Replying to LO29699 --
Dear Organlearners,
Don Dwiggins <d.l.dwiggins@computer.org> writes:
>At, you've mentioned these tacit LOs a few times now,
>without much elaboration. Finally, I'm taking the bait:
>would you describe these 4 LOs for us, especially the
>kinds of attributes that lead you to consider them LOs,
>as opposed to simply organizations exhibiting OL (or L+O).
Greetings dear Dwig,
I have not forget this request, but i kept on finding other things to do
rather than answering to it. Forgive me. This week, with the few digests
coming through, gave me the time to work on it.
I want to explain once again to fellow learners two things
(1) the LO as distinct from the L+O
(2) the "tacit LO"
to set up the context for this reply.
The Sengian Learning Organisation (two words, but one concept) may emerge
from an organisation in which learning is a key future. People from such a
latter organisation describes it frequently also as a "learning
organisation", yet knowing nothing of Peter Senge's distinctive work. For
example, I have seen hundreds of universities doing it. There is nothing
wrong with doing it because this is how the English language works. In
this non-Sengian "learning organisation" (L+O) the first of the two words
describes the second word, but they do not become one concept.
In my mother tongue Afrikaans we have a powerful rule that when two words
form one concept, they have to be written as one word. Using this rule in
the above case would lead to "learningorganisation" (LO) for Senge's
concept whereas people from, for example, a university still have to write
"learning organisation" (L+O) when refering to that university.
Unfortunately, the situation is more complicated. For example, a
university as a "learning organisation" may emerge into a
"learningorganisation" without its members knowing anything about Senge's
work. They know that their university is different to usual universities
and often try to articulate this difference, but not in a dedicated
manner. For example, the university where i studied (Potchefstroom
University for Christian Higher Education) seems (from old documents) to
have operated as a "learningorganisation" in the early part of the
twentieth century. This happened long before Senge's Fifth Discipline was
published.
I prefer to call such "learningorganisations" which do not know of Senge's
work as "tacit learningorganisations". I can think of three main reasons
why they are possible. Firstly, they may have existed before Senge's work
such as in the example above. Secondly, with the deluge of information
they may have not yet encountered Senge's work. Thirdly, the
"learningorganisations" among every kind of organisations, even the
"learning organisations", are not as abundant as we may think. Therefore
the message of what they are is not communicated effectively.
I have experienced the first two "tacit LOs" as a teacher some thirty
years ago. They were two classes of pupils among more than one hundred
classes which I had to teach over a period of four years. This gives an
abundance figure of less than 2%.
What was most striking of those two "tacit LO" classes i could articulate
in those days merely as their "ethos". But after having studied the Fifth
Discipline twenty years later, I knew what they actually were! I can
describe to you how they fitted to the five disciplines, but that would be
ketchup after the meal. I would rather give my impressions as they were
during those days.
The first impression was that they were incredibly spontaneous. They did
every task given to them rapidly besides doing many tasks on their own
initiative. The second major impression was the caring for each other
within such a class. The third major impression was that they were very
innovative. The fourth major impression was that their sense for virtues
(responsibility, compassion, order, etc.) developed extraordinarily. The
fifth major impression was that they loved to talk on the deeper things of
life. The sixth major impression was the ease with which they communicated
with any adult, yet knowing their place. After some twenty years, the
majority already had become leaders in their communities and work places.
I will for now not comment on the last two "tacit LOs" since they are from
completely different kinds of organisations.
>I'd also be interested in the Steigerung aspect: for what
>part of their lifetimes have the organizations been acting
>as LOs, and what kinds of emergences occurred to cause
>the transitions from OO to LO?
They acted as "tacit LOs" for the remainder of their stay at school. In
the one case it was four years (i left the school after the first three
years) and in the other case it was two years.
In both cases they emerged into a "tacit LO" after a few days of an
"ordeal" in which they had to care for each other. (It is was also the
case for the other two "tacit LOs" later as well as two other which i
recently had the opportunity to study.) In other words, they had to "blend
and transform" at the edge of chaos with a definite prupose in mind.
(Dwig, a "Steigerung" problem is very much like a computer program made up
of many procedures connected to each other!)
As for "Steigerungs" (string of sequential emergences), they showed it in
three branches. The first was in my teaching of science (physics and
chemistry) to them. I taught all the pupils by way of "Steigerung"
problems besides letting them have as much as possible experience self
through practical sessions. A "Steigerung" problem is a complex problem
consisting of many sub-problems connected to each other. The solution of
one sub-problem contains data by which the next sub-problem can be solved.
These two "tacit LO" classes devoured and excelled in these "Steigerung"
problems while all the other classes hated them.
The second "Steigerung" was in managing their social life as classes. For
example, they arranged on their own excursions on weekends to places like
picnic resorts or hike trails where they could enjoy themselves. They also
arranged social evenings (dances, debates, concerts, etc.) at school for
all the pupils of the school. I loved to attend those evenings.
The third "Steigerung" came as a result of them doing most of their
studies of science at home in advance. (I gave them my planned syllabus
for the year so that they knew what the topic would be for the next day.)
Thus i had to explain only the difficult parts in class. This left us with
lots of time to discuss non-scientific topics like ecology, history,
politics, religion and economics. One pupil would usually begin the
dialogue by saying that he/she read in a book this or that and what
his/her own opinion was of it. Others would then join in, giving their own
opinions.
In short, there was never a dull moment when working with these two "tacit
LOs". Learning in a LO and living with a LO, even a "tacit LO" is great
fun.
With care and best wishes
--At de Lange <amdelange@postino.up.ac.za> Snailmail: A M de Lange Gold Fields Computer Centre Faculty of Science - University of Pretoria Pretoria 0001 - Rep of South Africa
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.