Dear Organlearners,
Leo Minnigh <L.D.Minnigh@library.tudelft.nl> writes:
>But again, the higher the number, the greater the risk for
>imperfections and the chance to break-up.
>
>That's why small organisations with a high degree of internal
>order can compete with large organisations with internal
>imperfections.
Greetings Leo,
I enjoyed your extensions from the (Crystal) Digestor model to
Crystallography as a metaphor for organisations very much.
What you have written above summarises Deming's position with respect
to role of quality in organisations. Yet the description also fit
crystallography. Is it not exciting how one part of the universe
images what goes on in another part of the universe!
You also write:
>The break-up could be triggered by environmental influences
>(external forces). This could lead to a reshuffling of the
>organisation or outsourcing, or the complete cut of units and
>devisions ('back to basics', back to the core business). The
>result is that a lot of the available energy is now used for the
>creation of new units with a higher degree of order.
This is where we leave digestion close to equilbrium to head for
bifurcations at the edge of chaos. This requires entropy production,
using of the free energy made available through the reorganisation of
structure. Unfortunately, the free energy may be wasted if the entropy
production is not fast enough so that the edge of chaos cannot be
reached. Furthermore, even though the edge of chaos may be reached,
its bifurcations may result in destructive immergences rather than
constructive emergences. This will happen when one or more of the
seven essentialities are not sufficiently mature.
You give the following example:
>Even a company like Microsoft will reach a moment that the
>internal structure becomes less organised and if competators
>join together (creating a better structure), the size of Microsoft
>is probably not enough anymore to protect itself. Now the
>balance is still positive towards Microsoft because of its size,
>but maybe in the future it will be beaten by a smaller preditor
>with a higher degree of structure.
This is exacly what happened to IBM when it still was the "big one"
and Microsoft the "little one". Why did it not reconise in Microsoft
its possible Nemesis? Because as a crystal grows digestively, the more
it forgets how it emerged itself as a crystal seed.
Leo, you also write:
>Untill now I have written about groups of people, energy and
>the will. I have not given precise definitions of these words. But
>I hope that you are able to find the parallels between the WILL
>within the group and the FREE ENERGY.
Yes, motivation or will function against the background of free energy
F. But we have to be more specific. Motivation and will depend on the
change /_\ in free energy, namely /_\F. This change has to be negative
for the motiviation or will to actualise itself spontaneously.
Symbollically
/_\F < 0
This is a special case of the general order relation of Gibbs:
/_\F < W
This order relation is nothing else than a "translation" of the
universal Law of Entropy production form the dimension of entropy into
the dimension of energy. The Law of Energy Conservation is used to
make this "translation". The special case is nothing else than W=0,
i.e no work is done by either the system or its surroundings.
The expression
/_\F < 0
must be read carefully. It means that we have to find the difference
between the free energy F(beg) for the beginning (input) state "beg"
and the free energy f(end) for the FINAL or end (ouput) state F(end).
In other words,
F(end) - F(beg) < 0
or
F(end) < F(beg)
In other words, the free energy have to decrease for the will to
actualise itself.
A problem which most people have, is to be afraid of thinking about
the final state "end" itself. In other words, their "futuristic
perception" is restricted, they "look" far away into the "distant"
future. However, they are willing to think about an intermediate state
"int". This means that
F(int) < F(beg)
They now assume that
F(end) < F(int) < F(beg)
However, since they are not willing to think about the "end" itself,
the actual relationship is:
F(end) > F(int) < F(beg)
This pattern has serious consequences. The begin to act according to
will, going from "beg" to "int". Everything looks fine. But once they
reach "int", they do not have the will (free energy) to continue to
"end".
Why are they afraid of thinking about the final "end" state and why do
they assume that the intermediate state "int" will proceed into the
unknown final state "end"? I think it is because they are caught up in
the competition or predator-prey paradigm described by the Digestor.
It leads ultimately not only to a big crystal of one kind, but to a
granite structure consisting of many kinds of big crystals. What can
be more permanent than granites, the ultimate in building materials?
>An organization may be composed of identical building
>elements (humans (clones) of the same length, same age,
>same gender, same character, etc.), or it is composed of
>a mix of different humans. ........
Thank you Leo for describing to us the process of granitification and
showing how it can be used as a metaphor to describe how a mixture of
organisations function when relying on digestions close to equilbrium.
Well, granites may be the ultimate in building materials. But we
should never forget that every building has to be constructed on
mother earth. Mother earth is more than granites. For example, the
continental plates are slowly drifting on her liquid inside. Their
pressures against each other are building up. Then one day the
unforseenable happens -- an earthquake! The seemingly indestructable
buildings made of granite collapse when subjected to forces greater
than the digestive forces which caused granitification. To be caught
up inside such a granite structure leads to a different end as the one
assumed.
>Since we cannot avoid the input of extra energy into all the
>systems on Earth, this conquest between size and order will
>continue.
Wise words my friend.
Best wishes
--At de Lange <amdelange@gold.up.ac.za> Snailmail: A M de Lange Gold Fields Computer Centre Faculty of Science - University of Pretoria Pretoria 0001 - Rep of South Africa
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>