Marek Kapusta is telling us how he helped rock the vote in Slovakia through the Rock Volieb campaign in 1998. He later spent much of 2002 helping Serbia's opposition group Otpor to devise and run its own voter mobilization campaign (read more here).

And now Ivan Marovic, the founder of Otpor, has helped develop a computer game called A Force More Powerful, which teaches players the strategy of nonviolent conflict.

Created by BreakAway Games, the game leads players through simulations of real-life events, such as Gandhi's struggle for Indian independence, the civil rights movement in the American South, and Otpor's protests in Serbia.

"You start with just a couple of students under your control, so you plan parties and meetings, working within society to build up the strength of your group," said BreakAway CEO Douglas Whatley, outlining one possible game scenario. Read more about the game here.

Now... can we get them to make a version of the game, where you have to introduce democracy in the workplace? That would seriously rock the (corporate) vote.

Alexander's Weblog | 05:04 PM

...once you let it out, there's no getting it back in.

Mart Laar

Susanne's Weblog | 03:58 PM

I'm sitting here in the Transitions sessions and Mart Laar is talking about how he lead a revolution in his country, Estonia, creating an unbelievably successful democratic society.

If that doesn't make you wonder what you've been doing with your life, what would?

Susanne's Weblog | 03:49 PM

"Ultimately it's about ownership, not organization." Only democratic ownership will assure that organizations are democratic.

Living Thoughts | 01:34 PM

Worker-seized means of production? What in the heck? We think of factories in which the workers are the bosses as socialist-Marxist systems of paralysis and inefficiency. Avi Lewis just described the phenomenon in Argentina of over 200 worker-owned (even seized) factories. They were using "direct democracy" as the most efficient way to get their middle-class life back. Avi said the workers in these factories vote on everything--all the time and in all ways. It's not a top-down transformation as socialism was; this is bottom-up, worker-driven. Avi called it "reagonomics trickle down theory in a perverse manner". (He had a few choice other phrases with colorful language that I won't post... :-)

Could this happen in Iraq? What kind of culture does there need to be for democratic organizations? What are the conditions, what is the environment, to enable flat structures to take root in a heavily hierarchical society?

Janessa's Weblog | 01:10 PM

Thoughts about the emergence of organizational demoacracy and group decision making by Avi Lewis - Director of the movie "The Take"

• Systems designed from above are doomed to fail.
• In Latin America OD is happening in "worker run businesses"
• Represents a new social movement - not necessarily efficient, but inevitable
• While OD is teasing the minds of people in the developed world, it is coming from a period of intense business challenge in Latin American
• We have to be willing to fire the boss within oneself in order to enable the boss among us.

Susanne's Weblog | 12:58 PM

The challenge these people are facing is to fire the boss within.

- Avi Lewis explaining the main challenge of the argentinian workers taking over control of their plants as described in his documentary The Take ( link to http://www.thetake.org).

And here's a related quote by an Indian management guru:

In every substantive sense, employees of a company carry more risks than do the shareholders. Also, their contributions of knowledge, skills and entrepreneurship are typically more important than the contributions of capital by shareholders, a pure commodity that is perhaps in excess supply.

- Sumantra Ghoshal

Alexander's Weblog | 12:54 PM

Ralf Beuker is talking about different approaches to design, and singles out "paradox" as the most productive - when you approach your challenges as paradox, you're not looking for that one optimal solution. You're also not locked into either/or thinking.

I think the concept of paradox is crucial to OD. Any concept complex enough to be interesting is full of paradoxes, and if we re not able to deal constructively with them, we cannot appreciate the full complexity.

Here are a few thoughts on paradox:

Democratic leaders must be:

• Strong enough to be weak
• Successful enough to fail
• Busy enough to make time
• Wise enough to say "I don't know"
• Serious enough to laugh
• Rich enough to be poor
• Right enough to say "I'm wrong"
• Compassionate enough to discipline
• Mature enough to be childlike
• Important enough to be last
• Planned enough to be spontaneous
• Controlled enough to be flexible
• Free enough to endure captivity
• Knowledgeable enough to ask questions
• Loving enough to be angry
• Great enough to be anonymous
• Responsible enough to play
• Assured enough to be rejected
• Victorious enough to lose
• Industrious enough to relax
• Leading enough to serve

- Brewer, as cited by Hansel, 1987

How wonderful that we have met with a paradox. Now we have some hope of making progress. - Niels Bohr

It's an apparent paradox, that a democratic organization needs a strong leader. You'd think that the whole idea of democratic organizations, would be to eliminate the need for strong leaders so that everyone could lead according to their interests and passion. In practice this is not the case, as evidenced by the experience of many democratic organizations. But the strong leader is necessary not to make actual business decisions, but rather to keep the democracy alive and healthy. The one thing, that is not up for the vote in a democratic organization, is whether or not to be democratic. And since the transition to democracy and the practice of democracy once you're there is untried and can be confusing, frustrating and difficult (in addition, of course, to being fun, dynamic and energizing), someone needs to hold on strongly to the democratic principles and values.

Alexander's Weblog | 12:12 PM

Bob Fuller's definition of the hitherto undefined problem, "rankism" was so enlightening. I had never thought of how previous problems also had to be defined, racism, sexism, etc. in order to be tackled, as Bob pointed out. Pointing out the elephant in the room, that there is an issue to be addressed, galvanizes folks to take it on. It's much easier to pretend there isn't a problem if there's no language/word for it.

Bob made a great point about the collective lower ranks eventually get wind of the lack of dignity they're being afforded, which prompts them to take action against the higher rank. I asked him what he envisioned happening in the global context, with the unequal ranks between West and East, North and South. Would the lower ones rise up against the upper? Was terrorism a dark, sinister take on their uprising against their perceived enemy, (contrived or not?)

Bob's response made perfect sense. US foreign policy conducted in a way that does not humiliate or denigrate other nations would mitigate this type of response. It does not have to be an equalizing of the nations; there are many, inherent inequalities. However, there is no difference in the DIGNITY that should be accorded to all.

Janessa's Weblog | 11:45 AM

I have not posted a single blog yet since I have been completely involved with the Iraqi delegates at the Forum! It could not be more rewarding--facilitating discussions about these ideas with them, hearing their views on how organizational democracy should, can, MUST be applied in Iraq. The ideas are flowing and frankly are breaking the sound barrier. We even left the Forum briefly yesterday to go present a proposal/plan for a WorldBlu Iraqi Initiative at the State Department yesterday. More on that later!

Janessa's Weblog | 11:41 AM

The former Israeli soldier advanced the idea that Hitler was not the real cause of the Holocaust; it was the apathy of the German populace who let that madman use government and military power to have his way. The cadet thought that Hitler was bad enough to warrant a war. She countered that there is evil in everyone and cited stories about how even Jews in the concentration camps would do evil to their own by apathy, inaction or outright "little" aggressive acts (like hoarding or stealing food from other prisoners). He indicated that no one has to act in an evil way - and that he would sacrifice himself for his fellows. She said that only the evil ones in this case survived. But one of the others at the table pointed out that survival may not be the highest value and that the cadet's standard of sacrificing for the good of others trumps physical survival. Jesus said: "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." - John 15:13

The cadet said he didn't feel the present military strategy is the right one for winning in the Middle East. "The way to win the war is by moral victories," he said. And he cited how the true heroic US soldiers in Iraq are those who don't shoot bullets back, but shoot photos of the insurgents so that the Iraqi police and military can eliminate them. Another example: solders who take off their helmets and bow their heads as a funeral procession goes by. In other words, showing respect for the populace and not reacting in fear is a stronger foundation for victory than mere overwhelming force.

Mario's Weblog | 10:33 AM

• Use crises as opportunities
• Measure economies by quality of life factors for all stakeholders
• Make new materials from carbohydrates instead of hydrocarbons
• [I hope someone else recorded her butterfly metamorphosis example, where two cultures coexist for a while, the old and the new, and the old drops off. ]
• RE: intelligent design vs. evolution, she calls herself a "creationist evolutionary biologist"
• Interesting dictionary definition of reality, "non-derivative experience"
• The Federal Reserve is a private a debt-economy system
• The media must become much more interactive

Mario's Weblog | 10:19 AM

Good to learn about Erik Muten, whose western Massachusetts company, Drama Works, is hired by businesses that are seeking healthy change. His acting troupe holds up a mirror to the client company by portraying its people and operations. Fascinating concept!

Mario's Weblog | 10:17 AM

My notes from today's session on Roots with Bob Fuller, Author of "Somebodies and Nobodies: Overcoming the Abuse of Rank"

Bob Fuller, Author of "Somebodies and Nobodies: Overcoming the Abuse of Rank"

• Confluence of identity groups demanding equality
• Think of the disadvantaged group is the nobodies
• Somebodies are the power holders - who are reluctant to give up their power
• Organizational Democracy (OD) is about sharing power, in an intelligent way that results in happiness, better productivity and better bottom line
• So why isn't OD the default in business, church, education, family etc?
• Everything life shows us, people are unequal. Height, weight, abilities. But we are all equal in dignity - therefore call it a dignitarian movement
• People do no require equal rank to have equal dignity
• Rank is useful... as long as judgment is not passed in terms of recognizing dignity
• Democracy allows us to do something about those with rank who abuse that power
• When you have your whole team happy, free to speak up and participate... has shown to increase productivity and hence the bottom line
• The one place that rankism truly still exists is in cases where the differences in power is based on differences in rank
• Enlightened leaders welcome participation as a method for enabling people to do their best work and live their best life
• Historically this is a challenge, as humans are a top preditor on the planet... and sharing power is not intuitive
• Cooperation is the manifestation of power sharing in the modern world
• And most often leads to "beating" those who aren't sharing power
• Democracy is a movement that must remain in action, or like a shark, it dies
• With any form of discrimination it takes time to make a cognitive and behavioral shift
• It takes 4 generations within a family to get rid of racism
• It will take 4 generations to get rid of rankism
• Reading: Betty Friedan's book "The Feminine Mystique" - I really need to read this book - kind of embarrassing that I haven't
• How does this apply in the world today?
• Perhaps terrorists feel an affront to their dignity from Western powers. This translates to being the nobody who is trying to be a somebody
• 12 step programs like AA go a great job of eliminating rankism by flattening not the power structure... not that people don't have rank... but that influence in the organization can happen at any level, despite rank
• "Voice of the Faithful" Catholic people demanding a voice in the decision making with in the Church... in response to the church's sexual abuse scandals. The "people" demanded this involvement to save their church from going under.
• Business of creating a civilization... based on respect and dignity... which happens when people are given the individual power to have influence, no matter what their rank.
• We don't want to get rid of rank all together
• But there can be some organizing body that gives "voice" to the under represented.
• The US Congress is an example of equal representation and that concept has not been translated into business

Susanne's Weblog | 09:48 AM

Robert Fuller is currently talking about rankism and power, and this quote really resonated with me:

There is nothing outside power except martyrdom.

Read more about Robert Fuller here: http://www.breakingranks.net

Alexander's Weblog | 09:15 AM

Few things beat a good book. I went through my book reviews, and compiled a list of 10 excellent books related to organizational democracy.

Chris Turner: All hat and no cattle

The story of Chris Turner and her work to bring change, learning and empowerment into Xerox.

Hal Rosenbluth: The customer comes second

The title of this book is a deliberate provocation. After endless messages about putting the customer first, Hal Rosenbluth, decided to put he employees first.

Kevin Freiberg et al: Nuts!

"Nuts!, Southwest Airlines crazy recipe for business and personal success" is the story of Southwest Airlines.

Dee Hock: Birth of the Chaordic Age

The story of Dee Hock and how he came to be the CEO of VISA, the worlds first chaordic organization.

Margaret Wheatley: Turning to one another

Margaret Wheatley has written another beautiful book, and this time the topic is conversation.

Harrison Owen: The power of spirit

This book describes what an organization might look like, if it lived by the open space principles. And let me say this right away: If they're hiring, I want to work there!.

Peter Koestenbaum and Peter Block: Freedom and accountability at work

Can the business world learn anything from existential philosophy? What meaning do concepts such as freedom, good and evil, accountability and anxiety have in a corporate setting?

Paul Watzlawick: Change

When and how do people change? And when do they get stuck in situations and problems that seem hopeless?

Mark Buchanan: Small world

This book explains the discoveries in the science of small networks that have come very recently in many different areas.

Richard Reeves: Happy Mondays

Work can and should be fun. This is an excellent manifesto for the work of the future and the future of work.

There are more book reviews at http://www.positivesharing.com/bookreviews.htm.

Alexander's Weblog | 08:45 AM

I had a BFO when evaluating, pondering, internalizing the WEALTH of ideas that are coming from this conference. It's not only the speakers who have been outstanding -- how many? 16 in one day? -- the side conversations with the participants are incredibly stimulating. So it is a kind of "360" experience, a full-throttle mental stimulation/engagement.

I don't recall ever going to a business conference where the participants had as much to offer as the speakers. Usually it is the situation where the speakers are somehow elevated through their expertise and the participants come to "soak up" tidbits of learning.

Not here. Oh, yes, to be sure the speakers have a HUGE amount to offer...but it is like the participants are using the information to connect the dots of what they are already doing in their own experience. And then valuing what they are already doing and adding to it. So it is like a weaving of ideas, from speaker to participant to fellow participant, and so on...a tapestry of ideas for reference, for longterm support.

What hit me this morning was that, in contrast to other conferences where the uniting factor seems to be tactical information, this conference is lifting us to consider waaay higher values of democratic principles. It's spiritual actually. At least, that's how it hits me.

And that led me to my BFO. We are stepping up through a kind of Maslow's hierarchy of needs for organizations. The participants and speakers, regardless of whether they are start-ups or mature businesses, have jumped beyond the basics of survival and security, even beyond giving and receiving as "basics", to the higher considerations of respect and meaning.

This is the dimension where we are all meeting. The feeling as we connect the dots is pretty exhilarating. The downward tendencies to focus on survival and security having been minimized, what is created is a bouyancy and freedom.

We gotta continue this conversation, this feeling, this momentum...this freedom in our businesses. This is breakthrough stuff.

Chris | 08:30 AM

Amy Lyman of the Great Places to Work Institute:

Her opening slide: "It's all about trust." And trust seemed to be a continuous thread throughout the forum. When people are trusted, and feel they are trusted, they produce great work. When they are threatened and repressed they seldom excel but instead tend to be content with mediocrity.

• When the employee is placed at the center of a company excellence increases. In fact, the factor of level of trust defines a great vs. just a good place to work.
• Such companies have been shown to be good investments, performing better than the S&P 500 and Russell 3000.
• What drives some leaders and some organizations to successfully move forward? It's not what you would think!

Just having a crisis won't prompt change. FACT: 90% of bypass patients are unable to sustain lifestyle changes two years after surgery. (I've seen this in my own family).

Fear of failure and penalties won't do it because under stress people tend to deny reality and rationalize why they won't be harmed.

Even presented with solid facts, we don't change. If it doesn't fit our conceptual framework we discount it - mergers and acqucisitions are well known to have high failure rates.

• Sometimes financial incentives and awards are presented as agents of change, but money alone doesn't buy the best. There is no clear link between high CEO salaries and a greater likelhood of long term business success. High CEO salaries don't trickle down to others.

WHAT REALLY WORKS?

1. Belief that change is possible, and

2. Conviction that organization will be better because of the change

Successful change comes when:

• leaders take a long term perspective
• individuals and groups are actively and visibly supported in their efforts to change
• need to speak to feelings, emotions and aspirations
• need a positive reason for making the change - something to aspire to that benefits the individual and the group - clearly articulated and held up as the reason for change
• leaders who are willing to break out of the mold - to NOT do what everyone else is doing

Mario's Weblog | 08:03 AM

How gratifying to hear that there were two college students at the forum who openly admitted they had never heard of OD and felt that none of their peers had either but would be as jazzed to learn about it as they are. They were eager that such a forum be presented on college campuses. Seems like this is a logical followup to this week's program. Instead of requiring everyone to be in a certain place at a certain time - even if it's a nice place and everyone is having a good time - it seems more efficient to package a program that will ride the college circuit. WorldBlu, go for it! Plant the seeds of change directly in the soil of the next generation's learning grounds.

Mario's Weblog | 08:02 AM

Bill Taylor of Fast Company magazine characterized WorldBlu as a "movement." He said "Traci is fighting for a set of ideas. We are living in the age of disruption." A disruptive sense of purpose leads to ideas that reshape what's possible.

Changing large organizations is the hardest thing to do. They have their future hidden somewhere inside of them, so reformers need to look inside the organization to find out who's getting it and support them. [I wonder if some organizations have to come very close to failure first in order for change to come. Of all the organizations resistant to change, churches must be the foremost. Their DNA seems to mandate a command and control organizational architecture. Their "top-down" power purports to come from an infinite height!]

Mario's Weblog | 08:00 AM

From a conversation with Navy cadet Callon Nichols:

Do you remember Admiral Stockdale? If so, it's probably only as a buffoon, Ross Perot's running mate in the 1994 US presidential election, who came across confused and inarticulate during a televised debate. While comedians had their way with him because of that, students of military history know him as a heroic TV failure. Here's part of the entry on him in the Wikipedia

He was held as a prisoner of war in the Hoa Lo prison for the next seven years. Locked in leg irons in a bath stall, he was routinely tortured and beaten. When told by his captors that he was to be paraded in public, Stockdale slit his scalp with a razor to purposely disfigure himself so that his captors could not use him as propaganda. When they covered his head with a hat, Stockdale beat himself with a stool until his face was swollen beyond recognition. He told them in no uncertain terms that they would never use him. When Stockdale heard that other prisoners were dying under the torture, he slit his wrists and told them that he preferred death to submission.

Mario's Weblog | 07:43 AM

A question to the Thursday evening panel about fear yielded some interesting revelations. The four men and one woman (Traci) were asked how they were able to overcome fear as they set forth on their new directions. There was a noticeable thud of non-recognition from the men. Actually, Toby had brought up the subject that prompted the question by telling of how in deciding to get involved with the Iraqi elections he had to put aside his fear of being physically harmed and go forward with what he thought was right.

But this isn't the kind of fear the questioner, a woman, was talking about. It was expressed more clearly by Traci, who spoke of apprehensions about being rejected or humiliated as she strode forward with her ideas. The men valiantly tried to come up with something but it was plain to see that they hadn't had to think much about this issue. To them, the new direction was just a way to solve a problem. Since they didn't like the conditions they were faced with they just found another way. Their belief in the value of the idea was sufficient for them to go forward with it, regardless of what anyone thought of them.

I wonder if fear isn't connected with the need for approval. The men seemed not to have this need, at least not in the context of being pioneers. Speaking about this with Traci afterward, she admitted that the further she got with her project the less need she felt to be approved of and simply moved forward on the basis of her own conviction that her ideas were right.

Reminds me of the matriarchal religious cult in Walter Kirn's new novel Mission to America, where the primary value of an isolated religious sect was approval. My own experience is that gaining approval from people is a risky business. Sometimes you're in and sometimes you're out, and being out when you've been in, or have wanted to be in, is not pleasant.

Spiritual teachings that ground approval on the unconditional love of one's Creator seem to provide people with a firmer foundation for forging ahead into new territory, whether that territory is business practices, relationships or organizational structures. Those for whom theology matters can thrive on convictions about that unconditional love and see the open frontier as a means of having that approval revealed to them in fresh ways.

Since women will most likely be major innovators in the new society/economy it will probably be well for them to drop this baggage of fear of disapproval. But I don't know what it will take since so much of women's socialization involves gaining approval. It would be instructive to hear from women on this point.

Mario's Weblog | 07:38 AM