Replying to LO26074 --
Peggy said:
> (Thanks Arthur, I giggled my butt off at your post ...)
thank you; always nice to be appreciated.
> So here I am, doing my MBA thesis, which is in the form of an
> organizational consulting project, at my place of employment. So you
> probably can guess what I am doing it on ... but why? Because the
> management wants us to be a LO. Why does management want it? They have
> read some Senge. What do they want out of a LO? None of us are quite sure
> ... What does the employees want out of a LO? They don't really care one
> way or another, as long as change slows down and workload can decease to
> about 110% vice 120%.
>
> So why is my education riding on this? Because I never thought to ask the
> questions that led to the above answers until I was too deep and too close
> to convocation (Five weeks to go until I have to be done! Yikes!)
well, my heart goes out to you, but better to know this now rather than
later or never.
:-)
Now, I agree almost entirely with everything you said, AND [not BUT] I'm
going to be slightly picky. You'll see why, I hope.
> So I feel I am now quite familiar with management asserting "top-down
> efforts to produce bottom-up change" without completing some kind of
> strategic management process...
IMHO, it isn't a 'strategic management process'. There is no such thing
as 'strategic management'. SM is a term invented by business schools to
claim that it is possible, still, to command and control [CnC], to
predict, if things are done basically the same but slightly differently.
If you/we accept that that CnC has failed, then we have to find a new
paradigm. Within that paradigm, planning is replaced by scanning, to quote
myself in my book [plug below]. The process that connects 'top-down
efforts to produce bottom-up change' isn't a strategic management process
it's more likely to be an 'engagement process' or an LGI - large group
intervention'. Processes which bring people together, en masse, so they
can work together, emergently, in real time some of the time to iterate
towards a 'solution' . My own version is called 'PossibilitySpaceŠ'.
> For those that are in the same position, what do you do? May I be arrogant
> to call myself an semi-authority on this topic -- or should I wait five
> weeks? ;-) -- and offer a suggestion?
>
> Zoom out -- way out.
Now this zoom out thing, I like.
>Instead of looking at trying to change the culture
> and/or incorporate practices of the five disciplines (or whatever
> normative practice you think best), look at what could be interfering with
> what learning is already taking place.
Very smart move. There is, periodically, a discussion here on the list
about 'unlearning'. I probably contributed to it myself , back in '97.
Have a browse in the archives. Some of us feel that 'becoming more LO' is
about 'STOPPING doing things that block' rather than 'doing new things'.
Now I'm going to snip, and rewrite:
>Look at the organizational
> structure.
or to put it another way:
"direct your attention to an aspect of the organisation. Develop some
'theory' about what might be happening"
>Talk to employees.
or to put it another way:
"listen to employees"
because I KNOW that's actually what you mean!
ok that's the rewrite almost over
>Does it facilitate collaboration and
> communication? (You might have to revise the structure)
or to put it another way:
" having listened, revise your 'theory'
then snipping everything away except:
>Talk to employees.
>Talk to employees.
Talk to
> employees.
meaning, to put it another way:
"listen to employees"
"listen to employees"
"listen to employees"
> Although this wont get the organization anywhere near the ideal, it may
> just start to get people used to working and learning with and listening
> to each other. Baby steps.
Hey, there are only baby steps. There are no big steps. Even the big
change is not a big jump, it is a lot of small jumps done very quickly.
[Hence my catchphrase 'MLTQ' many little things quickly.
Peggy, all you have to do is finish writing it up, get your MBA from the
high priests, then you can change your 'consultancy religion', and get out
there and do good deeds to make organisations better places for humans to
inhabit. Me, I don't have an MBA, which makes it more difficult to win
business. And I couldn't now get one, because as a heretic I would either
be driven mad by the process, or they'd spot me and excommunicate me...
Again, good luck.
Best wishes
::::::APB::::::
-- Arthur Battram Director - P l e X i t y -Arthur Battram is the author of 'Navigating Complexity: the essential guide to complexity theory in business and management' published by the Industrial Society. Now available in paperback - navigate the Amazon to find it...
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.