James from HP with the long email address quoted Rol in LO15971:
> "You, for example, participate in this discussion"
>
> I also find the paradox of Simon's participation on this list very
> interesting. I find most of simon's posts very interesting and in some
> cases, very enlightening, although I disagree many times.
>
> Humans are a social animal for the most part, we have a need to belong
> to a group no matter how deconstructed the group is.
James, thanks for your post and the others that I will respond to- I have
been travelling in Eastern Europe the past few days and although I did, my
laptop did not have sufficient battery life for me to compose a reply. The
good news is that unorganization is receiving great interest in that
region, in particular in Russia and Slovakia where we have clients
implementing some downstructuring and opporTUNEizing their companies
(removing procedural and systems barriers to individual learning, through
for example cross-training and generalization of job titles to reduce
territorialism).
For the time being at least, those companies in those countries embracing
unorg most are those who have faced such fundamental transition that they
had to find ways to transform the ways they do business. I belive it will
spread further as all economic, social and political problems can be
traced back to overorganization and static structure- from the crisis in
Asian currency markets to corporate underperformance to child abuse in
children's homes- and this is just today's news!
James- I am not an anti-social person- we are all social- I am sorry to
come across so badly in this purely electronic forum- I explain the
Learning org list as a case study of a viable electronic community at
http://www.unorg.com/trans My participation in this forum is entirely
VOLUNTARY and as such completeely within keeping with the concept of first
achieving voluntary independence and then voluntary interdependence (See
http://www.unorg.com/diagrams.htm) or again explained in "trans".
> This is a delicate balance that must strive for.
I agree- I have just written a piece on teleworking for a management
consultancy journal and "Internet Business" magazine- and believe that
there has to be a balance between home and office, individual and group
working to reduce isolationism, provide context and stimulus and so on.
Getting the balance is difficult because most change tends to be crisis
driven and forced not voluntary- people in companies simply do not learn
fast or fully enough to EVOLVE. But either way, the removal of structure
is a pre-requisite in the end. The good news is, the more organized you
are, the greater the benefits from downstructuring. The bad news is the
more organized you are, the more structure must be given away voluntarily
before the unorganized market takes it away by force.
regards simon buckingham
http://www.unorg.com
unorganization: business not busyness!
--Simon Buckingham <go57@dial.pipex.com>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>