DJones@asheville.cc.nc.us wrote:
> Thanks for all the feedback-- it's always fun to dialogue
You're welcome, and thanks for this summary.
> > the real challenge for a learning organization is to foster
> > non-engineered knowledge transfers. What
> > would facilitate JIT knowledge
> > processing without professional middle men?
>
> Good question. That's what I keep asking. In addition, most "training",
> is batch processing of knowledge, AND, it is mostly information/knowledge
> transfer/dissemination, NOT "knowledge building" -- there is, IMHO, a big
> difference.
We need all types of learning: batch, whole-sale instructions in
universities (isn't that why they are call UNIVERSities?) and down-town
caffee-discussions (i think i must have said something really intelligent
last night, because my head is hurting, i wish i remembered). Most people,
in fact, all people, have a preferred learning style (Kolb, has anyone
mentioned Kolb lately? My guess would be: same discussion-group different
year): some people learn by doing, others by thinking or reflecting etc.
In personal as well as in organisational development, we must be aware of
the situation we're in and was is required from us. We then are able to
determine the probably best approach (some people learn by climbing
mountains-analogies).
> Vana says our first inclination is to "ask someone we know to help us
> out". She says that we naturally seek out the "expert" -- so true! This
> makes me want to ask questions like, How can we just as easily ask someone
> we don't know? How can we find the expert if we don't already know them?
We have a psychological barrier to ask somebody (noteably somebody we do
not know) to help us, well, i have. I've often wondered why i tended to
solve problems my own way: in my case it is simply that asking for help
means putting yousrelf in a dependent position, you become dependent on
the behaviour of others. And we will resist that, because it feels unsafe,
in my case at a very sub-consious level. Overcoming this fear became
necessary at one time, for me, a developmental step. So we prefer a large
assembly room full of students, not because the learning is great, but
because we feel psychologically safe. That, in my opninion, is also the
nice thing about this WWW-universe: it is safe here to ask questions, to
make mistakes, to learn. Nobody knows me here. Another, loosly coupled
phenomena, work-out the causal relations for yourself and submit them
within two weeks to this forum, has to do with the short term inefficiency
of learning processes.
> Jan Lelie gave a beautiful example of "knowledge building" (not training)
> when she wrote:
He, he, he (and i'm not laughing), see how gender neutral this medium
is.
> Here are just a few challenges that face us in building really effective
> "knowledge building" structures. I'll use Jan's "coffee-corner" as a
> model:
>
> How do we find the expert that will help in our knowledge building quest
> if they hang out at a different coffee-corner?
Post an agenda of your meeting at other coffe-corners.
> How do we not miss that
> critical "breakthrough" insight for our project that occured in the
> coffee-corner, but we weren't there that day to hear it?
You already did, you also hearded it and missed it. Do not cry over
spilled milk. It will happen again and again, and i'll tell you: i told
you so. (By the way, this also explains for me the feeling of
synchronicity people experience with a new breakthrough idea: it
"suddenly" emerges at different places. Nope, in my opinion, it was
already there, but not or not yet consious (or consiously ?) with the
people. As i say, Peter Senge wrote the book i had been talking about for
years).
> How can our
> coffee-corner benefit from crucial knowledge building generated at another
> coffee-corner, in another building, last month?
Tell people about it. (This doesn't work always: some people have
learning styles that prefer telling other people what to do, or even
what to think. They prefer established principles and methods and know
there is one best way of doing things (it is true, but you do not know
it in advance). These people will resist being told what to learn when
it is a new idea, method or principle. They can be recognized by the
saying: "that is not the way it works here".
Other learning styles prefer to find out things for themselves: they
have a "Not-invented-here"-like attitude (it is true, you didn't
invented it) when you tell them new ideas. So they will also not listen,
nor learn from you.
Then there are people who prefer to learn by doing, so if they didn't do
it themselves, they won't learn from hearing things, they will admire
your ideas and go on with business as usual (it is true: the real
learning is in doing).
And finaly there are people who prefer some people and detest some other
people, and as you seem to be a smart-ass and belong to a different
coffee-corner (the old tribal ways), they won't initially like you, and
won't like you're ideas. (It is true, nobody likes somebody who says:
"See, i not only told you: i'll tell you: "i told you so", i also told
you why i told you: "i'll tell you: "i told you so""").
Take this: "Love me, love my umbrella"- James Joice
Jan Lelie
-- Drs J.C. Lelie CPIM (Jan) janlelie@wxs.nl LOGISENS - Sparring Partner in Logistical Development - + (31) 70 3243475 Fax: idem GSM: + (31) 654685114Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>