Changes

440 bytes added ,  08:10, 17 August 2021
Changed the Open Space Technology text as it was wrong, not about consensus, there is no dot-voting for agenda items.
Line 77: Line 77:  
* Leading. A facilitator must be able to keep the training or meeting focused toward achieving the outcome identified beforehand.
 
* Leading. A facilitator must be able to keep the training or meeting focused toward achieving the outcome identified beforehand.
   −
===With Open Space===
+
===With Open Space Technology===
Open Space uses a consensus mechanism to define the agenda items. Users are asked to propose items for discussion and then are asked to 'dot vote' them in order to define which will be become the agenda items. It also allows the 'law of two feet' with people moving between the different discussion items if they do not like the conversation. As such it does not encourage debate but consensus and therefore it seeks to confirm and maybe educate but it does not rigorously explore a subject.
+
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Space_Technology Open Space Technology] (OST)<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Space_Technology</ref> invites each participant to identify the topics they would like to discuss. There is no editing or agreement on the topics proposed, or a limit to the number of topics proposed. These topics become the agenda and participants are free to choose which topic they want to go to, and can move between topics, or not go to anything, and start new conversations anytime anywhere. This allows for participants to engage in debate or walk away. The facilitator does not intervene in the process unless someone is trying to control others and stopping them making choices about their own participation. A key difference between OST and complex facilitation methods is that it is lightly constrained when compared to tightly constrained methods like Ritual Dissent or Future Backwards.
    
===With Radical Transparency===
 
===With Radical Transparency===
1

edit