Thanks for reaching out, @DrRossWirth! It’s great to meet you.
You’re correct that lately our community meetings have tended toward more operational aspects of running the project and have been less about advancing the state of the community’s definition. But we always welcome input and new ideas here.
A few notes and directions, based on your comments:
I am finding a good aspirational vision but little progress on how to implement it other than raising awareness of a few key principles that have some redundancies
Some of our community-produced resources may interest you here, including volumes in our book series. In particular, I’d recommend:
Our books and other writings are our vehicles for “operationalizing” the principles we outline in the Open Organization Definition; they’re they places we record various experiments in putting those principles into practice. We welcome your contributions!
(Side note: The fact that you sense redundancies in the Open Organization Definition is something I consider a feature of the document, not a bug. We aim for the various open organization characteristics to work reciprocally, self-reinforcing and feed positively into one another—which is why we include many “see also” hyperlinks referring some sections of the document to others.)
The Open Organization Definition is also missing some key principles that have been adopted by pioneering organizations that are inventing a post-Industrial organization
We’re always interested in hearing how others would suggest improving the Open Organization Definition, which is meant to be a living document. We perform our work on this and other resources on GitHub. You might consider visiting the project for the Open Organization Definition here:
… then starting a discussion about some of the idea you have.
We’ll soon be migrating all community discussions to GitHub, so by doing this you’d be among the first people to kick off a new series of productive conversations there.
Thanks for your great questions.