Tom--I'm not clear on your reason for expressing some of the feelings that
seem to be behind your words. Regarding Mike's comment, I'm not clear
about the differentiation of "industrial" organizations from "service"
organizations when it comes to learning (or the relevance of a "group
IQ").
tom abeles wrote:
> First, I would have to say that the learning organization has always been
> here. The ones that don't learn don't survive. The question is whether
> there are some new and more effecive ways to "learn". What we are seeking,
> of course, is the philosopher's stone to create some corporate system
> which will be smart enough to respond to any crisis which might confront
> it externally or internally and one which has a crystal ball and can
> anticipate what might be needed to continue to grow and succeed. It is the
> carrot in front of the milk horse syndrome. In the corporate world, it is
> a contiula quest outside of ourselves to find a path that avoids having to
> look within ourselves
I am not aware of any OD alchemists on this list searching for a
philospher's stone. I agree that there were learning organizations before
Senge's book came out--but I don't think that anyone has claimed
otherwise.
The learning organization concept has a lot to do with creating an
infrastructure that improves flexibility, adaptability, learning,
connections and survivability by improving systems thinking and
interpersonal relationships. That process requires a significant amount
of "having to look within ourselves." (I believe that "personal mastery"
and "mental models" are two disciplines that address that characteristic).
> I see littel discussion here about a more contemplative approach rather
> than a consant grasping at each clever pacakage which is being sold in the
> OD bizaar.
What would you suggest? Or perhaps you have some glimmerings of a
"contemplative approach" thread that hasn't been considered here? Usually
the complaint is the other way around--that we don't get practical enough.
I agree that there are a number of "clever" ideas in the OD bazaar, but I
haven't heard very many pitched here in the last 18 months.
> Since this is "labor" day here in the United States, I thought I would
> also indicate that I have seen absolutely nothing about the role of unions
> in a learning organization. I also happen to be from Minnesota, the home
> of Northwest Airlines which is shut down with its 6000 pilots on strike.
> This brings the issue home.
I've mentioned a few times my involvement with a labor union in initiating
a small learning organization. Nothing as large as you're speaking about.
What ideas or suggestions do you have for better integration of unions
into a learning organization? Why should a labor union be interested?
(my question here concerns motivation?)
> What is the purpose of the "organization" which is supposed to be
> learning. What is the role of the employees and what is the benefit of the
> orgainzation. A learning organization for whom? stockholders, customers,
> employees, suppliers? This all impacts on the LO
>
Please clarify this for me. Organizational purposes tend to be similar
and yet unique (for instance, a purpose to earn a surplus, generate
income, make baby clothes). I would also say that becoming a learning
organization influences roles, creates new benefits and sustains old
benefits. Your question, "A learning organization for whom?" is a good
one to ask. I would say that "stakeholders" of an organization can
eventually be involved as part of a learning organization (the way
organizational culture influences any stakeholders). But I'd like to see
more conversation about this question.
> yet the LO on this list seems to be some neutered straw person. The LO
> does not exist for itself and thus what the LO is depends on answers to
> these questions which will not be the same for all LO's
hmmm. Many of the people on this list talk from first-hand experience in
creating learning organizations...and they don't seem neutered or straw.
Perhaps you'd clarify what you're referring to on this one. While
learning organizations do have their individual characteristics, they also
exhibit features that are shared.
I admit I didn't really understand Mike's question, and your response was
even more puzzling. I'd like to learn more about where you're both coming
from--perhaps some clarification from each of you would help me, if you'd
be so kind.
walk in peace,
Doc
-- "Do not pursue the past. Do not lose yourself in the future. The past no longer is, and the future has not yet come. Look deeply at life, just as it is arising in the very here and now. Recognize it-invincible, unshakable. Care for it with your heart and mind." -The BuddhaThresholds <http://www.thresholds.com> Meeting Masters <http://www.thresholds.com/masters.html> Richard C. "Doc" Holloway Astoria, OR & Olympia, WA USA ICQ# 10849650 voice 360.786.0925
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>