Open Space Technology is an innovative group process for unleashing passion and responsibility in an organization. The method is especially valuable when there are high levels of complexity, diversity, conflict (actual or potential), and a decision is "needed yesterday" (Owen, 1997a). These criteria certainly are at play when school administrators seek to involve stakeholders in strategic planning. Open Space Technology is a strategic planning process that can help school administrators (a) handle external criticism constructively and proactively and (b) build partnerships with internal and external stakeholders in the pursuit of common goals.

What is Open Space Technology?

Harrison Owen, a management consultant who has written two basic books (1997a & 1997b) on the concept, designed Open Space Technology (OST). As a conference planner, he routinely observed (as have many of us) that the most productive and exciting learning took place during coffee and restroom breaks-in the "open space" between the formally scheduled sessions. The concept of "open space" also connotes a climate of freedom, an intentional leadership void, where there is no prearranged activity or expectation.

The use of OST is not for high-control administrators. The OST sponsor needs to have no prearranged agenda. Issues and leadership emerge from the participants. The participants have ownership in the ideas they put forth. Philosophically the notion is to set forth a minimum structure and then let whatever happens happen. This approach borrows a key concept from complexity science, "Establish only those very few requirements necessary to define something, leaving everything else open to the creative evolution of the complex adaptive system" (Zimmerman, Lindberg, & Plsek, 1998, p. 161). The minimum structure for OST is built around four basic principles and one law.

The Four Principles

The first principle is, "Whoever comes are the right people." This principle applies to both the OST event itself and to the breakout sessions on various issues. The emphasis is on having quality conversations among people who share a passion for a particular issue. The people who come to a particular breakout session are the "right people" because they care about the issue under discussion.

The second principle is, "Whatever happens is the only thing that could have." This principle keeps participants in the here-and-now, eliminates the "must's" and "should's" that can sometimes creep into group process, and reminds folks that things may not happen according to their expectations. We human beings do our best at any moment. No need to dwell on what might have been, could have been, or should have been. Whatever happens is what happens.

The third principle is, "Whenever it starts is the right time." This principle is designed to put people at ease and break the tyranny of the clock. Owen (1997b) reminds us that just because a meeting is scheduled to begin at a particular time, there is absolutely no guarantee anything useful will take place at that moment. The spirit of learning and creativity appear, or not, in their own time. By definition that is the right time.

The fourth principle, "When it's over, it's over" is closely related to the third. While nothing of any substance may occur at the start of a meeting (third principle), it's equally true that all of the "action" may be over early in the meeting, and there is no need to sit there and simply fill the time allotted for the meeting with unproductive or unrelated small talk. Productivity and creativity have their own rhythm. This fourth and final principle has its own corollary, "When it's not over, it's not over." A 90-minute time block may have been set aside for a breakout session, but the group may decide to press on at the end of the allotted time because they are still into good conversation and everyone clearly recognizes "it's not over."

The One Law

The one law, "the law of mobility," is the greatest contributor to the group process because of its impact on curbing egos and on placing responsibility on individuals for the quality of their learning. The one law says that if persons, at any time, find themselves in a place where they are "neither learning nor contributing" they must move to a more productive context-be that another session or off by themselves. This law reminds participants that they are present voluntarily, they have free will, and they are accountable for their own well being and learning.

Traditional Strategic Planning vs. Open Space

Strategic planning is typically handled with a "chosen few" setting direction for "the masses." On occasion some sort of consultant is brought in to enable "the plan." Chances are a key administrator winds up writing the plan, the powers that be bless it, and then it is shelved until the next planning cycle. The grass root workers have very little knowledge of the plan and no ownership. People tend not to support what someone else creates. Once again, paternalism wins out and it's business as usual.

Open Space can change all of that. The first advantage is that ALL stakeholders with a passion about the theme are invited to attend. (OST can handle large numbers. Events with hundreds of attendees have been held.) This avoids the politics of inviting an "in group of power brokers" while leaving Joe and Jane Doe detached, uninvolved, and feeling unwelcome. The whole system is in the room working together. A blanket invitation to all who care tends to eliminate external criticism. The second advantage grows out of the first. When all of the stakeholders are involved in creating a plan, they feel ownership of the plan. They voluntarily come because they have a passion about the theme, and they exercise their passion during the event. Thirdly, the Open Space process produces a set of proceedings that people can take with them when they leave the event. As noted at the outset of this article, responsibility is the complement to passion during an OST event. Immediate next steps are planned at the event and follow through occurs because the participants, when given the freedom that open space provides, hold themselves accountable for results. No small miracle. Lastly, Open Space can be handled by an internal person who has some group process skills, minimal training, and who does not have a vested interest in the outcome. Experiencing Open Space conducted by a trained facilitator would be a basic training experience. Background reading would also provide a theoretical underpinning and practical implementation guidelines. The point is that an outside consultant or facilitator, while desirable, is not absolutely necessary.

The Process for Day One

Walk with me through a typical Open Space Technology experience. Harrison Owen's original design suggested a two and one-half day event. One day for good conversations to be initiated, a second day for ideas to cook overnight and for a record to be made of conversations, and a wrap-up half day for converging ideas, prioritizing them, and planning immediate next steps. My personal experience with OST has been with a day and a half event. I have found schools to be very limited on time, plus a great deal can be accomplished in the abbreviated one and a half day design.

Let's set up this hypothetical scenario as a staff development day in August before the opening of school. Fifty participants arrive, say around 8:30 a.m., for a continental breakfast. Open Space officially begins at 9:00. The room is set up with a circle of chairs. (If there were 100 participants and limited space, the chairs could be arranged in concentric circles.) They walk into the circle and take a chair. They notice in the middle of the circle some quarter sheets of flip chart paper and markers on the floor. Typically the sponsor (board member, superintendent, principal, whomever) introduces the facilitator who then walks into the circle and welcomes everyone to Open Space. (The lack of an agenda and traditional structure can generate some natural tension on the part of everyone. Not a bad thing. Normal. To be expected.) The facilitator, moving continuously around the circle, reads the theme, which has been posted on the wall or on an easel outside the circle. The theme typically takes the form of "Issues and Opportunities Facing Our School (or School District) for the Next Academic Year." Still walking the circle, the OST process is then explained, including the four principles and the one law.

It's now about 9:20. Participants are invited to come to the middle of the circle where they pick up a marker and paper on which to write their topic and name. They announce their name, helpful for new faculty members, and topic to the group. Next they go over to the wall where a "space/time matrix" has been taped to the wall. They take a 3 x 5 post-it note (that tells at what time and where their particular topic will be discussed) and attach it to their sheet of paper. They then tape the quarter sheet on an open wall space adjacent to the space/time matrix. The people who come forward are "conveners" or champions of a topic; they need not be experts on the topic. They have a passion about the topic, want to discuss it with anyone who also cares about the topic, and are willing to take responsibility for getting the ball rolling.

(The space/time matrix is a grid of, in our particular example, three columns of times for the breakout sessions [10:00 to 11:30, 12:30 to 2:00, and 2:00 to 3:30] and four to six rows of breakout spaces (classrooms, corners of the main meeting room, anywhere a small discussion group can converse). The grid boxes contain 3 x 5 post-it notes that have the respective column times and row breakout spaces written on the note ahead of time.)

The posting of topics on the "community bulletin board," the blank agenda wall space, takes approximately 40 minutes. Every opportunity is given for people to step forward and post their passion to the agenda wall. The facilitator needs to be open to handling silence. Within 40 minutes a group of 50 folks might generate 12 to 18 topics. As agenda setting winds down, the facilitator encourages the conveners to invite someone to keep a record of the "topic title, convener name, list of participants, and discussion and recommendations." After the last call for topics, the "village marketplace" is open. That is to say, participants are invited to go to the community bulletin board to sign their names on the sheets for the sessions they plan to attend.

The time is now in the neighborhood of 10:00. In Harrison Owen's (1997b) experience, he has found that 90 minutes is a good length of time to have a quality conversation. Accordingly, the first round of breakout discussions takes place from 10:00 to 11:30. After these first discussions, reporters from the various groups come to computers in the main meeting room to compose their reports, leaving their disks with the facilitator. Lunch is from 11:30 to 12:30, typically in another location near the main meeting room. Notice there have been no official "breaks" so far in the schedule. Light refreshments are available in the main room throughout the day for all participants.

The second round of breakout sessions convenes from 12:30 until 2:00. Again reporters enter notes on computer disks and turn them over to the facilitator. The third and final round of meetings for day one occurs from 2:00 to 3:30. Computer disk reports are again provided to the facilitator. At 3:30, everyone returns to the circle of chairs in the main meeting area. The facilitator outlines what will happen the following morning and asks if there are any announcements or news that should be shared. It's 3:45 or 4:00 and Open Space Technology is adjourned for the day.

The Process for Day Two

Overnight the facilitator compiles all the group reports into a set of proceedings. These are distributed the next morning, day two, at 9:00 a.m. in the opening circle meeting. Participants are invited to read the proceedings, paying special attention to reports from the breakout sessions they were unable to attend. Each person is given a set of stick-on dots. Participants distribute the dots on the sheets on the wall according to each person's priorities (one technique is to put 5 dots on your first, highest priority, 4 on your second, etc.; another technique is to distribute the dots in any way you choose, putting 1 dot on each of ten topics or 10 dots on one topic or something in-between). The intent of this step is to get an impression of where the energy of the group is at the moment. This is not a competition of best ideas. No ideas will be lost. Where would everyone like to focus next steps?

The time may now be around 9:45. The top priorities (say five) are posted around the room. From 9:45 to 10:30, participants are invited to visit each priority and write on flip chart paper any "associated topics" or "next steps" they can think of. For this period of time a lot of milling goes on around the room. The idea of capturing "associated topics" is to begin the convergence process. From approximately 10:30 to 11:15, breakout sessions are held for the top group of topics in order to frame immediate next steps. What action steps can be taken in the immediate future that will move the topics forward? Who is taking responsibility for what and by when? These are brief meetings to outline action steps and responsibilities, not to rehash the topics.

Around 11:15 the total group reconvenes one last time in the big circle of chairs in the main meeting area for a closing ceremony. At this time participants are asked to reflect on the experiences over the past day and a half. Any observations or surprises they would like to share? Anyone notice anything different about how leadership, vision, community, and management were handled in Open Space? A "talking stick" (I have used a ceramic apple which is most appropriate for educators) is passed around the circle. People can share their thoughts if they wish or they can simply pass the stick/object on to the next person. No pressure. The use of a physical object to pass around the group helps people know when the previous speaker has finished talking. Comments are frequently made that Open Space is like no other experience. Everyone was a leader, vision was shared, community was real, and people worked in self-managed, inspired work teams. Insights are frequently expressed along the line of, "Why can't we work together this way all the time?" After everyone has had a chance to share, the facilitator thanks folks for coming and for participating. Open Space is then officially adjourned.

What Next?

The excitement and emotion generated by Open Space is exceptional. In the closing ceremony it's not unusual for voices to tremble and for tears to flow. In a recent experience, school district teachers expressed gratitude to the new superintendent that their opinions were elicited and for the opportunity to share their knowledge. One educator noted that in past years the staff orientation had amounted to nodding off during a lengthy speech from someone the educator had never met before and would never see again. Another teacher, sniffling her way through the closing ceremony, said she felt like her heart was healing, thanks to the two-day program the superintendent had sponsored.

Does the excitement last? Do things happen? Is there follow through? The anecdotal evidence to date suggests a resounding "yes." Compared to other strategic planning processes, the difference seems to reside in the ownership of ideas, passion for their exploration, and willingness (even eagerness) to take personal responsibility for making sure something happens. Open Space's twin engines of "passion and responsibility" seem to be the secret.

References

Owen, H. (1997a). Expanding our now: The story of open space technology. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Owen, H. (1997b). Open space technology: A user's guide. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Zimmerman, B., Lindberg, C., & Plsek, P. (1998). Edgeware: Insights from complexity science for health care leaders. Irving, TX: VHA.

Internet Resources

CornerStone Consulting Associates. (n.d.). Open space technology: Bringing the whole system into one room. Retrieved October 17, 2001 from http://www.ourfuture.com/open.htm

Corrigan, C. (n.d.). Open space technology. Retrieved October 17, 2001 from http://www.chriscorrigan.com/openspace/index.html

Herman, M. (n.d.). Worldwide open space. Retrieved October 17, 2001 from http://www.openspaceworld.org

Innovation Agency. (2001). Open space forum. Retrieved October 17, 2001 from http://www.theinnovationagency.com/openspace/welcome.html

Owen, H. (n.d.). Open space training program. Retrieved October 17, 2001 from http://www.openspaceworld.com

Owen, H. (n.d.). A brief user's guide to open space technology. Retrieved October 17, 2001 from http://openspaceworld.com/users_guide.htm

Williams, B. (n.d.). About open space technology. Retrieved October 17, 2001 from http://www.openspacetechnology.com/tr_ost.html