Re: Stable Unhealthy Systems LO2119
Sat, 15 Jul 1995 18:10:40 -0400

Replying to LO2117 --

The following is the remainder of my posting which was inadvertently sent
in an incomplete manner.

Pete goes on to say: >>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. Evolution
is a natural response to environmental influences. Genetic engineering
challenges the old mind set 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 we have an opportunity to become consciously responsible for our
continued evolution as a specie. Perhaps, at this point, evolution must
move from being primarily biological and unconscious (reactive) to a
conscious evolution involving wholeness and maturity (creatively
responsive). I don't agree with Peters that everything should be broken,
whether it appears to "need" breaking or not. Quite frankly, that seems
to be a somewhat adolescent statement trying to be cute. The concept of
"breaking" things belongs, to my mind, to our immature, mechanistic way of
thinking and being. Systems thinking and observation has taught me that
growth involves an enlarging of capacity, not brokenness. After all, we
don't "break" our ability to crawl and walk when we learn how to run. Our
abilities morph - and we learn to apply what is appropriate to situations,
environments and perceived needs. Our current mental constructs of change
are predicated upon destruction. That is why everyone is so afraid of it.
After all, Pete's twin-headed evil of complacency and arrogance is alive
and receives its life-giving energy from us. It is terrified of change.
It's slogan is "My way or the highway." Change, to it, means death.
Perhaps we need to adjust our views of change to reflect a growing
congruence and synthesis rather than destruction - a morphic inclusionary
process - evolving, transforming Life, rather than exclusion and Death.

Our work, here at IBSAIL, involves creating ever-more fluid, elegant
processes and structures for the social architecture of organizational and
human fulfillment. Assisting organizations in the creation of
collaborative learning cultures and strategic gaming, specifically
relevant to strategic planning, are just two of our areas of activity. For
us, these arenas are grounded in synthesis and in Life, not in separation
and Death.

It will be interesting to see how we, as a collective, decide to architect
our future. I, for one, hope that we choose Life.

Best regards,
Martha White