Jens Peder Kolind comments
>May I suggest Easterby-Smith's seminal paper on the disciplines of
>organizational learning as an alternative. He argues that it is futile to
>try to integrate organizational learning and attempt to build an all
>encompassing model of how organizations learn because the subject draws
>on at least six distinct disciplines
I concur with Kolind that "this subject is highly complex and thus cannot
be approached from just one angle" but let us not underscore the value of
models.
The learning organization is to be personified (or at a minimum -
environmental-ized). Learning organizations are living organizations.
They are living organisms. And - as no two beings or organisms are alike
- no two learning organizations are alike - yet similar in their traits,
characteristics, mission, and purpose.
Those of us working in such endeavors (schools as learning
organizations)benefit from constructing models with the knowledge that
there are never completed - but structured well enough that others can
learn them, contribute to them, build into them and upon them - and
perhaps replicate them (in structure only) to be molded within yet another
unique organization.
Jere Hochman
--Jere Hochman <jhstl@stlnet.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>