I remember that article as AVOIDING giving credit to Senge
(or anyone else exceptt the FN74 team) for what the FN74
team achieved. On the other hand, it was in the context of,
"Where have Senge's ideas been put into practice." Ford was
one of three examples, and the most prominent one. So it's a
dilemma. I recognize that the perception you had is valid.
I'm not sure how it could have been avoided. There's
something about the structure of business reporting AND
about the structure of consulting that seems to lead to
this type of hype. (In part, that's what my book's about.)
Having been a business journalist, I recognize the need to
draw cause and effect where there is only correlation. On the
other hand, the LO stuff DID lead to much of the innovative
work of the Ford team.
The point is: Itt was Fred Simon's & Nick Zeniuk's LO
stuff, not Peter Senge's.
And it was the FN74's LO stuff, not Ford's.
But that may not have come across in the article. It did to
me, but I may have lost perspective about this.