At de Lange wrote:
> But what you have written, has also a very dark side to it.
"it" referring to William Hobler's
>Make the goals clear, give your people the authority they
>need, get out of their way and clear obstacles from in front of them.
At,
One of the darkest examples has taken place in Germany - it is a good
modell for how the 3. Reich could proceed. Yet I hesitate to accept, that
this dark side is inherent to the process discribed by William Hobler. I
think darkness or brightness is set by the goals (it is not the knife that
is good or bad, it is the intention of the user).
But with your message in mind, may be darkness or brightness is even not
inherent to the goal. The goal may only reflect darkness/brightness of the
context out of which the goal has been extracted. In your words: Is it a
monopoly or a dissipative adaptive system in which goals are being set?
A very demanding thought! I accepted that I am responsible for the goals I
set, but am I also responsible for the context I am living in? I cannot
be, if this context is not adaptive. And a goal cannot be set into action
if it doesn't reflect the context. "Leave or keep in the current context"
is one of the most difficult questions for people living in a monopoly.
Leave: Life is not possible in a non-adaptive system.
Keep: Monopols by living people cannot be perfect and will fall some day.
Until then it can be a task worth to live for to keep cells of life alife
in the underground, or just in the depth of ones own heart.
Just some thoughts triggered by your mail.
Regards, Winfried
--Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>