Breaking Into this Field LO15197

Michael Gort (gort@mail.com)
Thu, 2 Oct 1997 11:58:55 -0400

Replying to LO15165 --

Daniel Amyx wrote:

"I want to dedicate myself to this type of work because of its spiritual,
intellectual and challenging nature. But... I'm having a heck-of-a-time
finding a position in this field, even an entry position."

Rick added a Host's Note:

"I've long had the sense that it is very difficult for new people, young
or otherwise, to break into this field. That first step on the ladder is
pretty high, most of the key learning is one the job, it's a chicken and
egg situation. With this thread, I invite comments about getting started
in the field."

Daniel,

I share your thoughts, and your pain, about the difficulty of
transitioning into this career. I got here a little differently - I was
introduced to Peter Senge by Jack Rockart from MIT's Center for
Information Research Center. We were just starting a quality effort in a
large IT organization. I began to read everything I could find on systems
thinking, team learning, personal mastery and so on. I was also studying
total quality efforts at the time and was pleased to discover a few key
publications, both academic papers and practioner books, that integrated
systems thinking, organizational learning and quality. In reflection, I
became obsessed with learning more, and with trying out the concepts in my
role as the head of the service group of an Information Technology group,
and as the "Chief Quality Officer". I hired a personal coach, arranged a
three-day systems thinking course inhouse, attended the Core Course of the
Society for Organization Learning, attended the Summer Session on Systems
Dynamics and so on and so on.

Systems thinking did not come easily to me. Trained as a lawyer, I have
spent my entire career (of 21 years) since law school practicing extreme
reductionism. As a lawyer then an investment banker, it worked very well.
I worked in investment banks arranging bond and note financings for public
agencies, and in the completely transactional culture of those divisions,
reductionism worked pretty well. Then I was asked to move to IT, where I
ended up responsible for Quality and Service. Reductionism was obviously
not going to work from day one - It was patently clear to me that
everything was connected to everthing and if you pushed hard on any one
thing, you quickly got push back from something completely different.

After some resounding successes, we got a new leadership team who declared
most learning and process improvement initiatives to be "too academic", so
I found myself with the "opportunity" for a late career transition. So
what follows are several observations based on my networking and
information gathering about careers for the past 3 months:

1. Rick is right. It is very hard to break into this field if you do not
come to it as a graduate of one of the recognized places and programs. Of
course, a Sloan MBA with a focus on organizational learning is by far the
best credential.

2. The field is very diverse. Many of the participants on this list, for
example, seemed to be more involved in traditional organizational design
and consulting roles. We rarely see much discussion about the importance
of working with feedback loops. A good number of participants do speak
regularly on personal master and mental model issues.

3. The number of consulting firms with a pure systems thinking or system
dynamics practice is small, and many of the consultants are in very small
or single proprietor organizations.

4. Many of us are or were practioners, not consultants, and as such, have
career paths towards various business goals. As Practioners, we tend to
get more involved in using the tools in the normal course of our job
duties.

5. Pure systems thinking, organizational learning is a difficult field to
establish yourself in as a new independent consultant for all the reasons
above.

For all of the above balancing loops, there are plenty of exceptions that
prove the rule. Arthur Anderson is building a Systems Dynamics core
competency. Several other large consultancies are talking about doing the
same.

I have found it necessary to present my self not as a systems thinking or
organizational learning consultant, but rather as a consultant with an
expertise in IT that includes helping to clarify and improve the value
that IT adds to the business. Systems thinking, mental model work and
personal mastery then become the core competencies that I bring to the
business domain and organizational problem identified by the client.

Thanks.

Mike.....

Michael A. Gort
Gort@mail.com
(203) 316-9454

-- 

Michael Gort <gort@mail.com>

Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>