Ed, thanks for your thoughtful and considered response to my statement
that "structure is evil".
> Can you see any redeeming value in structure, or is ALL structure evil?
> Or are you referring to the people who create structure? I'm not sure how
> structure is evil. Evil suggests to me choice and volition. We can
> choose between good and evil. How does structure do this?
Static structure, structure as an end, is evil. Dynamic structure,
structure as a means, is inevitable and tolerable. unorganization is not
disorganization: it is not chaos or anarchy but focus on business and not
busyness. Its sorting out what is important to a company by asking "What
cannot be outsourced?" and then achieving excellence- consistent
responsiveness- in those differentiators/ competences that make yopu
unique and special. For example, air traffic control is a positive
structure because it is a means to an end- we fly because it is a
convenient way of minimizing the transaction costs that have to incurred
by physical travel. But it needs to be well ordered to get done safely and
efficiently.
> Is it not the case that the evil in human beings use structure to exclude and hinder?
Yes. Static structure has these negative consequences and is put in place
by people who lack courage, self-confidence and disipline to recognize
their own inability to understand and control unorganized environments and
emergent phenomena.
> Is it not the case that structure is really a reflection of our own hearts
> and minds?
Not really- structure is a reflection of and response to that lack of
self-confidence- it is only therefore a reflection of those people who
lack in those ways who are in a position of power and influence to create
those structures and make those interventions. The vast majority of people
were subject to and stifled by those structures in the organized world,
eg. communism, hierarchies- however, the 4 fundamental forces in the
unorganized world mean that branders can now thrive outside of those
static structures without material loss and with spiritual gain- by
creating dynamic structures.
> And that structure which "hinders the ability for an
> individual to learn, collaborate, interact and share" is the result of
> peoples' inability to learn, collaborate, interact and share expressed in
> the structures which they create.
Yes. Static structure is the result of residual change avoidance. There is
in fact no such thing as a "learning organization"- because IF everyone in
that organization had learned to overcome their mental models, practice
systems and transaction cost thinking and so on- then none of those
learned-up people would require membership of a formal organization- the
goal of becoming a learning organization throughout the company results in
no formal static company at all. As you rightly say Ed, adopting a
learning paradigm can transform the nature and form of relationships in
those organizations. Structure arises as a result of residual lost
learning opportunities.
> It seems to be that the problem is not the evil nature of structure, but a
> mechanistic view of human relations within structure.
Yes, the problem is static but not dynamic structure.
> While the learning organization idea has great power to suggest how things might be, it is
> another thing to do it. And my sense is that it isn't a problem of
> structure primarily, but of leadership. If leaders value individuals
> learning, collaborating, interacting and sharing within their
> organizations, then they will ensure that the structure provides for
> opportunities.
Yes, leaders lack the self-confidence to voluntarily cede control, so they
build formal structures to emphaize and reinforce tehir control- they are
signalling their own attempts at being important. They do not realize that
their limited understanding and control of the unorganized world
necessitates such delegation and empowerment. Eventually, those companies
will miss so many local opportunities that that leadership is threatened
and removed by dissatified shareholders, employess, customers. The
imperative is to cede control.
> There is systemic evil in structures and systems, but it is there because of the evil which lurks in our
> hearts.
Only some hearts.
> And that is where we have to face it. If not, then anarchy is the answer, and that isn't a solution.
There is no such thing as anarchy because there is always order in
disorder. Negative hyperfludity such as genicide is unsustainable over
time- its like cutting costs, you cannot go on unchallenged forever. It is
only positive growth through ideas and revenue generation that is a
sustainable behavior mode/ competitive advatange over time.
Tough questions that stimulated me to evolve and clarify my instictual
beliefs. Thank you.
regards simon buckingham
--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/>