Replying to LO28580 --
"Dan Burnstein" <firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> I am not sure where I came across the cannard - when there is a conflict
> the informal organization always trumps the formal organization.
With your permission Dan, i'd like to offer a nottation: replace
negation-prefixes (like "in*", "un*" ...) by "not*" for the sake of this
discussion. Maybe you have something different from "notformal" in mind,
when you use "informal". in such case please consider the rest of this
post as a vague asociation :-)
Suppose we knew what exactly is the "formal organization" FO, then
"notformal organization" nFO would be anything outside FO. What exactly?
Anything (if we agree that the future is unpredictable to a certain degree
What then would you suggest then as a constructive act: to look for nFO
(find it and control it) or to expand FO (give it more form :-) ... inform
it :-)). Or something else?
> I think that it is a part of a good training in group problem solving,
> negotiation or team building to acknowledge this bit of reality.
so think i,
PS - same argument works for other pairs, like:
known ... notknown
spoken ... notspoken
Judy Tal <email@example.com>
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.