"Systems Thinking is the search for consistent dynamic patterns in complex
adaptive systems in order to predict behaviour."
This seems to lean toward a rather mechanistic or linear hope for systems,
unless your definition for consistent includes rather long spans of time.
Some patterns take an awfully long time to reappear and then may do so in
a form that is not readily discernable to the original observer.
1) If an organisation could demonstrate reasonably consistent competence
in and practice of systems thinking, then is it a "learning organisation"?
It is not in the thinking in systems concepts or terms that learning
occurs, it is in the applying of those thoughts to life, no?
2) Is it necessary for an organisation to demonstrate systems thinking to
be so classified?
Why is this important. Will the classification of an organization as a
learning organization guarantee that it's performance will be better than
one not receiving that classification does it? Does it imply that it's
future decisions will produce good for itself or the rest of society? I
don't think so. Do you?
3) Why is anyone interested in classifying the set of "learning
organisations"?
That's a good question. The two words alone mean little until attached to
other specifications or criteria.
Ned Hamson, editor: The Journal for Quality and Participation
Association for Quality and Participation, 801-B W. 8th St., Suite 501,
Cincinnati, OH 45203
Tel: 513-381-1979 Fax: 513-381-0070
e-mail: ParetoKid@aol.com
http://newciv.org/worldtrans/comqual.html
European representative: Peter Beerten, Belgium Consultancy Group: Tel:
011-32-02-569-0222/Fax: 011-32-02-569-7480
e-mail: Peter.Beerten@ping.be
Zat, 23 maa 1996
--Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>