Replying to LO28542 --
Developing on Judy's contribution, I think, we always need to compare one
improvement with another, because improvements are, typically, not free.
They cost. An improvement for me can be a disaster for my neighbour.
Besides, improvements require effort that can be spent otherwise (e.g., in
other improvements).
Therefore, to discuss improvement in an intelligible way, and to introduce
a notion of comparison, we may use a distinction between Local Improvement
and Global Improvement. Whereas the former relates to a specific context
of action, the latter aspires to escape the context and enable
improvements to be replicated in multiple contexts.
In fact, this distinction conveys one of the key ideas in what is called
'action research', which aims to produce improvements (in some specific
contexts) as well as some knowledge (of how to bring about similar
improvements elsewhere, or how to bring about further improvements in the
same context, or how to extend the improvement just achieved, etc.).
Therefore, knowledge in this sense is a tool for achieving global
improvements. This also relates to the discussion on 'action' and
'knowledge' we have had recently.
The distinction between local and global improvements makes it possible to
discuss action research projects (or projects oriented at some change and
developement within a practical context) in a critical way, so as to make
an assessment of the project's contributions.
DP
India
... Thus i can conclude the following:
All 'we' want from an LO is to improve.
complex, but very rewarding task for us all.
--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.