On Friday, August 08, 1997 7:59 PM, Richard C. Holloway wrote:
> John H. Dicus wrote:
>
> > I would appreciate hearing the benefit of the thinking on this list around
> > the use of the word structure. Partly to hear your thoughts and partly to
> > help in developing different vocabulary (under the assumption that it
> > might be helpful).
> >
> > ---snip---
>
[snip]
Doc said (Hi Doc)
> The thematic
> unity that runs through all of the definitions I've found can be described
> by synonyms such as relationships, composition, systems, patterns,
> organizations, and constructs.
>
> I was profoundly influenced by Fritz' books (both "Paths of Least
> Resistance" and "Corporate Tides"). I found a great harmony between his
> concept of structure and the definition of structure used in the "key
> criteria of living systems" that Capra restated in his "Webs of Life."
> Indeed, all of the uses in my dictionary seem to harmonize with that
> definition by leaving out one word, "physical." The reworked definition
> would read, "the [physical] embodiment of the system's pattern of
> organization."
> [snip]
> I look at pattern, structure and process as the organizational
> triumvirate, and their interdependence on one another are probably a
> fundamental source of life's robustness and the cause for organizations
> always being true to themselves despite our best efforts to make them true
> to fancy words in vision and mission statements.
Doc,
I would like to add a thought to what you've said. Structure is not just
physical, and I think you said that, rather it has more to do with the way
in which people feel "bound" to behave through rigid norms, ways of being
and experience (learned helplessness). We know that Bandura made some
profound points with self-efficacy and how it influences attribution,
behavior and performance.
What I'm trying to add is that structure is "at times" user-assimilated
through their own identity as a composite of that being compared to
organizational identity. The complex interrelationship and the
interdevelopmental nature of these constructs must be entered into the
equation as we deal with structure as some what of an ethereal force which
governs behavior and attribution.
To structure or not to structure--chicken and egg conundrum?
The interesting thing for me is that a structure for one is not a
structure for all as we begin to "individualize" the environment through
mass customization. AS technology permits us to permutate even greater
numbers of iterations will design a structure which can be
user-assimilated and customized for each individual constituent as we are
doing for the product/service side of the orgs output?
Hmmm?
--mike jay <quarterback@msn.com>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>