Guerilla Learning Org??! LO2404 -- Summary & Thanks

john.gancz@cdc.com
Mon, 14 Aug 95 15:12:57 EDT

Replying to LO2139 --

Three weeks ago I posted an inquiry re whether or not
the desire to develop a Learning Org could evolve from
guerilla tactics, i.e.. a group or individual acting without
'official' sanction.

There followed about a dozen responses.

Michael McMaster
Michael@kbddean.demon.co.uk wrote:

>>>
Is there an implication of a formal, explicit and
necessary model for "a learning organisation" implied in
the question?
<<<

and

Fred Nickols
fnickols@ets.org wrote:

>>>
Organizations don't learn, people do... A learning
organization, then, is an organization able to capture
and diffuse the knowledge and skills developed or
acquired by its people. Furthermore, within limits, it
is an organization able to identify and settle on the
knowledge and skills that its people should be acquiring.
<<<

There did seem to be an erroneous model in the question.
A model based on the need for the organization as a whole
to be involved in the process. The fact that it would not
be necessary for an entire organization to change in
order for a team to develop into a LO was my 'whack on
the side of the head'.

This was reinforced by

Peter von Stackelberg
PeterVS1@aol.com wrote:

>>>
I'm not sure why guerrilla learning was coined as a phrase,
but it seems to me to imply something subversive and hidden.
That is the antithesis of what needs to be going on in
organizations.
<<<

Without concerning myself about the rest of the org.
this secretive approach need not exist. If the team
succeeds, the example will generate the interest in
the rest of the org - in the full light of day.

Michael McMaster
Michael@kbddean.demon.co.uk wrote:

>>>
Can a formal and explicit learning organisation be
created in the guerilla way? I doubt it. But does
anybody care?
<<<

David J. Skyrme
david@skymr.hiway.co.uk wrote:

>>>
As we know from many studies of innovation, it
is often the informal, the "skunk works", that
gets things done.
<<<

Johanna Rothman
jr@world.std.com wrote:

>>>
They shared their experiences and expertise. They
were able to coach and facilitate each other. That
seems to be a guerilla-based, initial learning
organization.
<<<

Fred Nickols
fnickols@ets.org wrote:

>>>
(Moreover, the objective was rarely to win sanction
but, rather to effect the change without it.)
<<<

There appears to be a strong agreement that many
change and team efforts start un-officially and may
later evolve.

I would like to thank everyone who responded:
Fred Nickols, Michael McMaster, Barry Mallis,C. Ward
David J. Skyrme, Peter Von Stackelberg, Lily Evans,
Jim Michmerhuizen and Johanna Rothman.

--
john.gancz@cdc.com