When: Thursday, 27 June – Friday, 28 June
9:00 am – 8:00 pm

Where: University of London, Malet Street, London

In previous years, we’ve promoted platform co-ops in a traditional conference format. This year we’re doing things differently and will be exploring opportunities to increase decentralised collaboration in a completely open space format. We’re proud to be working on collaboration with Phoebe Tickell and Nati Lombardo from Enspiral, to convene and facilitate the event.

Who is OPEN 2019 for?

OPEN 2019 is an inter-network event for community builders, network organisers and key connecting members of organisations from a wide range of progressive communities. We welcome all cooperators, rebels, mavens, network builders, systems architects, open source developers, and anyone else who is interested in designing and building our collective future. The idea is to network the networks by creating deeper connections and relationships between some of the key connectors from a wide range of mutually aligned communities.

What will we be doing?

To kick off each day attendees will be introduced to a handful of new, distributed, cooperative, technical and social projects, through a selection of lightning talks. After that attendees will be guided to co-design the event by proposing, refining and voting on the content for the rest of the two days’ sessions. Experienced facilitators from the Enspiral network will help us create a ‘container’ for our time together. Working in small groups we will discuss, debate and feedback ideas to the wider group, to ensure everyone has a chance to have their say and that the collective wisdom of the group is captured and shared.

With an informal evening dinner and drinks and more networking opportunities, there will be plenty of time for building deeper understanding and relationships too.

What will you get out of it?

Recognising that effective collaboration, at any scale, can be hard to define and even harder to achieve OPEN 2019 does not aim to build immediate collaboration between attendees. Having studied the key ingredients of collaboration we know that the first step towards effective collaboration is building deeper connections and trusted relationships, and that is what OPEN 2019 aims to deliver.

By introducing more connectors to each other, getting to know one another, and working together over two days we aim to strengthen our relationships, deepen our understanding and to cross-pollinate and fertilise the pre-existing projects and evolving ideas within our networks.

We will explore opportunities to coordinate our existing organisations better, to keep each other better informed about what we are working on and to potentially cooperate if we can find opportunities to do so. Ultimately, as a result of the networking, we aim to pave the way for any collaborative opportunities which might arise as things evolve…

When and where is it?

The OPEN 2019 Community Gathering will take place on the 27th and 28th of June at the University of London in Holborn, London.

What should I do if I want to come?

Spaces are limited to 150 attendees in order to keep the group small enough to be effective so, if are interested in being involved, please order your tickets below asap. If this event becomes over-subscribed we will explore the possibility of running additional events. If you have a project you would like to present at a lightning talk we’d love to hear from you (please email a short description of your project) but please note – all attendees, including presenters, will be required to buy a ticket.

Please join us to discuss, explore, connect and decide how we can deliver systemic change, together.

For more information and tickets click here!

The post OPEN 2019 Community Gathering – Decentralised Collaboration appeared first on P2P Foundation.

Having re-watched the webinar on Catalysing Collaboration at Scale I wondered if it might be possible to identify some of the key themes of collaboration.

Truly effective, synergistic, collaboration is an elusive beast at the best of times and the idea of making it work at scale, for decentralised projects and organisations, is possibly the essential challenge of our times.

If we want to work out how to work together more effectively, to build an equitable and abundant world for all, it seems important to recognise, what hinders collaboration, to identify great examples of effective collaboration and to at least attempt to identify if there are any key themes which we can build on and incorporate into our work.

I’m especially interested in what Group Works call the magic which sometimes happens at particularly effective meetings, which they describe in pattern language for bringing life to meetings and gatherings:

“At certain moments, something beyond the group emerges, accompanied by a sense of awe . . . and resulting in a unanimous feeling of astonished accomplishment. Conditions inviting Magic include shared passion, urgency, openness, energy and trust–yet the quality is always mysterious, never guaranteed.

Participants are not always sure why it happens. You can plan for it all you want and you may not get it, or it can sometimes emerge with no planning whatsoever. After it occurs, people are likely to have a variety of theories of what led to it. The most unified thing about it is that usually, when it’s present, people will agree right afterward that it was – even if they call it different things!”

That magic feeling – and the emergent, synergistic outcomes it can deliver – is the holy grail of collaboration. When we achieve that feeling, through the effectiveness of all our intra and inter-group work we will, presumably, feel more rewarded, be more effective and ultimately be heading for the synergy we need to break free from the competitive mind-set.

But, as the quote above mentions, collaborative magic can be elusive. Shared passion, urgency, openness, energy and trust can help it appear but don’t guarantee it happens… So I combed through the discussion on Catalysing Collaboration at Scale in an attempt to identify any other key ingredients. I started to assemble these into themes – but on closer inspection they turned out to mainly be subsets of a larger, over-aching main ingredient: the need for deeper, trusting relationships.

What follows are the themes, and the quotes from the panelists which describe them… plus some conclusions about possible routes to more effective collaboration.

The Key Themes of Collaboration

1. Understanding / Alignment / Resonance / Relationships
Collaboration requires understanding, both of the people and groups that are working together, but also of their shared objectives.
Understanding each other, and aligning to the point of resonance requires well formed and trusting relationships.

“The forming of relationship provides ways to collaborate in the future…”

Collaboration requires:

“…lasting relationships of meaningful solidarity…”

“…Face to face experience – recognising each other – coming into relationships…”

“…Creating an atmosphere to bring people into emotional resonance…
or at least so we are neutral – so we’re no longer potential competitors…”

“We don’t need alignment across the whole group – only those that are in a relationship…
We can be in alignment with others in different ways… this create flows of richer ecosystems”

“Coherence requires coming into alignment”

2. Recognition / Shared understanding / Definition of “The group” / “The self”
Collaboration requires we recognise who “we” are, who we are working with and where our goals align and diverge

“Who are “we”? – where does “our group” start and end…? Who does it include and exclude?”

“…Power and privilege is THE issue – There is no one size fits all answer…”

“…The individuals involved need to be able to define their own answers…”

“… a fluid boundary of self – enables us to come into alignment…”

“…In murmurations – we should be able to experience our own integrity…
to respond to the big ideas – without losing the tune that is “me”…”

“…There are no boundaries – everything is interacting with its environment, in a dance, of things which are themselves dances…”

“…Boundaries have a role – to help us see we’re not the same – and we peruse different goals – but we should be careful when defining them…”

3. Shared Purpose / Values / Vision
Collaboration requires a shared purpose. It is the goal of the collaboration.
Shared purposes, mission statements and values should be carefully developed, with the input of everyone involved.
Beware of any top-down mission or values which are imposed from above – they rarely help produce alignment.

“…We had a set of words – but we didn’t agree about the meaning of the words…”

4. Context / Place in space and time
Collaboration only ever exists in some type of context – and that context affects the best way/s to collaborate.
Just like nature, contexts constantly evolve, so methods of collaboration need to be fluid and adaptive.
Maps can help, but only within particular contexts and points in time. By default centralised maps are out of date.

“…collaboration is always in context … What comes before and after matters…”

“…It’s not a static thing – its not objects… collaboration is flows or dances…”

Check out these useful thoughts on mapping the space to get collaboration flowing much more smoothly and naturally, from Maptio who define initiative mapping as an enquiry into:

• how the overall vision breaks down into the ever smaller ideas which contribute to it;
• who has taken responsibility for each part;
• and who is helping with what.

There’s also some useful mapping examples from the Real Economy Lab, listing initiatives and perspectives around the idea of what a better economics might look like, as well The Open Co-op’s own Mapping working doc, where you can collaborate directly.

5. Glue / Gravitational pull / Cohesion
Collaboration requires cohesion above that which can be articulated through shared purpose.
Effective, on-going collaboration, is held together by the people who provide the glue within any endeavour.

Collaboration requires…

“…Recongising the value of the glue in the fabric… that supports a community…”

“…distributing the invisible glue evenly…”

“…We should recognise it and surface it…”

6. Communication / Grammars / Patterns / Protocols
Collaboration requires clear communication. You can’t have collaboration without communication.
So, effective collaboration requires a shared language and grammars via appropriate mediums of communication.

“…The architecture of how we communicate sculpt the possibilities of what can be done…”

“…Every interaction is a communication, which alters you…”

What stands in the way of collaboration?

The webinar panelists also identified a range of factors that can hinder collaboration… this is not an exhaustive list.

“…So much: our minds and thinking and our emotions…”

“We’re sub divided into representations – broad blokes backed up by ideologies which people haven’t had a chance to contribute to developing…”

“…centralisation, to some degree, is a way of preventing other forms of centralisation… so we should be more intentional about building these institutions…”

“…Beware of the top down, enforced taxonomy – Categorisation is useful for the party that is doing the naming…”

See also Nathan Schneider’s Co-ops Need Leaders, Too… and thoughts from Ethereum about Distributed governance as well as systems…

Examples of collaboration in action

The following are just a few examples of successful collaboration that were mentioned in the webinar:

Linaro – collaborative engineering

“… it’s like a “club good” – all the collaborating companies benefit… That’s what collaboration is!”

Associated press – one of the most powerful media co-ops – founded by competing news papers

“…They found they could be more efficient together – on a narrow overlap… It’s powerful – creative competitiveness + Alignment of collaboration…”

Rural electricity co-ops – powering 80% of the US

New Economy Coalition – Build diverse networks – that would otherwise be separate

Giveth.io – A Community of Makers… Building the Future of Giving

Collaboration in practice – requires a genuine shared need

The final words of the webinar came from Ben Roberts, from the Thriving Resilient Communities Initiative in the states. Through his work he has experienced the difficulties of increasing collaboration first hand, and that experience seems especially pertinent to others working on the challenge of ‘networking the networks’.

At the Thriving Resilient Communities Initiative they asked

“How do we do this across the states…? Like minded organisations should be working together more… They ought to be collaborating…”

So they set out to catalyse that – and found it was really hard. They discovered that, If the organisations they wanted to collaborate together had more capacity (in terms of time or money) they would simply do more of what they know works already, rather than collaborating. After all, if you have something that is working and delivering a positive difference, it makes sense to do more of it, rather than explore more complex challenges with no guarantee of results.

So, instead of trying to force collaboration – which is really hard – they identified that cooperating and coordinating can be easier and more powerful. By simply sharing information about what each organisation is doing, about their events and activities, they could start to grow more solid bonds, through which possibilities for collaboration might arise.

As a result of the increased coordination, and the identification of a shared need for income, the organisations in their network started thinking together about how to manage grant money.

“Suddenly we had a collaborative activity which really mattered to everybody”

What emerged from that was a genuine collaboration, with a direct incentive for participation. Organisations in the network started writing each other into their grant proposals – including people outside their “normal membrane”.

This is a key point:

suddenly, through the coordination work and the deeper relationships and understanding that evolved because of it, the definition of “self” changed.

The individualistic, “My organisation only”, mentally dissolved and was replaced by a wider definition of “self” which included other organisations and people. A genuine evolution of perception which paved the way for effective collaboration.

“…So we are now collaborating in more organic rather than forced ways…”

Once the organisation were collaborating in one way, via agreed communication channels with a shared language and shared understanding, they were able to explore other options for co-creation more effectively, by asking themselves:

“…What can we do that nobody is doing yet?”

The results became more distributed – collaboration became not only more possible but more effective at any scale.

“…This was happening at a national level – but it changes at a community level – so now we have regional scale relationships so new projects are showing up which build on the relationships – bringing in partners – to meet shared needs and goals – because its all there as an ecosystem…”

The conclusions:

• Collaboration is hard – you can’t force it.
• There are some key themes – and it pays to understand them and work with them…
• But effective collaboration only really happens when there is a shared need…
• And the best way to identify shared needs is to be aware of, and understand each other…
• Which requires building trusting relationships…
• So, before you try to launch a collaborative endeavour, it pays to work on coordination and cooperation, as stepping stones to future collaboration.

If you’re interested in building deeper, trusting relationships with other people and organisations that are building the collaborative, regenerative economy, please join us in London this summer at the OPEN 2019 Community Gathering.

For more background and further reading around collaboration see also:

Corina Angheloiu’s Weaving networks — when we all need to be spiders

“We’re at a point in time where different networks working towards systemic change are starting to see the need for deeper and more strategic collaboration to increase our reach, impact, access to audiences and funding.”

TRANSIT has mapped out 20 case studies of prefigurative translocal networks which ‘embody their ultimate goals and their vision of a future society through their ongoing social practices, social relations, decision-making philosophy and culture’.

Wise Democracy Project’s patterns to “further the development of wiser forms of self-governance.”

Group Works, “pattern language for bringing life to meetings and gatherings”

“Decentralized Thriving” a free e-book from DAO Stack – “A digital anthology from 19 innovators on the forefront of decentralised governance”

The post The Key Themes of Collaboration appeared first on P2P Foundation.

This first event of OPEN 2019 covers the ideas behind The DNA of Collaboration and Harmonious Working Patterns to explore ideas which might help all the people, communities and organisations working on creating a new, decentralised, regenerative economy collaborate better to produce more impact.

Panelists:

• Indra Adnan from The Alternative
• Nathan Schneider from the Platform Cooperativism Consortium
• Matthew Schutte from Holochain
• Laura James from Cambridge Computer Laboratory
• Josh Fairhead, author of Harmonious Working Patterns
• Oliver Sylvester-Bradley from The Open Co-op

Follow along with the chat below the video and dig deeper – there are some valuable links to other articles on catalysing collaboration and related subjects.

Notes from the chat during the discussion:

16:47:37 Nenad Maljković : Interesting article in this context (4 minute read), for later, of course  https://medium.com/enspiral-tales/a-trickle-becomes-a-river-64893418a769
16:52:47 Trevor: Economies of scale and division of labour
Nenad Maljković : This makes very much sense from the permaculture (and living systeems) point of view!
16:57:37 From vivian : To me it sounds more like an argument for free markets, coming from the right of the political spectrum. the first is all about lots of autonomous utility-maximising agents (in an economic jungle) with no overall purpose
16:57:55 From vivian : Some of the interactions in a forest are pretty brutal!
16:59:13 From Nenad Maljković : Any group of humans is complex, adaptive system.
16:59:43 From vivian : Yes but many groups have a “purpose” and can plan together. That’s inherent in a democracy
17:00:53 From Dil Green : Forest participants and humans are different – because humans will always have some conceptually stated purpose (unless they are a zen master).
17:01:01 From Nenad Maljković : Vision, purpose… obsolete in groups that collaborate based on intrinsic values (first hand experience with transition town initiatives on the ground – they don’t waste time on defining purpose or vision
17:01:55 From Dil Green : For me, forests are fine (great!) in and of themselves – because the participants don’t have conceptual approaches.
17:02:40 From Nenad Maljković : For me (with permaculture glasses on) there is coordination >>> cooperation >>> collaboration succesion
17:02:51 From vivian : For me, defining purpose and vision are the most powerful democratic things to do in an organisation. In my experience, in groups where there is nothing like this going on, there’s usually one person or a small group in charge. Others might accept this for a time but it usually breaks down/
17:02:54 From Dil Green : It’s when humans try to act like forests that things get strange – because concepts cannot capture complexity – and complex relationships are what makes forests capable of building carrying capacity.
17:04:34 From Nenad Maljković : @vivian: group / team / organisatiom / network / “platform” / “ecosystem”… all are human systems, but different.
17:08:29 From Nenad Maljković : Oh… that’s not “community”…
17:09:11 From Ben Roberts : Re “Telegram hell:” “The small group is the unit of transformation” Peter Block
17:09:24 From Dil Green : @Nathan blockchain people obvs didn’t read the ‘Tyranny of Structurelessness’ in time…
17:09:58 From Dil Green : @ben nice distillation.
17:10:58 From Dil Green : Drawing appropriate boundaries and understanding that boundaries are spaces of exchange rather than barriers seems key.
17:15:40 From Nathan to All Panelists : @dil Actually at the meeting I was describing they were referencing “The Tyranny of Structureless” to describe their condition.
17:15:47 From Nathan to All Panelists :
17:16:03 From Ben Roberts : If we were sitting together, Matthew wouldn’t be on his phone like that!
17:16:17 From Nenad Maljković : Of course not – any mediated communication is 2nd grade communication… or worse
17:16:40 From Ben Roberts : And I wouldn’t also be working on a Google doc.
17:17:06 From Nenad Maljković : Focus Ben, focus!
17:17:13 From Simon to All Panelists : You think so ! ?
17:17:18 From Dil Green : https://medium.com/@joshafairhead/harmonious-working-patterns-2788d1523106
17:17:24 From Nathan to All Panelists : At the very least distract yourself with FLO software!
17:18:13 From Oliver Sylvester-Bradley : Harmonious Working Patterns: https://medium.com/@joshafairhead/harmonious-working-patterns-2788d1523106
17:19:03 From vivian : @Indra I like your analysis of how people interact with ideologies and the connection you make with concepts of identity. In the present political situation we have a classic case study of how people with insecure identities cleave to apparently powerful “ready-made” ones which are really crude vehicles for manipulation and control.
17:20:21 From Nenad Maljković : Hear, hear… (coming from an oralist)
17:20:50 From vivian : Arguably many externally-defined forms of identity (countries, brands for example) fall to a greater or lesser extent into this category.
17:21:31 From Dil Green : @Vivian Agreed
17:21:44 From Nenad Maljković : By the way, some good practical tips on… collaboration… here (there’s also part 2): https://medium.com/the-tuning-fork/hierarchy-is-not-the-problem-892610f5d9c0
17:22:06 From Nathan to All Panelists : I love that article, @Nanad. Thanks for sharing it.
17:22:06 From Dil Green : @Nenad – great stuff.
17:22:33 From Nathan to All Panelists : A corollary of mine: https://medium.com/medlab/co-ops-need-leaders-too-c78a303cd16ea
17:22:49 From Oliver Sylvester-Bradley : Thanks!
17:22:58 From Nathan to All Panelists : Sorry https://medium.com/medlab/co-ops-need-leaders-too-c78a303cd16e
17:23:19 From Dil Green : Rich and Nat capture something that panellists here are not talking about – which is scale. ‘How many people in the group?’ ‘What is the right size of group for this intent?” seem to me to be very important early questions.
17:25:38 From Nenad Maljković : What Matthew describes is how things work anyway… We are all associated – as individuals – with more then one “organisation”, etc.
17:26:50 From Dil Green : @Nen – I think he is saying that the protocols for collaboration in those forms of org are over-conditioned by the learned cultural modes of top-down hierarchy.
17:27:06 From Oliver Sylvester-Bradley : Cohesion – steer towards average position of neighbours
Separation – avoid crowding neighbours
Alignment – steer towards average heading of neighbours
17:27:13 From Oliver Sylvester-Bradley : https://open.coop/2019/03/07/defining-dna-collaboration/
17:27:23 From Simon to All Panelists : Is this aimed at corporations . . . who pay fat consultancy fees?. Personally can’t we just close them down?
17:27:37 From Ben Roberts : Never mind the GHG emissions associated with in-person meetings!
17:27:40 From Oliver Sylvester-Bradley : lol!
17:28:31 From Nenad Maljković : Extroverts and introverts keep their differences on video too
17:28:56 From vivian : @laura vulnerability is strength! (although I’m conscious I’m just sending text messages and you’re the one on the video! )
17:30:04 From Ben Roberts : So interesting to hear Laura say she “hates video.” The three ways of connecting–in-person, live virtual (video/audio), and asynch/text– each have benefits and limits, and each appeal/repel different people in different ways. Deep collaboration will leverage all three and have them synergize in ways we are still just starting to figure out.
17:30:21 From Ben Roberts : Yay NEC!
17:33:56 From Nathan to All Panelists : Thank you Laura for sharing that.
17:34:59 From Nenad Maljković : If viewer is focused enough on video listening can be as good – it’s a skill to acquire, in my experience.
17:35:20 From Laura James : Great point Indra about tech privilege. Virtual environments, especially without video, can be empowering for people with disabilities whose voices are not heard in the same way in face to face meetings. For scale we need to centre inclusivity
17:35:25 From Nenad Maljković : Live video is not the same thing as watching TV
17:35:29 From Nathan to All Panelists : One board I’m on requires members to stay unmuted on calls to enforce attention.
17:37:59 From Nenad Maljković : @laura: yes, fully agree + what Ben Roberts wrote above: “The three ways of connecting–in-person, live virtual (video/audio), and asynch/text– each have benefits and limits, and each appeal/repel different people in different ways. Deep collaboration will leverage all three and have them synergize in ways we are still just starting to figure out.”
17:41:34 From Nenad Maljković : Voting is out of date. We use consent decision-making (not even consensus, that’s also out of date).
17:44:57 From Nenad Maljković : Re. foking in collaboration – doable even without devices!
17:45:57 From Dil Green : imho democratic tools have appropriate and inappropriate contexts. So that voting can have its place (a quick workplace decision among 50 people as to a wildcat strike), consensus can have its place (a group of three choosing where to go for a meal), deliberative democracy… and so on.
17:49:40 From Nenad Maljković : @laura: thanks for sharing this, very useful!
17:50:49 From Matthew Schutte : Gregory Bateson’s critique of Conscious Purpose:
17:50:50 From Matthew Schutte : http://www.swaraj.org/shikshantar/Gregory_Bateson.pdf
17:51:49 From Matthew Schutte : And published yesterday: Gregory’s daughter, Nora Bateson’s article on “Tasting Textures of Communication in Warm Data”
17:51:49 From Matthew Schutte : https://medium.com/@norabateson/eating-sand-e478a48574a5
17:53:54 From Matthew Schutte : Nora’s wonderful recent 8 minute video that touches on the challenge that humanity faces today and the different ways of THINKING that may be required to actually surface solutions:
17:53:55 From Matthew Schutte : https://vimeo.com/310626097
17:55:20 From Nathan : Join us later! https://ethicaledtech.info/wiki/Meta:Inaugural_Edit-a-Thon
17:57:49 From Wes, Somerset UK to All Panelists : Really great session, thank you everyone!
17:59:13 From Dil Green : These ‘names’ are nicely captured by the concept of ‘patterns’ – identified recurring conditions in complex systems which are recognisable – although each instance is unique (in space and time), we can nevertheless useful name them.
17:59:49 From Ben Roberts : I’m not with you fully, @matthew. Sure, you can note how any boundary is permeable, or even arbitrary. And yet collectives DO exist in nature and are essential building blocks for its complex capacities for collaboration.
17:59:57 From Dil Green : Pattern languages allow us to trace systems of relationship between patterns that embody the complexity of the interactions.
18:00:13 From Simon to All Panelists : Interesting that Oliver insisted that everyone start by explaining ‘how they make a living’, & that Matthew lived in his car. Progress will be made when we don’t have to make these ridiculous choices. What will that take?
18:00:28 From Ben Roberts : It’s not just about giving something a “name.”
18:02:11 From Dil Green : @ben agreed – understanding a pattern and being able safely to interact with it design it requires a great deal of investigation, learning, documenting, mapping connections to larger and smaller contexts…
18:06:08 From Nenad Maljković : “Each pattern describes a problem which occurs over and over again in our environment, and then describes the core of the solution to that problem, in such a way that you can use this solution a million times over, without ever doing it the same way twice.”
– Christopher Alexander, A Pattern Language, 1977
18:07:00 From Nenad Maljković : Might work in similar way in social systems… I think.
18:07:47 From Dil Green : Thank you Nenad! Chris alexander student/practitioner here.
18:08:38 From Ben Roberts : Here’s a pattern language for group engagement that I love to use in various ways: https://groupworksdeck.org/
18:09:00 From Dil Green : I am working on building pattern language authoring tools for all sorts of domains.
18:09:47 From Ben Roberts : There’s a new pattern language for “Wise Democracy” too: https://www.wd-pl.com/
18:10:58 From Dil Green : know the group works one, but nice to have this democracy one. Thanks
18:11:08 From Matthew Schutte : An interesting blogpost on Dyads and Triads (similar to some of Josh’s comments) by the co-creator of SSL the most widely used security protocol on earth:
18:11:08 From Matthew Schutte : http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2013/04/dyads-triads-the-smallest-teams.html
18:11:14 From Ben Roberts : One of its categories is Collaboration
18:11:29 From Ben Roberts : I can speak to one version of an answer to Nenad
18:12:11 From Ben Roberts : Cooperation is another C word to include
18:16:52 From Ben Roberts : I can also answer Nenad’s question re the various C-words with a story about what we’ve learned in the Thriving Resilient Communities Collaboratory
18:20:13 From Nenad Maljković to All Panelists : Maybe give Ben a chance to answer my question?
18:20:14 From Matthew Schutte : Yes! We need to give ourselves and one another AUTHORIZATION to show up as full humans — with the complexity of other contexts — not just as our “role” in the organization!
18:20:53 From Matthew Schutte : Nora Bateson has designed a wonderful process called a WARM DATA LAB to foster this kind of experience — and result in transformative shifts.
18:21:57 From Ben Roberts : I’m eager to try a warm data lab with Nora using Zoom (and maybe some asynch tools and perhaps even a network of in-person groups too).
18:22:28 From Matthew Schutte : Nora spoke at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco yesterday. That recording should be on NPR radio stations around the US (and elsewhere soon) and will probably be available online in the next few days:
18:22:29 From Matthew Schutte : https://www.commonwealthclub.org/videos
18:25:10 From Dil Green : Ben this is fascinating – thank you.
18:26:10 From Nenad Maljković : Thank you Ben!
18:26:14 From Dil Green : Is this documented / described anywhere?
18:26:25 From Indra : share your links Ben?
18:26:25 From Ben Roberts : www.thrivingresilience.org
18:26:27 From vivian : Thank you Oli!
18:26:32 From Dil Green : thanks!
18:26:51 From Nenad Maljković : Thank you all + Oliver and Dil
18:27:04 From Trevor : Thanks everyone!

The post Catalysing collaboration at scale appeared first on P2P Foundation.

When: Wednesday, 3 April
4:30 pm – 6:30 pm

Add to: iCal – gCal

(See OPEN COOP website for map and further detail)

Could we model a formula for organisational collaboration on three simple rules?

1. Cohesion
2. Seperation
3. Alignment

…and define a protocol to aggregate, visualise and disseminate the resultant murmurations?

This free webinar on “Catalysing collaboration at scale” is the first even of OPEN 2019 organised by The Open Co-op exploring ideas around The DNA of Collaboration and Harmonious Working Patterns.

We have convened a panel of community builders, technologists and collaborators to explore ideas which might help all the people, communities and organisations working on creating a new, decentralised, regenerative economy collaborate better to produce more impact.

Everyone is welcome to log in and listen to a discussion and participate in the Q&A.

We will be hearing from:

• Indra Adnan from The Alternative
• Nathan Schneider from the Platform Cooperativism Consortium
• Irina (Ira) Bolychevsky from Redecentralize
• Matthew Schutte from Holochain
• Laura James from Cambridge Computer Laboratory
• Oliver Sylvester-Bradley from The Open Co-op

The panel will explore questions such as:

• What examples can you give / have you seen of group and intergroup collaboration working well?
• What do you see as the key ingredients / tenets / requirements for successful collaboration?
• Once collaboration is working within our groups, how do you think we could encourage more inter-group collaboration to achieve wider systemic impact?
• Plus, the concept contained in the posts on The DNA of Collaboration and Harmonious Working Patterns and examples and ideas from the panels’ projects.

The webinar will be held on Zoom – you will need to download the Zoom package and then click on the link to Join the webinar – there is no need to register in advance.

Where: Online, Webinar, Zoom

Categories: Beginner Collaborate Discuss Intermediate

The post Catalysing collaboration at scale – The Open Co-op appeared first on P2P Foundation.

What does it take for owners and managers to understand and liberate the true value of placing workers in charge of the business? How can we encourage the development of new, and the transformation of ‘conventional’ businesses, to become worker owned enterprises? What assumptions do we need to challenge to break the strong-hold of rapacious capitalism as the the dominant form of business?

The post OPEN 2018 – Narrative debate: Putting the employees in charge appeared first on P2P Foundation.

See the shared notes from this session too.

The post OPEN 2018 – Decision making for participatory democracy appeared first on P2P Foundation.

The post OPEN 2018 – The Capital Conundrum appeared first on P2P Foundation.

Photo by LaertesCTB

The post Open 2018 – Mapping the cooperative / solidarity economy appeared first on P2P Foundation.

Photo by haru__q

The post Open 2018: The Nature of Money – Signals and Transitions appeared first on P2P Foundation.

There are also some useful shared notes and links in the working doc from this session.

Photo by nigel_appleton

The post Open 2018: Richard Bartlett and Natalia Lombardo on Patterns for Decentralised Organising appeared first on P2P Foundation.