Dear Organlearners,
Richard Goodale <fc45@dial.pipex.com> writes:
> I've made references to some of the things they have done and are
> doing in the past but have had litle or no feedback from the active
> participants in this list. Does anyone want me to try again (maybe
> the legion of LO lurkers saw some value)?
Winfried Deijmann <winfried@universal.nl> also wrote earlier in
Subject: Virtual Faith LO18950:
> A while ago (june 15th) I posted a contribution on the subject
> Trust + Empowerment.
> Strangely enough nobody commented all though iI thought I was
> touching something of elementary importance.
I wish I had kept track the past three years of all the contributors
with similar complaints and disappointments. What is going on here?
I think it is a case of "ineffective collisions". See
Subject: Essentialities - "connect-beget" (fruitfulness) LO18750
<http://www.learning-org.com/98.07/0206.html>
I think the authors presented their requests "X" with sufficient
energy, reactivity and orientation. They wanted a connection "X*Y".
But the connection failed because the recoil of Y was too much,
making the collision elastic and reversible rather than plactic and
irreversible. To overcome this recoil a catalyst Z is needed,
something which grabs the attention of Y.
This is probably what happened in the following "effective collsion".
The catalyst here is the amount of research now being done on
contextual analysis -- itself being an outcome of the increased
sensitivity to wholeness (holism).
Brock Vodden <brock.vodden@odyssey.on.ca> writes
Subject: Qualitative research question LO18888
> I have been overwhelmed, once again, by the generous response of LO
> members who have responded to my question on coding methods for
> analyzing textual material.
> I have received about 30 replies including personal ones and those
> sent to the list. The list is more than a vehicle that talks about
> organization learning: it is an exemplar of a true learning
> organization which contributes to my ongoing education.
The seven essentialities of creativity can also be applied to
learning once we realise the learning is an emergent quality of
creativity. Thus we may even speak of them as the seven
essentialities of learning. An impairing of anyone of these
essentialties can prevent a learning event to happen -- not only
the impairing of fruitfulness.
Consider, for example, the essentiality "quanity-limit" (sparseness)
which we still have to discuss. Even our time is limited. If I had
enough time, and if you can bear my long posts (verbalage some say),
I would have loved to document my effective collisions in all of your
constributions. Here are a few examples of which I would have loved
to respond to.
Eugene Taurman <ilx@execpc.com> in
Subject: Levels of Intimacy in Communication LO18847
> The important point for all of us is to recognize a simple
> truth, appearance counts.
Lee Bloomquist <LBLOOMQUIST/0005099717@MCIMAIL.COM> in
Subject: economics LO18851
> The optimal organization would be one in which every individual
> really knows what's in his or her own best interests.
Doc Holloway <thejournal@thresholds.com> in
Subject: Sustaining Interest in Learning LO18868
> I'm sure that there are a host of other things I haven't considered
> here...but I do know that if any of the ones I've mentioned are not
> in place, that the interest in learning will eventually dissipate
> back down to those who were the only ones interested in learning, on
> their own for their own needs, in the first place. That, by the
> way, probably includes most of the people on this list.
Ben Compton <bcompton@emailsolutions.com> in
Subject: It hurts! Embassy Bombings LO18881
> The lesson learned may be joyous or it may be painful but it
> will always promote personal growth.
Terri Deems <Tadeems@aol.com> in
Subject: Qualitative research question LO18883
> Since validity or reliability are not a concern/objective of
> qualitative analysis, establishing trustworthiness will be critical;
> create a sound audit trail for yourself.
Vana Prewitt <vprewitt@bellsouth.net> in
Subject: Mechanisms for Organizational Learning LO18921
> Through a systematic, orchestrated, and highly structured set of
> rules, assumptions, culture, etc. a collective group of people DO
> grow the organizations' knowledge and tries pretty hard to avoid
> letting the individual get much further ahead than the pack.
Fred Nickols <nickols@worldnet.att.net> in:
Subject: Yes, but does LO work? LO18928
> Yet, we learn from exemplars even if their status as exemplar is fleeting.
(Fred, I have touched upon this "fleetness" in my contribution "Yes,
but does LO work? LO18944", showing that it has much to do with Wave
or Quantum Mechanics.)
Carol Jacobson <cjacobson@lynx.bc.ca> in
Subject: "Not my job!" Ethic LO18946
> A general "rule" about leadership is to not ask someone to do
> something that you (the leaders) would not do yourself.
Another essentiality which we still have to discuss, is
"paradigm-open" (openness). In this respect I think of the powerful
contribution by
Terri Deems <Tadeems@aol.com> in
Subject: From Learning to Teaching Organization LO18941
She writes:
> I would be cautious in viewing this as the 'next step' in the
> evolution of LO's, particularly in terms of "naming" it a teaching
> organization. In fact, in many respects this seems a step backwards
> rather than forwards. Maybe it's just the language that troubles me.
> We have always had 'teaching' organizations, where unfortunately the
> focus was just on that - -- teaching. Same thing in many of our
> school systems. Too much focus on teaching, and it seems the
> learning part is too easily forgotten.
Yes, what can we say about teachers in general and teachers in the
Learning Organisation? Have you noticed how little has been written
about teachers in the LO? Why? Is it because they are nowadays called
"consultants"? Or is there something about the ART (theory and
practice) of teaching which we fail to comprehend? See what
Doug Merchant <dougm@eclipse.net> had to say in
Subject: Mechanisms for Organizational Learning LO18927
> I think this is a strategic organizational learning question for
> senior leaders. If they are really committed to being "The Founding
> Parents" of a sustained Learning Organization, what could they
> initiate that would transcend the duration of their leadership. Of
> course, as long as the LO community is focused on learning at the
> individual level of the system, the senior leaders will have to look
> elsewhere for help.
Yes, what could these "Founding Parents" (Teachers) initiate?
In my account of the essentiality "associativity-monadicity"
(wholeness) I wrote:
> For example, in the case of a teacher we have the association
> reality * teacher * learner.
> The ultimate goal of teaching is to gradually replace the teacher
> with as diverse collection of "umlomos" as possible, selected by
> the learner as each situation requires. Thus the success of teaching
> is to obtain the association reality * umlomo * learner
Now what is this "diverse collection" of "umlomos" (mouthpieces)? I
have wondered if anybody would comment on it, directly or indirectly?
So far only one person gave an indirect comment on it, namely Douglas
Max <dmax@bellatlantic.net> who wrote that teachers in schools should
give more attention to System Thinking.
Teachers (consultants) are successful when they have replaced
themselves with Systems Thinking.
To open up the mind for creativity (and thus learning), Edward De
Bono suggested the PO technique (Provocative Opinion). A PO must have
so much kinetic energy that no catalyst is needed to prevent the
recoil from those to whom it is aimed. The next sentence is a PO:
* One way teachers (consultants) can ensure that they are
* irreplaceable is to leave some essential things out of their
* Systems Thinking.
The next example concerns the same thing topic. I wrote
> What do we fragment from systems thinking which renders it
> powerless? I can think of many things. I will note only three
> important things: God, life and creativity. It is the horrible
> "system" which remains which is causing all the hurt.
Charlie Saur <csaur@remc8.k12.mi.us> responded to it in
Subject: It Hurts! Embassy Bombings LO19001
(I must still respond to this one Charlie!)
The golden rule when using a PO, is to take care never to hurt people
with a PO. That hurt will surely happen when the PO is intended to
destroy something in other people. If we want to destroy things, let
each of us destroy only what belongs to the "me".
Best wishes
--At de Lange Gold Fields Computer Centre for Education University of Pretoria Pretoria, South Africa email: amdelange@gold.up.ac.za
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>