Why the Open Space Technology got self-locked, and how PTƟ can open it again ? OST vs. Human Factor: Perception and Matrix-Q Intelligence applied for communication, collaboration, strategic management & leadership.

Why the Open Space Technology got self-locked, and how PTƟ can open it again ? OST vs. Human Factor: Perception and Matrix-Q Intelligence applied for communication, collaboration, strategic management & leadership.

  • Are  individualism and competition more relevant than mission statement?
  • When choices come down to individual life impact ? Would in that moment mission statement be, indeed, used for private interests, and will not be used at all, in the worse cases, otherwise?
  • Are mission statement and corporate culture accepted, learned and practiced, by employee contract enforcement but not always by employee understanding or agreement or preferences?  Is it true that employees do not judge it, so far are well paid ?
  • Under which conditions mission statement and corporate culture are preferred and naturally followed by the employees ?
  • What is an open system for communication and collaboration ?
  • Are open systems always democratic ?
  • How an open system gets closed by human factor lack of ability of engagement (agreement and collaboration) on achievement and development of corporate aims, mission statement and culture ?
  • How to unlock an open system that got closed by human factor lack of loyalty (with mission statement and corporate culture, operational guidelines) ?
  • When an open system becomes useful for power based emotionally intelligent and dominant leader ?
  • How can SDG Goals be achieved by applying PTT OST Integration ?
  • Which benefits there are accessible for SDG Entrepreneurs that practice and apply PTT Tools for holistic strategic management ?
SYSTEMIC, SYNERGETIC, OPEN SYSTEMS

Along the years 1999 and 2003, while traveling in South America, and leading a NGO dedicated to sustainable development i came across to a small network of travelers dedicated to visit farms and learn about agriculture and sustainable practices. Along those years, responsible travel was emerging and travelers discussed at the travelers lodges and private multinational gatherings on issues related to the status of the world, global sustainable development, responsibility and consistency with mission statement of the local NGOs, and loyalty and capability of volunteers.

I had run for a couple of NGOs trainings on how to improve management of volunteer programs and facilitated some tools for human factor management and self-management. My own NGO (1999-2003) had a volunteer program for which mostly travelers will volunteer. Loyalty and responsibility of volunteers was an issue. Will volunteer complete the work necessary, will they cost to us more resources or help us improve effectiveness? How much does it cost us train a volunteer? and how much do we produce with them ? Will volunteer think by their own and help us get feedback from the field or are they only taking volunteer roles in order to travel un-expensive and get into cultural immersion experiences ?

On the other side, because of my work, i will deal with local organizations, companies, most of their leaders were social sensitive and wished to care for their locations and culture, through their business. In some cases, few of them had to deal with local networks, communication and agreements. I think here was the most challenging field of work. I have later on noticed a similar kind of challenge in corporate world. When a leader makes decisions based on collaboration and communication with a board of team members to whom a leader or the board hears, and why ? charismatic, emotional and psychological powerful individuals may lead the decision of an organization or network. Political games, conflict of interests, power game, wealth and religion will conduce communication and choice of priorities. In many cases not in order to the mission statement of the organization or network. The mission statement was utilized as for a marketing reason and not as a guidance for the management or development of projects.

Systemic perception (thinking, management) became a very important tool for me, along the time i was also learning on parallel thinking and thinking out of the box. A strange combination of opposite approaches. While systemic thinking limits everything to a system that represents the known reality, out of the box and parallel thinking look for alternative perspectives. With this foundation i started my training on Permaculture Design, in a farm centre in Bolivia. Along my studies on Permaculture (Permanent Agriculture) the idea, intention, of social permaculture was to bring the design principles into social management and community building, but for an unknown reason the social permaculture was not a main centre of attention between permaculture designer. I was wondering why, as the human factor is key for any social and cultural development. A system will evolve and perform as good as the humans involved do, without an accurate management and understanding of the human factor, what could be the outcome.

HUMAN FACTOR, DEMOCRACY AND OPEN SYSTEMS

I did continue my own research still with focus on human factor and here is where my permaculture design experience did focus more on solving the problems of the world in a garden where people lives and cocreates together, my focus was human factor. So Open Space Technology approached me with a wonderful promise, finally a method that will help people communicate and through collaboration process, arrive together to the design and implementation of a solution that is suitable, preferred, by if not all, most of the stakeholders.

Along these years, 1998-2007, i was applying my own methods for communication and collaboration, based on the use of key elements. First i did try the japanesse model, focus on 3 basic elements: earth, water and fire. Which was very well known by most of the cultures of ancient eurasia. In the Primordial Technology know how, earth, water and fire, are the cyphers, symbols, of the 3 main classes of natural, human and artificial phenomena in which reality has been organized, is perceived and managed, the triad of the under-world. The achievements in these three fields, the stability of the triad, is essential for survival and stability in the field of wealth generation and family, community, as well as for creative thinking and strategic management, process management and information management. This method applied for communication, collaboration and decision making suggest to its users to communicate in three channels, and design plans, strategies and actions for each channel or element,  and make strategic decisions accordingly. The method is holistic, synergetic, systemic and nature inspired. It helps the users to focus on mission statement, business culture, operational guidelines and business plan; and overcome greed, egos, conflict of interests, power based individuals influences on perception and decision making, emotional or psychological manipulation and other forms of influencing or conducing a process of communication and collaboration for decision making for which perception and emotions are so important. This method did prove to be successful, yet i was wishing for an additional tool.

I did decide to integrate the basic principles of OST, to PTT  Tools for communication, collaboration and decision making, and the result was amazing. www.holistic-strategic-management.com

OST Open Space Technology PARADISE

OST suggests first of all stakeholders to study and understand their own situation, identify their challenges and needs, and suggest the issues they individually consider relevant, within a main topic of common interest.

For example, in 2013 a gathering of stakeholder took place in Austria, lake Woerthersee, around the topic Lake Woerthersee and Water Management, with stakeholders in fields: tourism, energy, protected natural areas, culture, private business sectors, research, technology, government, education, community, arts, and others.  How to bring all of them together ? I wish at this even OST would have been used. The standard stakeholders meetings unfold around a program of presentations given by each, solutions suggested and round tables. But would be possible to create a more open space for dialogue and synergy ? without getting lost in diversity and brain storming ?

How many issues could OST solve world wide, but which challenges must OST face, is OST strong enough to face Human Factor reality ?

A OST moderator would have first invited all teams to suggest key issues, and then every attendee, despite the team they belong to or affiliation, will join workshops, circles for discussion and solution making under the respective issue, which will create multidisciplinary circles of work. And so on OST moderator will follow with know steps, workshop circle will present their own solutions to the plenum, after feedback, proceed with next OST events, design plan, strategic collaboration process and implementation. But is that all ? as theory for communication and collaboration process, even in praxis, all seems to work fine, but does it for real ?

When conflict of interest exist, or individuals lead topics and questions based on their own interests alone, if they are strong minded and powerfully influential through emotions, perception, psychology, or have a charismatic and powerful leadership, those individuals will lead at their own team and within the OST event.

In principle, there is nothing wrong with strong leadership and individuals that manage many employees, But the question that always comes to me by observing the success of OST and other communication and collaboration methods is that of how much knowledge of the human factor has been integrated to the process ? and about the diversity of know how, skills, that are not heard. How many times a “strong leader” systematically silence the voices of skillful and  knowledgable people, that have no capacity to compete or protect themselves against those “powerful”leadership skills ?

In general, it would make no sense to have a team of 9 individuals, all of them highly capable, so in the paper of the organization appears to be a strong team, but in reality only two of the team members decide everything based on their own perception, interest and influence skills. Yet, the other 7, must collaborate with the first 2, utilizing their skills. If this example gives now a clear idea of the challenge, the reader may be ready to agree that such of a situation do not match to an example of a wise use of resources, knowledge, skills and experience.

The ability to listen and be open to suggestions and ideas, seems to be too risky, in the space of vulnerability. Manipulative leaders in corporate will dominate other employees in equal and downline levels of responsibility and roles. As a result, a working machine that is functional and pretend to be effective, but that is not experiencing its full potential, on the contrary, it lives, evolves and develops under a kind of oppression and control, that is not structurally visible.

OST suggest a paradise in comparison with the traditional leadership dominant model. Everyone can suggest ideas, problems, if the suggestions communicate and inspire, will receive interest and participation, collaboration and engagement, and through a kind of democratic process, the whole collective of attendees will give attention to those topics their perception and policies will set as priority. It seems to be a paradise. But it isnt.

 

There are more levels necessary for assessment, interactions and fields of impact, that need to be know for a complete risk management.

 

OST MISPERCEPTION OF HUMAN FACTOR : WHEN OST GOT SELF-LOCKED ? AND WHY OST IS NOT AWARE OF BEING SELF-LOCKED ?

Consider for example how a local strong political party may influence those events ? if ket party members join strategically every workshop, sabotage those workshops with topics the party does not want to support. The same idea apply for a religious circle that intents to influence the gathering and decision making. Or a governmental or private funding representative that has for policy to influence stake holders according to their own agendas, by offering funding in trade for choosing topics and issues that the funders prefer.

There are many reasons why in corporate for example, within a board of directors, strong leaders develop the skills and practice of dominating team members, board members and employees. The art of war, deception, manipulation in the field of competition for professional and wealth success has been refined along 1000s of years of human culture and civilization advancement.

As result, OST creates a misperception, the idea that an open system has solved communication and collaboration issues, through a form of democratic synergetic process of communication and collaboration. This misperception has a high cost, that has not been perceived neither; but which in the long run will have an impact in all levels of management, society, culture and civilization. This level of impact is not of immediate interest for normal citizens that are not policy maker, nor for employees that have as main concern to have a job and a monthly wages; those levels of impact and influence are key for long term players with ability to measure benefits and profit out of long term social changes or market changes, within corporate, the long term return achieved through shifting the behavior and path of success of a company, mostly away of the mission statement and original intention of the organization.

 

A less simple case. A corporation with capacity of wealth generation is being target along 25 years by a well known sect. But how ? originally no one of the employees or leaders of the corporation was related to the sect. But around 26 years ago, the corporation sold services to a high level rank of the sect in reference. This customer perceived the corporation and their services, potential as an ideal investment for the sect. So the story started. In the following 5 years 10 new shareholders will invest important amount of money in the organization. along 10 years, from the 300 new employees recruited by the enterprise,  around 100 of them were sect members, including those with leadership positions. Within 25 years 20% of employees that were not members of the sect became sect members. Within 25 years 70% of the corporation human resources were directly affiliated with the sect or target themselves or any of their family relatives at their respective households. I wonder how OST would work in this type of environment.

A simple example: Within a 20 years network in field sustainable development with a main core knowledge as platform for the network collaboration and communication, 3 main leaders have build their mini-networks, downlines of command and influence. The three of them have 3 different political approaches, and receive there for resources and support and influential customers and opportunities for PR from their respective political parties and networks or religions. The network is suffering from lack of know how, some new tools are necessary. An open call is made, asking for new know how providers. Three candidates apply. The agreement imply to provide the know how to an international network that involves whole Europe. From the three influential leaders only one is interested in a totally new know how that if utilized will unveil the power of the mini-networks created by the leaders. Those mini-networks have transformed a democratic process into a theater and play of power, PR and lobby, and manipulation of resources and human resources. OST is practiced within the networks, so the common believe is that collaboration and communication are open and the process is democratic. 2 of the leaders create an strategic agreement. The network is on purpose dis-informed regarding the benefits of the know how provided by two of the candidates. False information is provided. The result only one of the candidates manage to reach the board and members of the network, with accurate information. The other two send their files digitally, the files never arrive to the board as they are but crafted versions of them. The results is that the winner was a choice of two of the leaders. The third leader realize the situation and does a public announcement. As result, systematically his projects and downline will be hijacked and damaged along the following 10 years. The two leaders coalition made history in the network by providing a very useful know how. 20 years later the network will discover a damage created in the field of sustainable development at their locations that their management tools was not capable to predict. If they would have listen and read the complete information of the other two providers would have realized the know how they did choose was not complete and not able to ensure a legacy after 20 years. But for 20 years the network did lives in complete darkness and ignorance.

A not so simple example: The mission statement of a corporation, dedicated to provide digital platform for local networking, escalate to global services, focus on serving the community and helping people connect with each other. The corporation invites local people to engage into their vision and take as volunteers roles of leaders, and through hat position invite more citizens at location to join the platform. ” At each location, leaders are considered as those that take leadership role first and use the service first. Even at their location many natural leaders may be more suitable for the function of representative, as for the preferences of their local communities. Opportunism plays here an important role: other individuals took leadership roles in the online network and through it got an influential position. Now the following question will make you think twice regarding the safety (In terms of vulnerability limits users will have to choose,  when communication and collaboration. How honest can people be? how transparent communication and relationship with leaders can be ?) of the network: are those self-elected leaders part of a political movement or religious movement ? if the answer is yes, then you may agree the digital network, neutral in the definition of its service and “open”in their mission statement, will not be a safe place regarding collaboration and communication.

A non convenient example: Within a network of support for refugees in Europe, a circle of members of the nationalist party join as volunteers for purpose of collaboration. As result, in the following 5 years, 100 refugees will be sent back to human rights terrible conditions and eventually death, as for the final evaluation for their residency permit was rejected. The nationalist party members that joined the refugees support camps and networks in the cities had their own agenda: to do as much as necessary for sending all of them back to their countries.

In the last examples,  cases, described in this article (most of them refer to real events, or real cases, which i have altered in some details as for pedagogic reasons, as it is necessary to make clear for the reader perception how human factor operates) the human factor defines the nature of communication and collaboration. For purpose of effectiveness is necessary an agreement  between stakeholders in terms of a shared mission, aims and operational values, guidelines, and a professional attitude plays a more important role than private interests, religion, politics or wealth/profit.

  • Are  individualism and competition more relevant than mission statement?
  • When choices come down to individual life impact ? Would in that moment mission statement be, indeed, used for private interests, and will not be used at all, in the worse cases, otherwise?
  • Are mission statement and corporate culture accepted, learned and practiced, by employee contract enforcement but not always by employee understanding or agreement or preferences?  Is it true that employees do not judge it, so far are well paid ?
  • Under which conditions mission statement and corporate culture are preferred and naturally followed by the employees ?
  • What is an open system for communication and collaboration ?
  • Are open systems always democratic ?
  • How an open system gets closed by human factor lack of ability of engagement (agreement and collaboration) on achievement and development of corporate aims, mission statement and culture ?
  • How to unlock an open system that got closed by human factor lack of loyalty (with mission statement and corporate culture, operational guidelines) ?
  • When an open system becomes useful for power based emotionally intelligent and dominant leader ?
  • How can SDG Goals be achieved by applying PTT OST Integration ?
  • Which benefits there are accessible for SDG Entrepreneurs that practice and apply PTT Tools for holistic strategic management ?

PTT OST INTEGRATION : HOW TO UNLOCK OST AND GIVE REAL POWER TO REAL LEADERS ?

STEP 01. Start your gathering with the following question: Which activities, aspects of the main issue to be solved belong to those of the 9 cyphers? Or in other words, how would you describe the main issue through the 9 cyphers ?

For example, if the issue is resilience in the city, ask the question: resilience in earth-3, for example: how wealth and property affects community resilience. The same question in water-7, may be similar to: how emotions and information influence community resilience ability. Fire-8: Which kind of ideas are leading the current structure of the community resilience capacity/performance.

The example above for the cyphers 3-8-7 apply for the triad of the under-world. Questions that will help us identify the status: IS IT. A similar set of questions can be applied

STEP 02: Identify a bridge ideal conditions.

Given the performance of stakeholders and the settings of the challenging circumstance, level of effectiveness, which is the ideal goal to be achieved, and how. How to design a process that would help stake holders collaboration and communication achieve that new stage of effectiveness or solution ?

STAKEHOLDERS STRATEGIC AGREEMENT

In most of the cases step 02 is not possible when more than one stakeholder. The reason is simple. As when from several disciplines an issue is observed, each discipline with own technical language and skills, expertise, focus on problem solving, will approach the issue from a particular perspective. In a multidisciplinary team, each discipline will have own perspective. How to approach an issue from several perspective simultaneously ?

The question bring us to Matrix-Q Intelligence, PTT Primordial Algorithms, Matrix-Q Emotional Intelligence, Matrix Perception and Thinking, and the PTT Tools for Holistic Strategic Management. ( REF: Primordial Algorithms and Primordial Mathematics Quick SYlver Collection, PTT 9 Elements & Heart Method for assessment: Systemic, holistic, synergetic tool for the organization, perception and management of human, natural and artificial phenomena)

The 9 cyphers template, or the template of the 3 triads and 3 spheres, gives to all stakeholders or disciplines a common language, and help all possible perspectives find a common structure, frame of reference, that can be utilized for communication, collaboration, assessment, strategy design, management, and decision making.

A PTT OST would take 9+ days, or will be organized in 9+ rounds or seasons of work. Each season focus on one particular cypher all stakeholders, attendees to the PTT OST can join, participate.

Sometimes the most un expert and new of a discipline can ask a question that will refresh the vision of the experts and inspire a new creative insight into the issue to be solved.

After the 9 seasons have been completed, a final round of takes place. At this point, along the process, several stages may have been accomplished, solutions identified and strategies designed, plans created and implementation programmed.

It is a natural outcome of the PTT Assessment process that simultaneously the solution takes form, so when the assessment is completed, the solution appears, like by “magic” out of the blue. But in reality, the solution that appear as evident to the collaborators is the result of a Matrix-Q Cognitive process that takes place by integration of the perspectives of the 9 cyphers, along a sequence of focus, on each cypher.

In the year 2013 i did run a first PTT OST Integration process in the city of Klagenfurt, Austria, with more than 20 attendees, stakeholders, on an issue related to community building, education, collaboration, sustainable living and network. The results of these experiences brought me to design and implement a PTT OST Integration, and test it in following years. Now is utilized as one of the PTT Communication Tools for city and community building, sustainable development. An advanced more business oriented version of this hybrid tool is utilized for corporate, start ups and scientific research.

The following image, gives the answer to how to unlock the OST that has been locked. Try it out!

ORIGINAL SOURCE OF THE PRESENTATION: The Matrix-Q Research Institute