Rol,
> It may be in the handbook, but there were real examples. Unfortunately,
> the bulk of the examples were about sports teams, symphonies, dance
> groups, etc. Unfortunate not because these are not good examples.
> Unfortunate only becausethey share a critical trait that is not available
> in most profit or non-profit organizations, and that is that they all
> spend more time practicing than in executing (one could add military org
> here as well). Personally, I believe this is why they are such good
> examples of learning orgs. I don't understand how to transport that
> example to environments where practice is not practiced.
Isn't that a key part of the point of the five disciplines? The focus on
system dynamics would seem, at some level, to have to do with creating
practice fields for management and business (whether you engage in
management flight simulators or doing the modeling oneself to solve
problems). My interpretation (again, at one level) is that the mental
models work (actually Chris Argyris' action science) is really a plea for
planning and designing interactions with people; it extends beyond that to
planning and desiging how one will choose to go about "performing" such an
interaction. (Of course, it has some _suggestions_ as to how to approach
the topic.)
Finally, thanks to some of the action research work out of Southern Cross
University (Bob Dick and others), I've begun to understand how to apply
explicit reflection, at least, to the practice of business. That's not
quite "practice", but it comes closer than I've done years ago.
Of course, your point is well made in that the percentage of time actually
spent doing these things in even the most reflective company environment
pales compared to any orchestra or dance company or ....
... and yet (Ray Harrell --- help me here) ... I was privileged to see a
rehearsal of a German choir years ago (directed by a well-known German
conductor). I had been an amateur orchestra musician and choir member
(and student director, too), and I was familiar with the long hours spent
practicing for each performance. Here was a well-known choral group (but
not his top group), getting together on an evening to start rehearsing for
a concert that was the next day. In that case, there was relatively
little rehearsal (at least by amateur standards).
That made an impression on me. For, in this situation, each singer came
knowing the music well and with no significant technical problems left to
master. It was their responsibility to come to the rehearsal that well
prepared. The purpose of the formal rehearsal was "merely" to bring the
group together (again) as a team and to come to a common agreement (led by
the director) on interpretation.
That seemed like a very professional approach. Rely on the individuals to
prepare themselves to participate fully and competently; rely on the group
preparation to align the individuals to present a unified result. Of
course, that didn't preclude other off-line work where individuals worked
with other individuals.
Comments?
Bill
-- Bill Harris Hewlett-Packard Co. R&D Engineering Processes Lake Stevens Division mailto: billh@lsid.hp.com M/S 330 phone: (425) 335-2200 8600 Soper Hill Road fax: (425) 335-2828 Everett, WA 98205-1298Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>