Replying to LO25555 --
Peggy,
Your assumption (that to effectively create and sustain the base for a
learning organization, rank and status would have to go out the window) is
probably not a bad one for a perfect pure learning org, or even for a very
good one. In the vast majority of organizations (I do not know the nature
of yours), the implication is that there can never be a learning org
because too many people are unwilling to give up all rank and status.
I would argue that an imperfect LO is better than none at all, so I would
see what could be implemented in a more typical organization. For
example, a policy that without exception all learning opportunities will
be paid for by the organization would begin to get the ball rolling. It
is only a start of course, and much more would be possible and realistic
over time...
Rol Fessenden
>I am assuming that to effectively create and sustain the base for a
>learning organization, rank and status would have to go out the window. A
>secretary (excuse the term) stands as equal a chance of obtaining support
>for her or his learning as an executive, no matter what form or level
>this learning took.
>If this is true, then there would have to be steps taken to ensure that
>both the non-physical and physical environments (policies, office layout,
>etc.) sends the message that all employees are "worth" the same.
[Host's Note: Welcome back, Rol! ..Rick]
--"Rol Fessenden" <Rol@Fessenden.net>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.