> Again whenever I receive a new worker or recognize that a worker is not
> capable of high quality work I assign them to a task that requires
> performance within their capabilities. My assumptions are.
> a. The most important work must be accomplished to standards in
> order for the organization to survive.
> b. The worker so assigned and the rest of the team will know why
> the assignment was made. Worker bees are pretty perceptive.
> c. I have a responsibility to help the reassigned worker to grow.
Usually - or recently - my thoughts would have been seeking a different
direction; however, today I was thinking of behavior that doesn't
emphasize "nurturing" workers. Sometimes, maybe in terms of hopes for
myself, I hear TQM or learning organization ideas as emphasizing the
worker, saying we'll do ANYTHING for the WORKER. Please excuse the
emphasis.
Good business is probably not that way. And yet most people's grandfathers
seem to still have jobs as they near retirement, at least in my "Father
Knows Best" version of the business world. Somehow people still support
their families, even if their workplace doesn't emphasize the employee.
Maybe some of the appeal of the learning organization for some is the
incorporation of kindness into the workplace. For me, it must be related
to wanting to be valued for efforts toward learning.
Have a nice day
John Paul Fullerton
jpf@myriad.net
--John Paul Fullerton <jpf@mail.myriad.net>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>