LO a Means to an End LO1717

Orbis (74363.3637@compuserve.com)
20 Jun 95 14:53:07 EDT

In LO1669 discussing the definition of LO's, Patricia Morrigan wrote:

>A problem with taking the position I have outlined, which is
>itself steeped in a particular
>paradigm, is that discussing epistemology, theory and method is not a 'big
>ticket item' in the literature or in orgs. The respondents in my study
>who are the 'leaders' are anti-intellectual to a man. Is this a phenomenon
>of Australian business leaders?

In describing the Work Program of Complexity, John N. Warfield wrote:

> Groups should be served by process experts, never asked to contribute
>to process decisions, and always asked to contribute content in response
>to questions carefully formulated before the group convenes as a group.
>Complexity demands computer assistance for the group, but protecting
>group members from the demands of using a computer while at the same time
>trying to contribute to resolving a complex issue

At the risk of being provocative, the tone of these messages left me
concerned. The LO, and its associated methodologies, is a means to an end.
In most business organizations, that end involves some form of return for
the primary stakeholders - customers, stockholders, business leaders and
employees. The means that the LO methodologies offer need to have some
connection to the current means used within businesses. For example, if we
advocate dialogue skills, then we need to be able to show how they can add
value to current means, such as group work, in order to produce improved
ends, such as better decisions or greater consensus.

If we, the advocates and practitioners of LO methodologies, start to
believe that business leaders/managers need to more intellectual, or that
groups cannot manage without process experts and need protecting from the
demands of using a computer while trying to contribute to resolving a
complex issue, that concerns me.

I have met many business leaders/managers who may not qualify as
intellectuals but who are very open to any new means that will help them
produce products faster, or better understand customers' needs. I have
also seen groups who can manage their own processes very well, and even
use group meeting computer software to accelerate consensus building.

Many of the subscribers to this list are in an interventionist role --
where their interventions are related to business-related ends and means.
IMHO such interventionists need to be able to speak the language of their
potential customers (the business leaders/managers) and relate to the
realities of those business-related ends and means. Otherwise, their
interventions will be rejected or fail.

--
Peter Smith
Orbis Learning Corporation
74363,3637@compuserve.com
Ph: 415 903 9982 Fax: 415 903 0334

"Individual learning is a necessary but insufficient force for organizational learning." Argyris, C. & Schon,D.A.