Thomas J. Sullivan wrote:
> Richard Holloway and Ray Evans Harrell seem to be struggling with a common
> "problem" of role behavior. One of the challenges that people face today
> is the need to fulfill many roles in their work. Each role may have a
> different set of expectations, not only for "what" we do, but also, for
> "how" we do it. Behavioral expectations can change considerably from one
> role to another. Behavior that be very successful in one area of work may
> be disastrous in another role.
>
> Clearly, a process for identifying which behavior would be most effective
> and appropriate in which role is essential for clarifying and
> communicating role expectations. The ROLE BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS (RBA)
> provides a process for describing and discussing expectations for
> role-based behavior. I'd be happy to send each of you or anyone else
> reading this list more information on the Role Behavior Analysis.
Thanks for the offer, Tom. My "struggle," as you call it, isn't with the
process of clarifying and communicating role expectations (though that is
a noble cause). The values I exposed in responding to Ray's thoughts
(which were not necessarily what Ray was thinking about) center on
society's (you and I) labeling people as dysfunctional. What I'm speaking
about is the child diagnosed with attention-deficit disorder (a diagnosis
panacea for many things), or fetal alcohol syndrome. These labels, which
attract special education dollars, stigmatize a child for many years
(perhaps life), are sometimes culturally motivated (this is especially
true with Native American children) by placing the child in the role of
the dysfunctional student. I seem to recall that very talented and gifted
children were also considered dysfunctional--because they didn't meet the
narrow expectations of the educators.
People who don't fit into our relatively narrow definition of
"functional," in our society, of course, are dysfunctional. For many
years in this country, the people, who are now labeled "developmentally
disabled," were considered dysfunctional. Nowadays, those same people are
working with specialists to become functional within work and home
settings. The mentally ill were considered dysfunctional by our western
societies for centuries. Today, more and more mentally ill are taking
charge of their lives and functioning, through the use of drugs and
therapies. There is a significant segment among veterans, who were heroes
in war (highly functioning) but trouble-makers (dysfunctional) in
peacetime settings.
So, as you can see, my comment really reflected my understanding of a
society that's bent on labeling, stereotyping, categorizing, victimizing
and "dysfunctionalizing" people. That's the script, director, casting
director, writer, and role--all waiting for the next actor to walk through
the door to take on the part.
What's this all mean for a learning organization, that values diversity?
On reflection, I suppose, it's to realize the specialized needs of all
individual people, and understand that, as a society, we perhaps are not
up to the challenge of meeting those needs. But we can value and
celebrate the differences and the people, and attempt to destigmatize the
differences by avoiding the labeling process. And I know how hard that
can be. It may also mean that organizations and people can learn to
create functional relationships in new and special ways. This may become
increasingly important as larger numbers of people become disenfranchised
economically and socially, hence dysfunctional.
regards,
Doc
-- Richard C. "Doc" Holloway Visit me at <http://www.thresholds.com/> Or e-mail me at <mailto:learnshops@thresholds.com> Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2361 Phone:01 360 786 0925 Olympia, WA 98507 USA Fax: 01 360 709 4361Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>