In a message dated 96-05-05 23:36:59 EDT, you write:
>I am reluctant to take issue with such eminent authorities as John
>Warfield and Sir Geoffrey Vickers, but the perspectives offered in
>John's quotations are, to me, too inward looking.
>
>Yes, organisations, institutions, etc. are human communities; but
>(except for those that only serve the needs and wants of their members)
>I would prefer a definition that focuses on their external purposes.
I refuse to have someone take issue with me on anything, without first
checking with me to make sure that it can happen.
It's just as JF says, the quotations are "inward looking", and so it boils
down to whether they are "too" inward looking.
Not being a Brit, I have to rely on Brits for a good understanding of the
life of Sir Geoffrey Vickers. But this is my understanding, JF:
Everything Sir Geoffrey worked with worked well, and all who worked with
him gained great benefits and satisfaction from that experience; largely
through the highly successful operations carried out by organizations to
which he provided leadership.
Maybe the point here is that inside looking is not the same as inward
looking; if people know their roles and play them well (as another
well-known Brit, W. Shakespeare showed), you can get highly-respected
results, even if some of them turn out to be tragedies on the stage.
Anyway, there is enough outward looking to go around everywhere (except in
the educational system), so it doesn't hurt perhaps to look inward now and
then.
John Warfield
Johnwfield@aol.com
--Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>