Enrique wrote
>I hope I'm not jumping into the rapids without a paddle...
you are welcome...
snip
>I think that the problem here is semantic in nature. A living system IS
>allways striving for a continuous equilibrium, but only arrives at
>intermediate states for relatively short periods of time... It sounds a
>bit contradictory, but we are talking about a state of DINAMIC
>EQUILIBRIUM. The whole biological system is oriented towards this state,
>and basically any ecosystem works the same way.
>I beleive that the type of organisation that is capable of learning has to
>understand this concept and be able to respond to change in the
>enviornment quickly (based on an efficient flow of information and task
>delimitation), searching to establish, as quickly as possible to the new
>situations it has to face.
snip
>I think that this happens with organisations, you begin to create
>"protocols" or "frames" to respond to certain situations and you become
>better at dealing with them as you go along, that is, your state of
>equilibrium is recovered more eficiently.
This are all good points IMHO, but there are countless cases of
organizations that lose the ability to listen, learn and respond and thus
stay at a previous point of equilibrium. Then they either regain this
ability or wither.
>The concept of the environment in equilibrium can only be present under
>two conditions, in a dead system or an extremely entalpic one that
>consumes incredible ammounts of energy.
>It is not impossible to achieve,
>but it may require a state of mind that most people are not yet willing to
>accept.
Could you expand on this "state of mind" please?
Roberto Reichard
emergent@sirius.com
-- emergent@sirius.comLearning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>