>An important component of the concept, it seems to me, is that an inter-
>vention is risky. At best it might reach the level of a Zen koan: an
>incomprehensible, almost nonsensical assertion or demand, backed up by
>incontrovertible authority: it _must_ be solved.
>
>I wonder whether the concept, in the form we're beginning to see it,
>here, hasn't been diluted somewhat. There _must_ be some useful
>distinction between "intervention" and plain old "outside initiative".
Hi Jim,
You have hit my concern with the word directly. I have felt for the last
25 years that the words we use quite often directly create our actions and
underlying BEHAVIORS. Not meaning to get too precise, I suggest actions
are what we do; behaviors are some of the emotional, body language, tacit
things accompanying our actions. I have serious doubts about the long-term
value of the word *intervention* as I review the loops in SHIFTING THE
BURDEN TO THE INTERVENOR. There is something tacit in that word which does
not *feel* right for LO coaches like me in a company attempting to
overcome the past of a paternalistic approach to management.
The reason for the title "coach" (self-given) on this digest is ... when
working with teams, I try to help them find their "question worth asking"
and then "a process to "discover the route for discovery". This is my
preferred way. I suppose surfacing the question is an intervention of
sorts but it has a similar effect to having asked about the word
intervention on this digest (as I now realize). It (often) creates
interesting dialogue and lets the participants talk with each other
instead of towards the intervenor (me).
Thanks to all of you who have worked on the questions about using the word
intervention. It has given me a lot to think about as we begin to give LO
principles much greater attention IMHO.
Have a great day and create an interesting question with your friends!!
-- Dave Buffenbarger Organizational Improvement Coach Dow Chemical Company dwbuff@aol.comOh for Eyes of a baby! Wisdom of age!!