flock of birds, LO21803

Goad Edwin R (edwin.goad@redstone.army.mil)
Tue, 1 Jun 1999 12:39:00 -0500

Replying to LO21774 --

On 29 May 99 Arthur Battram wrote (during an excellent article on
flocking): "Two key messages: complex behaviour need not have a complex
explanation and order will emerge from self-organisation. Management
theorists develop complex explanations for behaviour in the workplace; it
is often the case that a few underlying rules are "powering" all the
complex behaviour observed on the surface."

Thank you Arthur for springboarding off of my thoughts and helping me to
understand this phenomenon! My feelings are:

a) Significance, because I have been included in this dialogue;
b) Competence, because I have contributed a useful thought.

I mention these because they represent to me some of the "underlying
rules". I think Will Schutz (FIRO-B, The Human Element) summarizes best
the underlying rules for humans (see his book "Profound Simplicity"). He
points out 3 basic behavioral needs (Inclusion, Control & Openness) and
feelings corresponding to them (Significance, Competence &
Likeability-Love). Of course, these are connected to the largely
subconscious mental images we have of ourselves - our self-concept.
(forgive me, Will, for any mistatements here).

Anyway, I am not an expert in LOs or much of anything (gosh, why am i
apologizing - is my concept of my own significance that low?), and I don't
want to start a dispute of whose theory is best (please like me), and I
feel intimidated by the intellectual powers on this list (am i that
incompetent?), but I toss this out because I truly want to understand the
simple "underlying rules".

After having been serendipitously dipped into the world of individual and
organizational behavior/development for about 8 years, I find myself
constantly returning to the conclusion that all organizational dynamics
come directly from the individual members thereof - i.e. the organization
is not alive!. I look forward to your ideas on this. So far, I have
encountered what seems like a great desire to believe that the
organization is alive. And I hear words that support this assumption,
such as "the vision of our organization is ...", or "they did this to us",
or "The (name of organization) exists to serve you, our customer", or
"What does the (name of church) church believe?". I keep thinking that
perhaps very simple rules (like acceptance by others) move us in a
flocking type pattern that gives the appearance of life, but is only
understandable, and changeable, at the level of the individual. ---???---

Ed ODF (Out der flapping) Goad


Goad Edwin R <edwin.goad@redstone.army.mil>

Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>