Re: Senge and Ford

Art Kleiner (
Fri, 11 Nov 1994 05:01:39 -0800

You may have a point about the Fortune article. I don't have
it in front of me, and if you saw my office filing at the moment,
you'd know why . (I'm working on a book.... things are always
in disarray when I'm working on a book...)

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.