Replying to LO2442, Michael McMaster noted:
>Dealing with most of the above as conversations, dialogues,
>statements and language systems will provide more accessibility,
>particularly in organisational terms, than dealing with them as
>"belief systems" in my experience.
While I agree completely with this statement, I am concerned that a
concept embodied in the phrase "belief system" could get lost if we
abandon it.
Michael himself summarized this concept partially in an earlier statement
in the same post:
>The belief
>system may have emerged from a founder or early group of leaders. It
>is more likely to have emerged from the interplay of the individual
>beliefs systems and those of the larger culture from which it all
>emerged.
The culture of an organization, it seems to me, emerges from the systemic
interplay of practices and values. That cultures take their most
discernible shape from the perceived beliefs of "founders" and are most
deeply influenced by those of their "leaders" is self-evident and even
tautological if we take the definition of founder to be the person who
kick-starts and of leader as the person who steers.
It's hard enough helping people to think of systems as systems. Why would
we want to lead them away from that?
-- jack@his.com (jack hirschfeld)