Certainly, however the context of the discussions I've seen are in the
arena of electronic systems: computer generated interactions, feedback and
storage. All well and good for someone to pull and provide "knowledge."
However, "human (or organism) systems" do not plug-in and download. They
obtain information through a variety of motivations, their own and of
others. The recording of an experience, that provided some level of
learning and growth, does not have a guaranteed level effectiveness in
providing the same learning experience as the originator had. If that were
true, we need only read a text, a novel, or a non-fiction biography and be
able to garner from them the same level of ability as the author or
subject. They provide information we build upon or ignore. Sharing
experiences is very important for learning more effectively, but to each
of use, raw data means different things. Human interest and interaction
can not be replicated by an electronic system.
>aren't living organisms systems, after all? don't living systems store
>memories? Aren't memories the knowledgebase of living systems? Isn't it
>cognitive (or emotional or kinetic, etc) thinking (whether tacit or
>explicit) that drives the use of memories within the living system?
>
>If there is any analogy here, why can't or shouldn't there be a means to
>store organizational memories (experiences and thoughts) with which to
>enrich the organizational approaches to new problems, new experiences and
>future planning? It seems to me that the inclusion of an memory system
>within an organization may facilitate their increasing growth towards
>becoming a living system.
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com>
Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>