Replying to LO27103 --
In my last mail, I was making the case that organisations might be
considered to be people-like (anthropomorphisation!)
In this mail, I am going to suggest that people might be considered to be
A. Do people have names, legal rights, life-less parts, etc., like an
organisation? Yes, they do.
B. Can people contain multiple personalities within themselves? Yes. This
was viewed as a disorder until it was found to be a fundamental mechanisms
through which the mind functions [1, 2]. Some learning theorists see
individuals within individuals .
C. Can people serve as environment for other people to act? Yes. A
child's behaviour at school can drastically change when a parent comes
they assume an identity that is larger than life and touch the lives of
many other people? Yes, some people are regarded as institutions by
E. Can individuals be re-organised? Yes! This is the underlying approach
to therapy and healing. The so-called psychological geography of
individuals needs some re-structuring now and then.
F. Can individuals benefit from strategic management, i.e., by
formulating strategic choices and implementing these in their own lives?
Yes, it is possible. It is important for career planning.
G. Do people experience the kinds of difficulty organisations face in
acquisitions, alliances, joint ventures, etc.? Yes! Just as an acquired
firm's performance typically falls after acquisition, likewise a
boy-friend's (or girl-friend's) performance suddenly falls after he (she)
becomes a husband (wife)!
Therefore, it seems, people can [sometimes] be regarded as being
1. Hofstadter, Douglas. Metamagical Themas: Questing for the Essence of
Mind and Pattern (New York: Basic Books, 1985). See Chapter 5, "World
Views in Collision: The Skeptical Inquirer versus the National Enquirer".
When I name myself or when I am named by others,
I am created (constructed or written) with identities,
and these identities are multiple
because I always occupy many subject positions...
Gordon Pask's conversation theory presented by Professor Boyd
**Acknowledgements: My last mail and this one are both inspired by Fred
Nickol's hint that organisations (or corporations) do not learn, people do
Thank you Fred for your provocation and your patient and courteous
(Dr. D. P. Dash, India)
"D P Dash" <D_P_Dash@nts2.ximb.ac.in>
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.