Replying to LO28693 --
Fred Nichols last mail concluded:
> Back now to the final point of the essay question, the "interdependency of
> individual and organisational learning." I don't believe they are
> interdependent. I do believe that organizational learning (at least in so
> far as people are concerned) is dependent upon individual learning. I do
> not believe that individual learning is dependent upon organizational
> learning because "organizational learning," as stated above, is merely a
> shorthand way of referring to patterns in individual learning.
My vote would be 100% agreement with all of this until the net/digital
environment surounded us. I think this is truly the paradigm shift between
industrial age organising and whatever revolution comes next ( I'm certain
it will be on the revolutionary scale not the mere evolutionary one, but
what it will be is probably up for some double-loop breakout shaping right
now )
My guess is that the new competitive advantage of transparency - which
will quite soon turn out to be a matter of global organisational survival
- will go with those organisations that increase the individual learning
dependency upon organisational/network learning. They could start doing
this through e-learning, 360 degree appraisals and selected
resource-boosting of open-agent empowerment of personal networks to
criss-cross organisational borders, free agents, communities of everything
(practice, interest, passion, purpose) and new forms such as what the 21st
C virtual equivalent of the professional association may be distributed
as.
If that last sentence was indigestible, it probably means that companies
who have global advertising budgets should immediately cut half of them
and reallocate so that their employee brands are the best brained and
trained and networked and simply able to serve, and benchmarking
responsibility standards- being a founding sponsor of the medium that 21st
C practice accelerated-learning communities populate around is an
investment a CEO should challenge the organisation to creatively imagine
until we all work out how to do it simply.
- http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wh_remarks.htm when Bush
pleaded at Baldrige to America to usher in a Responsibility era, "usher"
was the polite word to address people with, to global corporates he meant
oxygenate yourselves or die because we the people are sick of your
cultural inadequacies, your current systems that get dumber and dumber ;
this definitely means that global companies with audit budgets must cut
the numbers-games suppliers by half and introduce a second type of systems
mapping audit geared to human relationship transparency of value. Do not
pass go (or this sentence) until you read current issue of Fortune on
System Failure:
http://www.fortune.com/indexw.jhtml?channel=artcol.jhtml&doc_id=208314
Socially, a lot of this depends on architectural choices that will very
soon define net civilisation: will agents that match every human being's
action learning travels around net-space be kept completely open in design
and ownership, or will we make the mistake of permiting one corporate to
own these? thank heavens that Enron only specialised in electricity not
the powers and currents of net-agency
If you agree with one para that I have written why not cut it out (editing
it if needs be) and pass it on; after all good people can only improve on
this; at times like this silence is for lambs.
chris macrae London (0208 540 5304) wcbn007@easynet.co.uk
www.valuetrue.com
http://www.normanmacrae.com/intrapreneur.html
http://www.normanmacrae.com/netfuture.html
--"chris macrae" <wcbn007@easynet.co.uk>
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.