John Zavacki wrote:
>
> Winfried writes:
(snip)
> >
> >It sounds amazing and not at all like Attention Deficit Disorder. Is
> >there any help to learn this ability (a sixth discipline) or is it "just"
> >talent?
>
> Winfried, and other learners;
>
> It is no more a talent than being able to hit a fastball (which I can't)
> or learn second, third, or more languages (which is part of my
> hardwiring). (snip)
Just a little note from Edward T. Hall on this issue.
"Monchronic time seals off one or two people from the group and
intensifies relationships with one other person or, at most, two or three
people. M-time in this sense is like a room with a closed door ensuring
privacy. The only problem is that you must vacate the "room" at the end
of the allotted fifteen minutes or an hour, a day, or a week, depending on
the schedule, and make way for the next person in line. Failure to make
way to intruding on the time of the next person is not only a sign of
extreme egocentricism and narcissism, but just plain bad manners." (How
about posts too long on the internet? REH)
Monochronic time is arbitrary and imposed, that is, learned. Because it
is so throughly learned and so thoroughly integrated into our culture, it
is treated as though it were the only natural and logical way of
organizing life. Yet, it is not inherent in man's biological rhythms or
his creative drives, nor is it existential in nature.
Schedules can and frequently do cut things short just when they are
beginning to go well. For example, research funds run out just as the
results are beginning to be achieved. How often has the reader had the
experience of realizing that he is pleasurably immersed in some creative
activity, totally unaware of time, solely conscious of the job at hand,
only to be brought back to "reality" with the rude shock of realizing that
other, frequently inconsequential previous commitments are bearing down on
him?
Some Americans associate schedules with reality, but M-time can alienate
us from ourselves and from others by reducing context. It subtly
influences how we think and perceive the world in segmented compartments.
This is convenient in linear operations but disastrous in its effect on
nonlinear creative tasks. Latino peoples are an example of the opposite.
In Latin America, the intelligentsia and the academicians FREQUENTLY
PARTICIPATE IN SEVERAL FIELDS AT ONCE--fields which the average North
American academician, business, or professional person thinks of as
anthithetical. Business,philosophy, medicine, and poetry, for example,
are common, well-respected combinations.
Polychronic people, such as the Arabs and Turks, who are almost never
alone, even in the home, make very different uses of "screening" than
Europeans do. They interact with several people at once and are
continually involved with each other. Tight scheduling is therefore
difficult, if not impossible.
Theoretically, when considering social organization, P-time systems should
demand a much greater centralization of control and be characterized by a
rather shallow or simple structure. This is because the leader deals
continually with many people, most of whom stay informed as to what is
happening. The Arab fellah can always see his sheik. There are no
intermediaries between man and sheik or between man and God. The flow of
information as well as people's need to stay informed complement each
other. Polychronic people are so deeply immersed in each other's business
that they feel a compulsion to keep in touch. Any stray scrap of a story
is gathered in and stored away. Their knowledge of each other is truly
extraordinary. Their involvement in people is the very core of their
existence. This has bureacratic implications. For example, delegation of
authority and a buildup in bureacratic levels are not required to handle
high volumes of business. The principal shortcoming of P-type bureacracies
is that as functions increase, there is a proliferation of small
bureacracies that really are not set up to handle the problems of
outsiders. In fact, outsiders traveling or residing in Latin American or
Mediterranean countries find the bureaucracies unusually cumbersome and
unresponsive. In polychronic countries, one has to be an insider or have
a "friend" who can make things happen. All bureacracies are oriented
inward, but P-type bureaucracies are especially so."
>From "The Dance of Life" by Edward T. Hall, Anchor Press, Doubleday 1983
Regards,
Ray Evans Harrell
--Ray Evans Harrell <mcore@IDT.NET>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>