Morty lefkoe wrote:
>The net result of the work I do in organizations is to produce a LO.
>This results when employees realize that their beliefs about business
>are not "the truth", i.e., universal principles true for all times,
>but "a truth" valid only under certain conditions. When the
>conditions change, then the job function, the policies, practices,
>structure, etc. also have to change. When people think they have "the
>truth", they can't be open to learn. When they realize there isn't any
>"the truth", but only "a truths" which change and must be searched for
>daily, a LO is the inevitable result.
Amen!
I have the distinct gut feeling that this subject, previously discussed on
the list using the terminology of the philosophy of science (ontology and
epistemplogy under constructivism vs. positivism etc.), represent the very
one central insigth from which a "generic theory of learning organization"
can be derived. Once people renounce thruths as absolutes, the need for
learning becomes obvious and inherent to the day to day behaviour.
This is not to say that we don't need moe spesiffic theory of the learning
organization, but it sure offers a good rule of thumb to measure
alternativ action patterns against, ie: "Wil this action promote the
continuous criticism and regeneration of truths throughout the
organization?"
By the way: Welcome to you, Morty. Stop by the next time you're in Norway,
and I'll buy you a beer. Oops, it's saturday nigth; I better get out and
buy myself some! See y'all.
Ragnar johansen
<ragnar-s.johansen@orklafoods.telemax.no>
--"Ragnar S. Johansen" <"/s=rsj/dd.GRADDR=BR1 rb1 garp/"@Orklafoods.telemax.no>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>