Finishing with Impact and Energy


In a recent conversation about how to keep the action going after an Open Space meeting or event, Diana Larsen added something simple and, I think, quite new:

More and more often, in any kind of action planning (OS or otherwise) I have abandoned the idea of finding group consensus on the “important” issues. What’s “important” is much too abstract and often involves what we think _other_ people, the proverbial “they” should do. So I don’t ask about importance anymore.

Instead I’ve begun to rely more on the group asking itself two fast rounds of questions, about impact and energy:

First, each person votes on which issues would have the most “impact” if worked on further. That provides some additional data to the group. (I usually use some kind of stickers rather than colored dots – dinosaurs anyone? It just adds some fun. I also like the idea of tickets instead of dots here…I’ll have to try that.)

Then second, I ask each person to put a small number of different stickers (1-3) on whichever issues they personally have the “energy” for moving forward (or if there is room, to stand next to where those issues are posted). We notice where the pattern of energy lies compared with their overall perspective on impact. And we follow the energy, which more or less equals passion.

After that, groups of people create action plans on anything someone has the energy to work on, in another round of OS-style sessions, complete with Law of Two feet, bumblebees, etc. And each group reports out ‘first next steps’. Not the whole plan, just the first action or two, because we know the plan will necessarily change as people implement the first steps and learn more. In the Agile software world, we say “inspect and adapt” and “respond to change rather than following a plan.” So that’s the expectation. People will try a few things, learn more, adjust the plan, try a few more things, etc.

 

[…] action planning in Open Space. The first is his own version of moving to action, the second is Diana Larsen’s approach to prioritizing ideas by impact and energy and the third approach is Jack Martin Leith’s approach to project planning, which he blogged […]

[…] action planning in Open Space.  The first is my own version of moving to action, the second is Diana Larsen’s approach to prioritizing ideas by impact and energy and the third approach is Jack Martin Leith’s approach to project planning, which he blogged […]

Not surprising that Diana would come up with something like this. I think it’s exceptional, focusing on impact rather than importance, outcome rather than impression.

[…] Open Space World » Finishing with Impact and Energy (tags: open-space meeting organization management collaboration advice) […]