Organization of a LO LO7521

Gordon Housworth (
Tue, 21 May 1996 14:04:25 -0400

Replying to LO7508 --

At 12:06 20/05/1996 -0700, you wrote:

> While I agree that organization charts as such are "wistful, even
> fanciful, abstracts ...," I suggest that they are important "tips"
> that suggest the huge, invisible iceberg.

Of course, and my comments should not be construed as saying that org
charts have no value -- even ones "in error" have value as the amount of
error is telling of the dysfunction. I just ask, at all levels of the
firm, either verbally or with the chart, questions such as, "How would you
redraw the chart to reflect how the firm really operates?" "Where are the
critical dotted lines?" "Are these dotted lines as powerful as the solid
ones?" Of course the answers don't all agree, but an amalgam will emerge
that paints a very clear picture of how things work.

I have the feeling that org charts are afterthoughts, or better yet,
archeological records of a vanished culture, hence my comment that they
are wistful, even fanciful, abstracts.

Best regards, Gordon Housworth
Intellectual Capital Group
Tel: 810-626-1310


Gordon Housworth <>

Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <> -or- <>