If heirarchies are inimical to organisational learning - not a proven
fact - then are "flattened heirarchies" better at learning?
Because heirarchies are inimical to learning doesn't make less
effective heirarchies less inimical to learning.
The problem is, when we think in terms of Heirarchy, we are still
within the classical corporate model of *single* heirarchy command
and control and flattening that sucker without transforming or
destroying it carries no guarantee or even likelihood of better
learning.
I suggest it takes a new design language - say networks, say
distributed phenomena, say an organisation of teams , say a
marketplace of projects, say multiple heirarchies, say transient
structures - to transform the organisation. Using the old
terminology only "flattened" is unlikely to be sufficient to break
the mold or to generate new results.
-- Michael McMaster Michael@kbddean.demon.co.uk