JC Howell responded to Bill Hobler
In LO10309 Bill Hobler wrote:
> I observe that many downsizing evolutions result in releasing long term
> employees while retaining the newest. I ask whether the loss of system
> memory and knowledge of the longer term workers is balanced by the
> reduction in labor cost?
>
>*SNIP*
>
> It is because the evolution may not be in directions of value to the
> system that the ability to perceive the evolution and make corrective
> changes is so valuable. Further, it is because these evolutions are
> occurring so rapidly that organizations must respond rapidly. In some
> (many) businesses a six month delay between evolutionary event and
> business response is much too long.
JC Howell said:
>This brings to mind the subject of intuition which I posted to in another
>thread. If we clearly see and understand ths system, we may, in fact be
>looking at the trees rather than the forest. A solid, in depth
>understanding of any system will allow action to affect the system without
>necessarily addressing specific sub-elements in a calculated manner. It
>also, though, can allow us to "see" aspects which are not there to the
>so-called naked or scientific eye.
**SNIP**
[Host's Note: I added > marks to indicate the paragraph above as a quote
of JC Howell's and I think the paragraph below is Erle's new material.
Hope I've got this right. Please indicate quoted material with > at the
start of the line. Thanks. ...Rick]
I teach an intro to management class at Lakehead University, and have been
discussing decision making in organizations with my students. One of the
concerns that has been identified by organizations is that new graduates
lack creativity, and many feel that it is due to the emphasis on the
logical problem solving method, the structure applied uniformly to
analysis etc that they are taught all through school. When discussing the
role of intution in decision making, one example used was the difference
between a champion chess player, and someone who does not play chess. A
chess game is in progress with about 22 pieces remaining and the board is
observed for one minute by a champion chess player and someone who does
not play chess. The board is then removed from sight, and the two asked
to place the pieces where they were. The champion will place about 18 in
the correct place, but the non player will only put about 6 in the right
place. If, on the other hand, 22 pieces are placed on the board in random
locations, the champion, as well as the non player will only correctly
place about 6. Why? Apparently there is only about 50,000 arrangements of
pieces at that stage of play, and the champion will have seen the
particular combination before, and recognize the whole instead of the
parts.
The role of intution used by people with experience reflects this. It is
not necasary to break it down, because you have experieinced it before in
one fashion or another. Just a thought for what it is worth. Erle
Wheatley
Erle Wheatley CMA Phone/Fax (807-767-3261)
Solutions eg. E-Mail ewheatle@norlink.net
124 Nottingham Cres. web home page http://loon.norlink.net/~ewheatle/
Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada
P7G 1B4
--Erle Wheatley <ewheatle@loon.norlink.net>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>