Consultants & "complexity stuff" LO10993

Durval Muniz de Castro (durval@ia.cti.br)
Thu, 14 Nov 1996 09:42:54 -0800

Replying to LO10959 --

Benjamin B. Compton wrote:

> Michael McMaster wrote:
>
> > Murray was expressing a concern that they were throwing out structure and
> > design in favour of self organisation. We were sharing a distaste for
> > that way of speaking.
> >
> > My own experience is that there are a significant number who are using the
> > term "self organising" as a contrast or antidote to structure as we know
> > it but who have little or nothing to replace it with. There are also
> > numerous executives whom I've talked to that have heard/interpreted self
> > organising used in this way.
>
> ...
>
> It occured to me, after this particular event, that what was lacking was a
> few good design principles. I began, at that moment, to think about
> writing a design methodology for messaging systems, particularly Novell
> GroupWise. Over the next few months a colleague and I talked about it,
> experimented, and took careful notes as we visited different companies.

Ben, this is a good example that design and engineering do not have to be
mechanistic, but must combine sensibility and rationality with wisdom.

Every organization has structures. When a structure is designed, it can be
checked, discussed, improved. Well designed structures lead to learning.

What is the alternative to design? Some structures may be emergent and
difficult to design in a mechanistic sense, but may be studied and
improved if we find its leverage points. Systems thinking is about that.

Some apparently emergent structures are the disguised outcome of
authoritarism, sometimes group authoritarism, which appears often in
organizations, and may not be deliberate, but result from prejudice or
fear.

Jay Forrester stresses the necessity of a design discipline for social
systems (see System Dynamics and the lessons of 35 years D-4224-4, at
<http://sysdyn.mit.edu/papers-index.html>) . The fact that self
organization is a recognized phenomenon doesn't excuse us from trying to
understand and improve structures, with respect for people's ways and
feelings.

Maybe we can make an analogy between self organization and the unconscious
mind. Our unconscious minds have a great power: the source of both good
and bad ideas. We do not give up our rational minds because we recognize
the reality and importance of our unconscious.

Concluding, it is very important to warn against giving up organizational
design because of self organization.

Durval

-- 
Durval Muniz de Castro <durval@ia.cti.br>
Fundacao Centro Tecnologico para Informatica <http://www.ia.cti.br/>
Campinas - Brasil - Fone: 55-19-2401011 - Fax: 55-19-2402029
 

Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>