On 25 Jan 98 at 8:33, Simon Buckingham wrote:
> I was apologizing to readers for my use of unorganization-specific jargon
> such as from rankers to branders via lifestreams, downstructuring,
> opporTUNEitizing and so on. Both At and myself tend to have our own
> vocabulary and terminology. I believe that whilst it is difficult for a
> first time reader to understand the terms, once they are familiar with
> them and thought about them, they act as useful signposts, especially when
> they are descriptive words. As long as the word has both a good name
> (outer core) and valuable truth in it (inner core), hopefully these terms
> and their descriptions are useful!
One of the things that perplexes me is the invention and use of language,
while at the same time talking about learning.
I may be totally off base here, but if the goal is to discuss learning and
to promote learning, then it makes sense to use language as it is commonly
used, rather than inventing new words which may only be meaningful to
those inventing the terms.
The greater issue, of course, is whether the language that we use in
promoting a learning organization has the exact opposite effect--impeding
the development of learning organizations.
Comments?
Robert Bacal, Bacal & Associates, rbacal@escape.ca
Join us at our Resource Centre at
http://www.escape.ca/~rbacal
Author of "Why Doesn't Performance Management Work?"
Phone: (204) 888-9290
--"Robert Bacal" <rbacal@escape.ca>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>