Fred Nickols writes:
> What's interesting to me about this "conversation-oriented" view of
> strategy making is that it happens in meetings, via e-mail and telephone
> calls. Only rarely does it occur via memoranda and documents called
> "plans." Moreover, if the conversations are in fact occurring on a
> regular, productive basis, the need for formal documentation is minimal--a
> few pages at most.
This is an interesting topic for me, because I see a tension that may or
may not exist.
The conversation-oriented process is indeed effective at avoiding
"analysis paralysis" and the kind of artery-hardening that occurs when
trying to write a comprehensive plan or other document. Also, much of the
shared meaning is implicit, allowing the conversations to be short and to
the point.
I wonder, however, if relying solely on this kind of process loses
long-term "organizational memory", so that, for example, when facing a
situation similar to one that was last encountered a year or more ago, the
organization has to re-invent the response. Assuming this concern is
real, is there a way to maintain the immediacy of conversation-oriented
processes while effectively capturing the knowledge gained in a way that
supports longer-term adaptability and conscious reflection (in At's terms,
to raise the level of learning from tacit to formal)?
--Don Dwiggins "Life is what happens SEI Information Technology while you're making other plans" d.l.dwiggins@computer.org -- John Lennon
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>