How fascinating!!!

Nynke November 23rd, 2006

Intent: Delivering meaningful Change Management consulting services to a customer for addressing challenges when the customer needs to know “How to introduce RUP as fast as we can”.

We know Open Space Technology could work wonders here? Why?

OST can be used for a range of purposes: from vision forming and scenario planning, to change management issues when introducing new tools and techniques.

The technology is ideally suited to the uncertainties and complex issues that appear when re-organising, introducing new ways of doing things in a corporation, or when there is a highly polarized strategic issue or technically complex issue to be addressed.

In general, OST is suitable for finding sustainable solutions fast to problems where a diversity of people will be affected and different perspectives need be involved.

Suppose we then offer OST to our customers as if they were the customer’s demands.

  • When our service then does not meet the actual demand, it can kick our customers in a negative internal spin.
  • What can come up for our customers is a desire to be rescued from us, and perhaps even placating us to force us in the role of a persecutor (which of course, we dislike tremendously).
  • The neutrality would no longer be just the professional exchange; it could become the neutrality of not knowing what it is one really wants.
  • Let’s make it worse. This then, would set up a negative expectation, so the neutrality is tainted with a placating stance to begin with.
  • The customer (client) plays a major role in the success factors of any OST meeting, especially in corporate settings, because the sponsor must communicate the parameters of the gathering and the degree of freedom that participants have to use their creativity to solve encountered problems and issues. These non-negotiables not only include simple resource limitations, it also means being real about who has the authority to make decisions or take actions after the OST meeting, and which laws, policies or procedures are not open to change.
  • When the relationship of the customer with the facilitator is tainted with placating to begin with, it will be impossible for the customer to do this. He or she will not speak of locus of authority, and chances of success of the OST meeting fall flat fast.

Choosing to use OST requires proper discernment and clear thinking by the meeting’s host or sponsor, in particular when focusing on organizational change. It is essential that the client/customer be open to authentically listening to ideas generated by participants.

If we as facilitator are not straightforward during initial consultation or if the client has a too well-defined vision of what is to be the outcome or result of an Open Space event or meeting, OST should not be used.

How to do it differently and guard against these dangers, for our own sake, and that of our customers?

In these corporate contexts I sell OST only to customers, when it is a means to an end for solving the customer’s real problem, and the client (customer) can think clearly and listen. And perhaps something else than OST is a better fit (first)? We need to get field impressions and a customer’s purpose and non-negotiables clear first.

counterspell4.jpg

For that we need to gather workable knowledge. Let’s get up and go for a walk …

To my knowledge, the best way to get started is to investigate system responses. Why investigate system responses?
Freethink, question, examine, and be willing to confront issues of belief from a place of knowing. Try appreciative inquiry.

  • We may discover some RUP introduction problems are/will be suffered in silence, and the intended gain by introducing RUP goes flatly lost?
  • Alternatively, introductions may get fought with inadequate definition and no resolution, but with lots of accusations and yelling?
  • Or teams are set up to handle major introduction projects and sustainable solutions are not really generated?

Dear customer, pick any issue or problem from the appearing field of (anticipated) issues from within your corporation regarding introducing RUP, and if you think I can be of assistance facilitating a resolution for that singled out item, contact me.

One Response to “How fascinating!!!”

  1. cheron 23 Nov 2006 at 8:08 pm

    My first exposure to RUP was back in 1997, when it was known as ‘Objectory’. On several other occasions, I was a Business Analyst/PM/Architect in major financial projects using RUP (& a host of other tools). Anyhow none of the projects delivered the final desired ’systems’. All these projects (using RUP) ended killed/sabotaged/put on the burner. I never did get to stay with the company or projects …
    sigh…

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.