Re: Essence LO299
Dr. Ivan Blanco (BLANCO@BU4090.BARRY.EDU)
Thu, 2 Mar 1995 16:46:36 -0500 (EST)
> Date: Thu, 23 Feb 1995 21:31:30 GMT
> From: Michael McMaster <Michael@kbddean.demon.co.uk> LO164
>
<<<< Lots of stuff deleted here >>>>
> Take the view, for a moment, that an organisation is more like a standing
> wave in a river. "It" doesn't exist, you can't find its parts except in
> the whole, but it rocks your boat just the same. If the existence of the
> organisation and its particular nature are all the flows of conversation,
> dialogue, information, action, relationships - and the structures
> (physical, habits, practices, etc) that form the "standing wave", then we
> can begin to discover consciousness, intelligence, memory, learning and
> many similar phenomena in more than metaphorical terms. And we can
> certainly gain some mastery in our dealing with them.
>
I like this description. There many energies in organizations
that cannot be fastened and measured, but they still exist. You seem to
recognize that in your "flows" above.
> I also think that we are misled by such things as vision. I know that
> "shared vision" is a popular idea in these conversations. It appears to
> me to be one of the unchallengeable meta-narratives of the learning
> organisation conversations. But I notice that there are people who get
> along fine without them. I notice that there are teams that get along
> fine without them. I notice that there are organisations that get along
> fine without them. Many of these not only survive, not only are
> competent, but they create things and sometimes even lead the world. I
> also notice that many organisations have spent fortunes and enormous
> energy and produced nothing but conflict or the suppression of conflict by
> agreeing to "pablum" statements of vision.
>
> I suggest sharing of vision is not only not necessary but is probably
> impossible and that frequently its pursuit is detrimental. What is often
> valuable when conducted for its own sake rather than for purposes of
> shared vision, are the dialogues centered in questions about "What are we
> here for?" and "What's possible?"
>
I would say that when organizational members engage themselves in
dialogues about these questions, then they are define some kind of vision.
As they ask these questions, the answers are telling them "what we look
like today," and aslo "what we may look like tomorrow." I know that
getting to a share vision, specially if done the bureaucratic way, is an
almost impossible task. But if we just learned to listen to those "flows"
that you talk about it here, then it will so easy to get to a common
vision, or at least to a common macro-purpose for the organization.
<<< other stuff deleted here >>>
I have been in organizations with no common vision (my former
university, for instance), and they are going nowhere. It is doing it very
slowly, but it will get there! I have also worked for organizations that
whose members have a clear idea of where they are going, and it is a
different type of experience. It is a great journey!
Ivan,
***************************************************************
R. IVAN BLANCO, Ph.D. Voice 305 899-3515
Assoc. Prof. & Director Fax 305 892-6412
International Business Programs
Andreas School of Business _________E-Mail Addresses________
Barry University Bitnet: Blanco%bu4090@Barryu
Miami Shores, FL 33161-6695 Internet: Blanco@bu4090.barry.edu
<<<<< ---------------- >>>>>
"Las naciones marchan hacia el termino de su grandeza, con
el mismo paso que camina su educacion." "The nations march
toward their greatness at the same pace as their educational
systems evolve." Simon Bolivar
===============================================================