. Harrison Owen in his book The Millennium Organization (Abbott, 1994) challenges us to use Open Space to leverage into the Millennium Organization as an interactive, empowering, creative organization. We both believe that for the Millennium Organization to emerge, notions surrounding Open Space must be expanded to include Open Space as a way of being in organization together. Admittedly brief work at the Centre, backed up by experience in other organizations, suggests that for Open Space to become an ongoing “management style”, there need to be: 1. Clear understanding from all of the givens in an organization - those items which are non-negotiable 2. Commitment at more than an intellectual level...that is, commitment at the level of individual Spirit 3. Effective supports for the chief leader who is likely to be the person called on to hold open the organization’s space and time...if not the chief leader, then whoever else shoulders this responsibility We believe that there are probably other conditions which assist/inhibit
transformation towards Open Space as a way of being and we look forward
to the opportunity to hear from others about their discoveries.
Birgitt Bolton, “Open Space in a Social Service Setting: Keeping the Spirit Alive” in Harrison Owen, Tales from Open Space. Abbott: 1995. Birgitt Bolton and Larry Peterson, “After the Open Space Event: Managing the Organization in Ongoing Open Space”, published as an occasional paper by the Open Space Institute of Canada. Harrison Owen, The Millennium Organization. Abbot: 1994. Margaret Wheatley, Leadership and the New Science. Berrett-Koehler:
1993.
|