I was facilitating the other changelab down the hall, around the corner and 3 buildings over. I had an amazing time, met some great people but actually was a little bummed I didn’t get a chance to engage more people on more ideas. So many of the things on the grid intrigued me.

It’s like the buffet versus the entree model, perhaps?

As for the idea that an unconference is what you make it, I guess that is something you have to get used to. But kudos to you and Mark for making this happen and getting the discussion going, you have to start somewhere.

Additional thoughts based on your feedback…first of all, I have to say that I too am an action oriented guy, but in due time. That said, I was pretty excited to try and force action using the ChangeLab format. Trying something, anything, is a great way of further illuminating the problem and leading to more action. Positive inertia.

Conversely, DeBono writes in Lateral Thinking that the act of going down one particular cognitive path tends to shut out other options so the very act of making a decision shuts off other possibilities at a cognitive level. At this stage in the ChangeCamp movement we felt that more conversation without a specific focus would help to increase possibilities, as a short term goal in itself. We could have asked the initial groups (or any of the groups) to come up with “Top 3 problems” or something along those lines but felt that it was too early in the overall movement for work of that type.

One of the principles of Open Space is that the conference becomes exactly what the participants make of it. Nothing more, nothing less. You noted that you approached the grid and didn’t find anything too compelling. At that time it was well within your prerogative to grab a marker, paper and the mic and say to the group, “My name is Nate and I’m going to propose a session on X and we’re going to take some action!” It takes some experience to be in a conference where you really do have that “permission” but that’s what Open Space demands, for better or for worse. Sometimes the Open Space principle of “Whatever happens is the only thing that could have” is maddening. But it’s also kind of cool.

Open Space is not the perfect solution for all types of collaborations. That’s why we tried to put some more structure around the ChangeLab sessions by having each hour dedicated to a certain type of activity (ie. strategy—-> planning ——-> execution) but I don’t know how well that was adhered to. In the future maybe ChangeLabs should have a dedicated, neutral facilitator to help with session structure.

We’re going to jot down some process notes, templates and pictures to help with the ChangeCamp in a Box so any feedback you have on structure or process will help a lot. Thanks!

Thanks for participating and thanks most especially for continuing the conversation.