Future Search and its Benefits
Future Search should be used by the CEO. The process of meeting planning with the goal of inspiring people to put their potential into action is known as future search (Norum, 2005). Also, it has between fifty and eighty participants, making it convenient for the CEO to use since she wants to involve roughly 50 top managers in the process in total. Future search also includes representatives with a stake in the outcome and a say in decision-making. Thus, it is preferable over Open Space Technology in scenarios where top management must make decisions regarding issues and challenges facing an organization. Additionally, it involves examining and prioritizing trends, and construction of knowledge from their past experiences.
Importance of Top Senior Managers' Knowledge
The top senior managers have knowledge from their past experiences, thus can make changes within the company. Moreover, future search involves representatives who have professional expertise, information, and resources that are needed to make such changes. Top senior managers are in a position of employing dialogue where they establish a common ground which is a source of stepping stone to the changes needed within the organization through the use of laid down action plans (Rogers, 2010). Future search includes diverse participants, from which quality thoughts arise which can be a good input to tackle issues that need changes.
Open Space Technology for Employee Involvement
Scenario 2
When there is a need for the input of employees in an organization, Open Space Technology should be used by the CEO. This is the most suitable approach to use since results in a productive and effective meeting (Leith, 1996). With the involvement of employees in decision making, there will be significant suggestions because of the enhancement in the good communication among the employees. Additionally, Open Space Technology promotes team building since it can unite together employees of a diversified economy, ethnicity, culture as well as social positions. Open Space Technology is based on the involvement of participants who in this case are employees. Besides, it offers room for disagreements and conflicts because every employee has an equal chance of giving out their views.
Furthermore, in open source technology, participants identify specific issues or concerns to be discussed, thus promoting a collaborative platform for all participants. As a result of collaboration more is learned from different individuals given that all parties participate. It also ensures that the opinions of low-level employees that are usually dormant in large groups are addressed because Open Space Technology ensures bottom-up issues identifications.
Open Space Technology for Unresponsive Employees
Scenario 3
In a situation where employees are unresponsive, Open Space Technology should be most suitable to be used by the CEO. This is because Open Space Technology provides employees with rooms to think before they act. As a result, possible solutions from employees rather than facilitators are arrived at (Nixon, 1998). Additionally, employees must think of action plans in order to tackle and confront an issue. For that reason, employees are free to participate in the meeting. Besides, with Open Space Technology, issues of less confident employees not giving out their opinions are clearly addressed since the participants are operating with employees who they are comfortable with. Additionally, Open Space Technology guarantees that solutions come from employees since there is a platform to air their concerns and challenges. Therefore, new ideas are welcomed thereby making stakeholders arrive at a concrete action plan.
Furthermore, on watching the video by Steve Pashley (2012) on Open Space Technology, I noted that "Open Space Technology is a good way to get everyone to feel comfortable discussing their heartfelt concerns because of the following reasons; there are no leaders, the setting is similar to a coffee break, everyone's opinions are considered, there are no right or wrong topics, and although you attend you do not have to participate".
The CEO's Violation of Open Space Technology Principles
Scenario 4
The CEO violated the principles of Open Space Technology. The first principle the CEO violated was providing a list of topics to be covered as well as giving out his opinion concerning what he wants the outcomes to be. However, according to Leith (1996), "at an open space event, people come together with the aim of pooling their ideas and developing plans for creative and collaborative action. They create and manage their own program of parallel sessions around a central theme". In this case, people did not come together to a collective agreement for the topics to be discussed. Additionally, the CEO violated the principle of appropriateness. With open space technology, the outcome should be known directly. Moreover, he commands the participants and gives little room for discussion, change and arguments concerning the topics to be discussed.
Furthermore, according to Nixon (1998), "this method is important as it allows people in creating and managing different agendas of discussion groups, workshops, and other sessions. In these forums they discuss matters that are important to them, exploring issues and opportunities and finding solutions and ways forward". However, the CEO did not put these into considerations. Moreover, participants had no passion about the outcomes of the discussion since they only discussed ideas provided by the CEO.
References
Leith, M. (1996). Organizational change and large group interventions. Career Development International, 1(4), 19-23.
Nixon, B. (1998). Creating the futures we desire - getting the whole system into the room: Part I. Industrial and Commercial Training, 30(1), 4-11.
Norum, K.E. (2005). Future search conversation. In Dialogue as a means of collective communication (pp. 323-333). Dordrecht: Springer Science & Business Media B.V. / Books.
Pashley, S. (2012, Nov 26). Open Space. NHS Research and Development Forum. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vEBcr_YkHU
Rogers, J. (2010). Large group interventions: facilitating group. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education.
