Drs. Lelie,
I found your response very intriguing. By taking responsibility, you
state we will be able to transform theory into practice; however, does
responsibility imply that we will also be accountable? I hope I am not
playing on words, because at times while I'm writing this, I feel I am
confusing myself! If I say I am responsible for a deed I have done, but I
am not accountable for that deed, have I learned enough to be
"responsible" for that same or similar deeds again? Did Orestes learn to
kill no more because he was responsible or because he was accountable, or
both?
IMHO, being responsible for problems, at least here in the USA, is not
enough to stop children from killing children. I feel our society has
allowed us to "admit" we have problems, and "admit" we are responsible,
many times with little or no consequences. For example, a person may be
convicted of a crime and held "responsible" for that crime, but because
they cooperated, were of high social stature, had a clean record--or
whatever--may have the consequences of their "responsibility" reduced or
set aside. Because their level of accountability did not match their
level of responsibility, have they learned enough in theory so as to not
practice that crime or similar crimes again?
Back when Orestes killed his mother, maybe responsibility and
accountability went hand-in-hand. I do not see that as being true today.
I often witness managers, leaders, teachers, students, friends,
colleagues, etc., taking theories as you've stated and practice them to
their fullest, experiencing only responsibility and not accountability.
If we stop at responsibility, have we learned only the theories without
learning their practices? Or have we learned to interweave theories and
practices, burking responsibility?
Warmest Regards,
Bill
--Bill Hancy Structured Solutions International Alexandria, VA Hancy@strsol.com
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>