Re: 8,000,000 Emergent - Complex Contagions & Behavior Change
Hi John,
I love that Michael said you've already convened a dialog. It's much
more in the spirit of Open Space to "take responsibility for what you
love as an act of service" (as Peggy Holman says). I'll just assume
that's what you've done and act accordingly.
There are certainly strong feelings about this topic. My sense being in
this community for over ten years is that those who "hold space" don't
do that, at least not directly. The process of holding space is mostly
in the pre-work, and perhaps the most beautiful illustration of this is
how after the rules are explained, the facilitator leaves and takes a
nap (as Harrison does).
My own experience as a "holder of space", the people inviting,
organizing and facilitating an Open Space, is that I've not reached the
Zen Mastery level Harrison Owen has. I'm often wearing the sponsor hat
as well as facilitator hat. So I'm not really immune from taking actions
in favor of my biases, nor do I really believe that is necessary or even
advisable to be rigid about this. We're human, and it's a hard task to
really lean back.
Yet in many ways - it's much more powerful to step back. If our theme
has been well convened on an urgent topic with diverse and conflicting
opinions, AVOIDING advocacy is likely to have even more powerful results
in your desired direction.
Tao Te Ching verse 7
Therefore the sages:
Place themselves last but end up in front
Are outside of themselves and yet survive
Is it not due to their selflessness?
That is how they can achieve their own goals
Cheers,
Harold
On 5/6/23 2:02 PM, John Warinner via OSList wrote:
Hmmmm...
I would LOVE to participate in a dialogue around this question:
/As each of us closely watches our system(s) of interest, and
supports emerging changes/adaptations that we consider positive, to
what degree should we introduce our own ideas of where and how the
system should proceed?/
Does someone on this thread have the interest and means to convene
this dialogue?
Thank you!
John
*John Warinner
(541) 815-4103
*johnwarinner@gmail.com
--
Harold Shinsato
harold@shinsato.com
https://shinsato.com
Thank you Harold. I think you raise a key point regarding the respective
roles of "stakeholders" (my word) and "spaceholders" (my take on your word).
Sometimes, we participate in a space or system at the invitation of the
"stakeholders" wearing only our "spaceholder" hat. In those instances, I
perceive the lines between roles are relatively clear.
Sometimes, we participate in a space or system in which we are
"stakeholders" AND "spaceholders." In those instances, I perceive the
lines between roles are less clear... and they must be navigated carefully
to maintain objectivity and the trust of the other participants.
I understand the argument that we can and/or should avoid playing the
"spaceholder" role in spaces/systems where we are "stakeholders."
But my personal worldview is that we are better served to acknowledge our
"stakeholdership" and practice/learn the art of serving both roles while
maintaining our objectivity and the trust of others.
Depending on the circumstances, this MAY NOT involve introducing our own
ideas of where and how the system SHOULD proceed, but it MAY WELL involve
introducing our unique ideas/insights about where and how the system COULD
proceed.
I believe this is consistent with the perspective you shared... but I
welcome feedback from you and/or others.
Thank you,
JohnW
John Warinner(541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com johnw@watersolving.com
On Sat, May 6, 2023 at 1:56 PM Harold Shinsato via OSList <
everyone@oslist.org> wrote:
Hi John,
I love that Michael said you've already convened a dialog. It's much more
in the spirit of Open Space to "take responsibility for what you love as an
act of service" (as Peggy Holman says). I'll just assume that's what you've
done and act accordingly.
There are certainly strong feelings about this topic. My sense being in
this community for over ten years is that those who "hold space" don't do
that, at least not directly. The process of holding space is mostly in the
pre-work, and perhaps the most beautiful illustration of this is how after
the rules are explained, the facilitator leaves and takes a nap (as
Harrison does).
My own experience as a "holder of space", the people inviting, organizing
and facilitating an Open Space, is that I've not reached the Zen Mastery
level Harrison Owen has. I'm often wearing the sponsor hat as well as
facilitator hat. So I'm not really immune from taking actions in favor of
my biases, nor do I really believe that is necessary or even advisable to
be rigid about this. We're human, and it's a hard task to really lean back.
Yet in many ways - it's much more powerful to step back. If our theme has
been well convened on an urgent topic with diverse and conflicting
opinions, AVOIDING advocacy is likely to have even more powerful results in
your desired direction.
Tao Te Ching verse 7
Therefore the sages:
Place themselves last but end up in front
Are outside of themselves and yet survive
Is it not due to their selflessness?
That is how they can achieve their own goals
Cheers,
Harold
On 5/6/23 2:02 PM, John Warinner via OSList wrote:
Hmmmm...
I would LOVE to participate in a dialogue around this question:
As each of us closely watches our system(s) of interest, and
supports emerging changes/adaptations that we consider positive, to what
degree should we introduce our own ideas of where and how the system should
proceed?
Does someone on this thread have the interest and means to convene this
dialogue?
Thank you!
John
*John Warinner *(541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com
--
Harold Shinsato
harold@shinsato.com
https://shinsato.com
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
I just invited my LinkedIn network of 2200 people, along with two groups
totaling over 3000 people into the OSList with the invitation to join this
dialogue.
It seems to me we have the ideal input criteria for a “yeasty” and “juicy”
open space.
May the principles and the law guide us to Peace.
I’m prepared to be surprised!
On Sat, May 6, 2023 at 6:19 PM John Warinner via OSList everyone@oslist.org
wrote:
Thank you Harold. I think you raise a key point regarding the respective
roles of "stakeholders" (my word) and "spaceholders" (my take on your word).
Sometimes, we participate in a space or system at the invitation of the
"stakeholders" wearing only our "spaceholder" hat. In those instances, I
perceive the lines between roles are relatively clear.
Sometimes, we participate in a space or system in which we are
"stakeholders" AND "spaceholders." In those instances, I perceive the
lines between roles are less clear... and they must be navigated carefully
to maintain objectivity and the trust of the other participants.
I understand the argument that we can and/or should avoid playing the
"spaceholder" role in spaces/systems where we are "stakeholders."
But my personal worldview is that we are better served to acknowledge our
"stakeholdership" and practice/learn the art of serving both roles while
maintaining our objectivity and the trust of others.
Depending on the circumstances, this MAY NOT involve introducing our own
ideas of where and how the system SHOULD proceed, but it MAY WELL involve
introducing our unique ideas/insights about where and how the system COULD
proceed.
I believe this is consistent with the perspective you shared... but I
welcome feedback from you and/or others.
Thank you,
JohnW
John Warinner(541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com johnw@watersolving.com
On Sat, May 6, 2023 at 1:56 PM Harold Shinsato via OSList <
everyone@oslist.org> wrote:
Hi John,
I love that Michael said you've already convened a dialog. It's much more
in the spirit of Open Space to "take responsibility for what you love as an
act of service" (as Peggy Holman says). I'll just assume that's what you've
done and act accordingly.
There are certainly strong feelings about this topic. My sense being in
this community for over ten years is that those who "hold space" don't do
that, at least not directly. The process of holding space is mostly in the
pre-work, and perhaps the most beautiful illustration of this is how after
the rules are explained, the facilitator leaves and takes a nap (as
Harrison does).
My own experience as a "holder of space", the people inviting, organizing
and facilitating an Open Space, is that I've not reached the Zen Mastery
level Harrison Owen has. I'm often wearing the sponsor hat as well as
facilitator hat. So I'm not really immune from taking actions in favor of
my biases, nor do I really believe that is necessary or even advisable to
be rigid about this. We're human, and it's a hard task to really lean back.
Yet in many ways - it's much more powerful to step back. If our theme has
been well convened on an urgent topic with diverse and conflicting
opinions, AVOIDING advocacy is likely to have even more powerful results in
your desired direction.
Tao Te Ching verse 7
Therefore the sages:
Place themselves last but end up in front
Are outside of themselves and yet survive
Is it not due to their selflessness?
That is how they can achieve their own goals
Cheers,
Harold
On 5/6/23 2:02 PM, John Warinner via OSList wrote:
Hmmmm...
I would LOVE to participate in a dialogue around this question:
As each of us closely watches our system(s) of interest, and
supports emerging changes/adaptations that we consider positive, to what
degree should we introduce our own ideas of where and how the system should
proceed?
Does someone on this thread have the interest and means to convene this
dialogue?
Thank you!
John
*John Warinner *(541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com
--
Harold Shinsato
harold@shinsato.com
https://shinsato.com
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
--
Rijon Erickson
Purple Phoenix Partners
513-375-8350
*Follow me on Twitter at *@soundslikeryan
https://twitter.com/soundslikeryan
*Connect with me on LinkedIn at *https://www.linkedin.com/in/rijonerickson/
Book time with me at http://calend.ly/rijon
Hi John,
Thanks for the reply. The stakeholder/spaceholder divide for me has
always been an interesting one. Especially since it never sat well with
me. When I'm being paid as a spaceholder, which I have been paid, and
professional facilitation is often the context then the divide makes
sense. But it's not where most of my passion about Open Space fits.
Have you heard of the role of Participant-Facilitator?
I learned this concept from a Peacemaking Circle training, which comes
from a first nations tribe of northern Canada. It's essential very much
related to what many if not most of the north American tribes have shown
us with the idea of a talking stick in a circle, giving space for
everyone to participate. This idea "healed" the divide for me, giving
the space holder a non-privileged role in the space where the
facilitator does participate as well as inviting (rather than
controlling) the self-organizing structures that the participants get to
enjoy.
I'm not sure how interested others are in this conversation. Mostly
people on this list focus on helping deconstruct the dysfunctional
control fantasy of traditional leadership/ownership control, while
needing to engage with traditional leadership. I'm not sure this is the
biggest issue in many emerging communities and organizations.
Harold
On 5/6/23 4:18 PM, John Warinner via OSList wrote:
Thank you Harold. I think you raise a key point regarding the
respective roles of "stakeholders" (my word) and "spaceholders" (my
take on your word).
Sometimes, we participate in a space or system at the invitation of
the "stakeholders" wearing only our "spaceholder" hat. In those
instances, I perceive the lines between roles are relatively clear.
Sometimes, we participate in a space or system in which we are
"stakeholders" AND "spaceholders." In those instances, I perceive the
lines between roles are less clear... and they must be navigated
carefully to maintain objectivity and the trust of the other participants.
I understand the argument that we can and/or should avoid playing the
"spaceholder" role in spaces/systems where we are "stakeholders."
But my personal worldview is that we are better served to acknowledge
our "stakeholdership" and practice/learn the art of serving both roles
while maintaining our objectivity and the trust of others.
Depending on the circumstances, this MAY NOT involve introducing our
own ideas of where and how the system SHOULD proceed, but it MAY WELL
involve introducing our unique ideas/insights about where and how the
system COULD proceed.
I believe this is consistent with the perspective you shared... but I
welcome feedback from you and/or others.
Thank you,
JohnW
*John Warinner
(541) 815-4103
*johnwarinner@gmail.com
--
Harold Shinsato
harold@shinsato.com
https://shinsato.com
Hi Harold,
Thanks for sharing your perspectives.
Yes, the role of Participant-Facilitator is familiar to me and akin to what
I meant by Stakeholder-Spaceholder. Most of my activity with OS/dialogue
is also spent in that realm.
I am sensitive to your question about the degree of interest of others in
this dialogue.
I suggested to Tony Budak that we may want to utilize his weekly Learning
Cafe platform to provide those interested with a live, interactive dialogue
on this topic.
Please let me know if you are aware of any other options for taking this
conversation off-line out of respect for the OSList members who are not
interested to observe and/or participate.
Thank you,
JohnW
On Sun, May 7, 2023 at 11:41 AM Harold Shinsato via OSList <
everyone@oslist.org> wrote:
Hi John,
Thanks for the reply. The stakeholder/spaceholder divide for me has always
been an interesting one. Especially since it never sat well with me. When
I'm being paid as a spaceholder, which I have been paid, and professional
facilitation is often the context then the divide makes sense. But it's not
where most of my passion about Open Space fits.
Have you heard of the role of Participant-Facilitator?
I learned this concept from a Peacemaking Circle training, which comes
from a first nations tribe of northern Canada. It's essential very much
related to what many if not most of the north American tribes have shown us
with the idea of a talking stick in a circle, giving space for everyone to
participate. This idea "healed" the divide for me, giving the space holder
a non-privileged role in the space where the facilitator does participate
as well as inviting (rather than controlling) the self-organizing
structures that the participants get to enjoy.
I'm not sure how interested others are in this conversation. Mostly people
on this list focus on helping deconstruct the dysfunctional control fantasy
of traditional leadership/ownership control, while needing to engage with
traditional leadership. I'm not sure this is the biggest issue in many
emerging communities and organizations.
Harold
On 5/6/23 4:18 PM, John Warinner via OSList wrote:
Thank you Harold. I think you raise a key point regarding the respective
roles of "stakeholders" (my word) and "spaceholders" (my take on your
word).
Sometimes, we participate in a space or system at the invitation of the
"stakeholders" wearing only our "spaceholder" hat. In those instances, I
perceive the lines between roles are relatively clear.
Sometimes, we participate in a space or system in which we are
"stakeholders" AND "spaceholders." In those instances, I perceive the
lines between roles are less clear... and they must be navigated carefully
to maintain objectivity and the trust of the other participants.
I understand the argument that we can and/or should avoid playing the
"spaceholder" role in spaces/systems where we are "stakeholders."
But my personal worldview is that we are better served to acknowledge our
"stakeholdership" and practice/learn the art of serving both roles while
maintaining our objectivity and the trust of others.
Depending on the circumstances, this MAY NOT involve introducing our own
ideas of where and how the system SHOULD proceed, but it MAY WELL involve
introducing our unique ideas/insights about where and how the system COULD
proceed.
I believe this is consistent with the perspective you shared... but I
welcome feedback from you and/or others.
Thank you,
JohnW
*John Warinner *(541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com
--
Harold Shinsato
harold@shinsato.com
https://shinsato.com
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
--
John Warinner(541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com johnw@watersolving.com
Please leave the conversation on the list. I suspect many find it relevant.
Peggy HolmanSent from my iPhone
On May 7, 2023, at 12:32 PM, John Warinner via OSList <everyone@oslist.org> wrote:
Hi Harold,
Thanks for sharing your perspectives.
Yes, the role of Participant-Facilitator is familiar to me and akin to what I meant by Stakeholder-Spaceholder. Most of my activity with OS/dialogue is also spent in that realm.
I am sensitive to your question about the degree of interest of others in this dialogue.
I suggested to Tony Budak that we may want to utilize his weekly Learning Cafe platform to provide those interested with a live, interactive dialogue on this topic.
Please let me know if you are aware of any other options for taking this conversation off-line out of respect for the OSList members who are not interested to observe and/or participate.
Thank you,
JohnW
On Sun, May 7, 2023 at 11:41 AM Harold Shinsato via OSList <everyone@oslist.org> wrote:
Hi John,
Thanks for the reply. The stakeholder/spaceholder divide for me has always been an interesting one. Especially since it never sat well with me. When I'm being paid as a spaceholder, which I have been paid, and professional facilitation is often the context then the divide makes sense. But it's not where most of my passion about Open Space fits.
Have you heard of the role of Participant-Facilitator?
I learned this concept from a Peacemaking Circle training, which comes from a first nations tribe of northern Canada. It's essential very much related to what many if not most of the north American tribes have shown us with the idea of a talking stick in a circle, giving space for everyone to participate. This idea "healed" the divide for me, giving the space holder a non-privileged role in the space where the facilitator does participate as well as inviting (rather than controlling) the self-organizing structures that the participants get to enjoy.
I'm not sure how interested others are in this conversation. Mostly people on this list focus on helping deconstruct the dysfunctional control fantasy of traditional leadership/ownership control, while needing to engage with traditional leadership. I'm not sure this is the biggest issue in many emerging communities and organizations.
Harold
On 5/6/23 4:18 PM, John Warinner via OSList wrote:
Thank you Harold. I think you raise a key point regarding the respective roles of "stakeholders" (my word) and "spaceholders" (my take on your word).
Sometimes, we participate in a space or system at the invitation of the "stakeholders" wearing only our "spaceholder" hat. In those instances, I perceive the lines between roles are relatively clear.
Sometimes, we participate in a space or system in which we are "stakeholders" AND "spaceholders." In those instances, I perceive the lines between roles are less clear... and they must be navigated carefully to maintain objectivity and the trust of the other participants.
I understand the argument that we can and/or should avoid playing the "spaceholder" role in spaces/systems where we are "stakeholders."
But my personal worldview is that we are better served to acknowledge our "stakeholdership" and practice/learn the art of serving both roles while maintaining our objectivity and the trust of others.
Depending on the circumstances, this MAY NOT involve introducing our own ideas of where and how the system SHOULD proceed, but it MAY WELL involve introducing our unique ideas/insights about where and how the system COULD proceed.
I believe this is consistent with the perspective you shared... but I welcome feedback from you and/or others.
Thank you,
JohnW
<a name="m_-1157550121178719340_SignatureSanitizer_SafeHtmlFilter_SafeHtmlFilter_SafeHtmlFilter_SafeHtmlFilter__MailAutoSig" style="font-family:arial;font-size:small;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-variant-alternates:normal;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(17,85,204)">John Warinner (541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com</a>--
Harold Shinsato
harold@shinsato.com
https://shinsato.com_______________________________________________
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org--
<a name="SignatureSanitizer_SafeHtmlFilter_SafeHtmlFilter_SafeHtmlFilter_SafeHtmlFilter__MailAutoSig" style="color:rgb(17,85,204);font-family:arial;font-size:small;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">John Warinner (541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com</a>_______________________________________________
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
Hi John and Harold
I love this conversation and I love for it to stay here. We are a few
people here who can form a nexus of caring about this topic. It is a
recurring topic for me as it is the role that I usually seek for my
interests.
The role of Participant-Facilitator
On Sun, 7 May 2023, 19:31 John Warinner via OSList, everyone@oslist.org
wrote:
Hi Harold,
Thanks for sharing your perspectives.
Yes, the role of Participant-Facilitator is familiar to me and akin to
what I meant by Stakeholder-Spaceholder. Most of my activity with
OS/dialogue is also spent in that realm.
I am sensitive to your question about the degree of interest of others in
this dialogue.
I suggested to Tony Budak that we may want to utilize his weekly Learning
Cafe platform to provide those interested with a live, interactive dialogue
on this topic.
Please let me know if you are aware of any other options for taking this
conversation off-line out of respect for the OSList members who are not
interested to observe and/or participate.
Thank you,
JohnW
On Sun, May 7, 2023 at 11:41 AM Harold Shinsato via OSList <
everyone@oslist.org> wrote:
Hi John,
Thanks for the reply. The stakeholder/spaceholder divide for me has
always been an interesting one. Especially since it never sat well with me.
When I'm being paid as a spaceholder, which I have been paid, and
professional facilitation is often the context then the divide makes sense.
But it's not where most of my passion about Open Space fits.
Have you heard of the role of Participant-Facilitator?
I learned this concept from a Peacemaking Circle training, which comes
from a first nations tribe of northern Canada. It's essential very much
related to what many if not most of the north American tribes have shown us
with the idea of a talking stick in a circle, giving space for everyone to
participate. This idea "healed" the divide for me, giving the space holder
a non-privileged role in the space where the facilitator does participate
as well as inviting (rather than controlling) the self-organizing
structures that the participants get to enjoy.
I'm not sure how interested others are in this conversation. Mostly
people on this list focus on helping deconstruct the dysfunctional control
fantasy of traditional leadership/ownership control, while needing to
engage with traditional leadership. I'm not sure this is the biggest issue
in many emerging communities and organizations.
Harold
On 5/6/23 4:18 PM, John Warinner via OSList wrote:
Thank you Harold. I think you raise a key point regarding the respective
roles of "stakeholders" (my word) and "spaceholders" (my take on your
word).
Sometimes, we participate in a space or system at the invitation of the
"stakeholders" wearing only our "spaceholder" hat. In those instances, I
perceive the lines between roles are relatively clear.
Sometimes, we participate in a space or system in which we are
"stakeholders" AND "spaceholders." In those instances, I perceive the
lines between roles are less clear... and they must be navigated carefully
to maintain objectivity and the trust of the other participants.
I understand the argument that we can and/or should avoid playing the
"spaceholder" role in spaces/systems where we are "stakeholders."
But my personal worldview is that we are better served to acknowledge our
"stakeholdership" and practice/learn the art of serving both roles while
maintaining our objectivity and the trust of others.
Depending on the circumstances, this MAY NOT involve introducing our own
ideas of where and how the system SHOULD proceed, but it MAY WELL involve
introducing our unique ideas/insights about where and how the system COULD
proceed.
I believe this is consistent with the perspective you shared... but I
welcome feedback from you and/or others.
Thank you,
JohnW
*John Warinner *(541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com
--
Harold Shinsato
harold@shinsato.com
https://shinsato.com
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
--
John Warinner(541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com johnw@watersolving.com
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
Will do. Thank you Peggy.
JW
John Warinner(541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com johnw@watersolving.com
On Sun, May 7, 2023 at 1:34 PM Peggy Holman peggy@peggyholman.com wrote:
Please leave the conversation on the list. I suspect many find it
relevant.
Peggy Holman
Sent from my iPhone
On May 7, 2023, at 12:32 PM, John Warinner via OSList everyone@oslist.org
wrote:
Hi Harold,
Thanks for sharing your perspectives.
Yes, the role of Participant-Facilitator is familiar to me and akin to
what I meant by Stakeholder-Spaceholder. Most of my activity with
OS/dialogue is also spent in that realm.
I am sensitive to your question about the degree of interest of others in
this dialogue.
I suggested to Tony Budak that we may want to utilize his weekly Learning
Cafe platform to provide those interested with a live, interactive dialogue
on this topic.
Please let me know if you are aware of any other options for taking this
conversation off-line out of respect for the OSList members who are not
interested to observe and/or participate.
Thank you,
JohnW
On Sun, May 7, 2023 at 11:41 AM Harold Shinsato via OSList <
everyone@oslist.org> wrote:
Hi John,
Thanks for the reply. The stakeholder/spaceholder divide for me has
always been an interesting one. Especially since it never sat well with me.
When I'm being paid as a spaceholder, which I have been paid, and
professional facilitation is often the context then the divide makes sense.
But it's not where most of my passion about Open Space fits.
Have you heard of the role of Participant-Facilitator?
I learned this concept from a Peacemaking Circle training, which comes
from a first nations tribe of northern Canada. It's essential very much
related to what many if not most of the north American tribes have shown us
with the idea of a talking stick in a circle, giving space for everyone to
participate. This idea "healed" the divide for me, giving the space holder
a non-privileged role in the space where the facilitator does participate
as well as inviting (rather than controlling) the self-organizing
structures that the participants get to enjoy.
I'm not sure how interested others are in this conversation. Mostly
people on this list focus on helping deconstruct the dysfunctional control
fantasy of traditional leadership/ownership control, while needing to
engage with traditional leadership. I'm not sure this is the biggest issue
in many emerging communities and organizations.
Harold
On 5/6/23 4:18 PM, John Warinner via OSList wrote:
Thank you Harold. I think you raise a key point regarding the respective
roles of "stakeholders" (my word) and "spaceholders" (my take on your
word).
Sometimes, we participate in a space or system at the invitation of the
"stakeholders" wearing only our "spaceholder" hat. In those instances, I
perceive the lines between roles are relatively clear.
Sometimes, we participate in a space or system in which we are
"stakeholders" AND "spaceholders." In those instances, I perceive the
lines between roles are less clear... and they must be navigated carefully
to maintain objectivity and the trust of the other participants.
I understand the argument that we can and/or should avoid playing the
"spaceholder" role in spaces/systems where we are "stakeholders."
But my personal worldview is that we are better served to acknowledge our
"stakeholdership" and practice/learn the art of serving both roles while
maintaining our objectivity and the trust of others.
Depending on the circumstances, this MAY NOT involve introducing our own
ideas of where and how the system SHOULD proceed, but it MAY WELL involve
introducing our unique ideas/insights about where and how the system COULD
proceed.
I believe this is consistent with the perspective you shared... but I
welcome feedback from you and/or others.
Thank you,
JohnW
*John Warinner *(541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com
--
Harold Shinsato
harold@shinsato.com
https://shinsato.com
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
--
John Warinner(541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com johnw@watersolving.com
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
Thank you Kari. I appreciate your feedback.
I appreciate the forum and opportunity to share my perspective.
I will leave the space open and welcome others to share their perspectives.
Thank you,
JohnW
John Warinner(541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com johnw@watersolving.com
On Sun, May 7, 2023 at 1:35 PM Kári Gunnarsson kortleggur@gmail.com wrote:
Hi John and Harold
I love this conversation and I love for it to stay here. We are a few
people here who can form a nexus of caring about this topic. It is a
recurring topic for me as it is the role that I usually seek for my
interests.
The role of Participant-Facilitator
On Sun, 7 May 2023, 19:31 John Warinner via OSList, everyone@oslist.org
wrote:
Hi Harold,
Thanks for sharing your perspectives.
Yes, the role of Participant-Facilitator is familiar to me and akin to
what I meant by Stakeholder-Spaceholder. Most of my activity with
OS/dialogue is also spent in that realm.
I am sensitive to your question about the degree of interest of others in
this dialogue.
I suggested to Tony Budak that we may want to utilize his weekly Learning
Cafe platform to provide those interested with a live, interactive dialogue
on this topic.
Please let me know if you are aware of any other options for taking this
conversation off-line out of respect for the OSList members who are not
interested to observe and/or participate.
Thank you,
JohnW
On Sun, May 7, 2023 at 11:41 AM Harold Shinsato via OSList <
everyone@oslist.org> wrote:
Hi John,
Thanks for the reply. The stakeholder/spaceholder divide for me has
always been an interesting one. Especially since it never sat well with me.
When I'm being paid as a spaceholder, which I have been paid, and
professional facilitation is often the context then the divide makes sense.
But it's not where most of my passion about Open Space fits.
Have you heard of the role of Participant-Facilitator?
I learned this concept from a Peacemaking Circle training, which comes
from a first nations tribe of northern Canada. It's essential very much
related to what many if not most of the north American tribes have shown us
with the idea of a talking stick in a circle, giving space for everyone to
participate. This idea "healed" the divide for me, giving the space holder
a non-privileged role in the space where the facilitator does participate
as well as inviting (rather than controlling) the self-organizing
structures that the participants get to enjoy.
I'm not sure how interested others are in this conversation. Mostly
people on this list focus on helping deconstruct the dysfunctional control
fantasy of traditional leadership/ownership control, while needing to
engage with traditional leadership. I'm not sure this is the biggest issue
in many emerging communities and organizations.
Harold
On 5/6/23 4:18 PM, John Warinner via OSList wrote:
Thank you Harold. I think you raise a key point regarding the
respective roles of "stakeholders" (my word) and "spaceholders" (my take on
your word).
Sometimes, we participate in a space or system at the invitation of the
"stakeholders" wearing only our "spaceholder" hat. In those instances, I
perceive the lines between roles are relatively clear.
Sometimes, we participate in a space or system in which we are
"stakeholders" AND "spaceholders." In those instances, I perceive the
lines between roles are less clear... and they must be navigated carefully
to maintain objectivity and the trust of the other participants.
I understand the argument that we can and/or should avoid playing the
"spaceholder" role in spaces/systems where we are "stakeholders."
But my personal worldview is that we are better served to acknowledge
our "stakeholdership" and practice/learn the art of serving both roles
while maintaining our objectivity and the trust of others.
Depending on the circumstances, this MAY NOT involve introducing our own
ideas of where and how the system SHOULD proceed, but it MAY WELL involve
introducing our unique ideas/insights about where and how the system COULD
proceed.
I believe this is consistent with the perspective you shared... but I
welcome feedback from you and/or others.
Thank you,
JohnW
*John Warinner *(541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com
--
Harold Shinsato
harold@shinsato.com
https://shinsato.com
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
--
John Warinner(541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com johnw@watersolving.com
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
This conversation brings my thoughts to the facilitator/sponsor divide and
the role of the participant. When I initiate something I feel myself as in
the role of a sponsor, than I can act as a facilitator for the sponsored
theme while at the same time embodying the theme as the sponsor and the
space as the facilitator. To venture forward and also participate is at the
risk of loosing some of the embodiment of the other servises that I am
holding in my presence.
What are the tricks and structures for this to be more successful?
On Mon, 8 May 2023, 20:57 John Warinner, johnwarinner@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you Kari. I appreciate your feedback.
I appreciate the forum and opportunity to share my perspective.
I will leave the space open and welcome others to share their perspectives.
Thank you,
JohnW
John Warinner(541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com johnw@watersolving.com
On Sun, May 7, 2023 at 1:35 PM Kári Gunnarsson kortleggur@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi John and Harold
I love this conversation and I love for it to stay here. We are a few
people here who can form a nexus of caring about this topic. It is a
recurring topic for me as it is the role that I usually seek for my
interests.
The role of Participant-Facilitator
On Sun, 7 May 2023, 19:31 John Warinner via OSList, everyone@oslist.org
wrote:
Hi Harold,
Thanks for sharing your perspectives.
Yes, the role of Participant-Facilitator is familiar to me and akin to
what I meant by Stakeholder-Spaceholder. Most of my activity with
OS/dialogue is also spent in that realm.
I am sensitive to your question about the degree of interest of others
in this dialogue.
I suggested to Tony Budak that we may want to utilize his weekly
Learning Cafe platform to provide those interested with a live, interactive
dialogue on this topic.
Please let me know if you are aware of any other options for taking this
conversation off-line out of respect for the OSList members who are not
interested to observe and/or participate.
Thank you,
JohnW
On Sun, May 7, 2023 at 11:41 AM Harold Shinsato via OSList <
everyone@oslist.org> wrote:
Hi John,
Thanks for the reply. The stakeholder/spaceholder divide for me has
always been an interesting one. Especially since it never sat well with me.
When I'm being paid as a spaceholder, which I have been paid, and
professional facilitation is often the context then the divide makes sense.
But it's not where most of my passion about Open Space fits.
Have you heard of the role of Participant-Facilitator?
I learned this concept from a Peacemaking Circle training, which comes
from a first nations tribe of northern Canada. It's essential very much
related to what many if not most of the north American tribes have shown us
with the idea of a talking stick in a circle, giving space for everyone to
participate. This idea "healed" the divide for me, giving the space holder
a non-privileged role in the space where the facilitator does participate
as well as inviting (rather than controlling) the self-organizing
structures that the participants get to enjoy.
I'm not sure how interested others are in this conversation. Mostly
people on this list focus on helping deconstruct the dysfunctional control
fantasy of traditional leadership/ownership control, while needing to
engage with traditional leadership. I'm not sure this is the biggest issue
in many emerging communities and organizations.
Harold
On 5/6/23 4:18 PM, John Warinner via OSList wrote:
Thank you Harold. I think you raise a key point regarding the
respective roles of "stakeholders" (my word) and "spaceholders" (my take on
your word).
Sometimes, we participate in a space or system at the invitation of the
"stakeholders" wearing only our "spaceholder" hat. In those instances, I
perceive the lines between roles are relatively clear.
Sometimes, we participate in a space or system in which we are
"stakeholders" AND "spaceholders." In those instances, I perceive the
lines between roles are less clear... and they must be navigated carefully
to maintain objectivity and the trust of the other participants.
I understand the argument that we can and/or should avoid playing the
"spaceholder" role in spaces/systems where we are "stakeholders."
But my personal worldview is that we are better served to acknowledge
our "stakeholdership" and practice/learn the art of serving both roles
while maintaining our objectivity and the trust of others.
Depending on the circumstances, this MAY NOT involve introducing our
own ideas of where and how the system SHOULD proceed, but it MAY WELL
involve introducing our unique ideas/insights about where and how the
system COULD proceed.
I believe this is consistent with the perspective you shared... but I
welcome feedback from you and/or others.
Thank you,
JohnW
*John Warinner *(541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com
--
Harold Shinsato
harold@shinsato.com
https://shinsato.com
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org
--
John Warinner(541) 815-4103
johnwarinner@gmail.com johnw@watersolving.com
OSList mailing list -- everyone@oslist.org
To unsubscribe send an email to everyone-leave@oslist.org