Counter-Intuitive Rules of Learning Org LO28801

From: chris macrae (
Date: 07/08/02

Replying to LO28795 --

Don -thanks

Its sort of part there and yet I feel you're still taking more tangible
language than we're trying to portray at

we're trying to talk about relationship connections flows between people
and I suspect that many of these are ultimately codified in some of the
circle diagrams of systems - this is quite important stuff because it says
to me that its not just corrupt leaders that are up the creek if they
attend to number valuation algorithms of accountants, the real
transparency crisis will turn out to be that you just cannot expect static
snapshots of intangibles valuations to mean anything without looking at
the system integrity (the very numbers that appear to be going up could be
the final fling of the dice from a business unit that has over-pressure
cooked the whole organisation)

Here's a killer extract in someone else's words - Hubert Saint-Onge full
bookmark at "The real
paradox is the fact that while technology is driving knowledge management,
the people who appreciate its value are those who are best at building
relationships. For them, knowledge is a matter of trust, not competition.
Those who can build up capabilities by working with others, including
customers and other workers in the same field, are those that will win.
Organisations that can generate capability fastest have the most to offer,
will be part of the best collaborations, and will have the best customers.
Partnering is the key idea that will make this happen, allowing
complimentary capabilities to take part at the top of the value creation
chain, creating unique tripartite value - for the individual, the
organisation and the client.

The key issue is trust, which must be based on shared ideals and values.
Leadership integrity will determine the width of the collaborative
pipeline, and will either restrict or open the flow of knowledge. Finally,
there's the role of technology, which provides the avenues for knowledge
transfers. This connectivity allows the flows that create superior value."

Topline Tentative Conclusions seem to be:
Numbers can never measure this because arithmetic is the logical
mathematical form for separation not for system flows.
Therefore second standard of measurement must be introduced alongside
quarterly numbers; downsize accountants numbers audits by half concentrating
on cashflow and none of the hairy estimates beyond that; and let people
system relationships flow be where you embed/govern the value dynamics

chris macrae

> Here's some "random synaptic sparks":
> Not sure if it meets your criteria, but it sounds like the basic "quality
> paradox" might apply: improving quality often reduces costs, rather than
> increasing them.


"chris macrae" <>

Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <>

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