Classical Management and LOs LO26132

From: Rol Fessenden (Rol@fessenden.net)
Date: 02/14/01


Replying to LO26124 --

I suspect there are different scales, and, as in the case of animals, at
one scale an animal can look like a placid, straightforward organism,
while at more detailed levels, one can see a great deal of complexity.
Organizations can be like outlines. Under each moderately simple header
one may find a surprising level of complexity.

It is also true that in bigger companies, people with average
responsibility can be somewhat deep in the organization, while in a small
organization, a person with the same level of responsibility can be a
corporate leader. Not to be overly simplistic, but a person who has $60
million in responsibility in a $100 million company is more visible than a
person with $60 million in responsibility in a $1 billion company.

Having worked for many years in both small and large companies, the large
ones are very complicated, the smaller ones refreshingly simpler to
navigate.

Rol

>Winfried:

>If you mean reduce the complexity of the "environment" inside the
>organization, I agree. When possible, I prefer to reserve the term
>environment for the organization's external environment. Of course, it
>gets a little muddy when talking about the "enacted environment". That
>is, how the organization's internal culture, systems, processes, etc.
>select, filter and shape those facets of the organization's external
>environment that reach management's radar screen. According to Karl
>Weick (cited in Miller's paper):

-- 

"Rol Fessenden" <Rol@Fessenden.net>

Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@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.