David Markham's systemic view of survival and evloution poses
some interesting questions. I especially like the term,
"dysfunctional homeostasis."
Critical to the development of a learning organization is a
system approach. If we view a system as a process for taking related
entities, adding value to them to produce a product or service, then,
like a car, the only systems which run themselves (perpetual motion
notion) are those which run downhill. Dysfunctionally homeostatic
systems seem to survive in spite of themselves. I can think of any
number of organizations operating in a response mode which would fall
neatly into this category. The twin-headed evil which seems to exists
in business today goes by the names of arrogance and complacency.
But I don't know that I would say these organizations are evolving.
My concept (no authorship claimed) involves planned change,
genetic engineering as opposed to evolution. Evolution is a natural
response to environmental influences. Genetic engineering challenges
the old mindset of, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," with "If it
ain't broke, break it" (one of the more famous Peters said that one).
Perhaps, then, a healthy system evolves to a learning
organization through genetic engineering. Did that confuse things
even more?
Pete
--
,___O
_-\_<;_
__(*)/' (*)_______________________________________________
| |
| Peter L. Heineman, Manager of Contract Training |
| University of Nebraska at Omaha |
| College of Continuing Studies |
| 1313 Farnam Street |
| Omaha, NE 68182-0335 |
| (402) 595-2340 FAX (402) 595-2345 |
| Internet: pheineman@unomaha.edu |
|_________________________________________________________|
What the mind of man can conceive and believe,
the mind of man can achieve.
Napoleon Hill