Uncovering the Act of Organisational Learning LO28901 (Part 3).

From: Peter Westerhof (p.westerhof@lixus.com)
Date: 07/25/02

Replying to LO28892 --

If you put it like that we couldn't agree more.

But then I assume we also agree that [true learning] requires a paradigm
shift in the [helped] in the sense that he/she needs to recognize:

A. the possibility of differing definitions as to what OL *is*;

B. the possibility (if not necessity) that each such differing definition
could actually present itself;

C. that each such definition may be explicit or implied by both sender and

D. if explicit its true definition may be acknowledged or denied at will
by both sender and recipient.

This is a change process in itself and precedes the actual organizational
change process.

This also constitutes a large part of what I call "helping people to
learn/think". Added to this comes the explicit or implicit refusal in the
[helped] to be helped. So as usual the change process involved is a box-
in a box - in a box.

And perhaps the skill of unpacking all these boxes is the core of a
successful change process After all, you may lead a horse to water but you
can not make it drink.

That is why I prefer 'change coaching' to change management', but I
daren't even call myself a coach.


>[As a contributor to this list i write:

>Thank you for your meta-perspective. As a facilitator of change i write:

>"Knowledge Management" - in my view - is not about knowledge, but about
>managing people. But "Learning Organisation" is not about learning, but
>about organising. etc.


"Peter Westerhof" <p.westerhof@lixus.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.