The discussion question--
"How do we deal with power and politics in our journey toward becomming
more of a learning organization?"
is a critical question in any human endeavor. Humans are indeed social
animals-- and general systems theory tells us that social groups work for
homeostasis, and that systems seek to reproduce themselves. That means
that unjust systems work to remain unjust, and that their injustices are
reporduced for generations and generations.
I think there might be theological answers for the root causes of this
human proclivity toward unjust social relations-- certainly it is not a
new occurrence. There might also be more palatable (depending on one's
point of view) sociological and psychological reasons as well. The fear of
the Other, wariness of strangers, the incliniation to seek comfort (status
quo, "better a devil we know than one we don't.") all play into this
observed phenomona.
And, homeostasis lies behind the truism that a "prophet is not welcome in
her/his homeland." It is not accidental that the messenger gets blamed
for the evil message that the status quo is wrong, that things must
change. This in power seek to hold power-- the lesson of Orwell's "1984"
is indeed true. Those who seek to hold power do not do so for the benefit
of others-- but only for themselves.
The potential for organizations seeking to become learning organizations
is perhaps first and foremost to realize that the whole is more than the
sum of the parts, and that decisions must be made that benefit the whole
and not the parts. The interconnectivity of human endeavor is a real fact,
and not simply a mythic truth. Organizations that adopt what Covey calls a
"win-win," or better yet a "win-win or no deal" approach find that the
energy spent on discovering wion-win solutions is far more productive than
the cost/benefit approach that analyzes how much one can afford to lose in
order to win.
One example of this excellence is in the sports world (although I am
loathe to use sports analogies.) The 49er's of the NFL are perceived by
players and coaches around the league to be not only a team committed to
wexcellent performance on the field, but to a holistic approach that seeks
the reasonable benefit of all who are involved in the team endeavor.
(Reasonable is a context sensitive term-- the benefits of professional
athletes in general are not reasonable, but excessive--yet they are what
the market bears.) Contrast this approach with the Cowboy's noticeable
lack of fire this past season after the owner in a fit of megalomania made
it very clear by his public actions that the most important person in the
organization was him. In his analysis, he could afford to lose the coach
of his back-to-back Super Bowl champion team in order to win the personal
esteem he needed as top dog. In the long run, the organization lost out.
This seems perhaps to wander, but the point is this-- politics and power
are tools which are basicalliy amoral until applied. When power and
politics are used to support the needs/wants of an individual or a small
group within the larger whole, those tools become increasingly immoral.
When power and politics work to the benefit of the whole group, they are
moral. The smart systems manager will always work to set in place checks
and balances to ensure that the power of an organization remains broadly
based and broadly accessible, so that power has a chance to avoid being
co-opted by an individual or a group. An organization which looks
carefully at its history can discover whether or not their recent history
has been determined by moral or immoral uses of power and politics, and
can then make the informed decision to change.
|-------------------------------------------|
| Allen Gibson |
| allen59@ramlink.net |
| "Wherever you go, there you are!" |
|-------------------------------------------|
| "That's all I can say, really-- |
| These things are true, and |
| I've seen them for myself." |
| Claudia Shear |
|-------------------------------------------|