Lon writes:
"it has been my experience that people who constitute the intuitive 15% in
one organization are always the intuitive 15% in any other organization to
which they also belong."
I do not find it difficult to accept that I can only hope to influence 75%
of the people in a company, or the people I train, but I do not find it
easy to sit back without challenging that paradigm.
I accept the fact that there are different levels of committment to an
organisation's work, and different personal standards within a workforce.
I believe there is a way to create mini-structures within an organisation
that will facilitate like-minded people building on common strengths,
rather than succumbing in isolation to individual 'weaknesses', and
encouraging the different groups to interact.
One example is the changing role of the unions in British organisations -
whereas union representatives used to be frequently seen as vanguards for
the workers against the management, now they are more commonly seen as
representatives who communicate with the management and with whom the
management can communicate effectively to bring about mutually beneficial
outcomes to problems.
15% may well bear the intuitive brunt of the organisation's work - but I
am not sure of the purpose(s) the 25% serve at the 'lower' end of the
scale which Lon describes.
I do not think this would necessarily work as well in a 'Matrix
Management'-led organisation as it would if applied to a more
'traditional' pyramidal-structured organisation.
Leon
Leon Conrad
The Conrad Voice Consultancy
Website: http://www.actual.co.uk/conrad
--Leon Conrad <100755.1675@CompuServe.COM>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>