Home › Commons › Conversations-Forums › Archived conversations, 2005-2007 › Hosting CI Convergence ›

Pre-conference work with confirmed and "maybe" invitees

Submitted by George Por on October 25, 2006 - 07:17.

Those who accepted our invitation to the onsite and/or online collaboration, or replied with "maybe" deserve our individual attention to any level/kind of collaboration consistent with their expressed interest.

That will be also in line with honoring  Sheryl's important feedback:

•    “That there [should] be opportunities created for people to learn in-depth of each others work, their points of commonality and resonance as well as significant distinctions”
•    “It is an intimate process grounded in trust and strong bonds.”
•    “The very hard work of uncovering points of convergence and distinction.”

Susan and Sheri wrote:

"She gets to the heart of what it will take to get people to open up and share and build real connection.  Where Sheri and I disagreed with her is around how much time this will take.  Sheryl sees the process of building sufficient trust for identifying points of commonality and resonance and differences taking a long time, we believe that if we create an appropriate enabling environment with our technology and masterful process design, we can do this in the 3 month lead up to the conference, starting even now.

In light of some of Sheryl’s insightful comments about the convergence, Sheri and I were prompted to consider that perhaps we need to reevaluate our focus.  It may in fact be far more important (and ultimately more successful) to go more slowly, to focus on relationship building and getting related to each other’s work more deeply before connections between threads of work can be created." (emphasis mine)

Thank you Sheri and Susan for your clarity on this!  Let's coordinate here our thoughts and action about how to do it.
 

Let's continue the meeting-design conversation in its forum

Submitted by George Por on October 27, 2006 - 07:42.

Sheri wrote about her post "this may be more appropriate for a forum on designing and contemplating what we want for our time together." I took the clue and re-posted it in its own  topic. It may grow into a new forum as the ac tivity level here raises, just didn't want to crfeate a bunch of forums before having a sense that our team will show up oinline. ( I wasted a lot of time in the past on creating spaces that people have never shown up to use.)

So, for now, let's continue the meeting design conversation here. (Don't forget to click the "subscribe post" link when you get there.)

 

designing for generative spaces

Submitted by Sheri Madrone on October 27, 2006 - 00:42.

this may be more appropriate for a forum on designing and contemplating what we want for our time together.  this would be part of the intention piece for that.  i just read this on the open space list and it resonated with me in terms of what CIC can be:

 What we are about in opening space is bringing people into proximity,
yes?

Proximity: notice what can happen when we bring people who care near
each other. Ideas bounce and blend and reproduce. Passions infuse. Keep
us in tightly sealed containers and nothing new happens. Juxtapose us
and there is possibility. For fire.

Which raises for me the question of why do people try to keep others in
tightly sealed containers, such as "do me" audiences who are not allowed
to talk back, let alone with each other? Is it lack of experience with
any container where people can let their lights shine on each other? Is
it fear of the fire? Something else?

Ever notice that after a play or a good seminar, when we go home we want
to talk about it? We want to assimilate it, re-enjoy, extend it. What if
we could harness that energy at the event itself? Get the people there
to assimilate, re-enjoy and especially extend it, starting right there?
What if?

Is this what OS is?