Objections to Learning Organization LO24046

From: Jan Lelie (janlelie@wxs.nl)
Date: 02/24/00

Replying to LO24017 and LO24028 --

Hi Steve, RBacal, Rick and you others,

I take the bait. Steve, i overlooked your first point - change an open
question into a question of resistance - , thanks for pointing it out. In
the subsequent message, you elaborate on this reframing of the question
and why this question is reframed. And i agree: the LO is a fuzzy,
oversold, limited, obscure, out-dated concept for organizational
development. I like the LO-concepts so much, i use my own concepts rather
than the LO-concepts. That way they won't wear. And, being a Deming
follower, i also agree with Rbacal's in LO24017:

> As with Deming, the problem isn't completely in the ideas,
> but in the followers who are living in a kind of self created
> illusion, largely disconnected from the experiences of the
> people they need too "pull in" to bring life and vitality to the
> ideas.

I live a self created illusion, disconnected from other people, but i
would prefer to say that i "pull in" the life and vitality of ideas. And
this is another con of the LO: the idea that it is a philosophy, something
to cling or adhere to, Group Thinking. This usually happens when people do
not understand a complex situation and still share a fairly high level of
agreement on the solution. This is the normal situation called life,
desperate but not serious. Problems with Group Thinking start when acting
out, en-acting, the "agreed" solution without the underlying
understanding of the problem(s) and being blind for the consequences from
the mis-understanding. Very rapidly a cover-up of the cover-up develops.
Another con of the LO is the suggestion of a solution it brings, a recipe
for success, five easy steps for salvation.

Also LO understates the social psychology of organizing: why do we
organize, what is in the human nature that promotes as well as inhibits
learning, solving problems? what roles play our emotions, feelings and
desires? and of course: who am i?

The LO to me is a "sollusions": a combination of solutions and illusions
and implying soll ("must become") situations. It belongs to the class
described by Kurt Vonnegut of "foma", small harmless untruths, like
prosperity is just around the corner, the cheese to lure the mice. I'm
perfectly willing to trade it in for any other sollusion, as long as i am
allowed to travel in your company. We seem to travel in the same way.

Kind regards,

Jan Lelie

He, an after thought: Another con of the LO: it is a process not a state.
It should be called Learn Organizing.
And a second one: why are objections called object-ions? Are the less

Drs J.C. Lelie CPIM (Jan)
LOGISENS  - Sparring Partner in Logistical Development
Mind@Work - est. 1998 - Group Decision Process Support
Tel.: (+ 31) (0)70 3243475 or car: (+ 31)(0)65 4685114
http://www.mindatwork.nl and/or
taoSystems: + 31 (0)30 6377973 - Mindatwork@taoNet.nl

Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>

"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.