Yes, this certainly is grist for the conversation...
I agree that it's quite possible to do damage and that this can happen
with consultants.
I propose that the consultants amongst us should see ourselves as
healers and, like physicians, should carry an ethical code that includes
"do no harm" to the best of our abilities to see and judge this.
I worry that if a set of LO-focused activities is started (pronouncements,
training programs, etc.) and then nothing appears to have changed... Have
we actually done harm (people more cynical)? Or is this a positive step in
that some individuals may have transformed their lives and careers, even
if the company as a whole doesn't change.
And the point about whether any given consultant has enough skills... I
think this is a serious question. I have no idea who should judge. I find
this same question even in medicine where there are standards and
licensing. One of my aims in offering the LO list is that is assist in
wide-spread development of capacity.
-- Rick
On Sun, 21 Apr 1996 Jcds@aol.com wrote:
> I've run into so manny companies what have been
> "mucked" with by both internal managers and external consultants who
> clearly didn't understand the implications or depth of consequences of
> what they were doing - I think that many of the mainstream books have
> enlightened many folks but have stirred the brew for so many "would-be
> corp.consultants"
>
> We've run across some terrible damage within companies that have been all
> but devastated by folks who obviously didn't know what they were doing.
>
> Well, here's some more grist for our conversational mill!
--Richard Karash ("Rick") | <http://world.std.com/~rkarash> Speaker, Facilitator, Trainer | email: rkarash@karash.com "Towards learning organizations" | Host for Learning-Org Mailing List (617)227-0106, fax (617)523-3839 | <http://world.std.com/~lo>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>