>PI is the measured difference and ensuing intervention between where one
>is and where one wants to be.
>
>Jesse W. White
Your statement is certainly true; and I think that it can be considered in
the reversed way that is : PI measure where you are from where you wanted
to go.
And ISTMT this other definition shows how the first definition can lead to
a static view ; where you wanted to go might not be relevant any more by
the time you take the measure, your goals may have been transformed by the
process, you may have encountered unforeseen difficulties...
So I personnaly would rather insist on the deliberated definition of a
goal than on the measuring. Deliberated here because, to follow the James
Carrington answer to John Constantine, if organisations must have
directions where to go, and a memory that let them know if they are on the
right track, it does not entail that people be pieces of clay that may be
modeled by and for the sole profit of the organisation's goals.
In the age of knowledge economy, it becomes less relevant than ever to
have plans and goals defined by experts, and execution made by operators
that coaches would control. Of course, everyone needs coaching, and the
environment provides a first hand adjustement function so that
organisationnal behaviour and goals fit with it.
Of course, management has always been about reducing behaviour
uncertainties. And in FW Taylor's time, it was understood by providing the
one best behaviour to the operators, the only permissible one.
IMO, in this age of knowledge management, reducing behaviour uncertainties
should be aimed at through shared vision first , abd if not exclusively by
this means, the focus should be on it; otherwise, you may just have to
define, command and control the tiniest actions of the operators. Which
would not leave much room for adaptation, creativity, intelligence of the
situations... and again, IMO those cannot be reserved to some kind of
elite. You can't foresee every aspect of a social activity for it entails
complexity and unpredictability because of the multiple interrelations and
recursive interactions it is build upon.
But I am not saying that you are wrong; just that, even if measurement and
improvement are needed, the focus your vision points to make a sensible
difference in your actions and communications. Anyway, I liked both of
your posts
Cheers
-- Frank Billot --- 820 chemin traversier 84210 Pernes les Fontaines France fbillot@avignon.pacwan.net 106625,301@CompuServe.COM telephone 33 4 90 66 53 24Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>