Srinath Srinivasa wrote:
> Motivations for forming organizations are interesting; however, I have
> some further questions. Why do some people strive to "create"
> organizations while some strive to be "part of" organizations? Other than
> reasons like one being more shy than the other, are there any fundamental
> motivational differences? Is the thought processes of these two kinds of
> people different?
In my experience: all people are different in character; like the
different rivers of the world: all rivres transport water to the see, but
every river according to its nature, its environment, a bed according to
the charatcter of the terrain. To continue this metafore: as the water
flows, it shapes is bed, it is bedding, it is a dynamical structure of
interacting, destroying and creating a bed, a channel. Always obeying the
law of the flow of the least resistance (a.k.a. the path of the least
resistance, but that wasn't dynamical enough to my taste) (Here in Holland
we became rather fed up with this persistent change and builded dams, like
Amster-dam and Rotter-dam, to control these flows).
Our toughts also flow through our heads, flowing through a 'given' bed, a
characteristical pattern. Some are shy by nature, they want to follow
others and need structure and reliability. Others are more 'free-flowing',
they like new ideas, challenges and resent structure. And as these
thoughts flow, they change their bed, our character developes. Always
obeying the law of the flow of the least resistance. So our thoughts
sometimes deepens, are sometime shallow, sometimes becoming stagnant (too
shy and defensive or too outspoken and rebelious). Then we experience a
crisis, we experience "stress", we build tension and need a breakthrough,
... and on and on our thoughts flow. (In Holland, having harnessed the
rivers, there came freedom of thought, freedom of religion and freedom of
press; strange, one would expect that these continuously changing thoughts
would be damned also :-D).
And when these flows of conscious meet, perhaps i'm carrying the metafore
too far, we start re-organizing our thoughts around this phenomena of
other consious beings and, while making sense of it, .. leap ... create
organisations. All according to our own nature and level of development.
So perhaps organisations are an effect of the thoughts and feelings,
organizing processes, in our heads, trying to find the easiest way too
flow.
And when somebody thinks the easiest way is structure: he/she sees and
creates structure; and when somebody else thinks the easiest way is values
and meaning: he/she sees and creates values and meaning. And when we
combine, manage, integrate, accept these different attitudes in stead of
try to change others, force a culture, create homogenity: these processes
of increasing complexity take up speed (until a counter movement starts in
response to too much change and speed, like whirlpools). Etcetera and in
these processes we create ever increasing complexities.
> I would be very interested to have any answers to these questions.
Mee too,
Jan
--Drs J.C. Lelie CPIM (Jan) janlelie@pi.net (J.C. Lelie) @date@ @time@ LOGISENS - Sparring Partner in Logistical Development - + (31) 70 3243475 Fax: idem
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>