Doc
let me respond to your posting in the following manner:
1) There are some underlying assumptions in the corporate world. One of
these is growth- usually measured in economic terms- more sales, bigger
profit, larger market share, increased stock value. Economics has been the
principle measure since it is one of the few easily quantifiable metrics
of success of corporations and individuals.
Recently, as I posted elsewhere, there have been some labor unrest where
the issues were not more money bu more time to spend that money. There is
some growing realization that time is a non-leverageable commodity. Also,
there is some fringe movement, like that of Joe Dominguez who has written
the little book "Your Money or Your Life". And even Esther Dyson and other
cyber Guru's have indicated that "attention" or a person's time may be the
marketable commodity in a wired world.
This says to me that there may be emerging some measures of growth which
are orthogonal to traditional economic metrics- (note I did not say
opposed to...). Yet issues raised by NAFTA, MAI, and even the IMF deny
these possibilities
What happens when one discusses these issues, it sends shudders through
the investment community and an entire system which could severely implode
if the system changes.
Learning organizations as currently discussed, are predicated on
maintaining the larger status quo which may, as we are seeing continue to
see more cracks develop.
I am concerned with the larger question- the one which seemed like it
could be discounted and asking whether or not the butterfly's flutter may
not be affecting us, even today.
You are right about the contemplative vs the quant and the tendency to be
"soft". But it is interesting to note that even in the hard sciences,
qualitative analysis is now becoming more respectable. But, in a pragmatic
sense, one can start to see that socially and environmentally screened
investments make sense in business, compensation other than pay raises
have made sense, open book management with production workers working with
management makes sense. There are non- econometrics that when translated
make economic sense in the traditional sense
these are some of the issue that start to emerge when one goes outside of
the organization to come back in. Contemplative and reflective don't
always mean turning inward in isolation. It may mean transcending and
going beyond- outside of the box and asking whether the parameters of the
game are those which must be lived with.
Who sets the rules of the game? That is the question. Not how you build an
organization which operates best within the rules of the game. We are
talking about humans and not formula 1 racing cars or class sail boats
thoughts?
tom abeles
--tom abeles <tabeles@tmn.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>