I distinguish intervention from development in the following ways.
That is, the operational definitions I use for organisational
purposes are:
- an intervention is "from the outside" of the existing community
*for the particular issue or situation* (so they may still be from
inside the corporation) for purpose of changing from a given state to
another specified and more desired state
- development is intentional action taken for the purpose of
increasing the ability of the participants in the development process
to deal with situations of a complex kind where the specific outcome
is not known but a general intention is (voluntarily) agreed upon.
In this case, the source of the action (ie. internal or external) is
irrelevant.
The most interesting cases for me are when a situation is complex.
In these cases, the choice may be to deal with specific outcomes that
are desired and also to decide whether or not to develop the
participants or merely to solve the problem. My understanding of
John Warfield's approach is that the choice can be made to be more or
less specific in result intended and also to focus more or less on
the amount of development which can be intended and realised.
My using the tool he has developed, you can solve a complex problem
with the minimal development (learning) that accompanies any new and
successful action which is explicitly available or you can introduce
more developmental intention and increase the learning without
sacrificing the result intended.
I for one appreciate many student/teacher relationships. This is a
response to a frequent occurrence in "learning organisation"
conversations - including this list and to a comment of John's in his
response. I suggest that there are many valid ways of learning and
that each has matches for time, place, circumstance and individual.
The expression seems to be an over-reaction to "the one prevalent
model" as the only way of learning.
John's communication indicates some important distinctions in this
area. One is that the relationship be voluntary and not merely an
expression of existing authority/power structures. Another is the
the roles be clearly specified as John's work does in a most rigorous
way.
-- Michael McMaster Michael@kbddean.demon.co.uk