Dear Friends --
Who are the most responsible people who DISAGREE with the organizational
learning field? Who are the challengers to these ideas?
I received the question below and realized I don't know how to reply.
I was going to reply, "Many people think 5 disciplines are not enough."
But this is a shallow reply. If the notion of learning disciplines is
valid, then there are certainly refinements and additions to the
disciplines.
Ed Schein has said, "The learning disciplines approach is not the only
approach." I think that's a little closer to the mark. But, if not
learning disciplines, then what?
I'm very curious who are the responsible voices with a view contrary to
the organizational learning field.
To answer this requires being clear about what are the central tenants of
the organizational learning field. What are these central tenants?
Being deeply involved can obscure the very thing you are involved in.
Best regards,
-=- Rick
>I often read articles by or about Senge's works on Organisational
>learning but never come across articles arguing against the
>substance claimed by him. Do you have any articles which challenge
>his views?
--Richard Karash ("Rick") | <http://world.std.com/~rkarash> Speaker, Facilitator, Trainer | mailto:Richard@Karash.com "Towards learning organizations" | Host for Learning-Org Discussion (617)227-0106, fax (617)523-3839 | <http://www.learning-org.com>
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.