This is going to sound funny, but I startled myself with the thought today that I am a small-business owner and an entrepreneur.
It sounds funny because I was asked if I would like to compete on a request for proposals. I said “I don’t compete” which is true, because I am a one-man show and I CAN’T compete against firms with offices and slick marketing materials and secretarial support (all of which it seems is designed to make the firm look credible enough to win the bids it needs to support the infrastructure it has…I believe Buddhists call this samsara)
I have found that trying to assemble a team of my associates to compete in bidding processes takes up too much unpaid time, and I have been burned once by having ideas in a proposal stolen by the client and used by the winning bidder. That in itself was funny, because if they had asked me if they could use my process design ideas, I would have let them.
That’s because, I discovered today, my business model is one of service. Truly being in service. It is important to me to provide services to clients who are doing good things. Sometimes I even donate these services. Very often I give away knowledge about Open Space Technology (after all, Harrison Owen set the trend by refusing to copyright the process). If you want to shadow me on an Open Space gig to learn more about the process, all you have to do is ask. I run training programs, for which I charge, but if you are really interested, and you want to ride shotgun with me, you are more than welcome to come along.
Likewise there are a few clients for whom I work for free. This has included in the past my home community of Bowen Island, for whom I have facilitated Open Space meetings and participated in citizen engagement initiatives. I kind of see this as my civic duty. I have also worked for free for some First Nations simply because I believe strongly in what they are trying to do.
When I first left university and entered the workforce, I had a strong sense of my role in the world as modeled on a somewhat traditional role of Elder’s Helper, common to many Aboriginal societies. Basically the Elder’s helper acts as a companion for an Elder, running errands, cooking food, taking care of the person’s needs so that the Elder can deliver his or her teachings and contribute wisdom to the community. The helper gains a great deal in this role, including an opportunity to be exposed to teachings and wisdom in an intensive way.
That has always been my business model. The people and organizations I work for have inherent wisdom and much to teach the world. My interactions with them as a facilitator are intended to make it easier for them to do that work. In return I get paid, but more importantly, I get exposed to a huge range of teachings and learnings, many of which find themselves back to this blog.
Now I don’t mean to say that this business model makes me morally superior to those for whom competition is the the key. But it just occurred to me today, that after four years of being in business, that it is possible to run a successful business in a capitalist economy without competing. My business is based on offerings. I offer something to the market, I try to do a good job and if people like it, they hire me again. I am not perfect, and I make mistakes. I always vow to learn from my mistakes and my clients, like the good Elders they are, are generous in forgiving me.
So it sounds funny to say that I am a successful small-business owner and entrepreneur. But I am going to reclaim those words anyway, because today I learned that it is possible to be that while staying away from the samasara of competition.
Card from the Osho Zen Tarot
This thread on circles is getting some legs. It has generated a flood of responses at the Open Space email list, Dave Pollard picked it up and today Fast Company magazine’s blog quotes Dave. Wonderful!
And yet, my favourite response so far comes from my friend Ashley Cooper who emailed the OSLIST with this gem from the poet Osho:
“Your inner being, when it opens, first experiences two directions: the height, the depth. And then slowly, slowly, as this becomes your established situation, you start looking around, spreading into all other eight directions. And once you have attained to the point where your height and your depth meet, then you can look around to the very circumference of the universe. Then your consciousness starts unfolding in all ten directions, but the road has been one.”
it makes me think of looking around the circle, everyone in front of you and yet the road is just one. it also brings the sphere that someone mentioned (sorry i don’t know who) to mind. so is this what open space is trying to do… unfold people’s consciousness, offer an opportunity to look around the circumference of the universe?
Thanks, Ashley.
For those of you who may be so inclined, this blog now has an RSS feed which can be found at the bottom of the sidebar. Other than showing that my postings all happen in 1969, it seems to work okay.
I’ve been asking around about the properties of circles. Mostly I’ve been querying the OSLIST community and there have been some fine responses. My query began with a quote from the “script” I use when I open space in OST meetings:
Circles are really rather neat forms of geometry because they force us to have a look at things in a particular way. For example in a circle, we don’t really know who “the leader” is. In fact we may be forgiven for thinking that the leader is either not here, or is each one of us. And as a leader who is not here cannot do anything, it must be that each one of is a leader.
Also circles teach us that there are some things that can only be done by groups. For example, you will notice that this circle of chairs isn’t really a very good circle. It’s actually a strangely distorted ellipse. That is because for one person to set up a perfect circle of chairs on their own is a nearly impossible task. But I’ll show you a small miracle. I’ll stand in the centre here and ask all of you to stand by your chairs. Now square up so that you are facing me and when you’ve done that check to see that you are sitting slightly behind your two neighbours. Now sit down. Have a look around. You have just made a perfect circle. This is something only a group can do and it took only a few seconds. If I had had to do that it would have taken me hours. This is important to note. It’s as if we all carry the coordinates for calibrating a circle within us but they can only be activated by acting along with several others.
Finally, here’s one more thing about a circle. If I stand in the middle then you will all agree that you are looking at me. But none of you will agree that you have the same view of me. You can see me, but your perspective is absolutely unique. It is not shared by anyone else. We agree on the object of our observation but none of us share the same perspective. Remember that today as we work on these issues. Without each perspective we would not have a full picture. If you were all behind me then none of you could say with certainty that I had a face. By surrounding me we have the whole picture, but we have to ask one another about the pieces that we are missing. If you folks sitting behind me want to know how many fingers I’m holding up, you have to ask this person I’m facing. That’s how it is with problems too. Remember that today.
Today, Alex Kjerulf, showed up with an amazing quote from the Danish polymath Piet Hein who once famously said:
“Man is the animal that draws lines which he himself then stumbles over. In the whole pattern of civilization there have been two tendencies, one toward straight lines and rectangular patterns and one toward circular lines. There are reasons, mechanical and psychological, for both tendencies. Things made with straight lines fit well together and save space. And we can move easily – physically or mentally – around things made with round lines.”
He was in the process of inventing the “super ellipse” which is a shape that mediates rectangular and circular tendencies.
Flemming Funch points to a great collection of citizen participation resources, which includes Open Space Technology and 62 other approaches to helping groups converse and make decisions.
I love collections like this. As a facilitator, I mostly design my own processes and tools for meetings depending on what the client wants. Open Space Technology is really the only “fixed” process I use. I draw heavily on Appreciative Inquiry, scenario planning, and a variety of other approaches to group work in all the design work I do, so it’s great to come across these kinds of tools to refresh my memory and spark new thinking. With a week full of designing and facilitating non-OST meeting ahead of me, Ming’s link couldn’t have come at a better time.