Dick Copeland wrote:
>This is the concept I've been wrestling with as I work with postmodern
>learning styles and systems: I've been trying to develop a system of
>mapping complex organizations organically/dynamically rather than linearly
>like most organizational charts. The closest I've come is to use a
>molecular model, but when trying to present that on a one dimensional
>medium it becomes too complex and mystifying to even myself. I've
>generated models using sticks and balls, but even then once the model is
>created it becomes too static to show the ebb and flow of organizational
>attraction/distancing.
Dick,
I am very interested in such kind of models. I have learned that people
like to choose easy (flat and one dimensional) models even when these
models are not correctly representing reality. Maybe this is the reason
why traditional organizational charts are still very popular, to be on the
top means you are a top guy....or could be there something like "we are
working together for the customer".
Peter Pick
Homepage of Organizational Fitness
http://www.orgafit.com
Mailto:Peter.Pick@Orgafit.com
--"Peter Pick" <Peter.Pick@Orgafit.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>