Large Group Interventions: Future Search and Open Space

Introduction to Large Group Interventions

The following case paper applies two prominent large group intervention methods — Future Search and Open Space Technology — to four distinct organizational scenarios, evaluating which approach best fits each situation and why.

Scenario 1: Future Search at a College

Future Search seems to be the best option for addressing the existing problems that students or employees bring to a college's attention. Since the new leadership has no prior experience running a college, complaints and suggestions must be handled carefully. For this matter, Future Search is valuable because all stakeholders from the concerned departments would be invited to a meeting that takes a top-down approach to designing the institution's future (Norum, 2005, p. 405).

By "designing the future," it is meant that the three core phases of the meeting would help craft the action plan needed to eradicate current issues. Those three phases are: reviewing the past, assessing where the institution stands at present, and determining the future direction of the college (Nixon, 1998).

Every stakeholder would have a voice in the process, making it fully inclusive, since their opinions matter and are directly tied to the issues they experience. For example, involving students at this stage would help analyze the state of educational delivery that students find unsatisfactory. The self-management and responsibility of top management and leadership would be gathered collectively to consider the formulation of a comprehensive "whole system" (Nixon, 1998).

A round table seating arrangement for stakeholders — preferably groups of eight, as suggested by Future Search design — would be convenient (Leith, 1996). This structure facilitates an open flow of conversation leading toward a desired future direction for the institute. The shared vision is communicated among all stakeholders; since the leadership has no prior experience running the college, it is beneficial to draw on the expertise of those involved. The issues stakeholders raise would be grounded in past experience, and they would know what could work better — which is essential for whole-system participation (Leith, 1996). Once it is confirmed that stakeholders are aligned, the goal of creating a shared vision and setting the right future direction will be achieved.

Scenario 2: Open Space Technology for a Video Game Company

Open Space Technology is a suitable approach for this scenario, in which there is a conflict between senior executives from the finance and management departments and young video game designers. The rationale for choosing this method is that senior executives who have already made up their minds about a solution are not well-suited to a structured, agenda-driven meeting (Rogers, 2010, p. 103). In this scenario, if the experienced executives of finance and marketing feel they are already correct, they are unlikely to contribute productively to finding a shared solution. The key advantage of Open Space Technology here is that participants may arrive and leave when they feel the session is not delivering value to them.

The law of two feet would be appropriately applied under Open Space Technology, making it a feasible option. The law of two feet means that participants move on to wherever they feel they can make a meaningful contribution (Nixon, 1998). The aim of using Open Space Technology in this scenario is to include all young video game designers — potentially from around the world — alongside finance and marketing executives, also from a global pool.

An online meeting could be arranged and opened to everyone. Whoever wishes to participate would be considered a relevant contributor toward deciding which of the two proposed directions should be selected (Nixon, 1998). Global participants would allow the company's five founders to understand what approaches are succeeding in different regions and whether the majority of success stems from the ideas of young designers or from those of the senior executives.

The five founding partners could determine an overall success rate and arrange as many sessions as needed — for example, a first session of 45 minutes. This would create a systematic, ongoing process that avoids haphazard input and steers the conversation toward problem-solving rather than confusion.

Traditionally, a round table arrangement is suggested for Open Space Technology conferences; however, in this scenario, online sessions open to both young designers and senior executives would prioritize direct, face-to-face interaction through two-way communication. A physical round table arrangement is therefore not applicable here.