Dear Organlearners,
Greetings to all of you.
I thought that the horrible events on 11 September 2001 would have had
worldwide a much greater influence on how people organise their
educational, social, economical, political and religious walks of life.
The tragedy of thousands of innocent people becoming obliterated within
an hour, seen by billions of people all over the world, was more than
enough to cause such a vast organisational reformation.
But it did not happen. Why? I think that is the same reason why the
catastrophy on 9/11 happened. Far too few of the world's educational,
social, economical, political and religious organisations are learning
organisations (LOs). Should there had been enough LOs before 9/11, the
growing abyss between the Western world and the Arabic world would have
been avoided. Should enough of them had emerged after 9/11, earnest
measures would have been taken to heal the wounds of 9/11.
Why do so few ordinary organisations want to become LOs? Why do so few
of them succeed in becoming LOs? Is it because the concept of a
Learning Organisation (LO) is still too novel? Is it because the
concept of a LO is just another fashion (fad) in managerial science? Is
it because creating a LO is about as difficult as creating a new kind
of living organism? Is it because the LO will put an end to our
parasitic way of living, making us aware that we will have to harmonise
with the rest of the universe? Is it because we have fundamentally a
wrong understanding of learning and knowledge as its outcome?
I try to avoid acting like a prophet because of not having visions
revealed transcendentally to me. But the following is not a vision. It
is a mere speculation based on facts. There are enough weapons of mass
destruction in the world to hijack some of them and create a horror far
worse than 9/11. There is enough bureaucratic incompetency to allow for
such a hijacking. There is enough hurt in the hearts of far too many
communities to breed terrorists. Killing millions of people by
terrorists in a city like London or Tokio is not impossible any more.
Even with such a massive, destructive event, will that bring about a
reformation of human affairs globally? I do not think so. Again my
reason is the lack of a sufficient number of LOs on all walks of life.
Such an event will rather unleash all the forces of hell causing an
apocalyptic retaliation. Will a prophetic prediction of such an event
bring about that much needed organisational reformation? No, never. A
person cannot be forced to reform radically, not even by a prophetic
vision.
So how will we advance the emergence of more LOs on all walks of life
until enough has been done to avert humankind's course of destruction
and possibly even extinction? I think that most important of all LOs
have to emerge spontaneously. It means that every organisation has to
use its own free energy to affect such an emergence, well knowing that
it will have to happen at the edge of chaos. The trigger may be a
horrible event in its surroundings like that of 9/11, but the body of
the transformation will have to be driven by the organisation self.
This brings me to two additional requirements. The first is that the
transformation has to be irreversible. There is no possibility of
looking over the shoulder and back track the steps taken when things
get too hot (chaotic). When a baby gets borne, it has no idea of what
it will become in the future. Even its parents have not such an idea.
Likewise the emergence of an OO (Ordinary Organisation) into a LO is a
leap into the unknown future. We may suspect certain things from
studying the emergence of other LOs, but in the end our own authentic
learning depends on our own experiences.
The second requirement is that the OO has to be sufficiently prepared
for such an emergence into a LO. Here the five disciplines of a LO form
a magnificent way in preparing ourselves. Yet, even excelling in them
(personal mastery, team learning, mental models, shared vision and
systems thinking) will not assure such an emergence. They merely
characterise the functioning of an already emerged LO and not its
actual emergence.
What is needed to initiate the emergence of an OO sufficiently prepared
to transform into a LO? I think we have two possibilities to consider.
The first is a cataclysmic event in the environment triggering its
change for survival. This will happen sooner or later, come hell or
high water. Just wait long enough.
The second thing is a team of leaders in that organisation who will
CATALYSE such an emergence. But this requires an extraordinary
knowledge and commitment from them. They will have to get off their
high stools and islands from which they are operating and integrate
themselves with people of all ranks in that organisation. A leader
knowing this is more valuable than the highest salary possible in that
organisation. Such a leader will catalyse the transformation for free
(spontaneously) because freedom cannot be fixed by any price. Freedom
is priceless.
This brings me to Mr Nelson Mandela. When he became president, he
lowered his salary while contributing to non-profit organisations more
than any other president or prime minister before him. He avoided
living and travelling in luxury. He had one vision in mind -- uniting
South Africans as never before over the divisions of race, religions,
politics and economics. This runs like a golden thread in his book "The
Road to Freedom".
Which leader of whatever organisation will actually give up to gain for
the benefit of all involved (something which I call the creative
collapse)? How will we recognise such a leader in advance and promote
him/her into a position of leadership through our democratic election
procedures? Look at the candidate and see how he/she interacts with all
people from whatever walks of life who could be labeled in whatever
way. When he/she wants to learn from them whatever it takes rather than
they learning from him/her, you will have the leader who can catalyse
an OO to emerge into a LO.
What sort of learning does it takes from such an leader? The path of
authentic learning scuttles between digestive learning close to
equilibrium where entropy production is low and bifurcative learning at
the edge of chaos where entropy production is high. The greatest danger
in digestive leaning is to become intimidated by qualities in the
environment. The greatest danger in bifurcative learning is to fear the
outcone of such learning. Mr Nelson Mandela showed clearly how he
avoided these two pitfalls of authentic learning.
So what about your future leaders in whatever organisation? Observe the
candidates carefully and make your choice where it is possible.
Anything like 9/11 can be avoided, but it depends on you. Learn to make
a wise choice.
Do your present leaders have to exit by natural causes before you can
make your influence felt? No, speak to the present leaders telling them
why you want your organisations to transform into LOs. The main reason
is not to avoid another tragedy like 9/11 or something even far worse.
It is rather to create an atmosphere of constructive creativity from
which all involved can benefit, inside and outside the organisation.
Also talk to the fellow members in those organisations, preferably in
advance. It will help you in several aspects. Firstly, it will shape
your thinking into high quality for every possible situation. Secondly,
this quality will become backed up by a larger quantity of LO
supporters. Thirdly, an irreversible change towards the much needed
transformation will be introduced. Fourthly, you will make more people
aware that an organisation can function as a LO. Fifthly, you will
contribute to a spirit of unity in that organisation. Sixthly, more
people will want to connect to existing information on LOs to learn
from it. Seventhly, you will open up that organisation to respond to
the real needs in it and in its environment.
In other words, if your leaders cannot lead the emergence into a LO,
you will have to lead for some time until they can take over. Your
strength will be in doing it humbly and compassionately, giving nobody
any reason to fear such an emergence. You will undo all your good work
should you employ any kind of coercion rather than relying on
spontaneous responses. Remember that the passion for learning and
profound knowledge as its outcome will path the way. There is still
time to respond to 11/9 as it should have been done the past two years.
With care and best wishes,
-- At de Lange <amdelange@postino.up.ac.za> Snailmail: A M de Lange Gold Fields Computer Centre Faculty of Science - University of Pretoria Pretoria 0001 - Rep of South AfricaLearning-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.