|
|
Open Space Principles:
OPEN SPACES
The Sydney Social Forum will be structured using the "Open Space"
model. This is basically a self organising model in which the detailed agenda
for the forum is defined on the day by the people who attend. Rather than
being chaotic, it is a dynamic, clearly structured model which can respond
to the needs of the people who attend.
'Open Space' draws on the work of science in the field of complex adaptive
systems, where humans, like nature, are seen to be self-organising, not self-disorganising.
If you accept this premise to be true then less becomes more. Outcomes arise
in spite of structure and control, not because of it.
Rooms will be made available and time slots pre-determined. There will be
at least 14 workshop spaces and 4 dedicated workshop sessions - allowing for
at least 56workshops.
People then are invited to announce their proposed workshop topics - within the theme of the forum - declaring who they are, what their workshop will be about, what time and in which room.
These workshops are then mapped on the wall.
People can attend the workshops at their leisure. If no-one attends a particular
workshop - fine. If people in another workshop decide that they want to spend
the whole day exploring the issues in more depth - fine. The people who are
there define and create the forum that they want. No one can control or co-opt
the process.
Open space operates according to 5 principles:
Participants take notes as they see fit. These will be typed up by participants as the forum proceeds and will be made available shortly afterwards.
Open Spaces in Practice
by Inge Arnold
Recently I attended the National Environment Conference held in Melbourne. It was the first major gathering of Australian-based non-government organisations in Australia in over 10 years. It was a fantastic experience to be among so many people working so hard in their wee corner of Australia on any one (or more) of an amazing spectrum of environmental issues. Over 400 participants had gathered from everywhere from the big smoke of central Sydney to remote towns in the Kimberley.
The conference itself was fantastic. However, it wasn't because of any particular speaker's speech or an inspiring workshop on an obscure pocket of old growth forest tucked away between logging coups. It was simply in the way it was organised. Facilitation of the conference was conducted in an 'Open Spaces' method - an attempt to open up the conference, and allow everyone the opportunity to concentrate on interacting and meeting each other (after all, it had been a long time between drinks!), rather than insisting that their issue was the most important of the new millennia.
Many of the conference participants at first were a little hesitant to adopt the structure and process immediately, it was after all, the first time that most had participated in an open spaces-facilitated conference. However, as workshops and plenaries progressed, there was overwhelming support for the process.
For many it encompassed much, if not all, of what they were looking for in a more inclusive, involving, open way of organising and participating. The irony is of course being that for informality to be recognised as a valid and productive process, it needs to be formalised.
Perhaps I should explain what I mean by informality. Open Spaces facilitation recognises the invaluable discussions that take place not so much in the usual confines of a workshop, but those that take place over the breaks, the conversations over coffee, the mixing, introductions and real interaction. In any gathering, whether it be of corporate entities, government bodies and even our own activist circles, it is over these informal chats where the information is shared, decisions, connections and agreements made.
The processes that we adopt through consensus, or simply out of habit are usually learnt. They are not inherent; they take practise and experience to master. This poses a number of problems; it focuses the power on those who have experience - those who know the lingo and the loop-holes. Through this it discourages input from newcomers, creating an intimidating, disempowering space.
Process adopted in meetings, conferences or any other space used for formal discussion, usually places restrictions on time available for each speaker. In doing so, it becomes ingrained in us to take what little opportunity we have to speak and use it to its full potential. We've all seen the result. Some jump on the opportunity and use it to rant about their own interest or issue for the maximum allowed time (and often exceeding it) to a largely uninterested audience. Open Spaces provides the forum for everyone to have their spiels, each to an enthusiastic (or at least interested) group. It also encourages participants to exercise self-control in self-facilitation. That is, given all the time in the world to speak, use only what you need, be concise and to the point or simply watch as your audience leaves.
Open Spaces places emphasis on this social interaction, rather that the time constrained hectic information bombardment that occurs often in workshops of conferences. That is not to say that workshops do not occur, it is simply in the manner in which they are organised and the way in which participation is enabled is different. The differences lie in five major principles that guide the process and operation of any Open Spaces forum.
The first of the five principles is 'whoever comes are the right people'. There is no point but to waste your own energy on focusing on the people who did not come. They have their own reasons for not participating, whatever they may be. From being too busy, to forgetting altogether or simply choosing to go to something else instead. Instead, focus your energies on those who do come. Maybe they have come to share their own experience, or to learn more. For whatever reason, they have chosen to participate and concentrate their own time and energy on the issue or activity being discussed. You have their attention, give them yours.
Something that is inherent in any conference or meeting process, is the restriction placed on us by time. Our inspirations, empowerment and problem-solving skills are not set by an alarm clock. A solution is not switched on at 10:45am. Nor does inspiration spontaneously appear at 11:30am. We need to understand this - that time restrictions may ease our initial frustration, but they won't necessarily find solutions. This is reflected in the second principle: that it starts when it's meant to. And of course, it will end when it's meant to, too. Meetings, workshops or discussion may need to be continued at a later date, or even to simply continue well beyond the allocated time. This is okay, if a solution to the problem or issue at hand is desired, then it may be necessary to put aside the processes that may inhibit our progress.
This follows on to the third principle, being: when it's over, it's over. Accept it when there is no more interest from other participants to continue, when the solution had been found, or the event over.
Given the people who participated, the issue that was addressed, the solutions to the problem or the manner in which they were undertaken; the fourth principle acknowledges the importance in recognising that: whatever happens is the only thing that could have. There is no point in dwelling over what could have been. Make the most of the people, resources and the time that you have - don't wish for things that aren't available, and don't regret outcomes. It was all that was going to be possible given the circumstances.
The final principle encompasses that of what the individual participant values. Everyone is entitled to give as much or as little as they desire, with the understanding that the outcome for each will reflect the effort put in and the circumstances at hand. In the same way, participants must be allowed to come and go as they please. If they have witnessed, participated and received all they needed in 10 minutes, they should be under no obligation other than what they make them selves to stay any longer. Similarly, anyone is able to stay as long as they like.
There are a few vitals that need to be considered for these principles to work. They are passion, the 'law of two feet' and responsibility.
The participants have got to be passionate about the issue at hand. Passion can't be created; it can be encouraged and people can be empowered, but ultimately, passion has to come from the person themselves. Solutions and ideas will come faster and will be longer lasting if they come from people who are honestly passionate about seeing the issue at hand progress.
The 'law of two feet' encompasses what the fifth principle explained above. That participants must be allowed to come and go as they please, giving as much as they value to a particular issue or problem. Knowing of course, that they will only get as much out as what they put in, and that their contribution is just as important in the quest for a solution as any one else's is.
Those who decide to take an issue to others and present it as something that needs their help to deal with, need to in doing so, take responsibility for that issue. That is, in a workshop situation, the person who suggests the workshop, needs to follow through in ensuring that the workshop goes ahead. Not necessarily run it themselves, but just make sure that those who choose to participate are not left in the lurch. On a similar note, when suggesting agenda items or issues at a meeting or workshop, the person who suggests it effectively owns it. They need to ensure that it is discussed sufficiently and appropriately dealt with. It is their responsibility. It is often found that this is what empowers people to take ownership over their knowledge, experience and passion and to ultimately follow the issue through to the end.
So, how is it applied?
Open Spaces facilitation can be applied to almost any situation. It is experimental - try different ways for different groups of people and when different outcomes are desired. Each group of individuals is different, the way in which things are dealt with are subsequently going to be different then too. However, the fundamental principals of Open Spaces can still be applied.
There are formal and informal outcomes from using the Open Spaces method to solve problems. Formal outcomes come with the solution or solutions found, while through the interaction and process, participants can be empowered through participation and ownership, while also through sharing information learn more about the issue and their fellow participants.
Some extra points:
- Inge Arnold
